קידושין

Continuing where our learning left off:  It  cannot be over emphasized that the Name of the Game in the study of both T’NaCH and Talmudic literature absolutely requires the generations to develop the skills required to “shoot a bearing azimuth”.   Torah common law stands upon the foundation of precedents; this applies equally – straight across the board – to both Halachic and Aggadic warp/weft opposing threads contained within the language of both the T’NaCH and Talmudic Primary Sources.  

Scholarship 101: The skill that discerns between Primary Sources from secondary and how much more so tertiary sources.  The train of traditional Yiddishkeit Judaism has become derailed from this most essential track.  This false narishkeit has placed the Era of the Reshonim upon a pedestal and generations of טיפש פשט Jewish imbeciles taught by their silly rabbis to rely upon Reshonim commentaries written almost 1000 years after the sealing of the Gemara by Rav Ashi and Ravina. 

Personally, tend to condemn the Rambam perversion of Talmudic common law to Roman statute law as the fruits of Spanish Jewry’s abomination avoda zara which worshipped the rediscovered writings of the Ancient Greeks as the first cause of Jewry behaving like dogs who return and eat their own vomit. 

My contempt over the failure of the Post Rambam Civil War rabbis to correct the perversion of Talmudic judicial common law unto Roman Legislature statute law; coupled with the substitute theology which replaced syllogism deductive logic and cast the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s and rabbi Yishmael’s logic upon the dung heaps of history.  Yeshiva students today do not even know that בנין אב directly inferred from משנה תורה common law.  Rabbinic Judaism has no shame.  Currently its erev shabbat prior to Yom Kippur.  What an utter disgrace of rabbinic, sin of the Golden Calf – avoda zarah. 

וניתני האיש קונה, ומקנה משום דאיכא מיתת הבעל. דלאו איהו קא מקני [אלא] מן שמיא. ניתני האיש קונה, ומקנה משום דאיכא מיתת הבעל. דלאו איהו קא מקני [אלא] מן שמיא שלא מדעתה לא. (גף. ב:) קידושין                                    

Shooting a bearing azimuth entails comparing a “home Gemara” to other similar precedent Gemara’s defines the wisdom how to study and learn the Talmud.  The chief רשע, the Rambam halachic code of statute law on the surface seems similar to the common law codes made by the B’HaG, Rif and later Rosh.  But wisdom requires “understanding” which discerns between like from like.  And in point of fact, the Rambam halachic perversion shares no common ground with the common law halachic codes written by צדיקים ומקובלים.

Yes, the RambaN harshly criticized the Baal HaMaor over his common law criticism of the Rif code, which defines his מלחמת השם.  Never encountered a Yeshiva rabbi who ever focused upon the Baal HaMaor, any more than did Yeshiva rabbis ever address the chief criticism made upon the Rashi commentary by his grandchildren – Talmud impossible to understand without out developing the skills required to jump off the dof in search of similar precedent cases in both the Bavli and Yerushalmi. 

Now and again the Reshonim scholars might perchance mention a Yerushalmi source, even more rare a Gaonic Midrashic source!  Yeshiva dogma, where I happened to learn, poo pooed the Yerushalmi as a minor tractate unnecessary to study.   At least until I met Rav Aaron Nemuraskii who made me focus upon making a systematic study of Midrash Primary Sources.  

This emphasis upon Aggadic material opened my eyes to the sins of rabbinic Judaism.  Many times while in Yeshiva rabbis teaching a shiur in Talmud would skip over Aggadic sources!  The commentaries written on these Aggadic Primary sources – utterly pathetic and moronic.  Living trees chopped down to produce the paper for this rabbinic trash.  Bottom line: post the Rambam Civil War which blew out the lights of Chanukkah and embraced the syllogism deductive logic developed by the Ancient Greeks which the Tzeddukim so much appreciated; rabbinic Judaism turned its back on the kabbalah of פרדס inductive reasoning.  Jews refused to reason together with our Sinai God.  Our people thereafter descended into the 7 levels of Av tuma avoda zarah which culminated in the Shoah.

As ר”ה calls to remember the sin of the Golden Calf substitute theology which replaces the שם השם לשמה with substitute words like אלהים, Jesus or Allah etc.  Which perverts the Torah Written Constitution and Talmudic judicial common law model for courtroom imposed judicial rulings of law – the basis of the justice “Faith” within the Israel Republic – to the puke ‘Word of God’ Xtian idolatry.  The latter abomination foists the deception of “superior” word of God, “inferior” word of Man binary av tuma 2-base avoda zarah.

The principle (that certain acquisitions bypass the husband because they are given from Heaven) is discussed in the sugyot of Ketubot (in the area of נכסי מלוג).  Many of the Rishonim, in their commentaries on Ketubot, quote the phrase “מן שמיא הוא דמקני לה” the Reshonim employed to re-inforce or interpret the Gemara’s logic about acquisitions that bypass the husband’s rights. 

