Explaining The Book

About

What is the main point of 1 Samuel?

,
What is the main point of 1 Samuel?

The Book of 1 Samuel: The Rise of Kingship in Israel

The book of 1 Samuel marks a pivotal shift in the history of Israel, transitioning from the period of the judges to the establishment of the monarchy. It tells the story of three significant figures: Samuel, the last judge; Saul, Israel’s first king; and David, the man after God’s own heart. Throughout its narrative, 1 Samuel highlights God’s sovereign rule over His people, His faithfulness to His covenant, and the need for righteous leadership.


Historical Context

1 Samuel spans approximately 100 years (ca. 1100–1000 BC), beginning in the final years of the judges. Israel is plagued by internal moral decline and external threats from the Philistines. The people demand a king to unify and lead them, rejecting God as their ultimate King (1 Samuel 8:7). This book records the establishment of the monarchy under Saul and the rise of David as God’s chosen leader.


Structure and Content

Samuel: The Last Judge and God’s Prophet (Chapters 1–7)

Key Events:

  • Hannah’s prayer for a son and the birth of Samuel (1 Samuel 1).
  • Samuel’s dedication to God and his calling as a prophet (1 Samuel 3).
  • The ark of the covenant captured by the Philistines and its return (1 Samuel 4–7).

Themes:

  • God’s sovereignty in answering prayers (Hannah’s story).
  • The importance of faithful leadership (Samuel as a contrast to Eli’s corrupt sons).
  • God’s power over Israel’s enemies, even without a human king.

Saul: Israel’s First King (Chapters 8–15)

Key Events:

  • Israel demands a king; Saul is anointed by Samuel (1 Samuel 8–10).
  • Saul’s early successes, including victory over the Ammonites (1 Samuel 11).
  • Saul’s repeated disobedience, leading to God rejecting him as king (1 Samuel 13 and 15).

Themes:

  • The dangers of rejecting God’s kingship.
  • The consequences of disobedience and partial obedience.
  • God’s sovereign choice of leadership.

David: God’s Chosen King (Chapters 16–31)

Key Events:

  • David’s anointing as king while Saul is still on the throne (1 Samuel 16).
  • David’s victory over Goliath, showcasing his faith in God (1 Samuel 17).
  • Saul’s growing jealousy and repeated attempts to kill David (1 Samuel 18–26).
  • Saul’s tragic demise in battle against the Philistines (1 Samuel 31).

Themes:

  • God’s choice of a leader based on the heart, not outward appearance (1 Samuel 16:7).
  • God’s protection and guidance over His anointed (David’s escapes from Saul).
  • The contrast between Saul’s failed kingship and David’s faithful dependence on God.

Key Themes and Theological Insights

God’s Sovereignty

1 Samuel emphasizes God’s control over history and His ability to raise up or remove leaders according to His purposes. He chooses Samuel, Saul, and David, demonstrating His ultimate authority over Israel.

The Need for Righteous Leadership

Israel’s transition to a monarchy highlights the need for a king who would lead the people in obedience to God. Saul’s failure as king underscores the necessity of a leader after God’s own heart, ultimately pointing to Christ.

Faith and Obedience

The contrast between Saul and David illustrates the importance of trusting and obeying God. Saul’s downfall results from his disobedience and self-reliance, while David’s rise is marked by his faith in God’s promises.

God’s Faithfulness

Despite Israel’s rebellion and the failings of its leaders, God remains faithful to His covenant promises. He continues to guide His people, ultimately preparing the way for the Messiah.


Christological Significance

David as a Type of Christ

David, the anointed king of Israel, prefigures Jesus in several ways:

  • God’s Chosen Leader: Just as David was chosen over Saul, Christ is the greater King chosen by God to lead His people.
  • Shepherd King: David was a shepherd who cared for his flock, foreshadowing Christ, the Good Shepherd (John 10:11).
  • Faithful Warrior: David’s victory over Goliath points to Christ’s ultimate victory over sin, death, and Satan.

Samuel as a Mediator

Samuel, serving as a prophet, priest, and judge, reflects Christ’s threefold office. However, unlike Samuel, Christ perfectly mediates between God and His people.

The Need for a Perfect King

The failure of Saul and the imperfections of David highlight the need for a perfect and eternal King, fulfilled in Jesus Christ, who reigns with justice and righteousness.


Applications for Today

Trust in God’s Sovereignty

1 Samuel reminds believers that God is in control of all circumstances. Even when human leaders fail, God’s purposes prevail.

The Importance of Obedience

Saul’s story warns against the dangers of half-hearted obedience. Believers are called to follow God wholeheartedly, trusting His Word and timing.

Hope in Christ, the Perfect King

David’s rise points forward to the coming of Christ, the true King who leads His people in righteousness. Believers can rest in His eternal reign and perfect leadership.

God’s Faithfulness Amid Human Failure

Despite Israel’s rebellion and the shortcomings of its leaders, God remained faithful to His covenant. This assurance encourages believers to trust in God’s steadfast love and promises.


Conclusion

The book of 1 Samuel is a profound testimony of God’s sovereign rule, His faithfulness to His covenant, and the need for a righteous King. It sets the stage for the unfolding story of redemption, culminating in the reign of Jesus Christ. As we reflect on the lives of Samuel, Saul, and David, we are reminded of our need for a Savior and the assurance that Christ, the true King, reigns over His people in justice and mercy.

Comments

24 responses to “What is the main point of 1 Samuel?”

  1. mosckerr Avatar

    Fundamental error in quoting opinions made by Big Authorities with absolutely no knowledge of משנה תורה common law. Simple question never asked? How does the mitzva of Moshiach qualify as a Torah commandment? The mitzva of Moshiach an Oral Torah time oriented commandment. Now what type of commandment qualifies as a time oriented commandment? Impossible to learn Torah common law without the wisdom of learning by means of comparative similar mitzvot!!!!! Meaning Common Law precedents based upon positive and negative commandments. Impossible to understand tohor time oriented commandments ignorant of the role of tohor middot!!!! Time oriented commandments require the dedication of defined/specific tohor middot. What middah tohor does the mitzva of Moshiach dedicate holy to the G-d of the 1st Sinai Commandment? Again a question never asked!

    Brit does not mean covenant. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah does not mean prayer. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah unlike saying Tehillem entails swearing a Torah oath. Just that simple. Impossible to swear a Torah oath without שם ומלכות. This tohor time oriented commandment which requires שם ומלכות, impossible to grasp without the Oral Torah logic system known as פרדס. Translating abstract Hebrew words to other languages amounts to false translations. Just that simple.

    The Name שם, directly refers to the revelation of the Divine Presence Spirit revealed in the revelation of the 1st Sinai commandment. Any attempt to “convert” this Spirit Name to words: YHVH, Jehova, Jesus, Allah etc amounts to the sin of the Golden Calf wherein Israel 40 days after the revelation of the Spirit Divine Presence Name many of Israel translated to a false translation word אלהים! The Torah revelation at Sinai exposes the tumah of any and all attempts to translate the Spirit Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment, and excluded in the Xtian bibles and Muslim korans, as the “Sin of the Golden Calf”. Just that simple. Righteousness does not come by way of Av tumah avoda zarah. Just that simple.

    Like

    1. Explaining The Book Avatar

      Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful response. I appreciate the depth of your insights and your commitment to Torah learning through the lens of משנה תורה (Mishneh Torah) and Oral Torah logic, including פרדס (PaRDeS). These are critical tools for engaging with the profound truths of Torah. Let me attempt to engage with your points and share my perspective regarding the Messiah and Jesus of Nazareth.

      On Time-Oriented Commandments and Middot Tohor
      You highlight the importance of understanding time-oriented commandments through tohor middot and their dedication to the G-d of the 1st Sinai commandment. This perspective is rich and profound. In my understanding, Jesus of Nazareth embodies the fulfillment of these commandments through His life, teachings, and actions, which reveal a direct connection to the Spirit of G-d.

      Jesus calls His followers to dedicate their lives to holiness (tohorah), reflecting the attributes of G-d revealed at Sinai. His fulfillment of Torah is not in opposition to it but rather its ultimate expression, as He emphasizes the weightier matters of the law—justice, mercy, and faithfulness (Matthew 23:23). Would you see any parallels between this emphasis and the middot of G-d described in Torah and Oral Torah traditions?

      The Meaning of Brit and Tefillah
      You raise an essential point about translations, particularly regarding “brit” and “tefillah.” I understand that the richness of Hebrew often gets lost when translated into other languages. Regarding “brit,” while it is often translated as “covenant,” its deeper meaning conveys a binding and sacred relationship. Christians believe that Jesus inaugurated a new brit, a renewed relationship with G-d, fulfilling Jeremiah 31:31-34’s prophecy of a new covenant written on the hearts of Israel.

      Similarly, “tefillah” as swearing a Torah oath with שם ומלכות is a compelling interpretation. Jesus often speaks of the importance of aligning one’s words and actions with the will of G-d, reflecting true allegiance to His kingdom. How do you see the role of שם ומלכות in recognizing divine authority, and could this connect to Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of G-d?

      The Divine Name and the Golden Calf
      Your concern about the misuse or mistranslation of the Divine Name is significant, particularly in relation to the sin of the Golden Calf. You suggest that reducing the Spirit revealed at Sinai to words or names like YHVH, Jesus, or Allah is akin to idolatry.

      I would like to offer this perspective: Christians believe that Jesus is not merely a translation of the Divine but the full manifestation of G-d’s presence. John 1:14 states, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us,” emphasizing the idea that Jesus is not a replacement for the Spirit revealed at Sinai but its ultimate revelation, bringing G-d’s presence into human experience in a unique way.

      This belief may seem foreign to Jewish tradition, but I see it as complementary to the Torah’s teaching about G-d’s desire to dwell among His people (Exodus 25:8). How do you see the relationship between the revelation at Sinai and the ongoing presence of G-d in the world?

      Righteousness and Avodah Zarah
      Your concern about righteousness not coming through avodah zarah (idolatry) is absolutely valid. The Torah is clear that worship must be directed to G-d alone. Christians believe that Jesus leads humanity back to true worship of G-d. His life and teachings call for repentance and devotion to G-d, fulfilling the Torah’s call for holiness.

      Far from being avodah zarah, we see Jesus as the embodiment of the Spirit of G-d, guiding people to a deeper understanding and relationship with Him. I recognize this may differ from your understanding, and I would be grateful to hear your perspective on how to recognize true righteousness according to Torah.

      Conclusion
      I deeply value your passion for Torah and your dedication to its study and application. My belief in Jesus as the Messiah is rooted in the hope and promises found in the Tanakh, and I would love to continue discussing these ideas with you. How do you understand Isaiah’s prophecies about the Messiah, and how might they inform this discussion?

      Like

      1. mosckerr Avatar

        Greetings,

        JeZeus’s lord’s prayer knows nothing about שם ומלכות. :)))

        Like

      2. Explaining The Book Avatar

        Thank you for your comment regarding the Lord’s Prayer and the concept of שם ומלכות (Name and Kingship). I understand your concern, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this further.

        In Jewish tradition, שם ומלכות refers to the recognition of God’s Name and sovereignty. This concept is central to many prayers and Torah commandments. Interestingly, the Lord’s Prayer, as taught by Jesus, begins with the words, “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your Name. Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:9-10).

        In this opening, Christians see a direct acknowledgment of both God’s שם (Name)—revered and sanctified—and His מלכות (Kingship)—prayed for and anticipated on earth. Jesus’ focus on God’s holiness and kingdom reflects a deep continuity with the Torah’s teachings on God’s sovereignty and the importance of aligning human life with His will.

        I’m curious how you interpret the relationship between שם ומלכות and daily prayer. Do you see this alignment in the Lord’s Prayer, or are there aspects of it you feel diverge from this concept? I’d love to hear your perspective and continue this discussion.

