קידושין ערב יום טוב ר”ה

Our Gemara wrestles with the language employed by the Mishna האשה נקנית. The dispute דאורייתא כנגד דרבנן מחלקת, prioritizes the precedent oath between the pieces eternal seed of all future born seed of the Avot. Whereas the דרבנן addresses the acquisition of the young girl ‘with or without’ her consent.

Clearly the custom of arranged marriages a minchag and not a mitzva from the Torah. Rivka consented to marry Yitzak sight unseen. The age range of girls: קתנה – age 3 years or younger. נערה aged 3 to 12 years. בגרת aged 12 years and 6 months or older. The Torah protects the קתנה, if raped she maintains her legal status as a virgin. The נערה her father can anul her vows and marry her without her consent. The בגרת considered an adult אישה. Her father cannot annul her vows and requires her consent to marry.

What does the Gemara language:
וניתני הכא: האיש קונה משום דקא בעי למיתנא סיפא: וקונה את עצמה בדידה … תנא נמי רישא בדידה! [מאי נפקא מינא בין] וניתני האיש קונה, ומקנה מישום דאיכא מיתת הבעל, דלאו איהו קא מקני [אלא] מן שמיא הוא דמקני לה.

Our Gemara presumes the woman has the status of a בגרת. While it’s possible to marry off young girls, even in the times of the Gemara, such a minchag – primarily the consequence of dire poverty, such as a famine might produce.

The aggadic story of Rivka, her marital age status the Reshonim argue. Such “debates” a waste of time. Torah commands prophetic mussar not physical history. Enough said that Rivka was very young and her mother and brother still inquired to her consent. The בראשית aggadic stories come to teach the mussar of Av tohor time-oriented commandments which require k’vanna.

All other trivial issues raised beyond the Av Torah commandment in the Book of בראשית – utterly trivial and not relevant. The Yatzir Ha’raw prioritizes minor points unto major points. Prophetic mussar refers to this Torah curse as calling Night Day and Day Night.

Torah as a משנה תורה-common law legal system breaks down into בראשית: introduces the primary set of commandments Av tohor time-oriented commandments. שמות, ויקרא, ובמדבר: these teach the בניני אבות. The term which rabbi Yishmael’s 13 middot refers to as בנין אב, modern Hebrew refers as תקדימים או פסיקות. The 5th Book of the Torah Constitution known as:

משנה תורהדברים. ביקורת חקיקה או סקירת חקיקה, שניהם מתרגם למשנה תורה
These modern Hebrew words mean ‘Legislative Review’ or ‘Legislative Critique’ respectively. As the Book of בראשית introduces time-oriented Av commandments which require k’vanna; as opposed to קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה תולדות מצוות which do not require k’vanna, found in the next three Books of the Torah Constitution. Prophetic mussar serves to define the “k’vanna” of all tohor time-oriented commandments. Based upon the precedent which commands the House of Aaron to do their work within the Mishkan while breathing Yatzir HaTov middot.

These תולדות secondary Torah commandments, they primarily serve as בניני אבות precedents where by the generations of Israel make a Torah aliya of mindless ritual commandments and robotic halachot muscle memory actions, which do not require k’vanna, raised to Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandments which do require k’vanna; and can only be sanctified when Israel leaves the curse of g’lut and make aliya to Israel. G’lut Jewry live under the Torah curse: they lack the wisdom how to do mitzvot לשמה – the greatest Torah commandment upon which the Mountain of תרי”ג commandments hangs upon the hair of the 1st Sinai commandment.

This limitation of Torah commandments to 613 a תיפש פשט made by the Rambam who took a bird-brained, Xtian fundamentalist fanatic reading of Torah commandments like as did these fraudulent religions of Av tuma avoda zarah, make a literal historical reading of the Creation story. Both this rabbinic karaite and those Xtian religious crazies failed to grasp that the central theme of the sefer בראשית teaches Av tohor time-oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as their tohor middot/Oral Torah spirits which quicken the Yatzir HaTov within the heart.

To shoot a bearing azimuth shall require making an examination of precedents found in mesechto כתובות ויבמות…coming attractions.

To shoot a bearing azimuth shall require making an examination of precedents found in mesechta כתובות ויבמות…coming attractions.

קידושין ערב יום טוב ר”ה

משנה תורה\דברים. ביקורת חקיקה או סקירת חקיקה, שניהם מתרגם למשנה תורה
These modern Hebrew words mean ‘Legislative Review’ or ‘Legislative Critique’ respectively. As the Book of בראשית introduces time-oriented Av commandments which require k’vanna; as opposed to קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה תולדות מצוות which do not require k’vanna, found in the next three Books of the Torah Constitution. Prophetic mussar serves to define the “k’vanna” of all tohor time-oriented commandments. Based upon the precedent which commands the House of Aaron to do their work within the Mishkan while breathing Yatzir HaTov middot.

To shoot a bearing azimuth shall require making an examination of precedents found in mesechta כתובות ויבמות…coming attractions.

A clear example how the Rambam Yad avoda zara worshipped Islam’s false notion of some Universal ONE God Monotheism nonsense.

The 10 plagues judged the Gods of Egypt. Elijah confronted the priests who worshipped Baal! The notion that the Torah commands monotheism confuses Islam with Torah. Flat out just that simple. The Talmud states that the Goyim rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Goyim do not worship their own Gods? Of course Goyim worship their own Gods. Since Goyim do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, therefore Goyim by definition worship other Gods.

Many societies have their own deities and religious systems, which can be seen as a form of polytheism. Hinduism clearly proves that Islamic monotheism – false. The seven mitzvot bnai Noach refers to gere toshav temporary residents living within the borders of Judea. It does not teach the absurd notion of some Universal God. Islam teaches this avoda zarah.

For a ger toshav to violate one of the 7 mitzvot – this qualifies as a Capital Crime/death penalty offence. Only a Sanhedrin court could judicate a Capital Crime/death penalty case. The jurisdiction of all Sanhedrin courts, only within the borders of Judea. Hence the absurd notion that the 7 mitzvot Bnai Noach applies Universally to all Goyim, simply pie in the sky bat shit crazy. The Torah in the Book of D’varim defines two types of Goyim; the ger toshav in mesechta Sanhedrin and the Nacree/Canaani in Baba Kama. Concerning treif meat the Book of D’varim writes: permitted to give the treif meat to the ger toshav or sell the treif meat to the Canaani. The Talmud defines the Chumash. It does not rule independent from the Written Torah Constitutional Mandate. Mesechta Sanhedrin whose Aggada addresses the 7 mitzvot bnai noach therefore refers to the ger toshav of the Torah. Mesechta Baba Kama whose Halacha rules that an Israel exempt to pay damages to a Nacree for damages inflicted upon his goods or person – this mesechta refers to Canaani in the Book of D’varim. Therefore the idea that Ger Toshav/Bnai Noach refers to all Goyim in all lands, utterly absurd.