Ketubot, the Gemara treats cases of acquisitions to the wife, bypassing husband. Rishonim quote the phrase to bolster and clarify the Gemara’s logic in נכסי מלוג discussions. The latter refers to a category of property in Jewish law, particularly in the context of marriage and family law. This catagory of property qualifies as assets that a woman brings into the marriage, which remain her property even after her husband gives the get divorce to her.

The dissolution of status of kiddushin mesechta יבמות directly addresses the k’vanna of קידושין to have children and educate these children to understand the culture and customs which set apart the chosen Cohen people from the non bnai brit Goyim who have not the slightest clue what qualifies as a tohor Av time-oriented commandment. יבמות fundamentally requires acquisition through ביאה. That Gemara views the time-oriented commandment of קידושין viewed through the perspective of a deceased brother’s brother acquiring his wife through the act of ביאה.

Oral Torah makes a דיוק\logical inference concerning the k’vanna of the time-oriented commandment of קידושין: לשם ילדים וחינוך, as the direct k’vanna of this mitzva דאורייתא. Reshonim who learn קידושין as merely a rabbinic commandment, do not grasp mesechta קידושין כתובות או יבמות. Herein defines the curse of ירידות הדורות; the Torah curse domino effect/impact on later downstream generations.

The phrase “מן שמיא קנסוה, מן שמיא רמיוהא” aligns with the broader concept in rabbinic Judaism that emphasizes divine intervention and the belief that HaShem acts as the יסוד, the ultimate source, of creation and the authority of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev – through observance of tohor Time-oriented Torah Avot commandments.

דתנן: שומרת יבם שנפלו לה נכסים – בית שמאי אומרים: יחלקו, ובית הלל אומרים: יחלוקו נכסים שנפלו לה עד שלא תיפול לפני יבם – מודים כולם שמה שקנתה קנתה, ומה שעתידה ליפול – יחלוקו  גמ.לט – אמר רב הונא: ביאה פסלה מן הכהונה, מאמר לא פסל מן הכהונה.

אמר רב נחמן: אף מאמר נמי פסל מן הכהונה.

ואמר רבא: מאי טעמא דרב הונא

?אמר קרא: “לא תהיה אשת המת החוצה לאיש זר” – הויה פסלה, מאמר לא פסלה.

אמר רב נחמן: מאי טעמא דרב נחמן

אמר קרא: “יבמה יבא עליה ולקחה לו לאשה” – כל דהו הויה.

אמר רבא: מאי טעמא דרב הונא? אי בעית קרא, אי בעית סברא.

אי בעית קרא – “יבמה יבא עליה ולקחה לו לאשה” – לקיחה גמורה אמר רחמנא. אי בעית סברא – מן שמיא הוא דרמיא עליה.  

(דברים כה: ה – י) serves to preserve the deceased brother’s lineage.  The Torah commands Yibbum, but also imposes restrictions on Cohanim.   The commandment of Yibbum – a mitzvah that applies to all men, but the restrictions on Cohanim, based on their unique status and the sanctity required to understand the wisdom of k’vanna – required for doing time-oriented commandments.  While Yibbum – a תולדות commandment, the sanctity of the Cohen’s role to dedicate Av tohor time-oriented commandments takes precedence.  

The Talmud explicitly restricts the mitzva of yibbum due to persons involved probably lacking the prophetic mussar wisdom required to grasp the k’vanna necessary to elevate a positive commandment unto a Av tohor time-oriented commandment.  Due to this “lack of wisdom” the sages of the Talmud favored that the brother of a Cohen should do chalitzah rather than Yibbum.  

Hence this Gemara addresses האשה נקנית בשלש דרכים to prioritize the essential importance of Av tohor time-oriented commandments, as opposed to secondary תולדות קום ועשה מצוות שלא צריך כוונה.   If a man marries a woman without the k’vanna of raising children and educating these children in the culture and customs which defines the society of the Chosen Cohen people, then any mitzva from the Torah which lacks the required k’vanna reverts back to תולדות קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה מצוות.  Herein these two mesechtot of Gemara re-interpret the perspective of the language of our Mishna of קידושין. They therein distinguish doing mitzvot לשמה בארץ ישראל, from cursed g’lut Jewry – which lack the wisdom to do mitzvot לשמה.

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.

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 mesechta כתובות ויבמות…coming attractions.

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 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. 

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 mesechta כתובות ויבמות…coming attractions.

Israel remembers the British betrayal through the Chamberlain 1939 White Paper.

UK Formally Recognizes State Of Palestine – YouTube

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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 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's avatarFrank Hubeny says:

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's avatarmosckerr 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.

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 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.