22 thoughts on “TRUST AND OBEY JESUS-YESHUA AMEN MARANATHA!!”

1. I am a ❤ Devout Conservative Christian-ZIONIST  ❤ Republican ❤ Patriot in our ❤ Judeo-Christian Nation United States of America USA ❤  and  ❤  I STAND with the  HOLY LAND of  ❤ Israel-Yisrael Israel ❤  “Pray Without Ceasing”  ❤  ( I Thessalonians 5:17 KJV )  ❤ For  ❤ USA  ❤ and  Israel-Yisrael ❤  and our  ❤ Christian Earth  ❤ Forevermore!!  ❤ Hallelujah ❤ Amen ❤  MARANATHA ❤

   May  our ❤  ONE TRUE GOD THE FATHER ❤  who art in Heaven Above Bless all my ❤ Sisters and Brothers in ❤  Christ Jesus-Yeshua ❤  and my ❤  Messianic Jewish Sisters and Brothers  ❤ in  ❤  Christ Jesus-Yeshua ❤  and my ❤  Devout  ❤ Jewish Sisters and Brothers ❤  who  ❤ STAND  ❤ with the  ❤ Holy Land of  ❤  Israel-Yisrael ❤  and our  ❤  Judeo-Christian Nation ❤  United States of America ❤  and Our ❤ Christian Earth ❤  Hallelujah ❤  Maranatha ❤  Amen-Amein ❤  SELAH ❤

   Please Pray  ❤  for all our Sisters and Brothers in  ❤ Christ Jesus-Yeshua ❤  and our ❤  Messianic Jewish Sisters and Brothers   in ❤  Christ Jesus-Yeshua  ❤  and our  ❤  Devout   ❤ Jewish Sisters and Brothers  ❤  Everyday  ❤   “Pray Without Ceasing.” ❤   ( I Thessalonians 5:17 KJV ) ❤  PRAYING for ❤  YE ALL  ❤

   MARANATHA-OUR LORD COMETH ❤ YE ALL JESUS-YESHUA CHRIST-MESSIAH ❤ AMEN-AMEIN ❤ SELAH ❤

   Happy Shabbat Shalom ( Peaceful Sabbath )  ❤  Happy Shavua Tov ( Good Week ) Everyone Shalom ( Peace ) Everyone  ❤ SELAH ❤

    Shalom Aleichem ❤  Mazel Tov Everyone ❤ MARANATHA  ❤

    TODAH RABAH-THANK YOU!!  ❤ IN JESUS-YESHUA AMEN-AMEIN ❤  MARANATHA ❤

   I LOVE  ❤  you all Everyone through  ❤ JESUS-YESHUA CHRIST-MESSIAH ❤  because  ❤  HE LOVED ❤ EVERYONE ❤  FIRST   MARANATHA ❤   SELAH ❤

   PRAISE ❤  JESUS-YESHUA CHRIST-MESSIAH  ❤  for Today and Everyday!!

   GOD BLESS  ❤ YOU ALL ❤ MARANATHA ❤

   LOVE  ❤ Always and Shalom ( PEACE ), YSIC ❤

     KRISTI 1611 AV

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply

   • Kristi, you always tell visitors to your site that you love them all in Christ.

     I think you knowalready, but I’ll say it anyway:

     Kristi, God loves you also, with an astounding powerful, pure, eternal love that nothing will ever quench. He loves you so much that you can’t ikmagine it. Not only does He love you “just because you are His child”, He also loves you because you have endured great suffering and STILL lifted up His name and the name of His only begotten Son Jesus with honor and praise beyond almost all other people on earth. Did you realize that? Your webpages are a constant stream of praise to God. You post so much of His Word, you invite p;eople to be saved, you declare your love for God and Jesus!

     Kristi, you make the holy angels rejoice! You are telling the whole world what they long to tell the world. THey are excluded from “direct participation” in most cases, but I would bet that if ever a holy angel gets discouraged, his supervisor tells him to spend time reading your web posts!

     Rejoice, Kristi! You have used what Gold gave you , inculding your suffering, to shout His praises to the world! BRAVO, KRISTI !

     I think I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating: when you steo inside Heaven’s gate, you will find that the applause of the angels greeting you will be deafening! 🙂 🙂 🙂 And your reward will overwhelm you!

     LikeLiked by 1 person

2. Thank you, Kristi! God gave you an incredible talent for creating peaceful, comforting, and truthful posts about Him and King Jesus! And as always, your choice of songs and the colorful scenes make me feel good! I am so glad you chose to use your talent as your Creator intended!

   “Trust and Obey” is one of the wisest and most helpful hymns ever written. Thank you for leading with that hymn in this post.

   LikeLiked by 3 people

   Reply

3. Amen 🙏 Amen 

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply

   • ❤ TODAH RABAH-THANK YOU!! thanks so very much Brother in JESUS-YESHUA WILLIE ❤

     Love ❤ Always and Shalom, YSIC ❤

     KRISTI ❤

     LikeLiked by 3 people

   • You are very welcome…. Blessings to you, today and always..

     LikeLiked by 2 people

4. 

   ( Proverbs 14:34 KJV ) “Righteousness exalteth a Nation but sin is a reproach to any people.” TRUST in Jesus-Yeshua TODAY!!

   

   ( Proverbs 14:34 KJV ) “Righteousness exalteth a Nation but sin is a reproach to any people.” TRUST in Jesus-Yeshua TODAY!!

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply

5. Without Trust in Jesus, we will not make it. Love your pictures, Kristi! You are a blessing! 🎶❤️🌷🤗

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply

   • ❤ TODAH RABAH-THANK YOU!! thanks so very much Sister in JESUS-YESHUA AMEN-AMEIN ❤

     Love ❤ Always and Shalom, YSIC ❤

     KRISTI ❤

     LikeLiked by 3 people

6. ❤ TRUST in Jesus-Yeshua TODAY!! ❤ MARANATHA ❤

   

   ( Proverbs 14:34 KJV ) “Righteousness exalteth a Nation but sin is a reproach to any people.” TRUST in Jesus-Yeshua TODAY!!

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply

   • “Sin is a reproach to any people.” That’s true in two ways: Sin is a disgrace to any people. Also sin makes everything dysfunctional. And furthermore sin always damages everyone and everything it touches, long before it kills.

     Thankfully we are going to be changed so that we will not sin. The author of Hebrews explains in Hebrews chapters 7 and 8 that King Jesus is a better high priest of a better covenant:
     “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.” (Hebrews 8:6)

     One of the things this better covenant will do is to make us free from sinning. How?
     “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.” (Hebrews 8:10-11)

     We will all know God in a far more personal way. We will have His laws in our minds and hearts. No more wondering, “What would Jesus do?’ We will KNOW what He would do.! HALLELUJAH!

     The old covenant “was symbolic for the present [until the resurrection] time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience…”

     “But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.” (Hebrews 9:11)

     And one of the results of the sacrifice of Christ is this:
     “how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” (Hebrews 9:14)

     HALLELUJAH Praise God and King Jesus! He will make us sinless when we come into His Kingdom! No reproach the ever again!

     LikeLiked by 1 person

7. Maranatha ❤ and a big AMEN ❤ JESUS-YESHUA SAVES YE ALL ❤ and HE LOVES YE ALL<3  MAY GOD BLESS our ❤ USA MILITARY ❤ and ❤ ISRAEL-YISRAEL ❤ Because ❤ ISRAEL-YISRAEL ❤ is the only ❤ BEACON of LIGHT ❤ in the ❤ MIDDLE EAST ❤ Sing Glory Glory Hallelujah<3 Amen-Amein!!

    Shalom Aleichem ❤  Mazel Tov Everyone ❤ MARANATHA  ❤

    TODAH RABAH-THANK YOU!! ❤  IN JESUS-YESHUA AMEN-AMEIN  ❤ MARANATHA ❤

   I LOVE  ❤  you all Everyone through  ❤ JESUS-YESHUA CHRIST-MESSIAH ❤  because  ❤  HE LOVED ❤ EVERYONE  ❤ FIRST  ❤  MARANATHA  ❤  SELAH ❤

   PRAISE  ❤ JESUS-YESHUA CHRIST-MESSIAH  ❤  for Today and Everyday!!

   GOD BLESS ❤  YOU ALL ❤ MARANATHA ❤

   LOVE ❤  Always and Shalom ( PEACE ), YSIC ❤

     KRISTI 1611 AV

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply

8. The Opening sugya of mesechta קידושין

   “Can’t see the forest for the trees” – being so focused on small details that you lose sight of the bigger picture. The trees – all the halachot raised in each and every sugya of Gemara. The forest, the common law basis wherein the Talmud serves as the model to re-establish common law courts of Sanhedrin Legislative Review of all government statute laws. This summates my criticism of the statute law codes; how they utterly corrupted how Yeshiva education became all corrupted and Fubar.  The more polite definition of the latter Army military euphemism –  “Fouled Up Beyond All Recognition”. But when a jarhead employs the term, he means: “fucked up beyond all repair”.

   The assimilated statute halachic codes, focus upon making a D’sok Halacha. In the case of the Rambam Fubar – straight from the Talmud itself. In the Case of the far weaker – copy-cat – halachic statute codifications of the Tur and Shulkan Aruch – they organized a codification of Reshonim opinion upon any given halacha from the Talmud. Why does assimilated statute halacha pervert the Talmud and Reshonim commentaries upon the Talmud into a fubar? Several reasons: 1. They rely upon the syllogism deductive logic developed by Aristotle and Plato. This substitute theology of logic, it replaces the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s revolutionary interpretation of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev unto פרדס. No different, what so ever, from the ערב רב שיצאו ממצרים. The latter Jews the Torah during the reading prior to Purim which remembers the tohor middah of רחום. Specifically, the commandment to war against Amalek in all generations. רחום — עמלק, represents a כלל — פרט in how the corollary 13 middot of rabbi Yishmael amplify the פרדס kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s understanding of how the Oral Torah revelation interpret the kvanna of the Written Torah.

   The Torah description of Jews as אין להם יראת אלהים – the first inference to “Fear of Heaven” in the Book of שמות. The later prophets mussar refers to assimilated Israel as אנשי סדום. They too lacked “fear of heaven” as the Book of בראשית introduces. בעל שם טוב: This term פרט, refers to the founder of Hasidic Judaism, Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov.  However this term כלל, refers to the pursuit of a righteous Good Name reputation. Post Shoah Xtianity permanently lost the claim to a moral good name reputation. Hence: יראת שמים the Talmud directly applies to both a Torah sofer and a shochet. 

   The mitzva of kashrut, spins around public trust based upon יראת שמים.The rediscovery of the concealed Ancient Greek texts which caused the Hanukkah Civil War which pitted the P’rushim against the Tzeddukim; when Muslim Armies invaded Spain in approximately 900, during the lifetime of Saadia ben Joseph, 882–942 CE. These rediscovered ancient Greek writings caused the Jews of Spain to emphatically embrace Greek deductive logic. This triggered the “Golden Age” of Spanish Reshonim T’NaCH and Talmudic scholarship!!! Alas the bards (Robert Plant (lyrics) and Jimmy Page (music) who wrote the song  “Stairway to Heaven”, declared: sometimes words have two meanings.)  טיפש פשט by stark contrast gets all hyper in their diaper over the obvious ‘bird brained’ ‘brain-washed’ meaning. 

   How the Orthodox make a simplistic understanding of the בראשית Creation story, functions as a פרט example.  Another פרט example:  Yeshiva bukkarim saying (all the time) מה פשט?
   The false ideal to simplify or stupify abstract T’NaCH and Talmudic common law, simply brain dead.  The Siddur serves as the foundation of all Talmudic scholarship.  Just that simple.  No fancy dance’n.  The Siddur stands upon the יסוד of ORDER.  The ORDER of פרדס inductive logic, not the same as the ORDER of Aristotle’s syllogism – deductive logic.  The assimilated statute law halachic codes – they shatter the ORDER of T’NaCH and Talmudic common law.

   A three-part syllogism is a form of logical reasoning that consists of three statements: two premises and a conclusion. It is a classic structure used in deductive reasoning, often associated with the philosopher Aristotle. Hegel’s bi-polar dialectics and Aristotle’s syllogism represent two distinct approaches to logic and reasoning, each with its own philosophical underpinnings and implications.  Hegel’s dialectics is a process of development through contradictions. It involves a triadic structure often summarized as thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The thesis represents an initial idea or state, the antithesis is its contradiction or negation, and the synthesis resolves the conflict between the two, leading to a higher understanding or state.  

   Hegel’s approach emphasizes change and development. Ideas evolve through conflict and resolution, reflecting the complexity of reality. This process is not linear but rather cyclical, where each synthesis can become a new thesis, leading to further contradictions and resolutions.  This late 19th Century German philosophy served as the logic foundation of Marx’s theory of Communism as a response to the Industrial Revolution.  “Revolution” implies the over-throw of the ‘Old Order’.  What defines the “Old Order” of the Middle Ages?  The economies of the Middle Ages made wealth through the Order of village communes, known as feudalism, wherein the aristocratic lords produced wealth through agricultural production.  The Industrial Revolution over-threw that ‘Old Order’, and replaced it by the production of wealth through Industrial production of goods and services.  This cause a mass population transfer from peasant living in village communes tied to working for their lords.  To citizens with political rights who lived and worked within the factories within huge cities.

   To understand the difference between rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive logic from Aristotle’s deductive logic, fundamentally requires comparing the two viewed from a fair larger “BIG PICTURE” context.  The two-dimensional halachic statute law codes, they compare to looking at a camera picture rather than actually seeing the event captured by the picture.  The question מה פשט?  Simply ideal for the two-dimensional deductive reasoning of Greek deductive logic.  The mitzva of lighting the lights of Hanukkah – the dedication to interpret the Written Torah through, and only through, the inductive logic of פרדס; the latter defines the culture and customs practiced by the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot throughout all generations.  The passage of this Cohonim culture and customs from generation, to generation, to generation – defines the k’vanna of תחיית המתים.  As does similar, marriage with the purpose to produce children and educate them to keep the cultures and customs of the chosen Cohen people.  The mitzva of קידושין.

   Rabbi Akiva’s inductive logic system directly compares to a Loom.  A Loom essential in the construction of the Mishkan.  As a Loom as its warp & weft opposing threads, the “fabric” of the T’NaCH and Talmud contains the Aggada threads of prophetic mussar contrasted by the Halachic threads of practical halachic ritualism.  Weaving the two opposing strands creates time oriented commandments which require k’vanna.  The Rambam, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch deductive logic divorces halacha from aggada.  Worse, the Prime assimilated Reshon Spanish רשע, his code uprooted halacha from its Home Mishna.  The commentaries on the Rambam Code, in their assimilated darkness, failed to affix any Rambam halacha to the B’hag, Rif, or Rosh common law codes. 

   The latter understood that the Gemarah halachot serve as the “70 faces to the Torah”, they view the language of the Home Mishna from different perspectives to make depth re-interpretations of the obvious פשט language of the Home Mishna!  This criticism, equally applies to Rabbeinu Tam the leader of the Baali Tosafot common law commentary upon the Talmud.  Going off the dof in search of a legal precedent permits the scholar to view his sugya of Gemara based upon a radically different perspective – “70 faces to the Torah”.  However, the Baali Tosafot commentaries, approximately 60 common law scholars, failed to make the required משנה תורה and make a “Legislative Review” of the language of the Home Mishna which the Gemara comments by way of comparing precedent cases!

   Rashi’s common law commentary to the Chumash – radically differs from Rashi’s dictionary like פשט commentary to the Talmud.  For this reason Rabbeinu Tam challenged the Rashi commentary made upon the Talmud.  The question stands:  Why did Rashi change from his common law פשט based upon T’NaCH and Talmudic Bavli and Yerushalmi precedent to writing a dictionary of terms to explain the language of the Talmud?  Answer:  Rashi witnessed the 1st Crusades and the slaughter of the Jews in Germany.  Rabbeinu Tam died before the Rambam published his statute law abomination in approximately 1185.  The Baali Tosafot placed the Rambam into נידוי in Paris 1232.  A decade later, the Pope and King of France burned all the Talmudic manuscripts in Paris.  King Philip IV of France (also known as Philip the Fair) expelled all Jews from France in 1306. This uprooted and destroyed the Rashi/Tosafot common law school of T’NaCH and Talmudic scholarship. Whereas the P’rushim defeated the assimilated Tzeddukiim, which the lights of Hanukkah remember; the Rambam forced Rabbeinu Yonah to write Shari Tshuva. Rashi feared the Goyim might learn how to study the Talmud as common law. Therefore he concealed this basic kabbalah limited only to his commentary to the Chumash. He did not even extend it to his commentaries upon the NaCH or Midrash!

   The Jews in ארץ ישראל possessed the wisdom, how to obey Torah mitzvot לשמה.  The Jews in living under the Torah Av tumah curse of g’lut, did not possess the wisdom, how to obey Torah mitzvot לשמה.  A simple מאי נפקא מינא, just that simple.  No fancy dance’n.  (Hence I refuse to travel to g’lut lands because I know I would immediately eat treif foods pork and shrimp yum yum.)The כלל to anything in life, but most especially to T’NaCH and Talmudic scholarship לשמה – ORDER.  The Siddur functions as the יסוד upon which both the T’NaCH prophetic mussar and Talmudic halachah stand.  Just that simple.  No fancy dance’n.  Therefore, sugya integrity defines how to study and learn both T’NaCH and Talmud.  This discipline of scholarship known, as taught to me by Rav Nemuraskii, as learning through a sh’itta.

   The internal ORDER of each and every sugya of Gemara – throughout the Sha’s Bavli and Yerushalmi.  Post Shoah, Xtianity and Islam have destroyed their Good Name reputations.  Jews have reconquered our homeland.  Goyim rot as stinking Palestinian dhimmi refugees and Xtians wait for the 2nd coming of their Gods.  What struck fear in Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam, no longer exists.  The shoe worn on the other foot today. Can our generations achieve self-determination in our Homeland and make the Torah the Constitution of our Republic of 12 Tribes?  Can we build the lateral Sanhedrin Federal Court System of common law Legislative Review?  These two fundamental questions shape and define Jewish identity today.  The purpose of T’NaCH and Talmudic scholarship today does not resemble the Reshonim need to codify a Jewish religion for Jewish communities scattered across g’lut having little or no communication between communities.  Today we can communicate in seconds what Jews then took perhaps generations!  The reality of the times determines the Halacha.  This issue which confronts our generations today, can we bring a re-birth to the chosen people, the Cohen sons and daughters of the Avot? 

   ---

   ---

   This Mesechta of Gemara includes the commentary of the Ran רבינו נסים.  He merits respect perhaps on par with the B’HaG, Rif, Rosh, and Tosafot.  If Spain produced a ‘Golden Age’, perhaps he best defines it.  The Ran emphasized the importance of the oral tradition and the interpretations of earlier authorities, including the Baali Tosafot.  The Ran did not support the cherem (excommunication) issued by the Baali Tosafot against the Rambam’s works, but he did align with the concerns raised by the Rosh (Rabbi Asher ben Jehiel) and others regarding the potential implications of the Rambam’s rationalist approach. The Rosh was particularly critical of the Rambam’s philosophical ideas and their impact on Jewish faith.

   Rabbi Asher ben Jehiel, the Rosh, openly critical of the Rambam and supported the cherem against his works, viewing them as a threat to traditional Jewish beliefs. He believed that the Rambam’s rationalism could lead to heretical ideas.  The Ran, while critical of certain elements of the Rambam’s philosophy, maintained a more nuanced position, recognizing the value of the Rambam’s legal contributions while also advocating for adherence to traditional interpretations and the authority of earlier scholars.

   The distinction between Jewish common law (halacha) and Roman statute law is an important aspect of legal theory, particularly in the context of medieval Jewish scholarship.  Jewish Common Law (Halacha): This refers to the body of Jewish law derived from the Torah, Talmud, and later rabbinic interpretations. It is often characterized by its case-based nature, where legal principles are derived from specific cases and precedents.  Roman Statute Law: This refers to the codified laws of the Roman legal system, which organized legal principles into systematic categories. Roman law had a more formalized structure, with clear definitions and classifications.

   The Rosh emphasized the importance of maintaining the integrity of Jewish law as distinct from external legal systems, such as Roman law. He was critical of the Rambam’s codification efforts, particularly in the Mishneh Torah, which he felt could blur the lines between Jewish common law and alien legal traditions developed by both the Greek and Roman civilizations.

   The Ran, while respecting the Rambam’s contributions, did not emphasize the same differentiation between Jewish common law and Roman statute law. His approach was more focused on the practical application of halacha and the integration of various legal sources, including the Rambam’s codification.

   The differing approaches of the Ran and the Rosh reflect broader debates within Jewish legal thought about the nature of halacha, the influence of external legal systems, and the importance of maintaining a distinct Jewish legal identity. The Rosh’s emphasis on the uniqueness of Jewish law contrasts with the Ran’s more integrative approach, highlighting the complexities of legal scholarship in medieval Judaism.

   Rabbi Moses ben Jacob of Coucy, the Baali Mor, wrote a commentary critical of the Rif common law commentary written upon the Talmud. He learn the Gemara as precedent halachot by which a person could re-interpret the original language of the Mishna. Hence he learned by reliance upon other Primary Source precedents to understand the language of the Talmud viewed from multiple perspectives. Like the Front/Top\Side views of a blue-print. His chief criticism on the Rif, that his code diminished the depth fluidity of inductive logic reasoning which compares Case/Law to similar precedent Case/Law. The Baali Mor emphasized the importance of studying the Gemara as a source of halachic precedent. He believed that the Gemara should be used to reinterpret the original language of the Mishnah, allowing for a deeper understanding of the legal principles involved.  A Baali Mor’s chief criticism(s) of the Rif – that his codification diminished the depth and fluidity of inductive reasoning in halachic analysis. The Rif’s structured approach, caused scholars to read his p’sok halacha in a simplified טיפש פשט sh’itta, which confused the inductive vs. deductive reasoning dispute which the Rambam later exploded into a bitter Jewish Civil War. 

   Court room common law makes ‘compare and contrast’ essential for inductive reasoning.  Essential for deriving legal principles from specific precedent Case instances.  The Baali Mor advocated for a more dynamic interpretation of halacha, where the law is not seen as static but rather as adaptable to different circumstances.  Talmud in his opinion serves as the model for later common law court room jurisprudence.  This perspective encourages ongoing interpretation and application of halachic principles based on the complexities of real-life situations.  His critique of the Rif highlights the ongoing dialogue within Jewish scholarship about what right then required prioritization. 

   Religious halachic codifications vs. the fluidity of legal reasoning which differentiate the brief precedents brought by the prosecution vs. the defense.  In practical terms he differentiates and prioritizes Judicial common law courts from religious codifications.  The latter permits the common man in scattered g’lut communities to easily determine and shape religious halachic faith.  The RambaN wrote מלחמת השם because he recognized the dire needs of g’lut Jews scattered abroad to have access to clear codes of Jewish ritual religious law.

   Sugya integrity defines the substance of all Talmudic common law scholarship.  The Rambam Code destroyed this יסוד, like as does Dof Yomi today.  Sugya integrity has an opening and closing thesis statement.  All points of halacha raised in the body of the sugya must fit somewhere on the sh’itta “line” which connects the dots between the opening thesis statement and the closing restatement of the same thesis statement … משנה תורה.  The opening sugya starts on dof .ב and concludes at dof :ג.  The language of the Mishna which requires a משנה תורה re-interpretation of the original language: האשה נקנית בג’ דרכים וקונה את עצמה בב’ דרכים.The opening thesis statement: האשה נקנית.  מאי שנא הכא דתני האשה נקנית ו ומה שכתב התם דתני האיש מקדש משום דקא בעי למיתני דתני ה כסף. Compare this to the closing משנה תורה restatement of the Opening thesis statement: מה יבמה שאינה יוצאת בגט יוציא בחליצה קמ”ל. ואימא ה”נ אמר קרא ספר כריתות. ספר כירתה, ואין דבר אחר כורתה Now the question stands: How does the closing thesis statement amplify the opening this statement?

   The phrase “A woman is acquired” refers to the legal framework of marriage in Jewish law (halacha). However, it is crucial to understand that this term does not imply that a woman is treated as a commodity or object like a slave or a prostitute. Instead, it reflects the formal legal process of marriage, which involves mutual consent and specific actions.  A Jewish woman is not comparable to a slave or a whore because her acquisition in marriage is based on mutual respect, commitment, and legal obligations. The concept of acquisition in marriage (kiddushin) is fundamentally different from the transactional nature of slavery or prostitution.

   Hence the closing thesis statement makes a מאי נפקא מינא separation/distinction between קידושין and חליצה.  These two points establish the sh’itta line of all the rest of the subject matter raised in the body of this the opening Mishna of קידושין.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply

9. Shema Israël-Yisrael the LORD is our GOD, the LORD is ONE with the HEAVENLY FATHER and HIS SON JESUS-YESHUA CHRIST-MESSIAH Hallelujah and Maranatha By HIS GRACE  Amen-Amein!!

   Okay RANT ON – If Ye are Anti-Israel-Yisrael / Anti-Zionism / Antisemitism / Anti-United States of America Everything, then Ye are Anti-Christian / Anti-Jewish!!

   RANT OFF – YAHWEH-JEHOVAH – HASHEM ( GOD ) LOVES Ye All Through HIS SON Yeshua-Jesus Christ, our KING / LORD ( ADONAI ) / MESSIAH / SAVIOUR!! Seek Ye First the Kingdom of YAHWEH-JEHOVAH HASHEM ( GOD ) with all thine heart, and all these things will be added unto Ye!!

   Jesus Christ – Yeshua HaMashiach is KING of kings, LORD ( ADONAI ) of lords, HE is the ALPHA and OMEGA, the FIRST and the LAST, HE is the BEGINNING and the END!!Hallelujah, Maranatha and Shalom Everyone!!

   Love ❤ Always and Shalom ( Peace ) ❤ Everyone!!

   Kristi 1611 AV

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply

10. TRUST in the LORD Jesus Christ-Messiah-Yeshua HaMashiach-Messiah with all thine HEART, MIND and SOUL NOW TODAY ❤ MARANATHA ❤

    

    TRUST in the LORD Jesus Christ-Messiah-Yeshua HaMashiach-Messiah with all thine HEART, MIND and SOUL NOW TODAY ❤ MARANATHA ❤

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply

11. Amen. Immersed in the Holy Word, faith walks in the footprints of Father and Son. May we continue to trust in this transforming journey.

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply

12. Amen. Blessings. 🙏

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply

13. Working on trusting more and obeying more and even repenting more. Those who repent repeatedly make the most progress in the long run. Be HIS light today!

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply

14. Trust and Obey for there is no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply

15. Oral Torah as revealed to Moshe at Horev following the sin of the Golden Calf, openly rejects ancient Greek theories of syllogism deductive reasoning. The kabbalah of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic format, especially as explained by Rabbi Yishmael’s 13 middot of logical interpretation strategies – together they define the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev as an inductive reasoning logic format.

    The T’NaCH functions as a common law system, where the texts establish precedents through case and rule comparisons. This suggests a structured legal framework that informs Jewish law and practice. The Gemarah’s commentary on the Mishna is highlighted as a method of interpreting Jewish law through inductive reasoning, which provides a dynamic – as oppose and contrasted by Greek deductive static reasoning – multi-dimensional understanding of legal principles.

    The common law of the T’NaCH prioritizes Prophetic mussar whereas the Gemara focuses upon ritual halacha as precedents. The authors of the New Testament misunderstood the nature of the T’NaCH, particularly in their claim that Jesus “fulfilled” the prophecies. This is framed as a misinterpretation of the role of Torah prophets, who were enforcers of law rather than predictors of the future.

    The distinction between the roles of prophets and legal authorities in the T’NaCH is a central theme, suggesting that the prophetic function is often misrepresented by later NT framers. The consequences of this basic fundamental error: the Xtian framers intended to establish a religious belief system whereas the Framers of the T’NaCH envisioned establishment of Sanhedrin courts common law. The complexity of this latter objective, difficult for Goyim to grasp, primarily because they lack the Talmud as a point of reference – how to understand the language of the T’NaCH as the Primary Sources of Jewish law. Lacking the Aggadic narrative provided by the Talmud, Goyim simply fail to understand that the purpose of the Aggadic stories – they explore the language of Prophetic mussar to provide the “k’vanna” which defines the purpose and meaning of all Talmudic Aggadic stories.

    The Talmud compares to a loom with its warp & weft threads. Weaving interpreted prophetic mussar as the k’vanna of halachic ritualism – this defines not only how to make an aliyah\elevation of rabbinic ritual mitzvot observances unto Torah commandments, but this same wisdom equally applies to elevate lower positive and negative Torah commandments to Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandments! Goyim have never grasped the depth & scope of Torah commandments within the Torah. They never conceived nor grasped that Moshe as the Framer of the Torah organized these 5 Books to function as the Constitution of the Republic of 12 Tribes. Torah as a Constitutional Basic Law of the Chosen Cohen Peoples’ Republic — a far different vision from the Pauline ‘Original Sin’ addiction of Man for some imaginary mythical Harry Potter God/messiah to save Humanity from their sins.

    Prophetic Mussar vs. Ritual Halacha: T’NaCH interprets prophetic mussar; Gemarah interprets ritual law as the culture and customs observed by the nation of the chosen Cohen People. Avoda zarah interpreted as such to mean: 1. The Cohen people have a negative commandment NOT to follow, much more so embrace, the cultures and customs practiced by Goyim civilizations which do not accept the opening First TWO Sinai commandments.

    This profound understanding of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai starkly contrasts with the Rambam’s pathetic perversion of Aggadah up-rooted totally out of context from mesechta Sanhedrin concerning the 7 mitzvot applicable to Gere Toshavim who temporarily dwell within the lands of Judea; as opposed to the despised Goyim refugee populations, who likewise temporarily reside within the borders of Judea. Mesechta Baba Kama instructs that the latter dhimmi refugee populations enjoyed no legal protections. If a Jew damaged their persons or property – these “illegal aliens” possessed no legal “Torah Constitutional” right to sue the damager Israel in any Jewish Court of Law within the borders of Judea. As a point of reference: Jews, as despised refugees in Europe and Muslim countries for 2000+ years – political exiles, dhimmi refugee populations – no Goy Court in Xtian or Muslim lands ever once held criminal war-crimes committed by the Church or Mosque priests or sheiks accountable. G’lut/exiled Jews had no legal rights to sue – NOT either Church or Mosque in any Goyim courts of law for 2000+ years of g’lut/exile.

    Viewed from this basic historical context, the Talmud of mesechta Baba Kama makes complete and total sense. Hence mesechta Sanhedrin addresses the legal rights of Gere Toshav strangers to sue Jewish damagers in Jewish courts of law; whereas mesechta Baba Kama excludes dhimmi foreign alien “wet-backs” from the ”privilege” of legal judicial rights to requests from a Jewish Court to enforce fair compensation of damages they suffered from an Israel. During the Dark and Middle Ages, a similar custom practiced upon dhimmi exiled Jews; writs of privileges issued to Jews by princes and church officials. These writs of privileges directly compare to mesechta Sanhedrin’s 7 mitzvot “bnai Noach”.

    The fundamental error of basic Talmudic common law scholarship made by Rambam’s decision to “convert” the Talmud into Roman statute law; this absolute error stands upon the copied-assimilated Av tumah avoda zara wherein this rabbi embraced the error followed by the Samaritans, Tzeddukim, Karaim, Reform & Conservative Judaism today. This Av tumah avoda zara generated a domino effect upon all down-stream generations of Jewry. The Talmud refers to this type of disaster as ירידות הדורות-descending generations.

    Later down stream rabbinic Judaism made a error and interpreted this Talmudic concept as the inability of later generations to challenge the opinions made by earlier generations; something comparable and akin to the Catholic idea of the infallibility of the Pope — utter and total narishkeit stupidity. Pope Pius XII stands as proof witness of this absolutely worthless טיפש פשט-bird brained idea. Rashi’s commentary to the Chumash challenged the opinion made by Targum Onkelos as erroneous. How could Rashi argue against a contemporary of Rabbi Yechuda – the author of the Mishna? Answer: In matters of logic, no generation has a lock monopoly by which it can dictate its logic over later generations.

    Genesis 1:1, Rashi discusses the creation narrative and contrasts his interpretation with that of Targum Onkelos. This Rashi opinion nails the Arab rejection of political Zionism’s quest to achieve Jewish self-determination within a restored Jewish State in the lands of Judea. Rashi believed that later generations could offer valid interpretations that might differ from earlier authorities, including Targum Onkelos. He emphasized that logic and understanding of the text naturally develop and evolve.

    Rashi’s commentary on בראשית א:ב — והארץ היתה תהו ובהו. Targum Onkelos translates as: איר אתכללו – “it was desolate”. Rashi argues that Targum Onkelos’ interpretation does not capture the full meaning of the Hebrew terms. He explains that “תֹהוּ” refers to a state of emptiness or chaos, while “בֹהוּ” refers to a state of void or nothingness. Rashi emphasizes that the two terms convey distinct concepts that are not adequately represented in Onkelos’ translation.

    Exodus 12:6: Rashi comments on the phrase regarding the timing of the Passover sacrifice. Targum Onkelos translates it in a way that Rashi finds problematic. Rashi argues that the translation does not align with the intent of the Hebrew text, suggesting that Onkelos’ interpretation – not accurate in this context. This example illustrates Rashi’s approach to engaging with earlier interpretations, including those of Targum Onkelos, and his belief that later scholars can offer valid critiques based on their logical insights. Based upon the premise that no one generation owns a lock and key monopoly of logic.
    “עד יום עשותו – עד יום שיבואו ישראל לידי עשייתו, ולא עד יום שיבואו לידי אכילתו, כמו שתרגם אונקלוס: ‘עד יום שיבואו ישראל לידי אכילתו’.”

    In his commentary, Rashi points out that Targum Onkelos interprets the verse as referring to the day of eating the Passover sacrifice, while Rashi understood this verse as the day of its preparation or offering. This illustrates Rashi’s critical engagement with Onkelos’ translation.

    In בראשית א:ב, the phrase “והארץ היתה תהו ובהו” is translated as “איר אתכללו,” meaning “it was desolate.” This translation captures the essence of the Hebrew term “תהו ובהו,” which conveys a sense of emptiness and chaos.

    In contrast, in דברים לג:ב, the phrase “מן אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” translates to “from the mountain of Seir.” Here, “אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” is derived from a different root and refers to a geographical location rather than a state of being. The context of this verse is about God’s revelation from Sinai, and the term is used to indicate a specific place, rather than a descriptive state. Rashi states that Onkelos’ translation is incorrect because it implies that the verse is referring to a physical location rather than the spiritual significance of HaShem’s revelation. Rashi emphasizes that the term “מִסֵּעִיר” should be understood in a different context, focusing on the divine aspect rather than a geographical one.

    בראשית א:ב — והארץ היתה תהו ובה Targum Onkelos translates as: איר אתכללו – “it was desolate”. Whereas דברים לג:ב: ויאמר ה’ מסיני בא ושרח מסעיר למו — Targum Onkelos translates this as “מִן אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” (from the mountain of Seir)? In בראשית א:ב, the phrase “והארץ היתה תהו ובהו” is translated as “איר אתכללו,” meaning “it was desolate.” This translation captures the essence of the Hebrew term “תהו ובהו,” which conveys a sense of emptiness and chaos.

    In contrast, in דברים לג:ב, the phrase “מן אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” translates to “from the mountain of Seir.” Here, “אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” is derived from a different root and refers to a geographical location rather than a state of being. The context of this verse is about God’s revelation from Sinai, and the term is used to indicate a specific place rather than a descriptive state. Thus, the variations in translation reflect the different contexts and meanings of the words used in each verse. The שרש\root – כ-ל-ל conveys meanings related to completeness or inclusion. In this context, it refers to a geographical location, specifically indicating a place from which something originates or emerges.

    This contrasts with the root of “תֹהוּ” and “בֹהוּ” in Genesis 1:2, which conveys a sense of chaos and emptiness, highlighting the different contexts and meanings in Rashi’s commentary and the translations provided by Targum Onkelos. This example of Rashi’s dispute with a Tanna illistrates the classic error assimilated to ancient Greek cultures and customs the Rambam erred when he interpreted the word ONE in kre’a shma means “monotheism”. Monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. Furthermore, mesechta Avoda Zarah opens with the understanding that prior to the generation of Noach that the Goyim had utterly rejected the oath brit alliance.

    The Torah of בראשית opens with the Name אלהים (the substitute word translation of the Divine Presence Spirit word of both the שם השם עצמו as well as the Orev 13 Oral Torah middot wherein Jews to this day during the month of Elul. For example: tefillah a matter of the heart … and to make a blessing requires שם ומלכות. The Mitzva of blowing the Shofar on ר”ה make a מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה which separates and distinguishes between air blown from the lungs from tohor spirits blown from the Yatzir Ha’Tov from within the heart. דכתיב: גכל לבבך.

    On Elul Jews likewise separate t’shuva from repentance. Similar words on superficial appearance, like brit and covenant. T’shuva “remembers” the Sin of the Golden Calf, like Amalek which plagues Jews in all generations with its hateful antisemitism. We remember that HaShem – measure for measure – threatened to make a substitute theology idolatry and replace the oath sworn Cohen seed of the Avot with the seed of Moshe Rabbeinu “eye for an eye” for the Israel ערב רב replacement theology with substituted אלהים “word” for the שם השם לשמה Divine Presence Spirit which quickens the Yatzir HaTov within the heart, through the dedication of tohor Oral Torah middot.

    Hence a blessing requires מלכות – the dedication of korbanot middot לשמה. Herein explains why the Book of בראשית opens with the word name אלהים rather than the Spirit Name שם השם לשמה as commanded in the first commandment of the Sinai revelation; the בראשית story opens prior to the oath brit which creates continually the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot through tohor Av time-oriented commandments which require the מלכות dedication of Oral Torah spirit middot through the Yatzir Ha’Tov.

    Goyim, both Xtians and Allah repentance by contrast only refers to personal regret. This interpretation goes well with the Xtian guilt trip theology of “He died for you”. In like manner, ברית refers to an oath alliance which function as the יסוד of the Republic of the 12 Tribes; wheras covenant implies some vague connection, which if “shattered” some foreign alien other God could substitute Goyim as the “New Israel” or Universal monotheistic God. The Rambam avoda zarah assimilated and embraced the Muslim idea of a universal monotheistic God. He rejected mesechta Avoda Zarah which understands the God of Sinai as a local Tribal God based upon the conclusion that the Goyim never accepted the revelation, meaning first two opening commandments of Sinai as John 1:1 proves, of the the Torah at Sinai.

    LikeLiked by 1 person

    Reply

16. Happy Rosh Hashanna! xoxox ❤ ❤ ❤

    LikeLiked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Happy Rosh Hashanah!!

      

      
      

      LikeLiked by 2 people