Therefore its patently false for anyone, especially Goyim or even later Jews, to declare that Torah commands belief in a Universal God when the Talmud teaches that only Israel accepted the Torah at Sinai and that both Yishmael and Esau rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. That Goyim living in Goyim lands – if they profane the 7 mitzvot bnai noach – that a non existent Sanhedrin can put them to death for violating these 7 mitzvot while these Goyim live under the court authority of their own nations! Therefore Torah does not command monotheism. Monotheism profanes the 2nd Sinai commandment.

Torah understands the concept of “faith” as Jews actively who commit their lives to pursue justice – even to their own personal loss. To embracing the cultures and customs wherein the sealed primary sources – they define the fabric of Jewish society; the cultures and customs practiced by the Chosen Cohen seed of the Avot. Walking the path walk of chosen Cohen destiny, this has absolutely nothing what so ever to do with what a person personally believes concerning the nation of the Gods. Avoda zara runs down this completely different and separated faith path.

מחילה purges the trangression offense but it still leaves a stain like as does wine spilt upon a white garment. תשובה actively requires remembering the oaths sworn by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov wherein they cut an oath brit alliance with HaShem through tohor time-oriented Torah commandments to eternally create יש מאין the chosen Cohen people. Nazi antisemitic racists assume that the Jewish people exist as a race; that our DNA determines our Jewishness. WRONG.

The false avoda zarah religions – both Xtianity and Islam worship foreign alien Gods… the 2nd Sinai commandment! T’shuva compares to regret and repentance … this false translation of t’shuva compares to the righteousness of a whore in church following the Saturday night cowboy cattle drive that entered into Dodge City Friday afternoon, where the boys immediately ran to the local whore-house.

T’shuva: process that involves remembering the oaths sworn by the Avot to cut the brit which creates the chosen Cohen people in all and every generation. What specific oaths did Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov swear in order to cut an oath brit Alliance with HaShem that for all generations the chosen Cohen people would live through the holiness of doing tohor time-oriented Av Torah commandments?

The reciprocal nature of the covenantal relationship between HaShem and Avraham. The understanding of oaths in this context is crucial for grasping the depth of the covenant established in the Torah. Avram’s oath back to HaShem understood through prophetic Mussar that He swore an oath through שם ומלכות that the Divine Shekinah spirit would live inside the Yatzir HaTov of his future born (world to come) chosen Cohen people seed.

The phrase שם ומלכות can be interpreted as a reference to the Divine attributes of HaShem. By swearing an oath through these attributes, Avraham acknowledges the sovereignty of God and the importance of aligning his actions with divine mussar Will. The concept of the Shekinah represents the presence of God dwelling among the people. By swearing an oath, Avraham is not only affirming his commitment to God but also ensuring that the Shekinah would reside within his descendants, particularly the Cohen lineage. Consequently the sages in the Talmud instruct: Tefillah a matter of the heart. The false prophet and God JeZeus by stark contrast taught “Our Father who lives in Heaven etc.”

The idea of Yatzir HaTov (the good inclination) suggests that Avraham’s oath involves a commitment to nurturing the spiritual tohor Oral Torah middot first revealed to Moshe at Horev. All the chosen Cohen descendants inherit this Torah education when their fathers dedicate their lives to having children and educating those children through Oral Torah common law. This aligns with the Torah faith which prioritizes the righteous pursuit of justice consequent to Jews damaging other Jews. The Cohen people are chosen to embody and promote ethical behavior or holiness as the pursuit of righteous judicial justice among and between our people.

Prophetic mussar does not limit its instruction to a טיפש פשט – ethical teachings. Rather prophetic mussar defines the meaning and intent of the revelation of the 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe at Horev wherein Jews dedicate their social behavior interactions “in the world to come” – meaning the future – based upon how the Talmud interprets the meaning to tohor middot revealed to Moshe at Horev.

Just as Jews study Torah in order to learn what oaths the 3 Avot swore to cut with HaShem. We likewise study Talmud to understand the fabric warp/weft of the chosen Cohen people customs, cultures, and traditions throughout the Ages. T’NaCH and Talmud, Midrashim and Siddur – they “seal” the cultures and customs the chosen Cohen people socially behave with one another throughout our generations across the Ocean of Time. Hence “time oriented commandments” do not have anything to do with time – understood as a clock that ticks and tocks. Rather time refers to the perpetual observance of a defined culture and custom behavior of the chosen Cohen people throughout eternity. Consequently time-oriented Torah commandments – the Av Commandments of the Torah Sinai revelation.

T’NaCH Talmud Midrash Siddur simply cannot become “Archaic” as the foolish reform rabbis declared in the 19th Century. Any given society must have its defining cultures and customs embraced by that people who make up any given society. The chosen Cohen people, we have cultural traditions which compare to a genetic inheritance while operating completely independent of the Human genetic gnome.

Texts such as the T’NaCH, Talmud, Midrashim, and Siddur play a vital role in “sealing” the cultural practices of the Cohen people. They provide a framework for social behavior and communal identity, ensuring that the values and teachings of the Torah are transmitted across generations. Studying Jewish texts as a means of connecting with the sworn oath alliance brit legacy, first established by the Avot, actively requires – understanding the cultural and ethical fabric of the Cohen people. This Oral Torah approach highlights the dynamic nature of Jewish identity, where tradition and contemporary practice are intertwined across the “Ocean of Time.” Oral Torah shares no common ground with theological creedal belief systems which command believers how they must believe in the Gods.

קידושין

The language “גופא”, the Gemara employs to indicate that discussion returns to Primary priority topic, as opposed to a secondary point of discussion. Our Gemara jumps directly into the פרדס\י”ג מידות Oral Torah wisdom skill of shooting a bearing azimuth, to make a reference direction, typically true north. Commonly used in navigation, surveying, and mapping to describe the orientation of a line or path. The 8th middah of the Oral Torah revelation – אמת – interpreted to mean “Path”. Halacha, as a significant defining term expressed throughout the Talmud likewise understood to mean “Path”.

The study of Talmudic common, prioritizes the “journey” rather than the “destination”. By stark and absolute contrast, the statute halachic codes made famous by the Yad, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch codes prioritize the “destination” over the “journey”; halacha takes on a meaning all its own. Whereas halacha employed within the pages of the Sha’s, so to speak, has no legs of its own to walk. The “משל” statute law halachic codes, they compare to a fiat based economy rather than a gold or silver commodity based economy.

This גופא, represents a subtle shift which post the Rambam Civil War rabbinic authorities utterly fail to either acknowledge or recognize. Our Gemara:
דף יא. גופא. אמר רב יהודה אמר רב אסי כל כסף האמור בתורה צורי ושל דבריהם כסף מדינה The term צורי (tzuri) in this context, denotes gold or silver. The Mishnaic economy during this time period of Roman occupation, an agricultural commodity based currency. Post Nixon, by contrast, the US currency became a fiat based “war time” economy. Governments commonly turn to fiat “monopoly money” currency to pay a ballooning national debt, especially during some “war time” (לאו דוקא) economic crisis.

Lincoln switched to the greenback to pay for the Civil War. This critical precedent later Wilson used as a spring board to restore the 3rd National central bank “Federal Reserve”. The latter institution inserted the US into both European Civil Wars commonly referred to as WWI & WWII. The bureaucratic Federal Reserve has no accountability to the American People. It compares to the US Intelligence Agencies: FBI, CIA, NSA during the first Trump Administration.

This 1913 newly established “National Bank”, unilaterally made huge loans to England and France to finance their war against the German “Huns”. In 1915 the German sinking of the Lusitania aroused public indignation across America. But Wilson primarily based his decision to join the Allied alliance based upon the exorbitant loans which the Federal Reserve unilaterally awarded to England and France. Wilson abandoned the advice given by Washington, in his Farewell Address in 1796, not to make “entangling alliances” with Europe.

Lusitania sinking in 1915, the consequence of unrestricted German submarine warfare, aroused the indignation of American public opinion. But had America joined the Central Powers alliance in 1917 England and France most certainly would have invalidated their debt – Federal Reserve unilateral and not authorized by Congress – loans.

This debt prompted England and France to impose the crushing terms which define the Versailles treaty. England and France demanded war reparations from defeated Germany. Wilson’s National Bank thereafter issued loans to the post-war German government to pay the Allied victors imposed war reparations. This bank duplicated the folly that post Civil War Congress initiated following the American Civil War. Congress restricted the currency of the Greenback by one-third. This decision restricted wealth into the “Robber Baron” monopoly class hands.

Post the fall of Wall Street, Wilson’s National Bank made the exact same error and severely restricted the flow of currency. This error, the root cause of the Great Depression. Consequent to the Great Depression, Wilson’s National Bank, refused to issue further loans to Germany. This set off a catastrophic domino effect that witnessed the rise of Hitler’s Nazi Party which overthrew the Weimar Republic. Wilson’s National Bank made a fundamental shift in the cultures and customs practiced by the American people and Federal Governments. Like, for example, the British East India Company’s monopoly on tea, which resulted in the Boston Tea Party.

Once the Federal Government entered into the European fold of Central European economic “tradition” of Governments establishing Corporate monopolies, initiated likewise by the post Civil War ‘radical republicans’ in Congress, whose policies established the ‘Robber Baron’ monopoly class. This shift in “tradition” away from State intra-State trade autonomy, caused an American economic switch from Adam Smith’s lesafair economics to FDR’s John Maynard Keynes – Central Bank socialist economic central planning fiat currency. FDR made owning gold illegal.

Have made a digression from the גופא of this common law commentary to the Talmud in an attempt to differentiate “tradition” between T’NaCH\Talmudic Court-based Judicial Common Law to “tradition” of the Yad, Tur, Shulkan Aruch statute halachic religious ritual legalism. This issue raises … who determines the culture and customs practiced by the chosen Cohen people; can our generation achieve Zionist self-determination and restore the Torah as the Written Constitution of our Republic of 12 Tribes in the Middle East; which includes the Talmud as the working model for our lateral common law Sanhedrin court Federal system; the Sanhedrin, mandated with the Constitutional power of Legislative Review over state and Federal government statute laws?

גופא – דתני האיש מקדש משום דקא בעי למיתני כסף וכסף מנ”ל? (דברים כב) כי יקח איש אישה. וכתיב התם (בראשית כג) נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני. וקיחה איקרי קנין.

Our Gemara now shoots an azimuth bearing. We have returned to our opening paragraph. Talmud directly weaves warp/weft threads to produce the “garments” of the Cohen priestly service within the Mishkan. This משל directly ties into the Book of שמות. What shapes and determines the Cohen “tradition” of practiced culture and custom – this the underlying study of the entire Talmud. Whereas statute law Judaism prioritizes religion, the Torah defines faith as צדק צדק תרדוף – judicial justice which strives to fairly compensate damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B.

The building of Jewish families, the bedrock whereby the chosen Cohen people live from generation to generation. A man marries a woman with the core obligation to produce children and educate these children in the oath brit alliance cut by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov. This tohor time-oriented Av commandment defines the essence of the Book of בראשית.

Rabbinic Judaism changed the “tradition” of tohor time-oriented Av commandments to a subsidiary class of Torah commandments which require k’vanna. Some undefined term(s), understood as “concentration”; or for example, attention paid to the literal meaning of words printed in the Siddur. This error duplicates the avoda zara of both “daughter religions” vis-a-vis the revelation of the שם השם in the first Sinai commandment.

Statute law directly compares to translating the Divine Spirit Name to Words. The difference between directly viewing a beautiful sun-set and a camera picture taken of that beautiful sun-set. Exceptionally difficult for words to express the subtle distinction between shades of the same colors. The obvious difference between a painted work of art vs. a print of that painted work of art.

How much more so the Divine Spirit Name revelation at Sinai, expressed in the opening first commandment. Substituting word translations for Divine Spirits, like the 13 middot of the Horev revelation, herein defines the treif tumah Av tumah avoda zarah – the Sin of the Golden Calf – which defines the 2nd Sinai commandment, together and along with the precedent negative commandments which forbid 1. assimilation 2. intermarriage.

Oral Torah פרדס logic employs positive and negative Torah commandments as בניני אבות-precedents to interpret the mussar k’vanna of Av tohor time-oriented primary Torah commandments, which create the עולם הבא of the chosen Cohen people יש מאין – תמיד מעשה בראשית. This latter phrase repeated twice within the opening blessing of tefillah דאורייתא ק”ש.

Greek culture developed philosophy. Hebrew culture spins around the central axis of “Big Picture” ideas. The two cultures – day and night, oil and water — different. The ‘Golden Age’ of Spanish Jewry witnessed the Samaritan, Tzeddukim, Karaim assimilation avoda zarah of Jews wherein our rabbinic leaders functioned as the tip of the spear-head wherein they murdered the Judges of the Great Sanhedrin to worship the Golden Calf.

Brit does not correctly translate as covenant. Brit correctly understood – as a sworn alliance. Its now Elul: the King is in the fields. T’shuva requires that Jews remember/יום הזכרון the oaths wherein the Avot did the tohor time oriented commandment which continually creates the chosen Cohen people יש מאין.

The mitzva of קידושין serves as a בנין אב-precedent that interprets the k’vanna of the Av tohor time-oriented commandment – brit cut between the pieces. K’vanna requires prophetic mussar as its יסוד. This k’vanna separates the Priority Av tohor time-oriented commandments from the secondary positive & negative Torah & Talmudic mitzvot — which do not require k’vanna.

Reading words from a book simply does not compare to the discipline of shooting בנין אב bearing azimuths. Consequently, translating T’NaCH or Talmud, worse than an utter waste of time. People read these “books”, but fail to study common law. Common law/Oral Torah – no book can write down or contain. Why? Because the study of common law depends upon comparing similar Case/Rule precedents. The sages “wrote” the Oral Torah into the T’NaCH and Talmud. But a scholar must make the precedent search – not the printed book. The Talmud only functions as a guide. You can lead a donkey to the trough, but you cannot make that ass drink.

דכתיב (שם מט) השדה אשר קנה אברהם אי נמי (ירמיה לב) שדות בכסף יקנו — תני האשה נקנית.

Our Gemara jumps through a lot of hoops of T’NaCH kabbalah. The ass reads and moves ahead to follow the Gemara train of thought. The donkey stops and weighs the prophetic mussar contained by these Aggadic sources derived from T’NaCH Primary Sources. From my experiences in Yeshiva, the vast majority of Yeshiva asses do not make a common law study of T’NaCH nor Talmud primary sources. At best, they rely upon g’lut commentaries written over a thousand years later.

How utterly pathetic. Worse, the rabbis of these Yeshivot fail to demand that their students study common law. They too have fallen into the trap of assuming that the purpose of the Talmud – to shape and define religious halachic observance rather than training our youth to pursue righteous judicial justice within the borders of the oath-sworn brit lands of our Republic.

The disgrace that rabbis fail to discern the Life-death/blessing-curse distinction which forever separates the Torah blessing of living as the chosen Cohen people in ארץ ישראל from the Torah curse of enduring the judicial oppression of Par’o and his court system which defines the entire history of Jewry in alien foreign lands which culminated with the Shoah. The Yeshiva rabbis compare to brown-nose boot-licker syphilitic-syphicants.

They do not teach Yeshiva students how to study the Torah לשמה. They do not teach פרדס\י”ג מידות Oral Torah logic. They pervert the T’NaCH and Talmud into children’s bedtime stories. Their belief system of statute halachic religious law has taken Jews completely off the דרך. Hence, no different from the Wilderness generation, they refused to encourage a mass aliyah to the Palestine Mandate before the British slammed the door shut with their 2nd White Paper.

Their moral cowardice provoked the Torah Shoah curse, just as the Wilderness Generation has no portion in the World to Come. Prophetic mussar, if easy to swallow, the generations of Israel would not have murdered the prophets. How many times did Israel seek the death of Moshe? Prophetic mussar has a bite worse than any other predator on the Planet Earth.

To grow and mature the seeds of prophetic mussar within the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the heart defines the purpose of the revelation of the Torah, expressed through the wisdom of the NaCH, Talmud, Midrashim, and Siddur. Hence the translation of mussar as “rebuke” as brain-dead idiotic as to translate t’shuva, unilaterally determined as repentance! Treif translations suck. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n.

Learning how to live as the time-oriented commandment created – Cohen people – requires more than simply a primary first grade education that instructs children how to read. T’NaCH & Talmud codified into books. To quote Snape of Harry Potter: “Obviously.” But the wisdom kabbalah of Oral Torah פרדס\י”ג מידות logic requires the patience and skill of making precedent bearing interpretations which translate Mishnaic living reality to Gemara contour maps, herein separates the pursuit of dynamic judicial justice from static dogma of religious halachic statute law.

The study of Jewish common law requires independent research. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n. Worlds separate the donkey from the ass. The latter, clearly a pejorative metaphor comparable how Torah common law perceives the Xtian/Islamic counterfeit Protocols of the Elders of Zion religions – ‘by their fruits you shall know them’. The Yad, Tur, and Aruch statute halachic codes follow the path trodden by these two gross counterfeit religions.

קידושין

The opening Av Mishna of קידושין – האשה נקנית, previously shot a bearing through the fixed known points of the opening and closing of the first sugya:
האשה נקנית מאי שנא (שהוא דומה למאי נפקא מינא? זה אחד מן הי”ג מידות תורה שבעל פה – שנקרא רב חסד.) הכא דתני האשה נקנית ומ”ש התם דתני האיש מקדש.
And compared this fixed point upon my Gemara “Map” to a point which concludes, my error with the closing fixed point of the 2nd sugya of this “Map” Gemara:

מיבמה שאינה יוצאה בגט יוצאה בחליצה

However, made a mistake, the end of the first sugya of this Gemara on dof .ג wherein the Gemara brings the fixed point location “on the Map” of:

זו אחת מן הדרכים ששוו גיטי נשים לשחרורי עבדים ניתני דברים אלא כל היכא דאיכא פלוגתא תני דרכים וכל היכא דליכא פלוגתא תני דברים. דיקא נמי דקתני סיפא ר”א אומר אתרוג שוה לאילן לכל דבר ש”מ.

Now a virgin girl acquired through קידושין simply does not compare not to divorce nor to Yibbum – as concludes the 2nd point on the “Map” of the 2nd sugya of our Gemara. The issue in question: what exactly does the Mishna language נקנית refer to? The point of zero disputes the language of the Chumash concerning the acquisition of both slaves and Yibbum widows. The dispute, which בנין אב sh’itta precedent does the Court accept to make an inductive reasoned conclusion – “interpretation”.

A common law court – by definition – both the defense and prosecuting attorney submit precedent briefs which support how their respective sh’itta interprets the language of the Torah. The “acquisition” through קידושין of a virgin young woman, does not compare to how slaves acquire their freedom or widows “acquired” by the brother of their deceased husband.

So why compare the Case/Rule cases of either this or that to the our case of the acquisition of a young virgin girl? Herein defines the opening thesis statement question which our Gemara makes on this the Av Mishna of קידושין.

The scholarship and inductive reasoning required to “shoot a bearing” in Talmudic common law, simply a completely different wisdom than that of reading a novel word for word. Herein the explanation why the translations made upon both the T’NaCH and Talmud – utterly worthless sophomoric undergraduate inferior learning.

The opening מאי נפקא מינא to האיש מקדש likewise contrasts rather than compares. A man simply not a woman any more than a virgin “compares” to a widow or a divorcee or a slave. The study of any literature requires sharpening the skills of “comparison and contrast”. English literature 101. Our Gemara compares to a topographical military map that has elevation rings. By shooting a bearing azimuth, likened to the employ of a compass in orienteering. T’NaCH\Talmudic common law examines precedent cases to other precedent cases in order to reach a conclusive judicial ruling of the case currently heard before the Court.

The Talmud language likewise compares to the warp/weft of a loom. Wherein the rabbis weave the fabric of culture and custom which defines the society of the chosen Cohen people. It’s this very scholarship – defining the culture and customs of the chosen Cohen people – which defines the sum total of the entire T’NaCH/Talmudic literature in one sentence.

Contrast the 2nd Sinai commandment – avoda zara. The Koran prioritized the theological creed known as Monotheism. Whereas the Torah language of the ערב רב openingly acknowledges, especially through the Av metaphor, sin of the Golden Calf, that assimilated Jews, no different than from Goyim, both this and that worship other Gods. Intermarriage contrasts with קידושין.

The Torah oath brit alliance has blessing vs. curse; life vs. death. Keep the terms of the sworn alliance and live as the chosen Cohen people through the Av commandments known as time-oriented mitzvot, within the borders of the nation of the Cohen people inside the Middle East. קידושין, like shabbat or Moshiach, a tohor time-oriented Torah commandments.

The Rambam views Kiddushin as a rabbinic enactment rather than a direct commandment from the Torah. He emphasizes that while the Torah provides the framework for marriage, the specific act of Kiddushin, established through rabbinic authority. He reads the Torah exactly like Xtians “read” their sophomoric bible translations. His Yad attempts to Translate the Talmudic halachot into Hebrew! His utter and total ignorance of פרדס inductive reasoning, his avoda zara replacement theology substituted the Order which Aristotle’s deductive syllogism mandates.

The downstream generations of rabbis failed to understand this gross error and correct it; despite the rebuke made by the Rosh common law halachic code! The mussar of the Rosh, who followed the vision of the B’HaG\Rif/Tosafot model, rabbinic orthodox Judaism totally refused to hear. Swept under the rug, the decree of נידוי – not simply limited to the court of Rabbeinu Yonah in Spain – as the post Rambam Civil War rabbis falsely teaches Yeshiva students! But far more significant, the Rashi\Baali Tosafot common law school in France. In 1232 the rabbis of Paris imposed the ban of נידוי upon the assimilated perversions written by the Rambam Karaite.

Both this and that “literalist-טיפש פשט” heretics, both read the T’NaCH or Talmud from a strictly literalist perspective. A simple glance of his Sefer HaMitzvot, which excludes the Torah commandment of קידושין exposes the crud Av tuma avoda zarah which the Rambam perversion worships. Jews who “obey” halacha as determined by the “cross-dress” Rambam code, walk off the path of the Chosen Cohen oath brit alliance faith – to actively pursue judicial justice which dedicates to make fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B among our chosen Cohen People – who have the burden to rule our brit lands – unlike how Par’o, and his court which judicially oppressed g’lut Israel.

However, the Rashi opening likewise failed to prioritize the central issue of Torah נקנית. The Baali Tosafot delves into the Torah subject of acquisitions and points out that it does not specify, “virgin”. This seems false to me. The Rivka Torah precedent, emphasized her virginity. Rivka serves as the Torah precedent-model for our Av Mishna and its Gemara here. Non the less the commentary of the Tosafot makes a similar “Map” bearing sh’itta as did my commentary. This sharply contrasts with the Rashi dictionary like definition approach to Talmudic scholarship.

The opening Rosh fails to emphasize the contrast between a virgin girl to Avraham’s plot of burial lands. Acquisition of a virgin girl for marriage simply does not compare to the Case of Avraham burying Sarah following the horror of the Akedah. The dismal failure of rabbinic downstream commentaries to connect this Av Mishna to 1. the resurrection of the dead, connected to the death of Sarah. This story serves as a tremendous Torah event. Why?

The mitzva from the Torah of קידושין, a man acquires the נפש עולם הבא of his wife through the future born children which he baal intends through the mitzva of קידושין. Hence this mitzva, directly linked to the brit cut between the pieces wherein childless Avram cut a brit that time-oriented Torah commandments eternally create יש מאין the Chosen Cohen seed of the Avot. This Cohen seed, not conceived through sex and sperm or genetics or race but only through Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandments.

The Samaritans, Tzeddukim, Karaim – one and all fail to learn Torah common law. Hence they deny the mitzva of the resurrection from the dead found in the language of the Written Torah. Rambam, no different that he too excludes the Torah commandment of קידושין from the Torah! Great and mighty empires have risen and fallen, but the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot live unto all generations! How? Through tohor time-oriented Av Torah commandments which require prophetic mussar as their internal k’vanna.

The Opening first two words of our Mishna holds a Torah commandment “BIG PICTURE” vision. Alas the famous commentators could not see the forest through the trees. It seems to me that every Av Mishna throughout Rabbi Yechuda’s common law Sha’s directly plugs into Torah commandments. ברכות opens with kr’ea shma as tefillah דאורייתא. Shabbat distinguishes between the עשר דיבורות in שמות ודברים.

The chiddushim of the Sha’s Mishna on the Chumash requires immediate address. The contrast between the Chumash and the Talmud a day vs. night obvious distinction. Hence this begs the question, how does the one express the other? The subject of קידושין way down the list of the B’HaG mitzvot דאורייתא priorities. The comparison to Avram acquiring a burial plot with money, what connection to a rabbinic commandment? Hence קידושין like all other “rabbinic” mitzvot, when elevated to tohor time-oriented commandments – their status achieves the aliyah to ארץ ישראל-mitzvot from the Torah! Just as the resurrection from the dead, a mitzva of the Torah – as a tohor time-oriented commandment! How?

The precedent of Avram’s stern mussar to HaShem – “I have no children to inherit my Name”. The cycle of life & death common to all man-kind. What makes the brit cut between the pieces unique? The Torah vision known as time-oriented commandments which both the NT and Koran ignore like they do the revelation of the first commandment Sinai Name – the greatest commandment in the whole of the Torah. The commandment to love God and Man merely a פרט ולא הכלל. This gross fundamental error proves the NT as a Protocols of the Elders of Zion – an utter fraud.

The דאורייתא of the time-oriented mitzva of Moshiach dedicates the Yatzir Ha’Tov spirits of middot to pursue righteous judicial courtroom common law justices within the borders of brit ארץ ישראל. The Pauline “original sin of Adam’s fall from the Garden”, compares to how the “prophet” Natan foisted Shabbatai Tzvi (1626–1676) as a false messiah. The genesis of that avoda zara error, Jews lacked clarity that Parshat שופטים ושוטרים in the Book of דברים understands the latter as prophet “policemen” enforcers of judicial courtroom rulings. Prophets, as agents of the Sanhedrin courts empowered through Torah constitutional mandate to anoint and depose kings! No Sanhedrin court has jurisdiction in g’lut. Hence the theological narishkeit vomited by Natan – not prophetic, most definitely not mussar.

A Torah prophet commands mussar to all generations of the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot. Chag יום הזכרון – a call through the sounding of the shofar for Jews to remember the oaths which the Avot swore a brit with HaShem to father the chosen Cohen seed for eternity. The language eternity implies the language: “resurrection from the dead” by means of a logical דיוק/inference.
____________________________________
____________________________________
[[[ The term kinyan in this context reflects sanctification (hekdesh) — not legal possession (reshut). That’s a key Talmudic distinction upheld in both sugyot and later halachic development.]]] The verb choice language of the Mishna, compares to the required explanation how a korban does not exist as a “barbeque offered up to Heaven”. Both terms of kiddushin and korban make a dedication of “holiness”, through the root verb of ק-ד-ש. Hence just as a the precedent of קידושין serves as a בנין אב which makes a depth analysis interpretation of the “brit cut between the pieces” — made in response to Avram’s complaint “What can you give me, I have no children”, so too all later korbanot dedicated at the Mishkan require swearing a Torah oath. To do this requires swearing a blessing which contains שם ומלכות. Saying Tehillem prayers by contrast, far less “holy” because they do not swear a Torah oath which requires שם ומלכות.

[[[You assert Kiddushin is not daorayta — aligning with Rambam’s supposed “Karaite” misstep — but this, respectfully, misrepresents both Rambam and the structure of Torah law.]]] Incorrect. I דוקא rebuke the Rambam who makes a literal reading of the language of the Chumash (the 5 Books of Torah) wherein he rules the mitzva of kiddushin a rabbinic commandment. I compared this mitzva of kiddushin to the time-oriented Torah commandments of Shabbat and Moshiach. Both Torah commandments not rabbinic commandments.

[[[ But Rambam, in all his philosophical articulation, was never guilty of that. His use of Aristotelian language was functional, not theological. His Yad HaChazaka is an attempt to organize law, not supplant the chiyuv of Mussar or prophetic command. If anything, he created a bridge for minds of his generation to see the inner harmony of halacha.]]] The Rambam replaced the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva/Yishmael’s פרדס\י”ג מידות inductive reasoning which compares a Case/Rule Mishnaic judicial ruling to lower court Baraitot wherein the Gemara employs פרדס וי”ג מידות comparisons of Case/Rule cases “compared” to similar but different Case\Rule cases. The Rambam code organizes his halachic rulings into statute halachic categories. He therein switched Mishnaic/Gemara common law unto Greek/Roman statute law. A direct Torah violation of דברים 12:30-31.

The summation of the entire Talmud – to one sentence: to shape and determine culture and customs practiced by the chosen Cohen people, the Rambam code directly and flagrantly violated. פרדס logic simply not a Greek/Roman syllogism logic any more than Day is Night or Night is Day.

The Hilchot of the Rambam Yad, systematically categorizes Jewish law into 14 books, each addressing different aspects of halacha – based upon the Order attained through Greek deductive reasoning.

This systematic organization of Hilchot into egg-crate/\shoe-boxed – categories sets the Yad completely apart from the B’HaG, Rif, Rosh Hilchot, organized around Mishnaic language. The Order of the Rambam Hilchot uprooted and destroyed all Talmudic points of reference where-from the Talmud, this much later Reshon made his Halachic rulings.

All the commentaries written on the Yad directly address this fundamental flaw. However, the damage already done. Quoting a Gemara source as does for example Karo’s כסף משנה, fails to make the required משנה תורה which makes a re-interpretation of the language of the Mishna which that Gemara comments upon. To correctly understand how to validate the invalid Yad, necessary to affix a Rambam halachic ruling to a similar B’HaG, Rif, or Rosh ruling wherein the latter scholars open, as does my commentary here, back to the language of the Mishna itself.

This the month of Elul, ‘the King is in the Field’. Meaning, its a time for Jews to remember the oaths sworn by the Avot to create time-oriented Av Torah commandments which continually create the chosen Cohen people יש מאין.

What does Midah k’neged Midah mean? The concept of “Midah k’neged Midah” (measure for measure) is a fundamental principle in Jewish thought and ethics, particularly within the context of the Torah and later interpretations in the Talmud. This principle emphasizes the idea that one’s actions have corresponding consequences, reflecting a moral order in the universe.

This phrase, divorced from the Torah constitutional mandate which authorizes Great Sanhedrin courts to exercise Legislative Review over the governments of Tribes or even kings of Israel, suggests something akin to an assimilated idea of Karma. Which literally means “action” or “deed” in Sanskrit. It encompasses not just physical actions but also thoughts and intentions. The principle asserts that good actions lead to positive outcomes, while negative actions result in adverse consequences.

Jews in exile often navigate between their traditional beliefs and the surrounding cultures. This can lead to varying degrees of assimilation, which may affect their understanding and practice of concepts like “Midah k’neged Midah.” Jews in exile often face the challenge of maintaining their identity while adapting to the surrounding cultures. This can lead to a reinterpretation of traditional concepts, such as “Midah k’neged Midah,” as they integrate elements from their host cultures. The assimilation of ideas can sometimes dilute the original meanings or lead to new interpretations that resonate with contemporary experiences.

Jews living in exile often navigate the complexities of maintaining their cultural and religious identity while adapting to the surrounding societies. This can lead to a reinterpretation of traditional concepts, including Midah k’neged Midah. The integration of surrounding cultural elements can influence how Jewish communities understand and practice their beliefs. This may result in a blending of ideas, where traditional concepts are viewed through the lens of contemporary experiences and values. This dynamic Midah k’neged Midah directly refers to the conflict between the Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. the Yatzir Ha’Raw within the heart. Specifically it contrast tohor vs. tumah middot! ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון וכו, the revelation of the 13 Oral Torah middot at Horev on Yom Kippur serves as the יסוד meaning of Midah k’neged Midah. Yet g’lut Jews cursed by the Torah curse of not obeying the Torah לשמה, they can not discern one tohor middah from another or even tohor middot vs tumah middot in the eternal struggle of Yaacov and Esau within the womb of Rivka.

Have encountered a Xtian believer whose opinion merits discussion.

Frank Hubeny says:

September 11, 2025 at 11:45 am

The important point to remember, Moshe, is that Jesus did – in fact – fulfill the words of the prophets.

That is why Akiva and company had to alter the genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 and move the Book of Daniel from the Nev’im to the Ketuvim section of the Tanach. They wanted to pretend that He didn’t and hide the fact that they knew He did.

So, now that your history has been corrupted, where does that leave you? Is Kabballah enough? Is mussar enough? Are “Case/Rule precedents” enough? It sounds like Akiva sentenced you to perpetual exile.

You can always be grafted back in unless you decide to talk yourself out of it.

Romans 11:23 NKJV – 23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
mosckerr says:

September 11, 2025 at 10:27 pm

Bunk. Mussar by definition applicable across the board to all generations of Israel. Hence impossible to “fulfill” prophesy as the false gospel narrative lies. Your speculation – simply slander. You offer no evidence to support your opinion – other than that you do not read Hebrew or Aramaic.

Daniel a mystic not a prophet. The Book of Daniel compares to the relationship which the Gemara has with the Mishna. The generation of Ezra primarily sealed the T’NaCH NOT rabbi Akiva some 600 years later. Oooops try again.

By the language of the Book of Daniel itself, the story occurs in Babylonian exile. Prophets the “Police enforcers” of the Sanhedrin Judges. The jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin courts – only within the borders of Judea. By extension this applies equally to prophets. Therefore Daniel a mystic and not a prophet. Oooops try again.

Your revisionist history, simply false. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n. משנה תורה a Torah 2nd given name for the Book of דברים, if you read the Torah in Hebrew you would immediately know this. Mishna Torah means common law. Common law stands on the foundation of precedents/בניני אבות in Hebrew. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n.

The confusion concerning the Aramaic Book of Daniel, even Rashi and later the Rambam debated this point. Also the Zohar weighs in on the Book of Daniel. Both the Book of Daniel and the Zohar written in Aramaic – and both this and that instruct mysticism. Mesechta Megillah, a tractate on Chag Purim clearly states that Daniel – not a prophet. Rashi on this dof of Gemara concedes that Daniel – not a prophet. But about 8 pages thereafter refers to Daniel as a prophet. This contradiction of Rashi’s commentary merits address.

By the time of the Reshonim scholars of the Dark and Middle Ages of European g’lut, Jews lacked a clear understanding of T’NaCH prophets. No Reshon validates that Parshat Shoftim and Shotrim in D’varim, that the latter enforcers existed as “Prophets”. Traditional commentaries such as Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Ramban do not explicitly state that the Shotrim served as prophets in their interpretations of Deuteronomy 16:18. Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, like the classical Rishonim, does not explicitly state that the Shotrim in Deuteronomy 16:18 directly referenced as prophets. The connection between Shotrim and prophetic roles simply not a common interpretation found in traditional commentaries. Most classical sources focus on the Shotrim as law enforcers and assistants to the judges without explicitly linking them to the prophetic function.

G’lut Jewry, estranged from the realities that the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin courts – limited to within the borders of Judea. Rav Shwartz, who gave me sh’micha, his beit din erroneously attempted to involve the Sanhedrin court in Jerusalem, in a legal dispute in America involving one of the leaders of the Bnai Noach movement. This fundamental ignorance concerning the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin court directly contributed to the collapse of Rav Shwartz attempt to restore Sanhedrin (common law) courts in the Jewish state.

The Yerushalmi includes a dispute Tannaim over whether king David established a small Sanhedrin court in Damascus. The small Sanhedrin courts, based upon the three established by Moshe Rabbeinu on the other side of the Jordan river, from this precedent Torah common law learns that these small Sanhedrin courts, they define the borders of newly conquered lands annexed to the Jewish state.

The Rambam civil war greatly further eroded rabbinic knowledge of the functions of Torah common law. As a minor judge on the attempt to re-establish the Sanhedrin court system within Israel, I watched in horror as the vast majority of my rabbinic peers voted to base the authority of the Sanhedrin court upon the Rambam’s statute halachic code.

These examples caused me to reach the conclusion that post the Rambam Civil War that rabbinic Judaism had abandoned the דרך faith to pursue judicial justice as the יסוד responsibility for accepting the revelation of the Torah at Sinai לשמה. While I can validate the arguments made by the RambaN in his מלחמת השם against the Baal HaMaor’s rebuke against the Rif code for reducing the primacy of Talmudic common law in favor of making a far easier halachic definition of religious halachic observance among g’lut Jewry.

The times absolutely demanded halachic simplifications due to the almost impossibility to travel on a collapsed Roman international road system. None the less, the codes effectively changed the priority established by the Framers of both the T’NaCH and Talmud to serve as the vision model to re-establish Sanhedrin common law lateral courtrooms within the borders of the Jewish Republic which have the Torah Constitutional mandate of Legislative Review. And hence none of the Reshonim commentaries on the Torah prioritized the the definition of Shotrim as “prophets”. A critical and fundamental error of Reshonim scholarship. Consequently, Rashi himself confused, and later referred to the mystic Daniel as a “prophet” in his commentary to Mesechta Megillah.

Have encountered a Xtian believer whose opinion merits discussion.

Frank Hubeny says:

September 11, 2025 at 11:45 am

The important point to remember, Moshe, is that Jesus did – in fact – fulfill the words of the prophets.

You can always be grafted back in unless you decide to talk yourself out of it.

September 11, 2025 at 10:27 pm

Never in the 2000+ years Jews existed as refugees in Arab or Muslim lands did any Goy court hold either Church or Mosque accountable for war-crimes committed against Humanity – which includes the Jewish people. The Torah defines faith as: Justice pursue. Only under the terms of a Torah blessing: Jews ruling our Homeland, does the potential for the establishment of Sanhedrin common law courts which have the Torah Constitutional mandate of Legislative Review. This fact has zero to do with the theology vomited by Romans 11:23. Justice has nothing to do with any belief system. Torah common law stands upon Case/Rule court precedents. Its this fact which separates Torah common law from Greek/Roman statute law.

The confusion concerning the Aramaic Book of Daniel, even Rashi and later the Rambam debated this point. Also the Zohar weighs in on the Book of Daniel. Both the Book of Daniel and the Zohar written in Aramaic – and both this and that instruct mysticism. Mesechta Megillah, a tractate on Chag Purim clearly states that Daniel – not a prophet. Rashi on this dof on Gemara concedes that Daniel – not a prophet, but about 8 pages thereafter refers to Daniel as a prophet. This contradiction of Rashi’s commentary merits address.

By the time of the Reshonim scholars of the Dark and Middle Ages of European g’lut, Jews lacked a clear understanding of T’NaCH prophets. No Reshon validates that Parshat Parshat Shoftim and Shotrim in D’varim, that the latter enforcers existed as “Prophets”. Traditional commentaries such as Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Ramban do not explicitly state that the Shotrim served as prophets in their interpretations of Deuteronomy 16:18. Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, like the classical Rishonim, does not explicitly state that the Shotrim in Deuteronomy 16:18 directly referenced as prophets. The connection between Shotrim and prophetic roles simply not a common interpretation found in traditional commentaries. Most classical sources focus on the Shotrim as law enforcers and assistants to the judges without explicitly linking them to the prophetic function.

G’lut Jewry, estranged from the realities that the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin courts – limited to within the borders of Judea. Rav Shwartz, who gave me sh’micha, his beit din erroneously attempted to involve the Sanhedrin court in Jerusalem, in a legal dispute in America involving one of the leaders of the Bnai Noach movement. This fundamental ignorance concerning the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin court directly contributed to the collapse of Rav Shwartz attempt to restore Sanhedrin (common law) courts in the Jewish state.

The Yerushalmi includes a dispute Tannaim over whether king David established a small Sanhedrin court in Damascus. The small Sanhedrin courts, based upon the three established by Moshe Rabbeinu on the other side of the Jordan river, from this precedent Torah common law learns that these small Sanhedrin courts, they define the borders of newly conquered lands annexed to the Jewish state.

The Rambam civil war greatly further eroded rabbinic knowledge of the functions of Torah common law. As a minor judge on the attempt to re-establish the Sanhedrin court system within Israel, I watched in horror as the vast majority of my rabbinic peers voted to base the authority of the Sanhedrin court upon the Rambam’s statute halachic code.

These examples caused me to reach the conclusion that post the Rambam Civil War that rabbinic Judaism had abandoned the דרך faith to pursue judicial justice as the יסוד responsibility for accepting the revelation of the Torah at Sinai לשמה. While I can validate the arguments made by the RambaN in his מלחמת השם against the Baal HaMaor’s rebuke against the Rif code for reducing the primacy of Talmudic common law in favor of making a far easier halachic definition of religious halachic observance among g’lut Jewry.

The times absolutely demanded halachic simplifications due to the almost impossibility to travel on a collapsed Roman international road system. None the less, the codes effectively changed the priority established by the Framers of both the T’NaCH and Talmud to serve as the vision model to re-establish Sanhedrin common law lateral courtrooms within the borders of the Jewish Republic which have the Torah Constitutional mandate of Legislative Review. And hence none of the Reshonim commentaries on the Torah prioritized the the definition of Shotrim as “prophets”. A critical and fundamental error of Reshonim scholarship. Consequently, Rashi himself confused, and later referred to the mystic Daniel as a “prophet” in his commentary to Mesechta Megillah.

The stark contrast how Goyim read their sophomoric moronic bible translations vs Torah common law which stands upon precedents.

__________________________________________________

Intentional Faith·pastorhogg.net

Resting in Reverence

As the day ends, Psalm 2:10–11 reminds us to serve the Lord with reverence, acknowledging His holiness and unshakable rule. This evening is an opportunity to…..
__________________________________________________
Interpreting Tehillem ב. Man struggles with tumah middot within his Yatzir Ha’Raw. This struggle – Universal within all Mankind. If National rulers struggle with their tumah Yatzir how much more so the common man on the street. What does “kingship in Zion” refer to? As a physical king gives direction to the nation so too and how much more so the struggling Yatzirot within the heart. Who wears the crown of the king? The tohor Yatzir Ha’Tov or the tumah Yatzir Ha’Raw?

Israel’s acceptance of the oath brit at Sinai done לשמה או לא לשמה? Clearly the Wilderness generation who accepted the Torah at Sinai did so לא לשמה. Forty days following the Torah revelation the ערב רב שאין לכם יראת שמים imposed a substitute theology of the WORD אלהים which replaced the first Sinai Torah acceptance – שם השם לשמה. Had the Wilderness generation accepted the Torah revelation at Sinai לשמה, they would not have given the assimilated and intermarried Israel/Egyptian ערב רב the time of day. But instead all the sages of the Great Sanhedrin, except for Aaron, MURDERED.

A blessing requires שם ומלכות. The charge of the King, to direct tohor spirits and crown the Yatzir Ha’Tov king within the heart. Superficial reading of Tehillem ב through the sophomoric moronic translation that “KING” refers to a physical/historical son of David – utterly perverts the k’vanna and mussar instructed by this Tehillem! The admonition to kings and judges which ב rebukes, directly addresses the struggle of opposing tohor vs tumah spirits within the Yatzirot within the heart.

Divine Law, not some pie in the Sky “Word of God”, but rather the pursuit of righteous judicial justice among our people. Fair compensation of damages inflicted defines Torah faith. Only through justice can an Israel trust another Israel following a fight/Civil War among ourselves. The metaphor “Kissing the son”, hence refers to the נמשל of tohor middot which the Yatzir Ha’tov breathes.

Tefillah a matter of the heart not the place or location where one prays. How much more so NOT an issue of National leaders but rather the Yatzir Tohor within our hearts! Justice can never prevail over our own interests if we do not dedicate our lives, comparable to a korban dedicated upon the altar in Jerusalem, to the righteous pursuit of justice among our people.

The concept of judicial awe as an ethical restraint is vital for legitimate jurisprudence. Instructs the mussar, that without a deep respect for remembering the oaths sworn by the Avot wherein they swore and cut an oath brit with HaShem, to create the chosen Cohen people through the performance of time oriented Torah commandments, that no generation of Israel can dominate the tumah Yatzir within all our hearts.

Tehillem ב stands upon the T’NaCH precedents of צדק צדק תרדוף and 2 Chronicles 19:6–7 (Jehoshaphat’s reforms): “Consider what you do, for you judge not for man but for HaShem… let the fear of HaShem be upon you.” Impossible to learn and interpret Tehillem without learning it back to similar Case/Rule precedents found within the T’NaCH itself. The tuma Yatzir continually seduces Man to make a shallow reactionary reading of T’NaCH verses snatched like Israeli hostages by Hamas on Oct 7th. This tumah Yatzir defines how the Roman NT gospel fraud makes a superficial and
inconsequential symbolism of p’sukim robbed and raped out of context from the Books of the Prophets and the NT framers declare that their Man/God JeZeus fulfilled the words of the prophets.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: