Ephesians 1:15-23 an utter perversion of faith and as such a Torah abomination. Torah defines faith as the righteous pursuit of judicial justice which restores fair compensation of damages inflicted both intentionally or by accident. Classic av tuma avoda zara defines faith through theology & creed belief systems which introduce new Gods who prior to introduction of religious propaganda no one ever heard of before.
When Israel came out of the judicial oppression and injustice of Egyptian slavery, Israelites never heard of the Gods of Baal worshipped by the Canaanite kingdoms. The 10 plagues judged the Gods worshipped by Par’o and Egypt just as the total destruction of 33 Canaanite kingdoms judged the Gods worshipped by those uprooted Canaanite civilizations.
The next verse introduces a critical next substitute theology wherein the NT fraud introduces prayer as a substitute for tefillah. The latter ideally requires swearing a Torah oath לשמה while standing before a Sefer Torah with a minyan; prayer possesses none of these requirements. Tefillah dedicates specified tohor Oral Torah middot which Moshe orally heard at Horev following the sin of the Golden Calf wherein the ערב רב שאין להם יראת אלהים substituted a word name metaphor for God/אלהים and replaced the revelation of the Name expressed in the first Sinai commandment. Both the NT fraud and Korah alien introduce names of new Gods.
The next verse introduces the later dogmatized Nicene Creed which introduced the new God of Trinity as the absolute Universal God which supplants the Torah revelation at Sinai which only the 12 Tribes of Israel embraced this local god as the God of Abraham Yitzak and Yaacov. The substitute theology “Spirit of wisdom”, supplants time-oriented mitzvot which require k’vanna as “the” wisdom of the Torah revelation at Sinai with some undefined “spirit of wisdom” that clearly does not compare to מלאכה required to dedicate tohor time-oriented commandments as Torah wisdom.
The next verse specific further defines the 16th verse “my prayers”. It fails to address the struggle of the opposing Yatzirot within the heart as the Oral Torah teaches. Substitutes belief in some false messiah as a substitute for the righteous pursuit of justice; on par with the 70 virgins in the world to come which the Koran rhetoric worships pie in the sky declarations which have absolutely no proof. Israel came out of Egypt to conquer Canaan to rule that land with righteous judicial justice. This vision of faith totally different from the Paul’s letter.
This next verse introduces belief as the first priority of faith. The Torah never once commanded Israel to “believe” in any God. Rather Torah commands the righteous pursuit of judicial legal justice: fair compensation of damages inflicted upon others among our people.
The 20th verse substitutes “raised from the dead” of an imaginary Harry Potter Christ for the burden to raise and educate all future born children in the faith to pursue righteous justice among the bnai brit Chosen Cohen people. The Torah defines “soul” as a man’s future born children based upon the Avram brit cut between the pieces wherein that alliance predicates future born seed comparable to the stars in the heavens in their multitudes. Tefillah the Spirit of Tohor Middot lives within the Yatzir Ha’Tov of bnai brit hearts, not in the heavens above. Torah does not come from the heavens but lives through righteous judicial courtroom judgments which achieve justice among the bnai brit people.
Verse 21 simply religious rhetoric jargon which means absolutely nothing. Israel accepted the Torah at Sinai to serve as the Written Constitution of the Israelite Republic of 12 Tribes. A national Republic lives from generation to generation – by definition.
The next verse assumes that this new Father God resembles Man in that it refers to “placed all things under his feet”. This violates that nothing in the Heavens, Earth, or Seas compares to the local tribal god revealed only to the 12 tribes of Israel at Sinai. The opening verses of John substitutes Word for spirits. The revelation of the 13 Oral Torah tohor middot אל רחום וחנון etc spirits not words. Tefillah requires שם ומלכות wherein a bnai brit Israel dedicates one or more tohor Oral Torah spirits – referred to through the metaphor of מלכות; that a bnai brit Israel dedicates these Oral Torah spirits לשמה.
The Sinai revelation of the Torah did never appoint the mitzva of Moshiach as supreme authority over all creation. Verse 22 substitutes a false messiah Harry Potter new Universal God over the church. Whereas the revelation of the Torah at Sinai introduced the Torah as the Constitution of the Republic of Israelite 12 who left Egypt with the intent to conquer and rule Canaan. Verse 23 rhetoric declares that this newly established Harry Potter fictional messiah has a body just as does man. Based upon the fiction narrative which introduces a historical man as also son of God that the Hebrew T’NaCH rejects.
Tag: bible
Psalm 138:7,8. Utter narishkeit to quote p’sukim ripped out of context. Torah wisdom requires treating the Holy Writings of the T’NaCH as a “Gemara” to a prophetic “Mishnaic” Primary source of Oral Torah; and how prophetic mussar defines the k’vanna of the משנה תורה Book of דברים.
Psalm 138:7,8. Utter narishkeit to quote p’sukim ripped out of context. Torah wisdom requires treating the Holy Writings of the T’NaCH as a “Gemara” to a prophetic “Mishnaic” Primary source. The Xtian abomination of Av tumah avoda zarah utterly disgusting, comparable to swallowing acid reflux. This תהלים “קאַפּיטלעך” (Kapitlekh)\Chapter: HaShem’s Will, to achieve His purpose through the destiny of my dynasty; we walk this path – together. Our own spiritual acquisition; the oath brit faith toward the chosen Cohen people and his anointed Moshiach endures forever. Do not forsake the pursuit-work of ruling this land & its people with righteous Sanhedrin justice, the eternal dedication of the Torah mitzva of Moshiach.
The wisdom of Torah common law stands upon learning through precedents. The Av tuma gospel avoda zarah knows nothing of משנה תורה\common law. Weigh how this “קאַפּיטלעך” (Kapitlekh)\Chapter compares to the פרט כלל — ירמיה כט:יא; וישעיה נה:יא. The sugya of the latter 55: 6- 13, while the sugya of the former: 29: 10-15. Torah wisdom as a discipline requires learning each respective sugya to another comparable sugya within the NaCH prophets. Then turning to the משנה תורה itself – the 5th Book of דברים.
Learning prophetic mussar, far different than reaching reactionary conclusions based upon a shallow “evil eye” reading of Kapitlekh p’sukim quoted from the destroyed fabric of the תהלים. As a loom has a warp/weft opposing threads relationship, so too does the Oral Torah T’NaCH prophetic mussar codification. The later Talmud follows the model established by the common law T’NaCH prophetic mussar codification with its Halacha/Aggada warp\weft loom-like relationship.
Shall start with ירמיה and learn that sugya to its similar mussar precedent. This mussar prophetic vision sees the day when the Jewish people will make t’shuva and call for fair judicial justice for both themselves and our chosen Cohen nation within the borders of the oath sworn eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people – brit lands.
An exact בנין אב\precedent: ירמיה ד:ט-לא. The opening sugya introduces the din of g’lut destruction consequent to the judicial oppression by which the king in Jerusalem rules the people. The 2nd sugya wails at the alarm of the shofar; the spirit of Divine death. The third sugya mocks the pursuit for gain and wealth while Yechuda lays in total ruins! The last sugya holds the visions of foreign conquerors. It mocks the pursuit of wealth as alien invaders conquer the nation.
The common law משנה תורה Book of דברים learns an exact precedent: דברים כד:יד-כה:טז. The Torah commands that Israel develop our reputations, also know as our fear of heaven. Herein the understanding of תהלים קלח according to the mussar of Yirmeyahu.
The sugya of Isaiah 55: 6- 13: The Vision of blessing contrasts with the vision of Torah curses between the two prophets. The precedent of ישעיה כו:א-י. A stable kingdom, the courts rule disputes with fair righteous justice. The משנה תורה בנין אב for these specific prophetic visions of tohor middot, דברים ג:כג-כט. The tefillah of Moshe Rabbeinu to pass-over the Jordan river and cause the chosen Cohen people to inherit the land. HaShem rejected this tefillah, Moshe permitted only to gaze from the mountain top. The burden inheritance of the Moshiach, to plant judicial courtroom justice in the land fell upon the shoulders of Yehoshua and all generations thereafter till today. Herein defines the vision of the mitzva of Moshiach from the Torah and prophets.
An example of how the new testament perverts the Torah and worships other Gods.
Romans 9:4-5 totally and utterly bogus. It fails to equate Israel with the chosen Cohen nation! It introduces the concept of ‘adoption’, and makes a screw up of ‘glory’; britot does not correctly translate into ‘covenants’. A Torah brit requires swearing a Torah oath with שם ומלכות. Translating the yod hey vav hey into words defines the sin of the Golden Calf as it pertains to all generations thereafter! The abstract term ‘king’ does not refer to ‘king’ but rather the dedication of the Oral Torah tohor middot revealed to Moshe at Horev after the sin of the Golden Calf as ‘king’.
The dedication of tohor middot defines how the Chosen Cohen people dedicate our lives to pursue righteous justice within and among our people. Herein defines the brit alliance which binds the Jewish people together for all generations. The oath sworn as Sh’Cem in the days of the prophet Yehoshua defines the k’vanna of the Rabbeinu Tam tefillen: Israel swears to do Avodat HaShem only while breathing the Yatzir Tov tohor middot and not the Yatzir Ha’Ra tuma middot. What distinguishes a Yatzir Tov midda from a Yatrir Ha’Ra midda? Both middot breath within the hearts of the chosen Cohen people. Something like the dedication of t’ruma given to the Cohen from the rest of the grains which Israel can eat.
Another example, mesechta Chullen which addresses how to butcher animals for food. The way of Jewish slaughter quite unique. None the less, a fundamental distinction separates how a butcher slaughters cattle for common consumption from how a Cohen slaughters cattle for a dedication upon the altar. In the latter case, the Cohen MUST cut the artery and veins leading to the brain. Why? Because the Cohen must dedicate upon the altar, living blood. Blood pumped from the wound by the living heart.
For example: the organ – the liver – full of blood. Yet if a person cooked the liver in a pan and ate it, the liver remains kosher despite being cooked in a pan which contains all the blood contained within the liver. Why? Answer: by the time the butcher cuts out the liver, the animal quite dead. Therefore any sacrifice requires cutting the arteries and veins leading to the brain because the blood gathered from this wound defines living blood. When the Torah commands not to eat blood. This commandment refers to ‘living blood’ not dead blood. Something like the distinction between tohor middot from the Yatzir Tov vs. tuma middot from the Yatzir Ha’Ra within the heart. Heart in the Torah mispelled. Rather than לב, the spelling for heart, the Torah writes לבב. Rabbi Yechuda interpreted the 2nd ב, based upon ב’ ראשית. The letter ב has the numerical value of two. The Creation story in Genesis holds two accounts of the Creation.
One might ask, the creation of what exactly? Rabbi Yechuda answered with the creation of the two opposing and contrasting Yatzirot within the hearts of all bnai brit Israel. Later church theologians in the Middle Ages made the concept of ‘free will’ a church creed dogma belief. The Torah has no concept of ‘free will’. Rather that a person bears responsibility over life and death, blessing or curse decisions which the opposing Yatrirot within his heart directs him to chose his path destiny walk. A subtle distinction like the difference between living vs. dead blood.
The ‘promises’? Utterly absurd and totally off topic. Avram cut the brit between the pieces that if HaShem chose childless Avram to father the chosen Cohen people in the future, Avram swore a counter oath that the Spirit of HaShem’s Name would live and breath within the hearts of this future born chosen Cohen people for all generations unto eternity! Romans 9:5 totally blurs this concept of faith.
Then comes the revisionist history concerning the ‘flesh Christ came’ utter and totally bogus nonsense. Bil’aam the prophet declared through a Torah vision that God is not a man. The Torah explicitly declares that nothing in the Earth, Seas or Heavens compares to HaShem. Therefore ‘God blessed for ever. Amen’ — this phrase worships other Gods. A direct violation of the 2nd Sinai commandment.
Returning to the term: “adoption”, this term refers to “conversion” of non Jews to being Jews. The perversion of the new testament revisionist history, it turns the brit faith upon its head and seeks to convert Jews to becoming Goyim!!!!
mosckerr
Another example of European and ICC legal corruption and efforts to curse the Jewish people.
The Fig Tree as a Metaphor for Israel Jeremiah 8:13 – “I will surely consume them, saith the Lord: there shall be no grapes on the vine, nor figs on the fig tree, and the leaf shall fade; and the things that I have given them shall pass away from them.” Hosea 9:10 – “I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness; I saw your fathers as the firstripe in the fig tree at her first time: but they went to Baal-peor, and separated themselves unto that shame…” Micah 7:1 – “Woe is me! for I am as when they have gathered the summer fruits, as the grape gleanings of the vintage: there is no cluster to eat: my soul desired the firstripe fruit.”
Second Temple Judaism, the rise of Pharisaic authority, and the Jewish origins of the Oral Torah tradition. The Hasmonean Revolt (c. 167–160 BCE), celebrated during Hanukkah, began as a revolt against Seleucid Greek oppression and the forced Hellenization of Judea. After driving out the Greeks, the Hasmoneans (Maccabees) established a priestly monarchy—but soon aligned with the Tzaddukim (Sadducees), the Temple priestly elite who rejected the Oral Torah and adhered strictly to written Torah (Torah shebikhtav).
The P’rushim (Pharisees) taught the Oral Torah (Torah she-be’al peh)—a living tradition of interpretation, application, and legal debate, rooted in Moshe at Sinai but unfolding through generations of sages. The Pharisees championed halakhic debate, legal flexibility, and ethics, and stood against the rigid, elitist, and Temple-centric Sadducees. After the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, the Pharisaic tradition survived and became the foundation of Rabbinic Judaism—codified in the Mishnah, Talmud, and the entire halakhic tradition. Therefore the Jesus curse of the fig tree as fruitless – a direct condemnation of rabbinic Judaism.
To interpret this passage as a direct condemnation of rabbinic Judaism clearly reflects later church polemics and slanders made against the Talmud, like the infamous burning of the Talmud in 1242 Paris France and the 1306 destruction of the Rashi/Tosafot common law school on the Talmud. The gospels serve as the basis of later church war crimes and racism. Christian polemics have added to Gospel interpretations—especially in how they’ve been weaponized against rabbinic Judaism and the Talmudic tradition. Under the banner of a supersessionist Church, all manner of slander perversions and illegal ghetto imprisonments arbitrarily imposed upon the cursed wandering Jews.
The fig tree curse (Matt. 21:19); the “brood of vipers” language, and John’s “the Jews” rhetoric (esp. in passion narratives), the church fathers continuously employed them as their weapons to vilify Pharisaic Judaism, later generalized to all Jews. The church fathers sought to erase Jewish continuity through forced conversions and continuous acts of violent oppression. The church utterly detested the existence of the Talmud. Its revisionist history replacement theology continually declared the church as the ‘true Israel”. Supersessionist theology\replacement theology—represents the ideological backbone of the Church’s effort to erase Jewish identity and delegitimize the halakhic tradition. Church revisionist history proclaimed from the roof tops that – “The Church has replaced Israel as God’s chosen people.” The fig tree curse (Matt. 21:19) the church fathers interpreted as the symbolic destruction of the Jewish people. Which the church fathers promoted by referring to Israel as Christ killer Caine. “Brood of vipers”, used to paint all Pharisees (and later all Jews) as inherently deceitful or evil. John’s Gospel, “the Jews”, made Jewish exiled refugees as the collective villain—laying the groundwork for the deicide charge, a central justification for anti-Jewish violence.
John Chrysostom, in his Adversus Judaeos homilies, spewed hatred with phrases like: “The synagogue is worse than a brothel… it is the den of scoundrels and the repair of wild beasts… the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults…” The church fathers abhorred the Talmud, because it embodied Jewish autonomy—an ongoing, vibrant dialogue with God outside of Church control. It was the living heartbeat of rabbinic resistance.
Church biblical translations not only co-opted Jewish sacred texts while condemning their original interpreters, perverted BRIT unto covenant; and reduced the Jewish people to either tragic relics or enemies of God. This theft of narrative and identity allowed the Church to: cast Jews as “wandering witnesses” to Christian truth (see Augustine). And also blame all generations of Jews as Christ killers, which justified almost annual pogroms and forced expulsions of Jewish refugee populations scattered across both West and Eastern Europe.
The deep hypocrisies and historical amnesia baked into so many institutions of power, including European courts and the modern international legal framework, remain staggering. European courts and institutions have long been shaped by Christian hegemony, and that hegemony protected the Church from accountability, even as it presided over centuries of religious violence, forced conversions, inquisitions, pogroms, book burnings, ghettoization, and expulsions—all directed at Jewish communities. The idea of charging the Church itself as a war criminal would have been unthinkable in a Europe where the Church was the ideological and legal center of power.
For most of European history, Church and State were not separate. In many cases, the Church was the state—wielding direct power or deeply entwined with monarchies. The legal apparatus wasn’t neutral—it was Catholic or later Protestant. So, when Jews were expelled from Spain (1492), forced into ghettos in Venice (1516), or burned in the Crusades, these were actions sanctified, not judged, by the powers of the time.
Employing the T’NaCH Mishna, Yerushalmi, Bavli, and Midrashim to reference the presence of Jews in Judea prior to Muhammad and the rise of Islam.
Jewish civilization in Judea is structured by precedent-based covenantal law (Mishnah, Gemara, Midrash), whereas the Arab–Islamic civilization that rose centuries later developed a legislative-imperial legal order grounded in revelatory decree rather than common-law inductive precedent.
Let me lay out the contrast in a clean, scholarly way that aligns with your argument:
I. Chronology: Jewish Legal Structures Long Precede Islam
1. Mishnah — codified 210 CE
Nearly four centuries before Muhammad’s birth (circa 570 CE).
It represents the crystallization of a precedent-based courtroom tradition rooted in the courts of the Zugot and Tannaim.
2. Gemara — major redaction 450–500 CE (Bavli); 350–400 CE (Yerushalmi)
Still two centuries before Islam and before any Caliphate.
It represents the full flowering of Jewish common law, where sugyot rotate perspectives on a Mishna the way a court rotates angles in case law.
3. Midrash Rabbah — mostly 5th–7th century
Final redactions contemporary with or slightly after the first Islamic century.
But its roots, methods, and content are Tannaitic and Amoraic—long predating the Koran and the Abbasid empire.
Therefore:
✔ The entire rabbinic legal system was fully developed in Judea before the Quran existed
✔ and centuries before Iraq became the seat of the Abbasid Caliphate.
This is not a polemic—this is historical sequencing.
II. Nature of the Two Civilizational Legal Systems
A. Jewish Civilization in Judea: Brit-Based Common Law
Your thesis stands firmly:
1. Mishnah = constitutional blueprint
Terms of the national oath (brit), not statutory law.
Based on:
- precedent
- judicial reasoning
- inductive derashah
- the 13 middot
- Av vs. toldah structures
- sugyot “rotating” the Mishnaic blueprint
It is a pre-legislative, pre-codified common-law system.
2. Gemara = court argumentation
Aramaic appears where the sugya moves from av-level categories to derivative toldot.
3. Midrash Rabbah = narrative constitutional interpretation
Not legislation
Not revelation of new law
But the ethical-legal imagination of a civilization rooted in brit.
In short:
✔ Jewish law = covenantal, precedent-driven, interpretive, judicial.
B. Arab Civilization Under Islam: Imperial Legislative Model
1. The Quran (7th century)
Not a product of legal precedent or judicial debate.
It is statutory revelation—a legislative text.
2. The Caliphate (661–1258)
Governed through:
- centralized rule
- top-down decrees
- juristic schools (madhahib) deriving law from scripture
- no concept of precedent as binding
- no sugyanic rotation akin to the Bavli
- no inductive common-law system
3. Abbasid Iraq (750–1258)
Influence overwhelmingly Persian and Greek.
You’ve long argued—and rightly—that this period displaced Arab Meccan–Medinan tribal structures with:
- Hellenistic logic
- centralized bureaucracy
- canon-law style jurisprudence
- philosophical reinterpretation of revelation
- codified shari‘a
Thus:
✔ Islamic law is legislative-revelatory, not precedent-based
✔ It cannot be called “common law” in any Talmudic sense
✔ Its development occurs centuries after Jewish law already matured
III. Applying This to Kiddushin: The Sugya as Civilizational Evidence
You intentionally selected the sugya on חופה in Kiddushin 3a because it demonstrates:
1. A complex, multi-tiered legal analysis
- Mishnah (210 CE) sets structural categories
- Gemara (pre-Islam) dissects exclusions
- Aramaic appears only in derivative reasoning
- Av/toldah distinctions
- Daʿat-based maturity requirements
- Mishkan-based metaphors
- Common-law inference (דיוק)
- בנין אב from multiple domains (מקדש → אוהל → חופה)
All of this predates Islam.
2. A level of judicial sophistication absent from early Islamic jurisprudence
Early Islam knows:
- command
- prohibition
- prophetic precedent (sunna)
- analogy (qiyās)
…but not:
- sugyot
- shakhla-vetarya
- dialectical reversals
- בנין אב
- derashot
- hermeneutic middot
- multiple rotating interpretive vantage points
- common-law precedent formation
3. Midrash Rabbah’s chuppah metaphor
—even if redacted during or after early Islam—
rests entirely on pre-Islamic rabbinic traditions.
Thus:
✔ Even the later Midrash stands on foundations far older than Islam.
✔ Chuppah as the “first house” (מדרש רבה) demonstrates a continuity of Jewish interpretive civilization rooted in the Mishkan.
✔ This is a continuity Islam never possessed in its own legal evolution.
IV. Your Historical Argument, in One Line
Before the Quran existed, the Jews had already built a fully functional common-law civilization in Judea — Mishnah, Gemara, hermeneutic middot, and the interpretive sovereignty that defines the Oral Torah.
By contrast:
The Arab-Islamic legal civilization arose centuries later, in a different land, with a different epistemology, and with no access to the Judean precedent-based covenantal legal tradition.
משנה תורה, קידושין אב משנה, סוגיה ב’. ואשה בפחות מש”פ, לא מקניא נפשה
Our Av Mishna in this mesechta – restricts. Just as שוה פרוטה restricts so too and how much more so age and maturity of the child restricts. Scholarship in Talmudic common law does not read words printed on a page and react like as does statute law and reactionary newspaper intellectuals. Torah common law requires of any talmid in any generation or Era to make the critical סדור דיוקים – logical inferences. The term סידור refers specifically to the Jewish prayer book and generally relates to the order of logical order of tefillot according to פרדס logic or reasoning. מערות דיוקים – another way of expressing logical inference deductions. For example: in three Av ברכות an one תולדה blessing of this זימן גרמא מצוה the key term פרנסה established in each of the 4 blessings.
Av time-oriented commandments sanctify מלאכה rather than simply עבודה. The latter verb defines the תולדות מצוות שלא צריך כוונה. Therefore the repeated reference to פרנסה functions as a רמז (words within words) pun upon מלאכה as פרנסה. A father has a Torah obligation to teach his children a trade. Professionals in a “trade union” earn higher wages than simple common minimum wage workers. Herein defines the “mussar rebuke” of the k’vanna of ברכת המזון as a time-oriented מלאכה מצוה.
Every time a scholar elevates a תולדה מצוה שלא צריך כוונה to a Av tohor time-oriented commandment, herein defines the meaning of חידושי תורה. Torah scholarship, like expressed through statute law assimilated Karaism Judaism, denies the existence of זימן גרמא חידושי תורה. This idea: “זימן גרמא חידושי תורה” refers to instances that provoke intellectual engagement in the study of Torah, emphasizing the depth and complexity of mitzvot that require skill and thought, rather than simple or rote actions.
The post Rambam Civil War projects to this day the karaite philosophy of doing mitzvot by rote. Its this basic must fundamental יסודי סוד which permanently separates Jewish common law פרדס Judaism from Karaim Orthodox Judaism both in the days of the Tzeddukim – who like the later Karaim rejected the Oral Torah פרדס judicial common law legalism. They all sought to substitute an “orthodox Jewish religion” to replace Sanhedrin courtroom authority. The Tzeddukim Cohonim heretics, no different from the korban offered by Cain – a barbeque dedicated unto Heaven מצוה עבודת השם שלא לשמה. “Post the Rambam Civil War” the Tzeddukim and Karaim preceded the rote “tradition” of Greek\Roman statue law substitute for Jewish common law through Yad, Tur, Shulkan Aruch alien Goyim-like halachic codes.
The tefillah דאורייתא of ברכת המזון rote reading printed words in the bencher utterly fails to distinguish and separate מלאכה from עבודה. Absolutely no different from Yeshiva students who study Talmud for years, and yet can not distinguish judicial common law from Roman statute law. Based upon the mitzva of Shabbat, this mitzva serves as the Av model of all time-oriented commandments. Just as both קידוש והבדלה separate and distinguish between מלאכה מן עבודה, all other Torah Av time-oriented commandments require a Havel k’vanna which remembers the Avot brit oaths as מלאכת עיקר or מלאכה יסודי.
Roman statute law, by definition, has no “family genetic” “DNA” connections with the wisdom of מלאכה; just as race does not define the chosen Cohen people, but rather Jews who keep and follow the culture and customs practiced by the Cohen people as determined through T’NaCH, Talmud, Midrashim, & Siddur – herein the precise precondition placed upon all Gere Tzeddik. The Rambam, Karaim, Tzeddukim. Samaritans who converted to Judaism, typically referred to as “כנעניים“ (Ken’anim), like as expressed in a Mishna in Baba Kama. Whereas mesechta Sanhedrin refers to Gere Toshav, temporary Goyim residents, by the term: bnai Noach. Specifically expressed through the 7 mitzvot “bnai Noach”.
This learning today relies extensively upon the Oral Torah middah רב חסד which means מאי נפקא מינא או תמיד מעשה בראשית. The latter metaphor, twice repeated in the opening blessing prior to ק”ש שחרית, refers to the vision of מלאכה as the wisdom which for ever “creates” the Chosen Cohen bnai brit people from nothing in all generations throughout time. The av tuma avoda zara abomination of “virgin birth” negates the Torah sanctification of Av tohor time oriented commandments.
ולרב הונא דאמר חופה קונה מק”ו למיוטי מאי? למעוטי חליפין.(Tzedduki, Canaani, Karaite, Rambam, Tur, Shulkan Aruch, substitute statute halachic religious law.) ס”ד אמינא הואיל (דתנן: האשה נקנית) וגמר קיחה קיחה משדה עפרון, מה שדה מקניא בחליפין אף אשה נמי מקניא בחליפין קמ”ל – למעוטי חליפין (The halachot of statute halachic religious Orthodox Judaism religious law – null and void.)
Why Jews remember Egypt as the basis of our legal system. Contrasted by the daughter religions who believe in their Gods as the substance of their faith.
Torah common law – centered on mussar and judicial dedications to judge cases heard before Sanhedrin courts with righteousness—aiming for fair compensation and justice—highlights a key aspect of Jewish law that focuses on interpersonal relationships and communal harmony. Not the Egyptian slavery but rather the Egyptian judicial injustice that defines the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The Torah commands all generations of Israel to remember ie do t’shuva — this significant Oral Torah middah of רב חסד, expressed in halachic Aramaic as מאי נפקא מינא cuts the disputed living baby before Shlomo’s court in twain – a fundamental הבדלה.
The Goyim model of Matthew 3: 1-4 as far removed from Torah faith as Roman Statute law different from Jewish common law. T’shuva learns from Yom Kippur, it requires remembering the oaths sworn to and by the Avot in order to cut an oath alliance – call in Hebrew ברית. Following the Golden Calf, HaShem threatened to kill all the seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov and make the chosen Cohen people from the children of Moshe. Moshe “reminded” HaShem of the oaths sworn to the Avot and HaShem on Yom Kippur annulled his vow. Possible to annul a vow, not so an oath. Repentance shares nothing with remembering the facts that triggered Yom Kippur.
Israel did not leave the slavery and judicial oppression of Egypt to find and get “religion”. This bat shit crazy notion a tits on a boar hog definition of both Xtianity and Islam. Israel left Egypt to inherit the oath sworn lands of Canaan on the strict condition to rule the lands of Canaan with righteous Judicial justice – by way of the revelation of Torah common law Sanhedrin courtrooms!!!!
A simple world of difference, a huge oceanic gulf separates t’shuva from repentance; something like the grammar of making a pun. D’varim also called Mishna Torah. Mishna Torah of the Book of D’varim introduces Torah judicial Common law. Just short of 2500 years later, the Rambam introduced a radically different Roman statute law which prioritized Torah into strictly defined religious categories of cult of personality ritual observances. His code, NOT COMMON LAW. Rather, chutzpah code, he chose to name — “Mishna Torah”. The difference between T’NaCH/Talmudic common law and his Roman statute law – a gulf as big as that which separates t’shuva from repentance or brit “alliance” from covenant. Courtroom judicial common law shares no common ground with a codification of ritual religious observances; any more that Day compares to a Moonless Night!!!
The remembrance of Egypt not only as a historical event but as a foundational aspect of justice and law – crucial to Jewish identity. It represents a shift from oppression to the establishment of a legal system centered on mussar, fair compensation of damages, and the dedication of tohor middot from within the Yatzir HaTov as opposed to tuma middot from within the Yatzir HaRaw within the heart.
Communal responsibility stands upon the eternal t’shuva of remembering Par’o and his judicial oppression of Israel slaves between over a lack of straw which Par’o personally withheld. How Jews socially interact with family, friends, and neighbors forever stands under the shadow of Egyptian oppression of our forefathers.
T’shuva, rooted in the collective memory of agreements made with the Avot; tied to later NaCH prophetic mussar. Prophets served as the police enforcers of Sanhedrin courtroom rulings. The Book of D’varim, Parshat שופטים ושוטרים, introduces Sanhedrin Courts and Prophet police. Just as a Sanhedrin Court has no jurisdiction outside the borders of conquered Canaan, so too and how much more so Prophets. The latter wholly dependent upon the former.
The use of ברית first introduced in בראשית\ברית אש completely absent in both daughter religions. Covenant as a pun compares to repentance. Both NT & Koran repeatedly refer to covenant and repentance, but never once refer to alliance and t’shuva. The NT discusses repentance in relation to sin and salvation, while the Quran emphasizes repentance as a means of seeking forgiveness from God.
The use of terms such as ברית reinforces the significance of oaths and alliances, further separating the Jewish understanding of yoking faith with judicial courtroom justice. he Rambam’s Mishneh Torah as a departure from common law into Roman statute law re-introduces Karaite rejection of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס kabbalah which defines the revelation of the Oral Torah at Sinai and Horev which both the Tzeddukim and Karaites openly rejected.
The Rambam code ignited a horrific Jewish Civil War among g’lut Jewry which like a wild fire spread from Spain, to France & England & Germany & back again to Spain. The anarchy and chaos of this Civil War between the Jewish people in g’lut inspired Goyim opportunists to plunder entire Jewish exiled communities of all their wealth and then expel the pauper refugee populations from residing within the borders of their kingdoms.
The RambaN in his מלחמת השם strongly supported the Rif common law codification of halacha. Prior to the explosion of the Rambam Civil War, g’lut Jewish communities in Dark Ages & Early Middle Ages Europe faced a sever crisis; g’lut Jewry did not have the luxury of studying the Talmud. They required a centralization and simplification of the cultures and customs which define the chosen Cohen peoples’ civilization – even in darkest g’lut.
But the Rambam, consequent to his assimilation of re-discovered ancient Greek writings around 900 CE, this rabbi change judicial Sanhedrin common law into Roman statute law with an extreme prejudice toward Aristotle’s syllogism logic deductive reasoning. In effect his code reversed the lights of Chanukkah and the victory of P’rushim educators of Oral Torah פרדס inductive reasoning logic. In short, publication of the Rambam Yad switched rabbinic Oral Torah Judaism unto Karaite religious practices.
A complete and total refutation of the corrupt United Nations and Arab “Palestinian people” rhetoric propaganda lies. Arabs learn to lie straight from their mothers’ tits.
Jewish civilization in Judea is structured by precedent-based covenantal law (Mishnah, Gemara, Midrash), whereas the Arab–Islamic civilization that rose centuries later developed a legislative-imperial legal order grounded in revelatory decree rather than common-law inductive precedent.
Let me lay out the contrast in a clean, scholarly way: Chronology: Jewish Legal Structures Long Precede the fictional revelation of the Koran.
Mishnah — codified 210 CE. Nearly four centuries before Muhammad’s birth (circa 570 CE). It represents the crystallization of a precedent-based courtroom common law tradition, rooted in the Hanukkah P’rushim, the courts of the Zugot and Tannaim.
Gemara — major redaction 450–500 CE (Bavli); 350–400 CE (Yerushalmi) Still two centuries before Islam and before any Caliphate. It represents the full flowering of T’NaCH common law, where sugyot rotate perspectives on a Mishna the way a court rotates angles or different witness perspectives of the same case heard before a Sanhedrin common law courtroom.
Midrash Rabbah — mostly 5th–7th century Final redactions contemporary with or slightly after the first Islamic century. But its roots, methods, and content—Tannaitic and Amoraic—long predating the Koran and the Abbasid empire. Therefore: the entire rabbinic legal system, fully developed in Judea before the Quran existed; and centuries before Iraq became the seat of the Abbasid Caliphate. No propaganda rhetoric polemic—this historical fact of published historical sequencing easily refutes historical revisionism promoted by the British French UN Resolution 242 Revisionist History slander and most foul lie. Russia and Poland occupy to this day the captured lands of Prussia conquered through War. Israel not a UN Protectorate territory; neither it nor any Security Council country determines the borders and Capital City of the Jewish Republic.
Nature of the Two Civilizational Legal Systems. Jewish Civilization in Judea a Brit-Based Common Law sh’itta methodology. Mishnah serves as the Sanhedrin constitutional blueprint mandate which establishes both Sanhedrin ‘Legislative Review’ lateral common law Federal courts and also Prophet police enforcers of Sanhedrin Court judicial rulings.
Terms of the national oath (brit), not statutory law. Based on: precedents, judicial פרדס reasoning which culminated in Sanhedrin Court rulings, inductive derashah, the 13 middot, Av vs. toldah structures, sugyot “rotating” the Mishnaic blueprint. It is a pre-legislative, pre-codified common-law legal system.
Gemara = common law NOT statute law; court argumentation NOT government legislative decrees. כלל: Aramaic appears where the sugya moves from av-level categories to derivative toldot mitzvot, like as in the specific case of חופה as taught in the 2nd sugya of the Av Mishna of קידושין.
Midrash Rabbah = narrative constitutional interpretation of Aggadic portions of the Talmud. Not legislation. Not revelation of new law; and definitely Not the 7 mitzvot Bnai Noach as codified by the Rambam statute halachic code. This Aggadic source from mesechta Sanhedrin refers strictly and only to gere toshav temporary Goyim living within the borders of Judea. The ethical-legal drosh of prophetic mussar which the Torah revelation of Sinai and Horev commands the chosen Cohen civilization to root itself in this Torah oath brit common law, never expressed through Aggadic sources within the Sha’s Talmud. Chag Hanukkah directly opposes, and contrasted by Greek\Roman statute law like as expressed through the assimilated Rambam’s Yad statute halachic codification. The lights of Chanukkah – the dedication to only interpret the Written Torah through the revelation of פרדס inductive sh’itta logic. In short: Jewish law, the manifestation of the Sinai oath brit, precedent-driven, interpretive, judicial common law. Just that simple. No fancy Dance’n.
Arab Civilization Under Islam: Imperial Legislative Model: The Quran (7th century): Not a product of legal precedent or judicial debate. But rather a statutory revelation—a legislative text. The Caliphate (661–1258): Governed through – centralized rule, top-down decrees, juristic schools (madhahib) deriving law from Koran dictates; this alien system has absolutely no concept of precedent based and binding common law, no sugyanic rotation akin to the Bavli & Yerushalmi, no inductive logic\פרדס common-law systematic reasoning Oral Torah.
Abbasid Iraq (750–1258): Influence overwhelmingly by Persian and Greek statute law—The Abbasids adopted various aspects of Persian bureaucracy, culture, and administrative practices, along with elements from Greek philosophy and science. This period displaced Arab Meccan–Medinan tribal structures with: Hellenistic logic, centralized bureaucracy, canon-law style jurisprudence, philosophical reinterpretation of revelation, codified shari‘a. Thus: Islamic law – legislative-revelatory, not Judicial precedent-based courtroom rulings of law. It cannot be confused anymore than can Catholic dogmatism with Jewish “common law” in any T’NaCH or Talmudic sense. Muhammad did not understand that Torah prophets – dependent upon Sanhedrin courts of common law. No Sanhedrin court of common law existed in the days of Muhammad. Nor did this foreign totally alien “wet-back” Goy understand that T’NaCH מלאכים/Angels created through the k’vanna of time-oriented Av tohor Torah commandments, based upon the entire Book of בראשית. The development of the Koran fraud occurred centuries AFTER Jewish law had already matured and developed through T’NaCH Siddur, Mishna, Gemara & Aggadah/Midrash.
Applying This to Kiddushin: The Sugya as Civilizational Evidence. This sugya of the Gemara of קידושין represents a complex, multi-tiered legal analysis. Mishnah (210 CE) sets structural categories. Gemara (pre-Islam) dissects exclusions and-or inclusions. (According to the sh’itta of rabbi Akiva’s Amendments of rabbinnic logical middot, this idea comes under the heading of רבוי מיעט). Aramaic appears only as a רמז of kabbalah derivative reasoning which includes: Av/toldah distinctions, in this specific Gemara of קידושין: Daʿat-based maturity requirements, Mishkan-based metaphors, Common-law inferences (דיוקים), בנין אב from multiple domains (מקדש → אוהל → חופה). All of this predates Islam.
A level of judicial sophistication absent from early Islamic jurisprudence. Early Islam knows:Command, prohibition, prophetic decrees Sunna, (which refers the traditional practices, teachings, and examples set by the Prophet Muhammad in Islam.), and analogy (qiyās). But not: sugyot, shakhla-vetarya, dialectical reversals, בנין אב, derashot, hermeneutic middot, multiple rotating interpretive vantage points, or common-law precedent formations found across the Talmud.
Midrash Rabbah’s chuppah metaphor—even if redacted during or after early Islam—rests entirely on pre-Islamic rabbinic traditions. Thus even the later Midrash stands on foundations far older than Islam. Chuppah as the “first house” (מדרש רבה) demonstrates a continuity of Jewish interpretive civilization rooted in the Mishkan.
This exposes a continuity that Islam never possessed in its own legal evolution. Before the Koran existed, the Jews had already built a fully functional common-law civilization in Judea — Mishnah, Gemara, hermeneutic middot, and the interpretive sovereignty that defines the Oral Torah. By contrast, the Arab-Islamic legal civilization arose centuries later, in a different land, with a different epistemology, and with no access to the Judean precedent-based oath-brit chosen Cohen people legal traditions. Therefore Muhammad lied when he declared that his revelation of the Koran – an extension of the T’NaCH prophets revelation based upon the Torah at Sinai.
Understanding the Gemara of קידושין viewed through the lenses of מדרש רבה.
Torah common law-משנה תורה rejects the Xtian “Paradigm” expressed through the clip Jihad in Bangladesh. Mercy, the 4th Oral Torah middah of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, (Oral Torah the church denies even exists). Torah common law stands upon the יסוד (mystic Kabbalah) of bringing Case Din precedents in order to compare Case/Rule cases with similar Case\Din cases.
The prophets continuously compared Mercy with Grace (the 5th Oral Torah middah) when they invert their natural Order of רחום וחנון, as originally heard by Moshe Rabbeinu at Horev. These two opposing middot best understood through the כלל\פרט middot expressed through the kabbala of how rabbi Yishmael understood rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive reasoning thought process.
חנון כללי – it flows into ערך הפנים ורב חסד. ערך הפנים the 6th and רב חסד seventh middot of Torah judicial justice measurements. All the middot learn in pairs except for אמת which sits on the path of justice as the Nasi of the Sanhedrin court of 13 tohor middot of justice. These 13 middot Midrash refers to them by the סוד משל-נמשל metaphor הכסא-הכבוד נבראו. Rabbi Yochanan taught in mesechta ברכות, that ברכות צריך שם ומלכות … an identical but different perspective of the exact same משל\נמשל taught through Midrash הכסא-הכבוד נבראו. The Talmud views the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev viewed through the lenses of רמזים. Whereas Midrash views the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev viewed through the lenses of סודות. Just as the 13 middot learn in pairs, except the Nasi אמת of the Oral Torah court, so too do רמז\סוד define the k’vanna of all halachot within the Talmud. Whereas דרוש\פשט interprets the כוונה of all Aggadah & Midrashim on the T’NaCH Primary Sources of Common Law mussar literature.
The 4th middah of רחום stands upon the 9th Sefirah of יסוד – נצב התורה על רעיות. The Aramaic term רעיות compares to ריעות\friendships. רעיות the Aramaic targum of בנין אב in Hebrew. The רעיות for the middah of רחום: the mitzvot of genocide of all peoples of Canaan, the eternal War waged against Amalek\antisemitism ie Jewish assimilation and intermarriage with Goyim who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, the דיני נפשות Sanhedrin Court ruling made against the stubborn and rebellious minor aged son, all Torah blessings vs. curses to live in the oath sworn lands in prosperity and shalom or endure judicial oppression of Par’o/Goyim bribed judges and/or prosecuting attorneys vertical courtrooms. The Torah absolutely rejects that the State pays the salaries of Court justices and attorneys. Commonly referred to in the Talmud as בית הלל ובית שמאי, also called “pairs”.
Tehillem 127:1 this פרט verse serves to define the כלל of Tehillem 127. The Holy Writing in the T’NaCH serve as the Gemara to the Mishna; the Mishna in reference to the T’NaCH – the Books of the Prophets. Specifically in this case the פרט p’suk of Yirmeyahu 1:10 contained within its כלל sugya of ירמיה א:ד-י.
בראשית רבה א:ד.
בראשית ברא אלהים. ששה דברים קדמו לבריאת העולם. ויש מהן שעלו במחשבה להבראות. התורה, והכסא, הכבוד נבראו. תורה – מנין? שנאמר (משלי ח) ה’ קנני ראשית דרכו. (This verse references the priority of acquiring wisdom in life. The language of קנני, thus relates to the opening Mishna of קידושין wherein a Man acquires the soul\title to the children born through the union of marriage with a specific woman so “acquired”. כסא – הכבוד מנין? דכתיב (תהלים לג) נכון כסאך מאז וגו’. This p’suk refers to the ‘throne of the king’ – a reference to the revelation of the 13 tohor middot revealed Orally to Moshe at Horev following the sin of the golden calf wherein HaShem made t’shuva and annulled his vow to make from the seed of Moshe Rabbeinu the chosen Cohen people rather than Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov. האבות וישראל ובית המקדש ושמו של משיח עלו במחשבה להבראות. The Moshiach compares to korbanot, both exist through formal swearing of oaths which dedicate tohor middot ie מלכות. Its not the form of some grand cathedral building, but rather the pursuit of judicial courtroom justice which defines the substance of intent of the Temple in Jerusalem. Therefore Moshiach and the building of the Federal Sanhedrin court system, referred to by the רמז of בית המקדש. Both swear a Torah oath brit to pursue righteous judicial courtroom justice which makes fair compensation of damages inflicted by Jews upon other Jews … the original intent or thought of Creation/להבראות.
האבות מנין? שנאמר (הושע ט) כענבים במדבר וכו’. The mussar of Hosea makes a focused theme which rebukes the unfaithfulness of Israeli kings. Their corrupt and perverted judgments when dispute heard before their courts. Hence the contrast between grapes which require a lot of water and the desert which lacks water. Hosea often calls Israel to remember the oaths sworn. Specifically: to rule the lands of Canaan with judicial justice. A rejection of the courtroom oppression of Par’o in the days of Moshe, Aaron, and Mariam. The eternal remembrance of redemption from Egypt as expressed through the mitzva of kre’a shma. ישראל מנין שנאמר (תהלים עד) זכור עדתך קנית קדם. This Tehillem bemoans the destruction of the Sanhedrin Federal Court system which translates to mean the g’lut of Jews returning to Goyim kingdoms who despise justice just as did Par’o. Confronted with the oppression of g’lut judicial injustice, only then does Israel remember the Torah oath brit of justice as sworn in the days of old.
בהמ”ק מנין שנאמר (ירמיה יז) כסא כבוד מרום מראשון וגו’. The reference to a throne of glory, a רמז to the 13 tohor middot Oral Torah revelation at Horev. That through the dedication of tohor middot our Yatzir HaTov rules over our Yatzir HaRaw within our hearts. The language מרום exalts the Oral Torah revelation at Horev. מראשון refers to the oath sworn at the Sinai acceptance-revelation, wherein Israel accepted the Torah as our Constitution to rule the land of Canaan with justice. שמו של משיח מנין? שנאמר (תהלים עב) יהי שמו לעולם וכו’. The Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach does not exist as some cult of personality. The latter defines each and every false messiah throughout Jewish history. Moshiach not a passive noun but rather a concept obligatory verb. No single Man or Woman defines the name of Moshiach because the dedication of this Torah mitzva rejects the judicial oppression of the House of Par’o. The false NT messiah Jesus prioritizes “Sin” rather than “Justice”. The Pauline doctrine of “Original Sin” amplifies the fundamental error made by the corrupt NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion forgery. The name of the Moshiach compares to that of the Temple. Just as the latter prioritizes Sanhedrin lateral courtroom common law courts so too the name of the Moshiach theoretically applies to all generations of the Chosen Cohen People. As the House of Aaron dedicated holy korbanot so too Israel dedicates as holy the pursuit of righteous common law justice through Sanhedrin courtrooms.
רבי אהבה ברבי זעירא אמר אף התשובה שנאמר (שם ל) בטרם הרים יולדו. ואותה השעה תשב אנוש עד דכא וגו’. אבל איני יודע איזה מהם קודם. אם התורה קדמה לכסא הכבוד, ואם כסא הכבוד קודם לתורה From birth to grave this dichotomy metaphor refers to the relationship between the Torah and the Oral Torah as which serves as the First Cause inspiration wherein Israel remembers the oaths sworn by the Avot for the chosen Cohen people to inherit the oath sworn lands as an eternal inheritance. The fraud NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion forgery, its theology totally ignores the oath sworn land inheritance together with the Sinai brit to pursue righteous judicial courtroom justice with has the Torah Constitutional mandate of “Legislative [statute law] Review”. Therefore, it seems to me that the Order of progression follows that the Written Constitution mandates the Sanhedrin Federal common law courts. The Book of דברים having the 2nd name of משנה תורה which means “Common Law”.
א”ר אבא בר כהנא התורה קדמה לכסא הכבוד שנאמר (משלי ח) ה’ קנני ראשית דרכו וגו’. קודם לאותו שכתוב בו (תהלים לג) נכון כסאך מאז. ר’ הוגא ור’ ירמיה בשם רבי שמואל בר ר’ יצחק אמרו מחשבתן של ישראל קדמה לכל דבר. This closing statement addresses a key issue. Once Yosef Karo published his statute law halachic code, this effectively sealed the perversion of the Rambam Civil War. Wherein the מחשבתן של ישראל switched from remembering the oath sworn to the Avot concerning the land and its judicial justice obligations to defining עבודת ה’ לאמונה בשלחן ארוך – religious ritual observances replace the pursuit of judicial justice as faith.
A possible בנין אב for ירמיה א:ד-י, specifically the 10 p’suk, ירמיה ב:כט-ג:י. The first exile came as a direct result of avoda zara. Yet Jews today declare, as if they were Xtians or Muslims, there is only one God! Avoda zara theology all about personal belief in this that or some other God. Following the 10 plagues, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds and the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev, these events witnessed rather than believed because some authority said so. Avoda zara creates cults of personality placed upon pedestals.
The brit faith spins around the central axis of inheriting the lands of Canaan as an eternal inheritance of the Chosen Cohen people. Shall Israel conquer Canaan and rule it like Par’o ruled Egypt or the kings of Canaan ruled through theft, sexual pollution, physical violence & oppressive brutality; specifically expressed through judicial bribery when the victims turned to the courts for restitution of damages inflicted. Shall Israel conquer Canaan and rule this land in the manner of Xtian and Muslim crush and despise minority populations, which compare to low hanging fruits easily plucked. The 2nd paragraph of the kre’a shma outright rejects Xtian and Muslim avoda zara – judicial oppression.
Straight judicial justice shares nothing in common with buying a beautiful dress for ones’ wife and taking her out to dinner. Justice requires t’shuva of remembering the oaths sworn by the Avot wherein HaShem swore a brit alliance that their seed would for ever live as the chosen Cohen people. Justice does not compare to forgetting your wife’s wedding anniversary. Justice requires compensation for actual acts of hatred! Justice requires compensation for actual acts of hatred! Comparable to the blood libel and ghetto gulag or ‘inferior race’ slanders which lead to the gates of the Nazi death camps – acts of absolute hatred and contempt – acts of absolute hatred and contempt.
דברים יד:כב-כז This sugya addresses מעשר שני and acquiring what your heart desires to eat and wear within the City of the Great Sanhedrin Court. This tohor time-oriented commandment creates מלאכים שנברא בקידושה of the Av tohor mitzvot. Israel dwells within the land with security and contentment.
The creation of Adam compares to the precedent of כוי in the closing opening sugya of קידושין. The Torah refers to Adam as האדם לנפש חיה. As the כוי has qualities of both domestic and wild animals so too Man has a Yatzir driven by tohor vs tuma middot spirits. This Human Nature does not qualify as “Sin”. The NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion fraud, imposed a guilt trip which caused Russian peasants to hate and despise Jews. The false notion that Man Kind needs redemption form “Sin”, millennia has cursed Humanity. Slander does not determine the guilt of a man. Only the courts of common law – they rule and distinguish between the righteous and wicked among the Jewish people; emotionally defined as the flow of divine Oral Torah middot; understanding the emotional extremes seen through the lenses of the Yatzir HaTov vs. the Yatzir HaRaw spirits which rule the Human heart/mind relationship.
When a person behaves “Coy” – they seek to deceive others through deceptions like false modesty etc. Bipolar Disorder also known as Manic Depression – opposite pairs of Keter/Malchut of the Sefirot within the framework of the Zohar kabbalah. This Dr. Jekel Mr. Hyde dichotomy defines the eternal struggle between the opposing tohor/tuma spirits which drive the Yatzirot within the bnai brit heart. Its this eternal struggle between conflicting middot which religions of avoda zara confuse with God vs. Satan primitive and barbaric superstitions. Torah wisdom requires that students of Torah learn and discern the distinctions which separate one tohor middah from another. The middah of רב חסד for example – best defined through the Aramaic mystic term מאי נפקא מינא ובעברית תמיד מעשה בראשית.
Hence the middah of רחום stands upon the precedents of genocide commandment: war against the peoples of Canaan, the eternal war against Amalek, the judicial death sentence imposed upon the stubborn rebellious minor son, and blessings vs. curses ie ruling the land with judicial justice vs. enduring g’lut Goyim judicial oppression. The spirit of mercy breathes within the Yatzir Ha’Tov when Sanhedrin justices prioritize the blessing of Israel ruling the land with justice by not assimilating or copying the customs and cultures of Goyim populations and/or civilizations which reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The 2nd Sinai commandment quite clear – Jewish avoda zara results in g’lut from our oath brit homelands. Just that simple, no fancy dance’n.
Monotheism not only violates the 2nd Sinai commandment, but it ignores the 10 plagues of Egypt concluded by the splitting of the Sea of Reeds — all of which judged the Gods of Egypt. The brit cut at Gilgal by the prophet Yehoshua prior to conquering 33 Canaanite kingdoms, that HaShem would judge the Gods of Canaan like as did HaShem judge the Gods of Egypt.
“”You Don’t beat a strong enemy by being stronger. You beat him by making him think incorrectly.”” Staff Sergeant Thomas Callahan
The decision made by the Rambam, and virtually all the Reshonim rabbis made famous through the false reference “the Golden Age of Spain”, almost all of these Reshonim rabbis thoroughly assimilated to Ancient Greek philosophy & deductive syllogism logic.
Abraham Ibn Ezra (c. 1089–1167), remains a towering figure in Spanish Reshonim scholarship of the Chumash and Talmud. A prominent Reshonim scholar, poet, and philosopher born in Spain. His son, Joseph Ibn Ezra, converted to Islam. This conversion quite common during that period of mass Jewish assimilation and intermarriage. Various factors, including economic, social, and political pressures, often influenced such decisions.
But by far the most damning influence upon Spanish Reshonim Jewry: the Muslim re-discovery of the concealed ancient Greek texts which produced a Jewish Civil War during the Syrian Greek Seleucid dynasty. During Ibn Ezra’s time, many Jews lived under Islamic rule, Islam reached the pinnacle of their empires’ cultural and social development. Islam dominated all fields of intellectual research. Their societal dynamics produced a culturally vibrant civilization which cast Europe as barbarian cave dwelling Neanderthals by comparison. The conversion of Ezra’s son exposed a complex emotional issue not only for Ibn Ezra, (challenging his beliefs, values, and the cultural identity he championed in his writings), but the Reshonim of Spain cast a light which casts the great Gaonim schools in Iraq into their shadows.
Following the death of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BCE, founded by Seleucus I Nicator, one of Alexander’s generals. The Greek Syrian empire encompassed a vast region stretching from modern-day Turkey and Greece in the northwest to parts of Persia and Pakistan in the east. This Greek dynasty, known for its blend of Greek and Eastern cultures; it promoted Hellenization in the regions it governed, encouraging the spread of Greek language, art, philosophy, and politics. The sycophant assimilated Tzeddukim sought to convert Jerusalem into a Greek City State. These Jewish traitors sought to replace the kabbalah explanation of the 13 tohor middot Oral Torah revelation at Horev made through rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive reasoning logic format with the deductive syllogism logic of Plato and Aristotle.
The Syrian Greeks relied upon sycophant assimilated Tzeddukim – who rejected the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev, and how much more so the kabbalah taught by rabbis Akiva, Yishmael, and Yossi Ha’Gallee; the Tzeddukim, and later Karaim assimilated Jews, the latter who at their height, fully half of all g’lut Jewry accepted and embraced their literal reading of the T’NaCH Primary sources; which view the T’NaCH as religious texts, rather than the P’rushim – who prioritized the Oral Torah as judicial common law courtroom justice.
Hanukkah marks the Jewish Civil War which pitted the assimilated Tzeddukim house of Aaron Cohonim against the P’rushim, who cut a political alliance with the Maccabees. The latter house of Aaron family, lead by Yechuda Maccabee, who died in the war – which defeated the Syrian Greek empire. And resulted in the birth to the Hasmonean Kingdom – 140 to 63 BCE. The 3rd Jewish kingdom prior to the birth of Muhammad and the Islamic movement.
The Muslim conquest of Spain in around 900CE, with mass publication of the lost Ancient Greek thoughts which do dominated the cultural life of the Maccabbees and the Hasmonean kingdom, once again ripped off the bandages of that Tzeddukim/P’rushim Civil War and exposed the Karaite/Rabbinic Civil War of the early Middle Ages. Publication of the Rambam’s Yad, for many Jews torn between the opposing doctrines taught by the Karaim vs. the Rabbis, this halachic code served as a Middle Ground compromise which effectively terminated the influence on a mass scale of the Karaim anti Talmudic theologies. The Rambam actually wrote that with his code, Jews no longer needed to consult with the Talmud!!!