        Like

      3. mosckerr Avatar

        [[[
        In Jewish tradition, שם ומלכות refers to the recognition of God’s Name and sovereignty.]]] Interpreting not the same thing as translating. The revelation of the Divine Presence Spirit Name, requires Torah wisdom to know how to pronounce because it lives as a spirit and not a word that the jaws and lips of Man can frame and pronounce. מלכות: the dedication of the 13 tohor spirits revealed Orally to Moshe at Horev 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf.

        This Father/son mythology confuses “Israel is my first born son” which refers to “chosen Cohen people”. Prior to the sin of the Golden Calf, the first born son assume the role of Cohen. After the Tribe of Levi replaced the first born sons of Israel in this function. But its a far more complex equation b/c all the Jewish people qualify as Cohonim! A contradiction which requires a lot of Torah scholarship to comprehend. Something like grade school children no matter how intelligent do not learn advanced Calculus equations. מלכות incorrectly translated as kingship. Even Jewish scholars known to err on this matter. Talmudic common law not learned through translations but rather through the Torah wisdom of knowledge how to learn by means of close comparison precedents. That’s how all common law legal systems learn – by means of close legal precedents NOT silly translations. Tefillah does not mean prayer. Saying Tehillem/Psalms qualifies as prayer. Prayer like your Lord’s Prayer lacks שם ומלכות as does saying Tehillem.

        Like

      4. Explaining The Book Avatar

        Shalom! Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I can see your deep respect for Torah wisdom and the complexities of Jewish tradition. I’d like to engage with what you’ve said and share why I see Yeshua (Jesus) as the fulfillment of the promises given to Israel.

        שם ומלכות – The Name and Sovereignty of God
        You emphasize the spiritual nature of God’s Name, something that is far beyond what human lips can fully express. This resonates with God’s revelation to Moses in Exodus 3:14 as אהיה אשר אהיה (“I Am Who I Am”), a Name that reflects His eternal, self-existent nature.

        In Yeshua, we see the fullness of God’s Name and sovereignty revealed. His very name, יהושע (“The Lord saves”), carries the meaning of God’s deliverance. Yeshua taught and demonstrated the sovereignty of God’s kingdom, declaring, “The kingdom of God has come near” (Mark 1:15).

        Israel as God’s Firstborn Son and the Role of the Cohen
        You rightly point out the significance of “Israel is my firstborn son” (Exodus 4:22) and the transition of the priesthood to the tribe of Levi after the sin of the Golden Calf. This reflects the seriousness of sin and the need for mediation between God and His people.

        However, the promise of a greater priesthood was also given in Scripture. Psalm 110:4 speaks of a priest “forever in the order of Melchizedek,” pointing to a role not limited by the Levitical priesthood. Yeshua fulfills this role as both the perfect mediator and the ideal Son of Israel, embodying the calling of the nation to be a light to the nations (Isaiah 49:6).

        מלכות – Kingship and God’s Spirit
        You’re correct that מלכות often carries a deeper meaning than simply “kingship.” It reflects the rule and reign of God, established through His Spirit. In Isaiah 11:1-5, the Messiah is described as a ruler filled with the Spirit of wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, and the fear of the Lord.

        Yeshua embodies this vision of מלכות. His reign is not about political domination but about establishing God’s justice and peace, as prophesied in Zechariah 9:9-10. Through Him, God’s sovereignty is extended to all who trust in Him.

        Tefillah, Psalms, and the Lord’s Prayer
        You note that the Lord’s Prayer lacks שם ומלכות. However, when Yeshua taught His disciples to pray, He began with:
        – “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your Name” – sanctifying God’s Name.
        – “Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” – longing for God’s מלכות to be fully realized.

        This prayer reflects a deep connection to the themes of Torah and Prophets, seeking alignment with God’s purposes.

        A Call to Consider Yeshua as the Messiah
        I understand that seeing Yeshua as the Messiah may challenge traditional interpretations. However, I invite you to consider how the Hebrew Scriptures point to Him:
        – Isaiah 53 describes a Servant who suffers for the sins of others.
        – Daniel 9:24-26 speaks of the Messiah being “cut off” to atone for iniquity.
        – Psalm 22 portrays a righteous sufferer, rejected yet vindicated by God.

        These passages, when taken together, provide a picture of the Messiah that aligns with Yeshua’s life, death, and resurrection.

        May the God of our fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, lead us into His truth and wisdom. I welcome your insights and look forward to continuing this dialogue.

        Shalom!

        Like

      5. mosckerr Avatar

        Wisdom to pronounce the Spirit Name requires the knowledge of learning this mitzva to a similar mitzva. The wisdom of מלכות centers upon learning how to separate and distinguish the k’vanna and intent of the 13 tohor middot which Moshe heard at Horev 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf where Israel committed avoda zarah and translated the Divine Presence Spirit Name to words!

        Like

      6. mosckerr Avatar

        Greetings,

        Wisdom to pronounce the Spirit Name requires the knowledge of learning this mitzva to a similar mitzva. The wisdom of מלכות centers upon learning how to separate and distinguish the k’vanna and intent of the 13 tohor middot which Moshe heard at Horev 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf where Israel committed avoda zarah and translated the Divine Presence Spirit Name to words!

        Like

      7. mosckerr Avatar

        [[[In Jewish tradition, שם ומלכות refers to the recognition of God’s Name and sovereignty.]]] Interpreting not the same thing as translating. The revelation of the Divine Presence Spirit Name, requires Torah wisdom to know how to pronounce because it lives as a spirit and not a word that the jaws and lips of Man can frame and pronounce. מלכות: the dedication of the 13 tohor spirits revealed Orally to Moshe at Horev 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf.

        This Father/son mythology confuses “Israel is my first born son” which refers to “chosen Cohen people”. Prior to the sin of the Golden Calf, the first born son assume the role of Cohen. After the Tribe of Levi replaced the first born sons of Israel in this function. But its a far more complex equation b/c all the Jewish people qualify as Cohonim! A contradiction which requires a lot of Torah scholarship to comprehend. Something like grade school children no matter how intelligent do not learn advanced Calculus equations. מלכות incorrectly translated as kingship. Even Jewish scholars known to err on this matter. Talmudic common law not learned through translations but rather through the Torah wisdom of knowledge how to learn by means of close comparison precedents. That’s how all common law legal systems learn – by means of close legal precedents NOT silly translations. Tefillah does not mean prayer. Saying Tehillem/Psalms qualifies as prayer. Prayer like your Lord’s Prayer lacks שם ומלכות as does saying Tehillem.

        Like

      8. Explaining The Book Avatar

        Thank you for your detailed thoughts on the meaning of שם ומלכות and its connection to Torah wisdom and Jewish tradition. I can see your deep commitment to understanding the richness of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Oral Torah. I’d like to engage with some of your points while sharing a perspective on how they point to the Messiah.

        The Name and Sovereignty of God (שם ומלכות)
        You emphasize the spiritual nature of God’s Name and sovereignty, which cannot be fully captured in human language. This aligns with how God revealed Himself to Moses in Exodus 3:14 as “I Am Who I Am” (אהיה אשר אהיה), a Name that reflects His eternal and unchanging nature. In the fullness of time, God revealed His Name and sovereignty most clearly in the person of Jesus (Yeshua), whose name means “The Lord saves” (יהושע). As the Word made flesh (John 1:14), He embodied the Divine Presence and fulfilled the promises of redemption spoken of in the Torah and Prophets.

        Israel as God’s Firstborn Son
        You mention that “Israel is my firstborn son” (Exodus 4:22) and note the transition of the priestly role from the firstborn to the tribe of Levi after the sin of the Golden Calf. This shift points to the larger narrative of God’s redemptive plan. While Israel is indeed God’s chosen people, the Messiah fulfills the ultimate role of the firstborn Son, perfectly embodying Israel’s calling to be a light to the nations (Isaiah 42:6; 49:6). Jesus, as the Son of God, restores what was lost and invites all who believe in Him—Jew and Gentile alike—into the covenant blessings promised to Abraham.

        The Meaning of מלכות
        You raise an important point about מלכות (often translated as “kingship”) and its deeper connection to dedication and the 13 tohor (pure) spirits revealed to Moses. The Messiah is the one who perfectly embodies מלכות by establishing God’s kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. In Isaiah 9:6-7, the Messiah is described as the one upon whose shoulders the government rests, bringing peace and justice forever. Jesus declared, “The kingdom of God has come near” (Mark 1:15) and demonstrated this through His life, death, and resurrection.

        Prayer and the Lord’s Prayer
        You note that prayer, such as the Lord’s Prayer, lacks שם ומלכות. However, Jesus taught His disciples to pray in a way that acknowledges both:
        – “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your Name” recognizes the sanctity of God’s Name.
        – “Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” calls for God’s מלכות (sovereignty) to be fully realized.

        Far from being a simple formula, the Lord’s Prayer aligns with the Torah’s emphasis on honoring God’s Name and submitting to His will.

        A Call to the Messiah
        Your focus on Torah scholarship and learning through comparison of precedents is essential. The New Testament itself does not seek to replace the Torah but to reveal its fulfillment in the Messiah. Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17). The Torah and Prophets point to Him as the One who perfectly fulfills God’s promises.

        I invite you to explore the Messianic prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures—such as Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, and Daniel 9:24-26—and consider how they find their ultimate fulfillment in Jesus. As the Messiah, He bridges the gap between God and humanity, offering the hope of restoration and eternal life.

        Like

      9. mosckerr Avatar

        [[[ the Messiah fulfills the ultimate role of the firstborn Son]]]

        No. Utter nonsense the Book of בראשית teaches the aggadic story of the creation of the chosen cohen people created from nothing. Hence the struggle over the inheritance of the first born throughout the בראשית aggadah! Starting with the births of the two sons of Adam, Noach cursing Ham, the struggle between Yishmael and Yitzak, the struggle between Esau and Yaacov, the struggle between the sons of Yaacov! The Book of בראשית defines time oriented commandments and how these commandments possess the power to create from nothing the chosen cohen people in all generations!

        Like

    2. mosckerr Avatar

      Why the Torah rejects the gospels as totally false? The Huge Lie: Revisionist history and substitute theologies. The False Notion which represents God as a historical physical being or into some Universal Monotheistic G0D. Why does the Gospels amount to a false messiah foreign Roman counterfeit on par with the Czar’s Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

      Fundamental error in quoting opinions made by “Big Authorities”, cult of personalities, similar to placing an idol upon a pedestal, with absolutely no knowledge of משנה תורה common law. Simple question never asked? How does the mitzva of Moshiach qualify as a Torah commandment? Reliance solely upon NaCH sources of kabbalah fails to grasp the mitzva of Moshiach as a Written Torah time oriented tohor commandment which weighs upon the scales of Life or Death.

      The mitzva of Moshiach, an Oral Torah time oriented commandment, only secondarily limited to time – like looking at ones’ watch! What type of commandment qualifies as a Life/Death-time oriented commandment? Korbanot require swearing a Torah oath, and life & death! Aaron and his House “anointed” to dedicate “Moshiach” korbanot! Hence the Moshiach of the House of Aaron serves as the Torah foundation for the mitzva of Moshiach for the House of David as taught by NaCH kabbalah. Impossible to learn Torah common law without the wisdom of learning by means of comparative, similar mitzvot precedents! Torah common law/משנה תורה\ stands upon the יסוד/foundation\ of positive & negative toldot Torah commandments which function as logical פרדס precedents to Av tohor time oriented commandments.

      Meaning, Common Law precedents based upon positive and negative ((think Gemarah halachot as precedents to re-interpret the k’vanna of the language of the Mishna)) commandments. Impossible to understand tohor time oriented commandments ignorant – also – of the role of tohor middot!!!! Time oriented commandments require the dedication of defined & specific tohor middot, just as does the dedication of korbonot by the Moshiach House of Aaron. The wisdom which discerns the middah of אל from the middah of רחום from the middah of חנון etc. What middah tohor does the mitzva of Moshiach dedicate holy to the G-d of the 1st Sinai Commandment? An absolutely critical and crucial question. This most essential question concerning the Torah mitzva of Moshiach, the church has never asked in its entire history as a religious faith belief in its Trinity god(s)!

      In point of fact, the church fathers deny the existence of the Oral Torah. Despite the fact that the mitzvah of Moshiach qualifies as an Av tohor time oriented commandment, which sanctifies the middah of justice, holy to HaShem, as THE sanctification of the mitzva of Moshiach. Based upon the Oral Torah revelation to Moshe at Horev. Despite, justice not included in the 13 tohor middot, the mitva דאורייתא of Moshiach dedicates the pursuit of judicial justice among our people inside the oath sworn lands, as the midda korban dedication holy לשמה. The fact that the mitzva of Moshiach the Torah of דברים defines through the middah of צדק צדק תרדוף, as the k’vanna of the mitzva of Moshiach in all generations of the chosen Cohen nation. We Jews do not wait for the coming of the Moshiach, any more than We Jews wait for some stranger ICC Court of the Hague to establish just rule of judicial justice in the land of Israel! Post Shoah, Europe has forever lost any mandate to judge the Jewish people; as likewise the dead Olympus Gods of the Xtian post Shoah fictional mythology.

      Brit – as an oath alliance, does not mean covenant. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah does not mean prayer. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah unlike saying Tehillem entails swearing a Torah oath. Just that simple. Impossible to swear a Torah oath without שם ומלכות. The concept of שם breathes the spirit of life through the Yatzir Ha’Tov. This Spirit Name raises the souls of the Avot from the dead within the chosen Cohen nation’s Yatzir Ha’Tov. The concept of מלכות has the k’vanna of dedication of some defined tohor middah. This tohor time oriented commandment which requires a שם ומלכות Torah oath, impossible to grasp without the Oral Torah logic system known as פרדס. The 4 part פרדס does neither resembles nor compares to the 3 part syllogism of Aristotle’s logic, nor to Hegal’s system of dialectic metaphysics of greater and lesser logic. Translating abstract Hebrew words to other languages amounts to false translations. Just that simple.

      The Name שם, directly refers to the revelation of the Divine Presence Spirit revealed in the revelation of the 1st Sinai commandment. Any attempt to “convert” this Spirit Name to words: such as – YHVH, Jehova, Jesus, Allah etc amounts to the sin of the Golden Calf – wherein Israel 40 days after the revelation of the Spirit Divine Presence Name, many of Israel translated the revealed Spirit Name to a false translation word אלהים! The Torah revelation at Sinai exposes the tumah of any and all attempts to translate the Spirit Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment, ((which the Xtian bibles and Muslim korans exclude this 1st Commandment Spirit Name revelation)), as the “Sin of the Golden Calf”. Just that simple. Righteousness does not come by way of Av tumah avoda zarah. Just that simple.

      T’shuva does not mean repentance. A bad translation. Just that simple. T’shuva has everything to do with the struggle, think of Esau and Yaacov in the womb of Rivka, between the two opposing Yatzirot within the bnai brit chosen Cohen peoples’ hearts. Hence the Torah incorrectly spelled heart as לבב rather than לב. Rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi, explained in the Mishna of ברכות the additional ב, as a reference to the two opposing and conflicting Yatzirot within the heart.

      This, the author of the Mishna, the foundation to study the Oral Torah revelation of the 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe, 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf, on Yom Kippur. Yom Kippur where HaShem did t’shuva and annulled the vow to make Moshe the chosen Cohen nation rather than the seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov! T’shuva as a Torah mitzva, learns from the precedents of a father who annuls the vow made by his young daughter, or the Husband who annuls the vow made by his wife. Both of these Torah precedents serve to define the mussar of T’shuva! Repentance has no portion, it plays no part in annulling a vow. Just that simple. The translation of t’shuva to repentance a false translation. Just that simple.

      Peace a false translation of Shalom. The latter a verb which stands upon the foundation of trust. The former evil translation a noun that amounts to pie in the sky false rhetoric. Like the “peace negotiations” between Arabs and Jews. Post Oct 7th Jews do not trust Arabs of Gaza. Shalom learns from the Torah mitzva of Shabbat. This precedent mitzva of shabbat, the Talmud builds around the 3 meals. A person does not invite an enemy into his home to sit and meal together – ever. No trust No shalom. Just that simple. The false & sophomoric translation of the substitute word “peace”, just that simple – utterly false.

      The term יראת שמים, commonly mistranslated as: Fear of Heaven – another false translation. A טיפש פשט literal translation on par with the fundamentalist belief that the Genesis creation story literally refers to the creation of the Universe in 6 days! Bible toting Xtian fundamentalists absolutely abhor Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. In 1925 the Monkey Trial between John T. Scopes teaching evolution in a state-funded school! Comparable to the dispute between Galileo vs. the Poop. יראת שמים, a metaphor which refers to protecting ones’ Good Name reputation. Hence the Hebrew term: Baal Shem Tov/Master of the Good Name. Mistranslating this abstract Hebrew metaphor to “fear of Heaven” as false as the absurd notions of Xtian fundamentalists concerning the Creation story in the opening Aggadic mussar of the first Book of the Torah – which introduces Av tohor time oriented commandments.

      Emunah does not correctly translate into “faith”. Emunah learns from the precedents of Moshe standing before the Court of Par’o, on the matter of Par’o, his decree which withheld the straw required to make brick and the consequent beating of Israelite slaves. Another precedent: the rebuke of Yitro when Moshe judged the nation alone by himself. The Torah defines emunah as the righteous pursuit of judicial justice; wherein the Courts make fair restitution of damages inflicted by party A upon party B. The false substitution of faith as personal belief in some theologically decreed Creed concerning the nature of the Gods, such as Islam’s strict Monotheism; this latter perversion of emunah, it defines the Av tumah 2nd Sinai commandment known as avoda zarah: do not worship other Gods.



      Commentary:

      The thesis argues that the Gospels present a false and distorted messiah, analogous to a fabricated narrative like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It critiques the Christian portrayal of Jesus as the Messiah for failing to align with key Torah commandments, particularly regarding the concept of Moshiach (Messiah). The central point is that the Christian view ignores the essential Torah framework—especially the Oral Torah—and misrepresents the spiritual and legal qualifications of the Messiah.

      The Torah has specific, time-bound commandments related to the Messiah (Moshiach), particularly involving the House of Aaron and the role of judicial justice. These commandments are rooted in the Oral Torah and must be understood within the context of Torah law, which is absent in Christian doctrine.

      Christian theology misinterprets core concepts like the Name of God (Shem), justice, and repentance. These misunderstandings, according to the thesis, result in a flawed, “foreign” understanding of the Messiah, a theology built on misinterpretations of Hebrew terms (e.g., T’shuva as repentance, Emunah as faith, Love as agape.). The Torah learns the abstract concept of love from the oath sworn brit cut between the pieces which serves as the Torah precedent for the mitzva of קידושין in marriage. Where a man acquires the “soul of his wife”. Meaning, he acquires Title to the children born from this union born into the future. This mitzva of קידושין therefore defines the abstract term of “LOVE”, as — “A man cannot love that which he does not own”.

      The thesis highlights that key Hebrew terms, such as Shem (God’s Name) and T’shuva (the act of spiritual return), have been mis-translated into false Christian or secular equivalents. This, it argues, leads to a theological error comparable to idolatry, such as the Christian portrayal of Jesus or the Quranic understanding of God.

      The Messiah, according to Torah law, is deeply connected with the establishment of judicial justice (Tzedek), a responsibility that Christianity overlooks. The Moshiach must sanctify justice, not merely fulfill prophetic predictions.

      The thesis concludes by arguing that the Christian concept of the Messiah, along with its theology of sin, faith, and divine justice, fundamentally contradicts the Torah. It claims that Christian teachings about the Messiah are a foreign, Roman-influenced construct that misrepresents the Jewish understanding of divine law, justice, and messianic prophecy.

      The thesis asserts that the Gospel narrative is not only a false representation of the Torah mitzva of Messiah, but is a theological construct that distorts the core values of the Torah, particularly concerning the nature of divine justice and the messianic mission. Xtianity knows nothing about tohor time-oriented Commandments. The mitzva of Moshiach a tohor time oriented commandment, which the Gospel forgery knows nothing about. Just that simple.

      The thesis argues that the Gospel narrative of Jesus as the Messiah is a complete fabrication, akin to a false, foreign narrative like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It claims that Christianity misrepresents the true Torah concept of the Messiah (Moshiach), ignoring key commandments and spiritual principles that are integral to Jewish law. The central critique is that Christianity distorts the qualifications and role of the Messiah, particularly by overlooking the Oral Torah and its time-oriented commandments.

      The mitzva of Moshiach as a time oriented commandment applies equally to all Jews in every generations. Jews do not wait for the coming of the Moshiach like Xtians wait for the 2nd Coming. Justice understood as judicial courts which makes fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B.

      The thesis argues that Christianity’s portrayal of the Messiah, alongside the misinterpretations of terms like T’shuva (translated as repentance) and Emunah (translated as faith), leads to a false and foreign theology. This misrepresentation, it claims, parallels idolatry, particularly in the Christian deification of Jesus, which the thesis likens to the sin of the Golden Calf in Jewish tradition.

      The thesis suggests that the Christian concept of the Messiah is not rooted in Jewish tradition but is instead a Roman-influenced construct. This fabricated theology distorts the original Jewish understanding of divine law, justice, and messianic prophecy.

      The thesis concludes that the Gospel narrative is a complete fabrication, failing to align with the true Torah commandment of the Moshiach. Christianity, according to the thesis, has no understanding of the Torah’s time-oriented, holiness-focused commandments, especially the Mitzvah of Moshiach, which is an essential and central part of Jewish law. The Gospel, therefore, is not just a misrepresentation but a theological forgery, which distorts the fundamental principles of divine justice and the messianic mission.

      In essence, the thesis argues that Christianity’s portrayal of Jesus as the Messiah is a theological construct that bears no resemblance to the true Jewish concept of Moshiach as outlined in the Torah. The Gospels misinterpret key Hebrew concepts and ignore essential commandments, leading to a false narrative of the Messiah that is incompatible with Torah law and spiritual principles.

      Like

      1. Explaining The Book Avatar

        Thank You for Your Detailed Response. I greatly appreciate the depth of your knowledge and your commitment to Torah principles. Your passion for preserving the integrity of Torah and Oral Torah traditions is evident, and I respect that immensely. Allow me to engage with your points thoughtfully and share my perspective.

        The Role of the Messiah and the Oral Torah
        You emphasize that the mitzva of Moshiach is a tohor, time-oriented commandment rooted in the Oral Torah and connected to judicial justice. This concept aligns with Isaiah 11:1-5, which describes the Messiah as one who judges with righteousness and equity.

        Christians believe that Jesus fulfills this role in a spiritual sense, emphasizing inner transformation as the foundation for societal justice. His teachings, such as “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled” (Matthew 5:6), point to a deep alignment with Torah values of justice and holiness.

        How do you see the relationship between internal righteousness and societal justice in the Torah’s vision for the Messiah? Could these two dimensions be interconnected in a way that complements the Torah’s teachings?

        Translations and Key Terms
        You highlight the dangers of mistranslating Hebrew terms like Brit, T’shuva, Emunah, and Shalom, arguing that these mistranslations distort the Torah’s message. I agree that translations often fall short of capturing the depth of Hebrew concepts. For example:
        – Brit: While often translated as “covenant,” Christians see it as a sacred relationship initiated by God, such as the “new covenant” promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34, written on the hearts of believers.
        – T’shuva: More than repentance, it involves a return to God and alignment with His will. Jesus calls for this return, urging people to turn from sin and live lives rooted in God’s righteousness.

        Would you agree that these terms, even if imperfectly translated, carry a shared emphasis on restoring a relationship with God and pursuing justice?

        Critique of Christian Theology and the Oral Torah
        You critique Christianity for denying the Oral Torah and misunderstanding the Torah’s principles. While Christians do not interpret the Oral Torah in the same way as traditional Judaism, Jesus’ teachings reflect many Oral Torah principles. For example, Jesus emphasized the spirit of the law (Matthew 5:17-20), encouraging deeper observance that honors both its letter and intent.

        Additionally, the Sermon on the Mount reflects values consistent with Torah ethics: humility, mercy, and a commitment to peace rooted in trust (Shalom). How do you see the role of ethical teachings in Torah shaping the lives of believers, whether Jewish or Christian?

        The Sin of the Golden Calf and the Name of God
        You compare Christian reverence for Jesus to the sin of the Golden Calf, arguing that any attempt to translate or embody God’s Name (Shem) amounts to idolatry. I understand your concern, and I’d like to offer a perspective.

        Christians believe that Jesus is not a replacement for God’s Name but the full revelation of God’s character and presence, as stated in John 1:14: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” Far from idolatry, this belief sees Jesus as fulfilling the Torah’s vision of God dwelling with His people (Exodus 25:8).

        Do you see any parallels between this idea and the Torah’s emphasis on God’s presence in the Mishkan (Tabernacle) or the Shechinah? Could this concept deepen our understanding of the divine?

        Justice as a Core Torah Value
        You rightly emphasize that the Messiah’s mission is rooted in the pursuit of judicial justice (Tzedek). Jesus’ ministry included calls for justice, care for the marginalized, and the transformation of hearts to align with God’s justice. While Christians believe Jesus inaugurates this justice spiritually, they also anticipate its ultimate fulfillment when He returns.

        How do you interpret the Torah’s vision for a just society? Could the Messiah’s role include both spiritual transformation and societal restoration?

        Conclusion
        I deeply value your commitment to Torah and Oral Torah traditions and your desire to preserve their integrity. My belief in Jesus as the Messiah comes from seeing His life, teachings, and mission as deeply aligned with the Torah’s call for justice, holiness, and a restored relationship with God.

        I’d love to continue this dialogue and learn from your insights. Perhaps we can explore specific passages, like Isaiah 11 or Jeremiah 31, to better understand how these texts inform our respective views on the Messiah.

        Like

      2. mosckerr Avatar

        [[[How do you see the relationship between internal righteousness and societal justice in the Torah’s vision for the Messiah? ]]] Lateral Sanhedrin Common law courtrooms. Just as Yitro rebuked Moshe after Israel came out of Egypt.

        Torah defines its key term through common law precedents. Love defined through the mitzva of קידודין. Xtianity had to turn to Greek agape: as pure, willful, sacrificial love—one that intentionally desires another’s highest good. Not a whiff of ownership as Torah common law requires.

        Brit requires שם ומלכות. Xtian theology does not know what either key term means. Hence their misuse of covenant amounts to pie in the sky empty rhetoric like as equally applies to their false notions of “world to come”.

        The incredibly bad translations which define the Xtian bible so gross in their utter incompetent scholarship. A “young girl” translated as virgin. So completely bogus.

        The church confused the Oral Torah codification known as the Talmud as the Oral Torah. Again brain dead scholarship. The Mishna written in 210 CE. The Gemarah commentary on the Mishna sealed around 450 CE. The church fathers simply brain dead stupid. Oral Torah revealed 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf!

        Jews have always denounced the new testament as false and JeZeus as a false messiah. For 2000+ years the church punished the Jewish people for our honesty.

        The Torah ideally serves as the Written Constitution of the Jewish Republic. The Framers of the Talmud wrote this codification of Oral Torah פרדס logic as the model to the time when Jews reconquered our homeland and could turn to the Talmud as the model to establish a lateral common law Court system.

        Xtianity has nothing to do with lateral common law courts. Never did any Xtian nation ever establish a lateral common law courtroom. All Goyim European courtrooms, including British common law courtrooms – vertical rather than lateral courtrooms! The church never in 2000+ years ever forced to stand before the Bar to answer to war crimes committed against the Jewish people or other minority populations.

        Xtian theology from Head to tail – avoda zarah. Avoda zarah attempts to decree through creeds what people must bellieve concerning the Gods. The Nicene Creed or the Mohammad creed of strict monotheism stand as stark proofs of the tuma avoda zarah of both trief religions.

        Impossible to cherry pick verses taken out of their surrounding sugya contexts. The Xtian bible not only perverts key Torah terms, it shattered the Organization/Order of sugyot and replaced it with Chapters and verses! To what does this narishkeit compare? The difference between God vs. dog.

        Like

      3. Explaining The Book Avatar

        Shalom, and thank you for sharing your thoughts. Your passion for Torah and the justice it envisions is clear, and I appreciate the opportunity to dialogue on these profound matters. I would like to address your points with respect to Torah, the Messiah, and the role of righteousness and justice in God’s plan.

        Internal Righteousness and Societal Justice in Torah
        The Torah emphasizes the unity of internal righteousness and societal justice. Deuteronomy 6:5 commands us to “love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and might,” while Leviticus 19:18 instructs us to “love your neighbor as yourself.” These two commandments connect the internal disposition of righteousness with the outward pursuit of justice, as reflected in the structure of the Torah itself.

        Yitro’s counsel to Moshe in Exodus 18:13-26 is an excellent example of this principle. He advises Moshe to delegate authority to capable men who fear God, are trustworthy, and hate bribes—qualities that reflect internal righteousness as the foundation for just leadership. This balance between personal integrity and societal justice points to the Messiah, who embodies both in their fullness.

        Covenant and שם ומלכות
        You rightly emphasize the importance of שם ומלכות (God’s Name and sovereignty) in understanding the covenant. The covenant with Israel was always about revealing God’s Name and establishing His rule on earth. The Sinai covenant, for example, was sealed with the declaration, “I am the Lord your God,” and the call for Israel to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exodus 19:6).

        Yeshua’s life, death, and resurrection are deeply rooted in this covenant framework. Far from being “pie in the sky,” His work fulfills the promises given in the Torah and Prophets. The “world to come” is not a foreign or abstract concept but the realization of God’s kingdom, as described in passages like Isaiah 11:1-9 and Zechariah 14.

        Virgin Birth and Prophecy
        You critique the translation of עַלְמָה in Isaiah 7:14 as “virgin,” and this has been a longstanding debate. While עַלְמָה can mean “young woman,” the context of Isaiah’s prophecy and its fulfillment in Yeshua highlights something extraordinary. The word עַלְמָה is used in other Scriptures (e.g., Genesis 24:43) to describe women in a state of purity. Moreover, the Septuagint—a Jewish translation of the Torah and Prophets into Greek—renders the term as παρθένος, meaning “virgin.” This reflects an ancient understanding of the text’s messianic significance.

        Yeshua’s birth fulfills this prophecy, pointing to His unique identity as Immanuel, “God with us.” His coming signifies the restoration of God’s presence among His people, as promised throughout the Scriptures.

        Oral Torah and the Messiah
        Your points on the Oral Torah and its timeline are well taken. The revelation at Sinai included both the written Torah and the oral explanations necessary to understand and apply it. The codification of the Mishnah and Gemara preserved this tradition, but they were never intended to obscure the Torah’s ultimate purpose: to point us to the Messiah.

        The Messiah brings not only justice through Torah principles but also reconciliation with God. This is evident in passages like Jeremiah 31:31-34, where God promises a new covenant written on the hearts of His people. Yeshua inaugurated this covenant, fulfilling the Torah’s deeper intentions.

        Lateral Courts and the Messiah’s Role
        You raise an important distinction between lateral and vertical court systems. While Torah’s vision for justice is indeed lateral, centered on communal accountability, the Messiah’s role is unique. He fulfills and transcends human systems by perfectly embodying both the Judge and the Mediator. In Yeshua, we see justice and mercy united, as prophesied in Psalm 85:10: “Mercy and truth have met together; righteousness and peace have kissed.”

        The kingdom of God, as Yeshua proclaimed, is about restoring justice not only externally but also internally—transforming the hearts of individuals and communities.

        Reconsider the Messiah
        I understand that you reject Yeshua as the Messiah and view Christianity as fundamentally flawed. However, I encourage you to revisit the Hebrew Scriptures with fresh eyes. Passages like Isaiah 53, Daniel 9:24-26, and Psalm 22 describe a Messiah who suffers for His people, brings atonement, and is ultimately vindicated. These align with Yeshua’s mission and His transformative impact on the world.

        Like

      4. mosckerr Avatar

        Covenant cannot describe brit b/c the latter requires an oath of שם ומלכות and Goyim do not know not שם nor מלכות. Therefore covenant just pie in the sky rhetoric nonsense.

        [[[Yeshua’s life, death, and resurrection are deeply rooted in this covenant framework.]]]
        Not even close. The new testament knows nothing of tohor and tumah spirits. The chosen Cohen nation revolves around tohor and tumah spirits!

        [[[His work fulfills the promises given in the Torah and Prophets.]]] This gospels narishkeit utterly pie in the sky nonsense. All generations of the Cohen chosen people strive to grow prophetic mussar rebukes within our Yatzir Ha’Tov hearts! Impossible to “fulfill” that which rebukes all generations of the chosen Cohen people!

        I do not rely on the Xtian bible mistranslations. The Hebrew and Aramaic texts do not teach anything about Zeus impregnating married women! A direct Torah abomination.

        Like

      5. mosckerr Avatar

        Covenant cannot describe brit b/c the latter requires an oath of שם ומלכות and Goyim do not know not שם nor מלכות. Therefore covenant just pie in the sky rhetoric nonsense.

        [[[Yeshua’s life, death, and resurrection are deeply rooted in this covenant framework.]]]
        Not even close. The new testament knows nothing of tohor and tumah spirits. The chosen Cohen nation revolves around tohor and tumah spirits!

        [[[His work fulfills the promises given in the Torah and Prophets.]]] This gospels narishkeit utterly pie in the sky nonsense. All generations of the Cohen chosen people strive to grow prophetic mussar rebukes within our Yatzir Ha’Tov hearts! Impossible to “fulfill” that which rebukes all generations of the chosen Cohen people!

        I do not rely on the Xtian bible mistranslations. The Hebrew and Aramaic texts do not teach anything about Zeus impregnating married women! A direct Torah abomination.

        Like

      6. mosckerr Avatar

        First Light of Hanukkah

        Hanukkah: Time oriented mitzva from the Torah IF a person affixes prophetic mussar as the מלכות of the oath sworn ברכה לשמה. Now that’s how the B’HaG, also known as Baal HaMaor,,, (based upon his commentary to the Rif’s famous halachic code) [[This, the student of the Rif, and Rabbeinu Gershom]],,, learned.

        This unique poskin of Halacha, that tohor time oriented commandments could make an aliyah of positive and negative toldot commandments unto time oriented Av commandments to create from nothing the chosen Cohen people in all generations יש מאין. Furthermore, he argued an even larger chiddush, even halachic rabbinic mitzvot – if elevated to time oriented Av commandments by means of interpreting the k’vanna of prophetic mussar tohor middot – as the מלכות of the sworn ברכה, these rabbinic commandments too became Mitzvot from the Torah!

        However the מלחמת השם directly challenged the priority to interpret the k’vanna of mitzvot, over the need to establish religious halachic codifications as the Rif code clearly accomplished. The commentary written by the RambaN on the Rif halachic code, the dispute between the B’HaG and the RambaN (which also included the Raavad III – this מחלקת ראשונים) … disputed matters of priority.

        Whether to learn the T’NaCH\Talmud in order to interpret the k’vanna of tohor Oral Torah middot, as learned from T’NaCH/Talmudic Primary sources vs. the establishment of religious halachic codifications, to cement the religion of Judaism, during the dark ages of Medieval Europe.

        Herein defines the essence of the dispute which ripped Jewish communities apart from Spain, to France, to England and Germany. This terrible Jewish Civil War erupted into an all out brawl after the Rambam published his Yad Ha’Zakah. That the RambaN named his commentary to the Rif code מלחמת השם testifies to the bitter fierceness of this brutal Jewish Civil War.

        Like

      7. mosckerr Avatar

        What separates the Torah Menorah from the Hanukkah Menorah?

        The Torah menorah in the Mishkan has 7 branches which affix to the 6 Yom Tov and Shabbat. Hence the bnai brit soul has 7 names affixed to these 6 Yom Tov + Shabbat. Nefesh, Ruach, Neshama, Chyyah, Yechida, Nefesh Klalli, and Nefesh Shalom. These 6 + 1 souls dedicated holy to HaShem on those Chaggagim & Shabbat have Divine Names. Yah, Ha’El, El, Elohim, El Shaddai, Eish Ha’Elohim, Shalom. The Talmud teaches that the name Shalom – a Divine Name. These Divine Names remember the Yom Tov + Shabbat throughout the year; something like the rear and front sights of a rifle permit a person to shoot accurately down range.

        These 7 Divine Names affix as the k’vanna within the heart to the davening said on each specific day of the week. The mitzva of shabbat requires making the most essential הבדלה. Hence the blessing said over wine at the beginning and termination of the day of shabbat. Why does making הבדלה absolutely essential to observe shabbat? K’vanna (shabbat and yom tov exist as tohor time oriented commandment which require מלכות defined prophetic mussar k’vanna – learned by comparing precedent case studies one against another), separates the understanding which discerns like from like.

        For example, what separates the Oral Torah revelation of tohor middot spirits from words: ה’ אל רחום חנון וכו? If a person cannot discern one tohor middah from another then likewise that person fails to discern tohor middot from tumah middot. The heart contains two opposing Yatzirot. Hence the kre’a shma writes לבב, which Rabbi Yechuda the author of the Mishna calls Yatzir Ha’Tov vs the Yatzir Ha’Rah.

        The Yatzir Ha’Tov through tohor time oriented Av Commandments breaths the Spirit of the 1st Sinai commandment Name, the greatest commandment in the Torah – doing mitzvot לשמה. The sin of the Golden Calf lacks understanding and confuses the Divine Spirit Name רוח הקודש with word translations! Hence the Xtian bible and Muslim koran both worship other Gods of avoda zarah. Monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. The 10 plagues which afflicted Par’o and Egypt judged the Gods of Egypt. The brit cut at Gilgal calls upon HaShem to likewise judge the Gods of Canaan. The Rashi tefillen based upon the oath sworn at Gilgal; the Rabbeinu Tam tefillen based upon the oath sworn at Sh’Cem.

        The examples brought all require making the essential הבדלה. To keep shabbat requires making the essential הבדלה which separates and distinguishes מלאכה from עבודה: skilled labor from unskilled labor. Mesechta Shabbat addresses the verb of מלאכה; whereas mesechta Baba Kama delves into the verb of עבודה. The morning davening concludes with יום ראשון בשבת יום שני בשבת וכו. A person who observes Shabbat observes all the commandments! The Mishkan has the מקום קדוש וגם מקום קדוש קדושים. So too likewise observance of the Mitzva of Shabbat.

        On the day of Shabbat, which has the Divine Name Shalom dedicated within your Yatzir Ha’Tov heart, a person sanctifies not doing acts of מלאכה. This dedication not to do מלאכה on the day of shabbat likewise equally sanctifies not doing איסור עבודה on the 6 days of Chol “shabbat”. The mitzva of shabbat observance sanctifies not just the day but the entire week.

        Mesechta Baba Kama makes the דיוק on the opening Av Mishna. It makes the required הבדלה which separates and distinguishes Tam from Muad. Four avot tam damagers and Four avot muad damagers.

        The דיוק defines the latter as חמס גזל ערוה ושוחד במשפט. A person who sanctifies not to do these Avot muad damages during the week, sanctifies not doing the 39 forbidden labors on the day of Shabbat and therein keeps all the Torah commandments!

        Hence the Gemara of Shabbat learns precedents from the Gemara of Baba Kama. The study of Talmud – a common law legal system and not a post sealing of the Gemarah codification of statute law halachot codifications. The Rambam’s Yad Chazakah failed to make this critical הבדלה and the court of Rabbeinu Yonah together, (it seems to me) with the majority of the Baali Tosafot which learned the Talmud as common law and not assimilated Roman statute law which relies upon Aristotle’s logic of organizing laws into egg-crate like orders, placed the Rambam into נידוי. T’NaCH/Talmud common law – as different from Greek\Roman statute law – as Shabbat differs from both Xtian and Muslim interpretations!

        First Light of Hanukkah

        Time oriented mitzva from the Torah IF a person affixes prophetic mussar as the מלכות of the oath sworn ברכה לשמה. Now that’s how the B’HaG, also known as Baal HaMaor,,, (based upon his commentary to the Rif’s famous halachic code) [[This, the student of the Rif, and Rabbeinu Gershom]],,, learned.

        This unique poskin of Halacha, that tohor time oriented commandments could make an aliyah of positive and negative toldot commandments unto time oriented Av commandments to create from nothing the chosen Cohen people in all generations יש מאין. Furthermore, he argued an even larger chiddush, even halachic rabbinic mitzvot – if elevated to time oriented Av commandments by means of interpreting the k’vanna of prophetic mussar tohor middot – as the מלכות of the sworn ברכה, these rabbinic commandments too became Mitzvot from the Torah!

        However the מלחמת השם directly challenged the priority to interpret the k’vanna of mitzvot, over the need to establish religious halachic codifications as the Rif code clearly accomplished. The commentary written by the RambaN on the Rif halachic code, the dispute between the B’HaG and the RambaN (which also included the Raavad III – this מחלקת ראשונים) … disputed matters of priority.

        Whether to learn the T’NaCH\Talmud in order to interpret the k’vanna of tohor Oral Torah middot, as learned from T’NaCH/Talmudic Primary sources vs. the establishment of religious halachic codifications, to cement the religion of Judaism, during the dark ages of Medieval Europe.

        Herein defines the essence of the dispute which ripped Jewish communities apart from Spain, to France, to England and Germany. This terrible Jewish Civil War erupted into an all out brawl after the Rambam published his Yad Ha’Zakah. That the RambaN named his commentary to the Rif code מלחמת השם testifies to the bitter fierceness of this brutal Jewish Civil War.

        War brings chaos and anarchy. Civil War brings foreign intervention. Picture a dead carcass where lions, hyenas, wild dogs, and vultures all fight to consume the carcass of some trief animal … this depicts a Civil War. How many countries in Syria today? Iraq invaded Iran immediately after the Khomeini revolution in 1979. 1980 Iraq invaded. G’lut Jewish Civil War did not have vast Armies as did the American Civil War where England Russia and France threatened to intervene. But it most definitely experienced foreign interventions!

        Henry Seward the Yankee Secretary of State, the European equivalent of Foreign Minister, prevented PM Gladstone from recognizing the Confederate states. Russia threatened to send its navy to Yankee ports and also to widen the American Civil War into a general war across Europe, if England initiated to break the Union blockade of Confederate Ports. Secretary of State Seward pulled a clever stratagem. He knew that PM Gladstone and FM Lord Russell detested one another. Therefore he sent two diplomatic notes conveying opposite messages to Gladstone and Russell.

        The Industrial revolution began in England. Hence England, the first European country to outlaw slavery! The Yankee States also Industrialized as did France, especially after Napoleon’s defeat at the battle of Waterloo in 1815. Both the Southern Confederacy and Russia maintained a feudal agricultural based slavery/serf economy. In 1864 both Lincoln and the Czar of Russia outlawed slavery. Both the consequences of military victory/defeats. Lincoln following the battle of Gettsburg & Russia after the 1856 Crimean War. Where Russia faced off against industrialized England and France, and lost that war just as the Confederate South lost the Civil War to those Damned Yankees!!!!!

        Southern bitterness has not diminished to this day. Jewish bitterness because lions, tigers, bears and wolves have mauled our trief bodies over and again since the Rambam Civil War have caused the Jewish people to forget the extreme bitterness of that specific horrible Jewish Civil War which plunged Jews into chaos and anarchy following publication of the Rambam’s Yad Chazakah halachic code of “Statute Law”.

        Secretary of State Seward sent a diplomatic note to PM Gladstone saying America would tolerate, if England traded Confederate long strand cotton (Only in 1864 did a similar long strand cotton start growing in Egypt. British mills required long strand cotton.), by acquiring it through the Mexico-Texas border; to prevent the British navy from breaking the Union blockade of Southern ports! Secretary of State Seward sent a different diplomatic note to Foreign Minister Lord Russell. In that note Seward bluntly stated that if England attempted to bi-pass the Union blockade of Confederate ports, by trading through Mexico, that such a hostile act – Washington would consider as a pre-text for War between England & the United States.

        Secretary of State Seward gambled that the two men, Gladstone & Russell, would not communicate and share their received diplomatic Notes from Seward. Gladstone, deceived by Seward’s diplomatic note, immediately dispatched British troops to acquire Southern Cotton in Mexico. Secretary of State Seward issued an Ultimatum of War, and Foreign Secretary Russell waved his diplomatic note in front of the whole of Parliament, and called the PM a warmonger! This diplomatic crisis almost brought down the Gladstone majority in Parliament! British politics entered into a state of chaos and anarchy!

        In this near collapse of the British government, during the ensuing chaos and anarchy – of the fox in the hen house – Bismarck of Prussia initiated his 3 little wars which turned Prussia (dismembered Poland) into the 2nd Germanic empire. That damned Yankee Seward set up a domino effect ירידות הדורות, which triggered the 1st & 2nd World Wars and the Shoah! The resurrection from the dead of the Jewish state, 2000+ years after Rome expelled almost all Jews living in Judea and renamed the land “Palestine”, also a direct result of Secretary of State Seward stratagem to prevent PM Gladstone recognizing the Confederate right to self-determination.

        Like

      8. mosckerr Avatar

        Yo etb ya don’t want to come out and play?

        Like

      9. Explaining The Book Avatar

        Hello friend. I have to balance creating new content for this site with replying to folks like yourself. I’ll try to get back to our conversation if I can. Peace.

        Like

      10. mosckerr Avatar

        Peace a noun Shalom a verb.

        Like

      11. mosckerr Avatar

        Hanukkah & Civil War. Avoda zarah & the complexity of the Oral Torah.

        What connects Hanukkah to Jewish Civil Wars? Enough of the childish dreidel! Can anyone explain how Chag Hanukkah confronts Jewish Civil Wars based upon the complexities of the Oral Torah?

        What separates the Torah Menorah from the Hanukkah Menorah? שלום כנגד מלחמת אחים

        The Torah Menorah dedicates the 7 faces of the oath brit chosen Cohen peoples’ soul. The Hanukkah remembers the Jewish Civil Wars fought as a direct consequence to Jewish assimilation and intermarriage with Goyim. Both transgression define the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai commandment: not to worship other Gods. When Israel worships avoda zarah: the Torah curse rains down upon our people like as did the plagues in the days of Moshe and Par’o. HaShem condemned the kingdom of David to endure Civil Wars when David profaned the anointing of Moshiach to rule the land with righteous judicial common law Sanhedrin courtroom justice – following the death of the baal of Bat Sheva.

        The Torah menorah in the Mishkan has 7 branches which affix to the 6 Yom Tov and Shabbat. Hence the bnai brit soul has 7 names affixed to these 6 Yom Tov + Shabbat. Nefesh, Ruach, Neshama, Chyyah, Yechida, Nefesh Klalli, and Nefesh Shalom. These 6 + 1 souls dedicated holy to HaShem on those Chaggagim & Shabbat have Divine Names. Yah, Ha’El, El, Elohim, El Shaddai, Eish Ha’Elohim, Shalom. The Talmud teaches that the name Shalom – a Divine Name. These Divine Names remember the Yom Tov + Shabbat throughout the year; something like the rear and front sights of a rifle permit a person to shoot accurately down range.

        These 7 Divine Names affix as the k’vanna within the heart to the davening said on each specific day of the week. The mitzva of shabbat requires making the most essential הבדלה. Hence the blessing said over wine at the beginning and termination of the day of shabbat. Why does making הבדלה absolutely essential to observe shabbat? K’vanna (shabbat and yom tov exist as tohor time oriented commandment which require מלכות defined prophetic mussar k’vanna – learned by comparing precedent case studies one against another), separates the understanding which discerns like from like.

        For example, what separates the Oral Torah revelation of tohor middot spirits from words: ה’ אל רחום חנון וכו? If a person cannot discern one tohor middah from another then likewise that person fails to discern tohor middot from tumah middot. The heart contains two opposing Yatzirot. Hence the kre’a shma writes לבב, which Rabbi Yechuda the author of the Mishna calls Yatzir Ha’Tov vs the Yatzir Ha’Rah.

        The Yatzir Ha’Tov through tohor time oriented Av Commandments breaths the Spirit of the 1st Sinai commandment Name, the greatest commandment in the Torah – doing mitzvot לשמה. The sin of the Golden Calf lacks understanding and confuses the Divine Spirit Name רוח הקודש with word translations! Hence the Xtian bible and Muslim koran both worship other Gods of avoda zarah. Monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. The 10 plagues which afflicted Par’o and Egypt judged the Gods of Egypt. The brit cut at Gilgal calls upon HaShem to likewise judge the Gods of Canaan. The Rashi tefillen based upon the oath sworn at Gilgal; the Rabbeinu Tam tefillen based upon the oath sworn at Sh’Cem.

        The examples brought all require making the essential הבדלה. To keep shabbat requires making the essential הבדלה which separates and distinguishes מלאכה from עבודה: skilled labor from unskilled labor. Mesechta Shabbat addresses the verb of מלאכה; whereas mesechta Baba Kama delves into the verb of עבודה. The morning davening concludes with יום ראשון בשבת יום שני בשבת וכו. A person who observes Shabbat observes all the commandments! The Mishkan has the מקום קדוש וגם מקום קדוש קדושים. So too likewise observance of the Mitzva of Shabbat.

        On the day of Shabbat, which has the Divine Name Shalom dedicated within your Yatzir Ha’Tov heart, a person sanctifies not doing acts of מלאכה. This dedication not to do מלאכה on the day of shabbat likewise equally sanctifies not doing איסור עבודה on the 6 days of Chol “shabbat”. The mitzva of shabbat observance sanctifies not just the day but the entire week.

        Mesechta Baba Kama makes the דיוק on the opening Av Mishna. It makes the required הבדלה which separates and distinguishes Tam from Muad. Four avot tam damagers and Four avot muad damagers.

        The דיוק defines the latter as חמס גזל ערוה ושוחד במשפט. A person who sanctifies not to do these Avot muad damages during the week, sanctifies not doing the 39 forbidden labors on the day of Shabbat and therein keeps all the Torah commandments!

        Hence the Gemara of Shabbat learns precedents from the Gemara of Baba Kama. The study of Talmud – a common law legal system and not a post sealing of the Gemarah codification of statute law halachot codifications. The Rambam’s Yad Chazakah failed to make this critical הבדלה and the court of Rabbeinu Yonah together, (it seems to me) with the majority of the Baali Tosafot which learned the Talmud as common law and not assimilated Roman statute law which relies upon Aristotle’s logic of organizing laws into egg-crate like orders, placed the Rambam into נידוי. T’NaCH/Talmud common law – as different from Greek\Roman statute law – as Shabbat differs from both Xtian and Muslim interpretations!

        First Light of Hanukkah: Time oriented mitzva from the Torah IF a person affixes prophetic mussar as the מלכות of the oath sworn ברכה לשמה.

        Now that’s how the B’HaG, also known as Baal HaMaor,,, (based upon his commentary to the Rif’s famous halachic code) [[This, the student of the Rif, and Rabbeinu Gershom]],,, learned.

        This unique poskin of Halacha, that tohor time oriented commandments could make an aliyah of positive and negative toldot commandments unto time oriented Av commandments to create from nothing the chosen Cohen people in all generations יש מאין. Furthermore, he argued an even larger chiddush, even halachic rabbinic mitzvot – if elevated to time oriented Av commandments by means of interpreting the k’vanna of prophetic mussar tohor middot – as the מלכות of the sworn ברכה, these rabbinic commandments too became Mitzvot from the Torah!

        However the מלחמת השם directly challenged the priority to interpret the k’vanna of mitzvot, over the need to establish religious halachic codifications as the Rif code clearly accomplished. The commentary written by the RambaN on the Rif halachic code, the dispute between the B’HaG and the RambaN (which also included the Raavad III – this מחלקת ראשונים) … disputed matters of priority.

        Whether to learn the T’NaCH\Talmud in order to interpret the k’vanna of tohor Oral Torah middot, as learned from T’NaCH/Talmudic Primary sources vs. the establishment of religious halachic codifications, to cement the religion of Judaism, during the dark ages of Medieval Europe.

        Herein defines the essence of the dispute which ripped Jewish communities apart from Spain, to France, to England and Germany. This terrible Jewish Civil War erupted into an all out brawl after the Rambam published his Yad Ha’Zakah. That the RambaN named his commentary to the Rif code מלחמת השם testifies to the bitter fierceness of this brutal Jewish Civil War.

        War brings chaos and anarchy. Civil War brings foreign intervention. Picture a dead carcass where lions, hyenas, wild dogs, and vultures all fight to consume the carcass of some trief animal … this depicts a Civil War. How many countries in Syria today? Iraq invaded Iran immediately after the Khomeini revolution in 1979. 1980 Iraq invaded. G’lut Jewish Civil War did not have vast Armies as did the American Civil War where England Russia and France threatened to intervene. But it most definitely experienced foreign interventions!

        Henry Seward the Yankee Secretary of State, the European equivalent of Foreign Minister, prevented PM Gladstone from recognizing the Confederate states. Russia threatened to send its navy to Yankee ports and also to widen the American Civil War into a general war across Europe, if England initiated to break the Union blockade of Confederate Ports. Secretary of State Seward pulled a clever stratagem. He knew that PM Gladstone and FM Lord Russell detested one another. Therefore he sent two diplomatic notes conveying opposite messages to Gladstone and Russell.

        The Industrial revolution began in England. Hence England, the first European country to outlaw slavery! The Yankee States also Industrialized as did France, especially after Napoleon’s defeat at the battle of Waterloo in 1815. Both the Southern Confederacy and Russia maintained a feudal agricultural based slavery/serf economy. In 1864 both Lincoln and the Czar of Russia outlawed slavery. Both the consequences of military victory/defeats. Lincoln following the battle of Gettsburg & Russia after the 1856 Crimean War. Where Russia faced off against industrialized England and France, and lost that war just as the Confederate South lost the Civil War to those Damned Yankees!!!!!

        Southern bitterness has not diminished to this day. Jewish bitterness because lions, tigers, bears and wolves have mauled our trief bodies over and again since the Rambam Civil War have caused the Jewish people to forget the extreme bitterness of that specific horrible Jewish Civil War which plunged Jews into chaos and anarchy following publication of the Rambam’s Yad Chazakah halachic code of “Statute Law”.

        Secretary of State Seward sent a diplomatic note to PM Gladstone saying America would tolerate, if England traded Confederate long strand cotton (Only in 1864 did a similar long strand cotton start growing in Egypt. British mills required long strand cotton.), by acquiring it through the Mexico-Texas border; to prevent the British navy from breaking the Union blockade of Southern ports! Secretary of State Seward sent a different diplomatic note to Foreign Minister Lord Russell. In that note Seward bluntly stated that if England attempted to bi-pass the Union blockade of Confederate ports, by trading through Mexico, that such a hostile act – Washington would consider as a pre-text for War between England & the United States.

        Secretary of State Seward gambled that the two men, Gladstone & Russell, would not communicate and share their received diplomatic Notes from Seward. Gladstone, deceived by Seward’s diplomatic note, immediately dispatched British troops to acquire Southern Cotton in Mexico. Secretary of State Seward issued an Ultimatum of War, and Foreign Secretary Russell waved his diplomatic note in front of the whole of Parliament, and called the PM a warmonger! This diplomatic crisis almost brought down the Gladstone majority in Parliament! British politics entered into a state of chaos and anarchy!

        In this near collapse of the British government, during the ensuing chaos and anarchy – of the fox in the hen house – Bismarck of Prussia initiated his 3 little wars which turned Prussia (dismembered Poland) into the 2nd Germanic empire. That damned Yankee Seward set up a domino effect ירידות הדורות, which triggered the 1st & 2nd World Wars and the Shoah! The resurrection from the dead of the Jewish state, 2000+ years after Rome expelled almost all Jews living in Judea and renamed the land “Palestine”, also a direct result of Secretary of State Seward stratagem to prevent PM Gladstone recognizing the Confederate right to self-determination.

        The Rambam, in his work Yad Ha’Zakah (Mishneh Torah), sought to create a comprehensive, systematic codification of Jewish law. His intention was to clarify and simplify the application of halacha by organizing it into 14 books, which cover everything from foundational beliefs to laws of ritual observance. His approach was deeply logical, structured, and aimed at providing a clear, static/rigid “statute law”- halachic code for everyday Jewish life, making it accessible to all, including those who might not have access to deep talmudic study.

        While the Rambam’s goal was to create a unified, easy-to-follow codex, this was controversial. Because it did not include sources or direct references to the Talmud, and it seemed to close off the possibility of evolving halachic discourse. Some critics, most notably RambaN, felt that the Rambam’s approach was overly rigid and reduced the dynamic, interpretive nature of Jewish law.

        In stark contrast the B’hag and Rabbeinu Tam, who lived before the Rambam, in effect they still condemn the statute law perversion committed by the Rambam’s static codification which abandoned פרדס kabbalah which defines Talmudic, and T’NaCH common law.

        The RambaN agreed with the Rambam goal to create a unified, easy-to-follow codex. The chief superficial controversy, the Yad did not include sources or direct references to the Talmud; it seemed to close off the possibility of evolving halachic interpretative discourse. However the substance of the Jewish Civil War more compares to the Confederate argument with Washington DC/Lincoln over States rights to bureaucratically regulate trade and commerce independent of Big Brother; the Rambam code negated T”NaCH and Talmudic common law.

        Critics, such as the B’HaG and Rabbeinu Tam would have utterly rejected the Rambam static code. Rabbeinu Yonah’s court placed the Rambam into נידוי. They felt that the Rambam’s assimilation of Greek philosophy & logic, endemic of assimilated ‘golden age’ Spanish Jewry, negated the kabbalah taught by rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system. Furthermore, his overly rigid code of law reduced the Talmudic dynamic equilibrium factor. Absolutely required for a living interpretive body of Jewish law. For example: the Rambam’s Sefer Ha’Mitzvot failed all together to address Av Torah commandments: time oriented mitzvot! He clearly misunderstood the opening Av Mishna of Chullen. He failed to address the critical requirement of “fear of heaven” in the kosher slaughter of animals. The apikoros might possess the knowledge how to slaughter correctly but lacks the essential fear of heaven, just as do likewise Goyim.

        The B’HaG (Baal HaMaor) and Rabbeinu Tam represent a different approach to dynamic halachic interpretation, one closely aligned with common law fundamentals, the use of precedents and comparative analysis of primary sources.

        The B’HaG, a key figure in early halachic history, focused on halachic analysis through a common law פרדס logic approach. Rather than simply codifying laws into rigid egg crate categories which define Greek & Roman law. The B’HaG emphasized, halacha must evolve from an analysis of historical precedents and the comparison of similar Case/Din legal judicial rulings learned from sealed Primary sources. This sh’itta involves understanding halacha not as a static set of rules, but as a dynamic, case-based system flexible & adaptive, to changing dynamic circumstances required for thoughtful legal interpretive reasoning.

        The B’HaG’s sh’itta shares many characteristics with the English common law system, where laws developed through judicial decisions based upon prior judicial rulings. Rather than based only upon rigid written codes of static halachic rulings. He focused on evaluating specific legal situations and their outcomes, which could then be applied to new cases.

        Rabbeinu Tam, an influential Tosafist and a key figure of French Rishonim common law. He likewise focused on analyzing Jewish law through the lens of case law and precedent. And emphasized the interpretation of Talmudic texts and often used comparative analysis of multiple Talmudic sources to derive halachic rulings. This approach very much reflects the common law T’NaCH/Talmud\Midrashim tradition, which values the analysis of specific legal precedents (and to a far less prioritized aggadic prophetic mussar) to establish a flexible, evolving legal system.

        Rabbeinu Tam’s methods, deeply rooted in Talmudic discourse and encouraged a dialogue between past legal rulings and contemporary situations. His sh’itta sought to balance theoretical knowledge with practical application, and his halachic decisions, grounded in precedents, making them deeply relevant to everyday Jewish life.

        Both these great common law scholars failed to delve into Midrashic scholarship of Aggadic prophetic mussar common law. Perhaps had Reshonim scholarship done more than give lip service and superficially comment upon Midrashic Gaonim scholarship’s Midrashim, a powerful tool to learn the Aggadic mussar of the T’NaCH & Talmud, the Rambam revolution would not have treated the T’NaCH and Talmud common law legal system, much like as did the Gang of Four during the Cultural Revolution despised classic Confucianism.

        Furthermore, Rabbeinu Tam’s approach frequently involved resolving apparent contradictions in the Talmud by using comparative analysis. This allowed for much more of a dynamic halachic system. Law could more easily apply a depth analysis, based on a פרדס logic of previous similar בנין אב cases. However, the chief flaw of the Rabbeinu Tam’s Talmudic scholarship, it seems to me, while he delved into the specifics of a Gemara sugya through comparative precedents. Alas afterwards he failed to re-interpret the language of the Home Mishna using the precedents employed to interpret a Gemara sugya on that home Mishna! Something like a blue-print front, top, and side views permits a man to see a 3-D idea from a 2-D blueprint.

        The Rambam sought clarity and uniformity by codifying Jewish law. The RambaN, while impressed by both the B’hag and Rabbeinu Tam, inclined toward the Rambam rigid legal system. The B’HaG and Rabbeinu Tam, emphasize a case-law approach based on precedents and comparative analysis, making halacha more flexible, dynamic, and context-driven.

        The debate between codification and common law – not merely an academic criticism which rebuked the Rambam’s failure to bring sources for his halachic posok. Based upon the Tur and Shulkan Aruch, this criticism—merely superficial. The Rambam’s statute law rigic codification of halacha, established a uniform structured Jewish law. It represents a significant shift in Jewish religious authority—one that centralized authority in the hands of the codifier and placed greater emphasis on a universally applicable system of halacha.

        This tremendous error in judgment matched the Rambam’s assimilation to Xtian and Muslim theology and Creeds which demanded from their believers to believe in a Universal Monotheistic God. Mesechta Avoda Zarah teaches that the earliest generations, prior to Noach, rejected the Torah oath brit faith. Hence Goyim by definition worship other Gods. Monotheism a creed of avoda zarah.

        The B’HaG, Rabbeinu Tam, and others emphasized the importance of Talmudic study and personal interpretation. Their approach consequently led to a more decentralized form of Jewish legal authority and a living tradition that could respond flexibly to the diverse needs of Jewish communities. Alas Feudal Europe required a fixed rigid law at that time.

        The assimilated halachic codifiers decreed, which Talmudic authorities the halacha must always followed. There aim, a very valid argument, faced with the feudal constraints which prevented travel, they argued that establishment of rigid static halachic codifications would prevent Jewish communities from scattering into diverse religious Orders. Something that defines Orthodox from secular, from Historical to Liberal Reform Jews today.

        After Napoleon freed Jews from the Catholic ghetto war-crimes, Reform Jewish leadership, seeing the huge gap in education following three Centuries of ghetto imprisonment & destitute Jewish poverty, declared the “classic” halachic statute codifications – as archaic and not relevant to the modern world!

        This tension between centralized rigid codifications and decentralized dynamic interpretive analysis led to significant divisions within the Jewish communities across Western Europe, contributing to the “Jewish Civil War”.

        Following the Pope’s decree condemning Western European Jewry to ghetto imprisonment, a mass population transfer ensued. Jews fled to Poland and the Ukraine. Alas Jewish anarchy and internal chaos left our people no place to hide. At the conclusion of the 30 year War, in 1648 the Cossacks slaughtered up to 1.5 million Jews in a 12 year period.

        The debate between static codification (as represented by the Rambam) and a more dynamic, common law sh’itta (as represented by the B’HaG and Rabbeinu Tam commentaries to the Talmud) reflects a fundamental tension in Jewish legal philosophy.

        The Rambam’s static codification aimed to establish a unified and systematic religious structure, Jews he viewed as something like a bridge. While the B’HaG and Rabbeinu Tam preferred a more dynamic, interpretive approach. Their sh’itta views the Jews as the waters flowing underneath the bridge. This ongoing debate influences how Jewish law studied and applied across the Yeshiva world. The g’lut victory of the Rambam Civil War, set off a chain reaction, a ירידות הדורות which plagues the Jewish people to this very day. This conflict between static vs. dynamic legalism, it highlights conflicts which separate and divides Jews till now.

        The distinction between Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס (Pardes) logic system and Aristotle’s syllogistic logic is crucial. Rabbi Akiva’s approach, rooted in the mystical and interpretive layers of Jewish tradition, indeed contrasts sharply with the more rigid and categorically structured syllogisms of Aristotle, which are based on deductive reasoning.

        Rabbi Akiva’s Pardes system—comprising four levels of Torah interpretation (Peshat, Remez, Derash, and Sod)—involves a multi-dimensional approach to understanding texts, which allows for a depth of insight that evolves dynamically, adapting to spiritual and philosophical insights. Aristotle’s syllogisms, on the other hand, work by following a more rigid, three-part deductive structure (major premise, minor premise, conclusion), aiming for logical certainty. The difference between these two systems is not just a matter of intellectual style but also a fundamental difference in how knowledge and divine wisdom are perceived and processed.

        The central idea found in the Birkat HaMazon (Grace After Meals) regarding the Greek oppression, “כשעמדה מלכות יון הרשעה על עמך ישראל להשכיחם תורתך ולהעבירם מחקי רצונך”. This phrase is crucial because it directly connects the Greek period of assimilation to the spiritual and cultural struggles of the Jewish people. The attempt to “forget” the Torah and erase the distinct identity of the Jewish people aligns with the context of the Hanukkah story and the deeper spiritual struggle between maintaining Jewish identity versus the pressure of assimilation. This point touches on the fundamental challenge the Jewish people faced during that time—an ideological civil war, if you will—between remaining faithful to Torah principles and being influenced by the Hellenistic culture that sought to diminish or even eliminate the Jewish tradition.

        Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס (Pardes) logic system differs significantly from Aristotle’s syllogism. Rabbi Akiva approaches Torah interpretation through four levels—Peshat, Remez, Derash, and Sod—which guide us from simple meaning to deeper mystical insights. This method allows for a dynamic exploration of texts, fostering an evolving understanding that connects the individual to divine wisdom. Aristotle’s syllogisms, however, focus on deductive reasoning. They follow a strict three-part structure: major premise, minor premise, and conclusion. This contrast highlights the difference between Jewish thought, which embraces spiritual depth and multiple interpretive layers, and Greek logic, which values clarity and deductive certainty.

        The passage from Birkat HaMazon—”כשעמדה מלכות יון הרשעה על עמך ישראל להשכיחם תורתך ולהעבירם מחקי רצונך”—describes the oppression the Jewish people faced under Greek rule. The Greeks attempted to erase Torah knowledge and disrupt Jewish identity. This aligns with the Hanukkah story, where Greek Hellenistic culture sought to assimilate the Jews and diminish their unique spiritual practices. The Jewish people stood at a crossroads, facing the struggle of either remaining faithful to the Torah or yielding to external pressure to abandon their distinct religious path. The tension between these two forces mirrors a broader cultural and philosophical battle, one that still resonates with us today.

        The Greeks didn’t just challenge the Written Torah, but their deeper threat lay in their attempt to erase or distort the very essence of the Oral Torah and its mystical underpinnings, which are far more subtle and dynamic than the Written Torah alone.

        The Greeks, especially during the reign of Antiochus IV, sought to suppress the Oral Torah—the tradition of interpretation passed down orally through the generations. This includes both the Talmudic and Midrashic traditions, which provide depth and meaning beyond the plain text of the Written Torah. The Greeks wanted to promote a worldview based on logic, philosophy, and uniformity, which stood in stark contrast to the Jewish approach of interpreting Torah through layers of mystical, legal, and ethical frameworks.

        The Written Torah itself might have been preserved in some form, but the Oral Torah—which transmits Jewish law, ethics, spiritual guidance, and the more esoteric aspects of Jewish belief—represented a unique system of knowledge that transcended static texts and relied heavily on a dynamic, interpretive process. The Greeks attempted to erase this system of interpretation and the freedom of Jewish thought that flowed from it, intending to subjugate the Jewish spirit to Hellenistic philosophical structures. They targeted the Oral Torah specifically because it was the living tradition that connected each generation to the divine wisdom behind the Torah’s commandments.

        This makes the Hanukkah story not just about resisting the imposition of foreign rituals or the desecration of the Temple, but about the battle for the soul of Jewish spiritual life. The victory over the Greeks symbolized the preservation of Jewish autonomy in interpreting the Torah—both written and oral—and safeguarding the Oral Torah as the foundation of Jewish identity, wisdom; the oath brit faith which prioritizes the righteous pursuit of judicial imposed fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B – justice.

        The broader implications of the Rambam’s codification of law, especially in relation to the Oral Torah (פרדס) and the Kabbalah of Rabbi Akiva compared to the examples of Seward’s diplomatic strategy during the American Civil War and the 1968 Gang of Four Cultural Revolution in China—to further highlight the dynamics at play between Common Law vs Statute Law.

        The Rambam’s Mishneh Torah represented a systematic codification of Jewish law, offering clarity, uniformity, and simplicity to Jewish practice. his codification ultimately reduced the dynamic, interpretive nature of Jewish law that is characteristic of the Oral Torah and the deeper Kabbalistic teachings passed down through traditions like Rabbi Akiva’s Pardes. By consolidating Jewish law into a fixed, written code, the Rambam inadvertently disconnected Jewish spirituality from the living process of interpretation that had existed for centuries through the Oral Torah.

        This shift to statute law is comparable to the actions taken by both Secretary Seward during the American Civil War and the Gang of Four in China during the Cultural Revolution, both of which involved efforts to undermine or uproot longstanding systems of thought and tradition in order to impose rigid, centralized control.

        Seward and the Preservation of the Union

        In the case of Seward, his diplomatic maneuvers during the Civil War—specifically, preventing PM Gladstone from recognizing the Confederate States of America—reflect an effort to preserve the existing order and prevent foreign powers from gaining influence over the future of the United States. Seward’s strategic use of diplomatic notes undermined Gladstone’s plans by preventing England from bypassing the Union blockade and thus preventing a balkanization of the Union. This is akin to the Rambam’s codification of Jewish law: while the Rambam sought to unite and strengthen Jewish practice through a singular, standardized legal code, this effort simultaneously closed off the dynamic process of legal interpretation and the ability to evolve with changing times, much as Seward worked to preserve the unity of the American Union. Just as Seward blocked foreign interventions, the Rambam’s codification blocked the free flow of Jewish legal discourse that had previously thrived in the Oral Torah and Talmudic scholarship.

        This analogy between Seward’s diplomacy and the Rambam’s statute law codification helps explain how both efforts—Seward’s diplomatic interference and the Rambam’s halachic system—essentially “freezed” the trajectory of their respective cultures. By creating a legal monolith, both efforts sought order and stability but at the cost of dynamic evolution, flexibility, and the deep wisdom that comes from organic, fluid processes of intellectual and spiritual development. The Civil War in this case, like the Jewish Civil War can be seen as a battle between traditional systems of power and those that wanted to centralize and impose new forms of control, thus preventing the ongoing development of the legal and philosophical traditions.

        The Cultural Revolution and the Attack on Tradition

        The 1968 Gang of Four in China presents a similarly revolutionary example. Under Mao’s influence, the Gang of Four sought to uproot and destroy Confucian traditions that had guided Chinese society for centuries. Their Cultural Revolution specifically targeted the ancient Confucian system of civil servant examinations, which had for millennia helped to select individuals for public office based on knowledge, wisdom, and ethical behavior. The Gang of Four wanted to replace this tradition with Maoist ideology and a more centralized, rigid political structure.

        In this way, the Cultural Revolution mirrors the effect of the Rambam’s codification of Jewish law: both movements sought to disrupt and uproot longstanding systems of knowledge and interpretation. The Gang of Four tried to replace the living, dynamic tradition of Confucian civil service exams with the centralized, rigid ideology of the state under Mao’s directives. Similarly, the Rambam’s statute law approach to Jewish law effectively disrupted the dynamic, interpretive nature of the Oral Torah and replaced it with a centralized, fixed system that removed the living interpretive process of Talmudic discourse.

        Rabbi Akiva’s Pardes system, which provides a pathway for interpreting Torah through multiple layers—from simple textual understanding to deep mystical knowledge—was rooted in Oral Torah. By codifying Jewish law into a uniform system, the Rambam reduced the rich, multi-dimensional method of Torah study that Rabbi Akiva’s Pardes embodies. The Gang of Four’s attack on Confucianism and Seward’s blocking of foreign influence both represent forces seeking to centralize control and replace deep, evolving traditions with more rigid, top-down systems of rule.

        By codifying Jewish law into a statute system, the Rambam effectively cut off access to the kabbalistic teachings that flowed from the Oral Torah and the deeper levels of Jewish wisdom. Rabbi Akiva’s Pardes logic system, which includes mystical and allegorical readings of Torah, serves as the spiritual backbone of Jewish thought. This system is inherently dynamic, relying on interpretation, personal insight, and spiritual growth to understand the word of God. But when the Rambam’s statute law took precedence, it disrupted the flow of this dynamic process, leading subsequent generations to forget or abandon the deeper kabbalistic teachings that form the soul of Jewish spirituality.

        The uprooting of the Pardes system, akin to the Gang of Four’s destruction of Confucianism, marks a significant shift in Jewish history. Like the cultural purges in Maoist China, where ancient traditions were replaced by state-driven ideology, the Rambam’s statute law imposed a fixed structure that no longer allowed for the organic growth of Jewish thought. By limiting Jewish practice to a codified statute law, the Rambam, despite his profound contributions to Jewish legal thought, inadvertently alienated future generations from the mystical and interpretive aspects of the Oral Torah that had kept Jewish spirituality vibrant.

        Both Seward’s diplomatic tactics and the Cultural Revolution represent efforts to centralize control and impose order, much like the Rambam’s codification of Jewish law. All three efforts—while seeking unity, clarity, and stability—suppress the living, evolving traditions that allow for deeper spiritual and intellectual engagement. The Oral Torah, with its focus on dynamic interpretation, was the key that unlocked the deeper mystical truths of the Torah, as taught by Rabbi Akiva and his followers. The Rambam’s legal system served to replace this dynamic process with a static code, which eventually led to the forgetting of the Pardes and a long period of spiritual dormancy in Jewish thought.

        This loss, in part, set the stage for later Jewish Civil Wars. As different factions vied for control over Jewish law and practice, seeking to either restore the Oral Torah or accept the Rambam’s system as definitive, or in the case of false messiah movements which preceded the rise of post Ghetto Reform Judaism, these tensions continue to reverberate through Jewish thought today, as we grapple with the tension between statute law and oral tradition, and the dynamic, evolving nature of Jewish spirituality.

        The false messiah movements of Sabbatai Zevi and Jacob Frank function as the foundation of post Ghetto Reform Judaism which condemns the statute law codifications as archaic and not relevant to the Modern Era. Reform Judaism represents a form of spiritual crisis that deeply impacted how Jews viewed their religious tradition in the post-Ghetto era.

        Both Sabbatai Zevi and Jacob Frank were charismatic figures whose movements challenged traditional Jewish spirituality and law. They represent radical deviations from Jewish normativity, particularly with regard to the Pardes system, the Oral Torah, and the deeply mystical aspects of Jewish Kabbalah. Their influence can be seen as both a reaction to the statute law victory as expressed through the Tur and Shulkan Aruch halachic codifications.

        The codification of Jewish law into a fixed system by the Rambam, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch, and the broader intellectual currents of the Enlightenment that were sweeping Europe at the time. Sabbatai Zevi (1626-1676) proclaimed himself as the Messiah of the Jewish people, sparking a movement that challenged traditional Jewish authorities and their legal frameworks. His followers, known as Sabbateans, believed that the coming of the Messiah would involve transgression of Torah law and the rejection of many of the rigid structures that had governed Jewish religious life. Sabbatai Zevi’s movement represented a kind of spiritual rebellion against the established order, including the very system of Jewish law codified by the Rambam. His radical reinterpretation of Jewish messianism questioned the authority of halacha and the traditional system of Oral Torah that governed Jewish life, leading to a spiritual crisis that deeply unsettled Jewish communities.

        Jacob Frank (1726-1791), a later figure influenced by Sabbatai Zevi, took the Sabbatean heresy even further by blending it with Christianity and Islamic mysticism, creating a movement that explicitly rejected the authority of Jewish law. Frank’s followers, the Frankists, went so far as to openly renounce the Mosaic law and advocate for a new religious order, one that transcended traditional Jewish identity and law. Frank’s teachings were deeply tied to the idea that traditional Jewish law, as codified by figures like the Rambam, was obsolete in the face of new spiritual revelations. He claimed that the Jews needed to break free from the constraints of their past and embrace a new spiritual path that was no longer bound by the rigid legal systems of the past.

        The Sabbatean and Frankist movements were not mere religious aberrations; they became profound symbols of the deeper currents that eventually led to the rejection of traditional halacha and the emergence of Reform Judaism in the 19th century. After centuries of ghettoized Jewish existence, where traditional Jewish law (and the codifications of figures like the Rambam) governed virtually every aspect of daily life, the Enlightenment and the emancipation of Jews in Western Europe triggered a radical shift in Jewish thought.

        The rise of modernity brought with it a crisis of authority in many traditional religious systems, including Judaism. The rigid legalism of the Yad Chazkah, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch statute halachic codifications perverse framing of the Talmud as just another example of a Tzeddukim: Greek polis city state based upon ancient Greek rules of logic, seemed increasingly out of place in a new, secular world where reason, science, and personal freedom became dominant values. Sabbatai Zevi’s messianic pretensions and Jacob Frank’s heretical teachings can be understood as early expressions of the broader desire among some Jews to break away from the constraints of codified law and embrace a new, less structured form of spirituality.

        For many Jews living in the post-Ghetto era, the codified laws that had once kept their communities together began to feel antiquated. The Enlightenment’s emphasis on reason and the secularization, consequent to the American and French revolutions, led to the development of Reform Judaism, which sought to modernize Jewish practice by rejecting some of the more rigid aspects of statute law—like those embodied in the Rambam’s codifications—and adapting Jewish tradition to the modern world.

        By the early 19th century, Reform Judaism began to emerge as a reaction against the perceived irrelevance of traditional Jewish legal frameworks, particularly those that had been codified in works like the Mishneh Torah. Reformers, like Abraham Geiger and Moses Mendelssohn, saw the statute law approach of the Rambam and other medieval Jewish codifiers as an obstacle to the adaptation of Jewish religion to the modern world. The Reform movement advocated for:

        The reinterpretation of Jewish law to align with modern values, such as individual autonomy, rationalism, and universal human rights. The disengagement from practices and rituals that were seen as too rigid, outdated, or non-essential in the modern era. A return to the spirit of the ethical monotheism heretical interpretation of the 2nd Sinai commandment, rather than adherence to a fixed, legalistic system that they saw as more concerned with external ritual and structure than inner spiritual growth.

        Statute halachic codes prioritized a theological belief in a Xtian Islam like Universal God over the pursuit of righteous judicial justice which strives to faithfully restore restitution of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B. This religification of statute halachic codes over the Torah faith of judicial pursuit of justice served as the foundation for Reform Judaism’s declaration of Berlin as their ‘New Jerusalem’!

        This reformist rejection of traditional halacha was not just an intellectual exercise; it had profound consequences for the way Jews saw themselves and their relationship with the Torah. Many Jews began to view the codified Jewish law—especially that of the Rambam—as a relic of an earlier, pre-modern era, one that had no relevance in the post-enlightenment world.

        In this context, the Sabbatean and Frankist movements can be seen as precursors to the Reformist spirit that rejected traditional Jewish legalism. Sabbatai Zevi’s antinomian approach, which suggested that Jews could transcend Mosaic law and even embrace the realm of transgression in order to hasten the redemption, mirrors the later Reform Jewish rejection of statute law. Similarly, Jacob Frank’s rejection of traditional Jewish legal systems and embrace of syncretic spirituality laid the groundwork for a more flexible, less law-bound approach to Jewish identity.

        For those Jews influenced by the Frankists, the law of the Torah—particularly as codified by figures like the Rambam—was not divine and eternal, but rather a set of cultural norms that could be transcended or transformed in response to new spiritual revelations. In many ways, this mindset permeated the Reform Judaism movement, where Jewish law was not viewed as an eternal, binding system, but as something that could be adapted, modified, or even discarded altogether in favor of a more personalized, flexible spirituality.

        The Sabbatean and Frankist movements represent the spiritual breaking point where Jewish law—embodied most systematically in the Yad Chazaka, Tur, and Shulkah Aruch path of statute halachic law—became increasingly irrelevant to a growing number of Jews. Modern Jewish religious movements initiated a philosophical and spiritual shift away from the notion of justice and the dedication of tohor middot, towards a more fluid and adaptable forms of religious/secular and assimilated lifestyles

        Sabbatai Zevi and Jacob Frank acted as the precursors to a broader movement that rejected T’NaCH & Talmudic common law by standing on the post Rambam Civil War establishment of statute law religious Judaism. Reform Judaism, in its turn, eventually rejected the authority of Jewish legal codifications of the Rambam, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch, and adopt a more progressive, individualized approach to Jewish law and identity, just as did the assimilated Jews of the Spanish ‘golden age’ reject the kabbala of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס understanding of the revelation of the Oral Torah to Moshe at Horev 40 days following the sin of the Golden Calf.

        Like

  2. Ark of the Covenant Explained – Explaining The Book Avatar

    […] 1 Samuel 4–6, Israel carries the ark into battle as a good-luck charm, but God allows it to be […]

    Like

Leave a reply to mosckerr Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Explaining The Book

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading