9 responses

1. 

   oiltranslator

   June 19, 2025 at 10:58 am

   Yes Lyin’ Ted is a girl-bullying National Socialist. But he wins until Dems either learn to vote Libertarian or abandon Fabian Socialism and Sharknado Warmunism.

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   mosckerr

   June 29, 2025 at 6:30 am

   “THEORY & TRUTH” — President Trump’s 2nd Term of Office.

   2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) lowered the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, significantly benefiting high-income earners and large corporations. Limited Impact for Most Americans: While some middle-class households saw modest short-term gains (mostly through withholding changes), many did not experience lasting improvements. Some even saw increased taxes due to the capping of state and local tax (SALT) deductions.

   The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) infact did lower taxes for most income groups, not just the wealthy. But the scale of those cuts, and especially their permanence, heavily favored corporations and high-income households. Basically this economic policy ties into the Reagan-era “supply-side economics”, which theorized, cutting taxes, especially on businesses and the wealthy, would spur investment, job creation, and ultimately “trickle down” benefits to everyone.

   But in 1980, George H. W. Bush, during the Republican primaries, famously mocked this theory as “voodoo economics.” That critique — which many economists still uphold — applies to Trump’s TCJA as well. Bush’s “voodoo” jab remains a historically sharp and accurate label for the long-term imbalance baked into such policies.

   Though George H. W. Bush famously criticized Reagan’s policies as “voodoo economics” in 1980, once in office (1989–1993), he largely embraced the same supply-side, trickle-down framework, and his son, George W. Bush (2001–2009), doubled down on it.

   Once president himself, Bush kept most of Reagan’s tax cuts intact, including the 28% top income tax rate from the 1986 Tax Reform Act. This forced him, due to ballooning deficits, to raise some taxes in 1990 through a bipartisan budget deal. That move angered conservatives and likely contributed to his 1992 electoral loss to Clinton. Overall, he did not fundamentally challenge the Reagan-era economic model. He called it “voodoo” but governed under its spell.

   George W. Bush (2001–2009): His administration pushed supply-side economics even further. His Administration enacted massive tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 (EGTRRA and JGTRRA). Cut the top income tax rate from 39.6% to 35%. The wealthiest 1% gained the most from these cuts, exacerbating income inequality. These cuts were passed during a period of Clinton surpluses turned into deficits, especially after 9/11 and the Iraq War.

   Clinton-era Budget Surpluses (1990s Keynesian + centrist policy). George W. Bush ran wars in Iraq/Afghanistan without raising revenue → deficits ballooned. Trump during his first term, the only post WWII US President not to involve the US in foreign wars abroad.

   Clinton-Era Economics (1993–2001) as earlier stated embraced more of a Keynesian or center-left fiscal discipline. Supporting targeted investment (Carter’s Federal regulation education, tech, etc. which stripped the States of their Constitutional Rights to bureaucratically regulate intra-State trade & commerce.) This caused the Federal Bureaucracy to become the Government pulling the strings of the puppet 3 Constitutional Branches of the Federal Government consequent to the incest relationship between Government established Corporate monopolies and Federal Bureaucratic non-Constitutional Branches – the largest employer in the US.

   The Carter/Clinton policy of expanding bureaucrapic Big Brother bypassed state sovereignty. Using conditional grants (e.g., “Race to the Top” or “No Child Left Behind”) to coerce state compliance. Expanding federal agencies like the Department of Education and EPA into areas historically managed by state governments. Relying on regulatory agencies (ATF, IRS, SEC, etc.) to make quasi-legislative rules outside congressional oversight. This trend built upon the Jan 22, 1973 Nixon Era Supreme Court Roe vs. Wade ruling which stripped the States intra-State commerce rights to regulate the abortion industry.

   This trend of governance established the Administrative State wherein unelected bureaucraps wrote, enforce and adjudicated rules — a violation of the separation of powers. Often operate with limited judicial review, under doctrines like Chevron deference (recently curtailed by SCOTUS in 2024).

   The corruption of the Obozo Administration which permitted the illegal Forth Branch of the Federal Government to streamline streamlined oversight and reduced judicial review of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) a particular stink in the nostrils of Freedom. In 2015, the USDA introduced a new regulatory framework for GMOs, which included the “Plant Pest Risk Assessment” process. This framework aimed to simplify the approval process for GE crops and reduce the regulatory burden on developers. The changes were part of a broader effort to modernize the regulatory system for biotechnology.

   Europe boycotted GMO produced from America. President Trump by means of high tariffs seeks to address this issue. Furthermore through Elon Musk, President Trump has sought to massively reduce the size and scope of illegal Federal bureaucraps and restore balance to States Rights intra-States rights to bureaucratically regulate trade and commerce. The Trump Supreme Court annulled the Nixon Era Roe vs Wade abomination.

   Trump’s administration aggressively rolled back federal agency overreach by limiting the scope of EPA, Department of Education, and other federal mandates, pushing more regulatory authority back to state governments. His policies encouraged states to develop their own education standards and environmental regulations without federal conditional grants forcing compliance (a reversal of programs like No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top).

   Trump-appointed justices on the Supreme Court continued to interpret the Constitution with a strong emphasis on states’ rights and limits on federal power. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), which overturned Roe and returned abortion regulation to states. This administration cut back on federal programs that used conditional funding to coerce state compliance, thereby restoring genuine state discretion. This rollback includes scaling back or eliminating strings attached to Medicaid funding and infrastructure grants, enhancing states’ autonomy in spending and policy design.

   Promotion of State-Controlled Commerce Regulation. Includes efforts to curtail federal control over intra-state commerce, particularly in sectors like energy and agriculture, reinforced the states’ ability to regulate commerce that does not cross state lines. This challenges expansive readings of the Commerce Clause that federalize many traditionally local issues.

   Trump as reduced the scope of Nasa. Collaborations with private-sector innovators (e.g., Musk’s SpaceX, Tesla) fostered public-private partnerships that bypassed large federal bureaucracies, enabling states and localities to take a leading role in technology deployment and infrastructure.

   Under Trump’s second term, policies and judicial appointments arguably have reduced federal encroachment on state governance; restored local control over key policy areas; limited bureaucratic overreach; and reinforced constitutional federalism consistent with the 10th Amendment’s original intent.

   President Trump’s leadership reject the Bush II to Obozo shoe-shine boy in the White House Neocon war adventurism; together with the utterly corrupt and condemned Administrative-statist capture of local governance. Federal bureaucraps have no authority to regulate how Amish farmers milk their cows!

   Trump stands apart from both parties’ post-9/11 Neocon Imperialism military overreach. Agencies like USDA, EPA, and DOJ have no business regulating the daily life of sovereign American communities. The structural logic of the Constitution – President Trump defends the 10th Amendment.

   While the Trump administration did aim to reduce regulations and some bureaucratic functions, these cuts did not offset the loss in revenue from the tax cuts. The Congressional Budget Office projected the tax cuts would increase the deficit by nearly $2 trillion over 10 years, even accounting for growth effects.

   Trump’s administration cut budgets or attempted to cut budgets for: EPA; Department of Health and Human Services; Medicaid and SNAP (food stamps). However, many of the most drastic cuts were blocked or modified by Congress, so the actual impact varied.

   Numerous analyses, including from the Tax Policy Center and CBO, concluded that the TCJA: Disproportionately benefited the wealthy and corporations; widened the income gap, as middle- and lower-income groups received smaller, often temporary, benefits. The TCJA added significantly to the federal debt. The national debt grew from $19.9 trillion in January 2017 to $27.7 trillion by January 2021, with the tax cuts and COVID spending as major drivers.

   Cutting taxes, especially for corporations and high earners, encourages investment, business expansion, and job creation. Corporate tax rate cut from 35% to 21% made the U.S. more competitive globally. A surge in corporate earnings, stock market growth, and record-low unemployment (3.5%) pre-COVID. Defenders argue that allowing businesses to keep more of their profits boosts productivity and wages over time. Trump supporters like myself argue a rising tide lifts all boats, and that middle-class incomes did grow modestly.

   Rolling back excessive regulations unleashed business activity across key sectors. Over 1,500 regulations were rolled back or weakened, especially in energy, finance, and labor. Businesses faced lower compliance costs, encouraging hiring and expansion.

   Ultimately, Trump’s economic agenda prioritized growth and deregulation over fiscal balance and income redistribution. The benefits were tangible: rapid economic expansion, job creation, and restored corporate confidence. But they came with costs: increased debt, rising inequality, and potential long-term sustainability concerns.

   For supporters, these trade-offs were justified to revive American industry, enhance global competitiveness, and stimulate short-term prosperity. For critics, they represent a missed opportunity to build a more inclusive and fiscally stable economy.

   What might have happened had Vice President Kamala Harris—or by extension, the Biden Administration—doubled down on Obama-era economic policies during a time of post-COVID inflation and global disruption?

   Obama-Era Economic Trajectory focused on stimulus and recovery post-2008 financial crisis. Emphasis on fiscal restraint post-2010 (due to Tea Party pressure), leading to a slow but steady recovery. Heavy reliance on monetary policy (Federal Reserve) rather than major structural tax or welfare expansions.

   Biden Administration Economic Trajectory broke sharply from Obama-era caution. Passed the American Rescue Plan ($1.9 trillion) in 2021. Advanced massive spending via Infrastructure, CHIPS Act, and Inflation Reduction Act. These policies resulted in a strong job growth, fast GDP rebound; but also significant inflation (peaking at 9.1% in June 2022).

   Had the Biden-Harris administration followed a more restrained Obama-style approach, the recovery would have been slower, especially for lower-income households. Inflation may have been lower, but the labor market might not have recovered as fast. In short a sluggish recovery similar to 2010–2013… a blue collar worker horror story.

   A return to Obama-era economic orthodoxy—may have left millions of working-class Americans behind with persistent underemployment in many sectors, especially blue-collar and service jobs. President Biden, with Kamala Harris as Vice President American Rescue Plan ($1.9 trillion), providing direct aid to families, expanded unemployment benefits, and child tax credits; massive public investment through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act resulted in the treat of a 1789 French Revolution based upon the 35 trillion dollar Federal bankrupsy. The absolute corruption of the illegal forth Branch of the Federal Government – the Corporate monopoly/Federal bureaucrap con-job—combined with global supply chain disruptions and the Russia-Ukraine war—contributed to the highest inflation spike in 40 years (peaking at 9.1% in June 2022). Critics blamed “Bradon-nomics” for overheating the economy.

   The Trump administration pursued an economic strategy focused on growth through tax reform and deregulation, but it came at a cost. While it successfully reduced regulatory burdens and cut corporate tax rates—sparking investment, job creation, and record-low pre-COVID unemployment—those policies did not offset the revenue loss, leading to a projected $2 trillion increase in the deficit over a decade, per the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

   The Trump Administration 2nd term rolled back more than 1,500 regulations, especially in energy, finance, and labor, lowering compliance costs and unleashing a pro-business climate unseen since Reagan.

   When Joe Biden and Kamala Harris took office, they broke sharply from Obama-era caution. Rather than limit stimulus and prioritize austerity—as Obama did after 2010—the Biden administration opted for massive fiscal expansion. Which resulted in significant inflation, peaking at 9.1% in June 2022, the highest in 40 years! Critics of “Bidenomics” blame it for overheating the economy, worsening deficits, and triggering a cost-of-living crisis that especially hurt the very working-class voters it claimed to protect. The DemoCRAP Obama-era orthodoxy betrayed the blue-collar labor and turned it into a Jaws horror story. Hence the major labor union threw their support to Trump against Biden!

   Biden’s spending spree and the resulting $35 trillion national debt have shaken public confidence in the long-term viability of the federal government. The rise of what some call the “Fourth Branch” of government—a bloated, unelected federal bureaucracy intertwined with corporate monopolies—has created the conditions for public outrage. Combine that with corrupt administrative overreach, broken supply chains, and the economic strain of the Russia-Ukraine war, and you have the makings of a 1789-style populist backlash. This time, not in Paris—but across Middle America.

   Inflation, inequality, and institutional decay are no longer just policy problems—they’re existential threats. And if not addressed, the result may not be another Great Depression… but another Revolution. God Bless the leadership of President Trump.

   President Trump’s economic strategy wasn’t perfect—but it worked. It prioritized growth, jobs, and American competitiveness. It challenged the grip of unelected regulators and gave working families a real shot at rising.

   For those who believe in restoring America’s economic sovereignty, defending the middle class, and dismantling the corrupt alliance between Washington bureaucrats and multinational monopolies—Trump’s return is not just preferred, it is necessary. Trump make America Great Again.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   1. 

      mosckerr

      July 10, 2025 at 2:39 am

      The mitzva of observing Torah commandments לשמה within the borders of the oath sworn brit lands, the inheritance of the Chosen Cohen people.

      [[[ Within the covenantal framework that you so powerfully defend, how do you see the role of individual conscience? Not as a competing system, but as a faculty formed by oath remembrance and living Torah? I[[[ Within the covenantal framework that you so powerfully defend, how do you see the role of individual conscience? Not as a competing system, but as a faculty formed by oath remembrance and living Torah? In a world saturated with propaganda and revisionism, what disciplines shape that conscience to remain true to Sinai? ]]]

      The Books of שמות וויקרא concentrate on the avodat HaShem of dedicating korbanot. This “service” does not exist as offering up a barbeque unto Heaven. The mitzva of the פרט case of Moshiach learns from the כלל of korbanot services of the House of Aaron.

      Another בנין אב-precedent, the כלל for faith: צדק צדק תרדוף. Still another פרט-בנין אב precedent: the court case of Hebrew slaves vs. the State of Par’o – beating slaves for their rebellion to meet their brick production quota consequent to Par’o withholding the required straw.

      One other בנין אב-precedent learns from the כלל that all ברכות require שם ומלכות.

      Just as a korban requires a dedication to achieve a specific specified purpose, so too the mitzva of Moshiach. Specifically in the mitzva case dedication of Moshiach, this dedicated “king” sanctified לשמה to rule the land with Judicial justice, working through the common law lateral Sanhedrin courtrooms. Based upon the Torah Constitutional mandate that the Sanhedrin courts operate through משנה תורה-Legislative Review of any and all statute laws or bureaucratic regulations imposed by the Monarchy and/or his government.

      The often repeated rebuke which the Book of Shmuel makes upon the House of David as Moshiach, the injustice shown to the husband of Bat Sheva. This פרט-specific defines the כלל dedication of the mitzva dedication of Moshiach. No such dedication for the mitzva of Moshiach to become a substitute theology which has some mythical theologically based messiah to replace the chosen Cohen People.

      The opening word of the Torah בראשית, through the aggadic stories of the Creation, teaches the k’vanna of tohor time-oriented commandments; as the Av of the תולדות secondary source positive and negative commandments located specifically in the Books of שמות ויקרא ובמדבר. Hence just as the Book of בראשית introduces the Avot Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov, this opening first Book of the Torah introduces Av tohor time-oriented commandments which the rest of the Books of the Torah come to clarify.

      For example: what separates tohor spirits from tumah spirits? Avodat HaShem in the Mishkan, only served in the state of tohor middot. For a Cohen to serve within the Mishkan in a condition of tumah middot – this Av transgression carries the din of כרת. Cutting off that person and his children from the oath brit wherein HaShem and the Avot mutually swore to create the chosen Cohen people יש מאין. This latter בראשית most essential idea shares nothing with tuma middot which promote racial or genetic inheritance of the Jewish race – as the Xtian church and Nazis promote – examples of tumah middot.

      Hence to swear a Torah oath requires שם ומלכות like as do all ברכות from the Torah. The sin of the Golden Calf – a substitute theology which replaces the revelation of the 1st Sinai commandment revelation of the Spirit Divine Presence Name unto other word-Gods. Avoda zara by definition worships other Word-gods. The sin of the Golden Calf serves as the defining פרט for the 2nd Sinai Commandment כלל not to worship other Gods.

      Therefore all Torah oath britot require שם ומלכות. The Name clearly directly links to the Spirit Divine Presence Name revealed in the first Sinai commandment. The term מלך refers to the כלל mitzva of the dedication of the spirit of משיח as expressed through all tohor time oriented Av commandments … the righteous pursuit of justice to achieve shalom among the chosen Cohen people throughout the generations in all Ages and times while Jews rule our ancient homelands.

      מלכות understood as the dedication of defined tohor middot. אל remembrance of the Sin of the Golden Calf. רחום the inference which turns pity upon its head. Obliterating the Canaanites, the killing of the minor stubborn and rebellious child, the war against Amalek (Jewish assimilation to foreign cultures and customs of peoples who do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. And intermarriage with such Goyim). The middah of רחום a Jew dedicates how he shall socially interact with both his people and Goyim in the future; specifically through the dedication of defined tohor middot. חנון the general dedication to dedicate all future behavioral patterns with family friends, people, and even Goyim by and through the future born tohor middot that a person dedicates whenever that Jews does Torah or Talmudic mitzvot/halachot.

      Both Xtianity and Islam worship other Word-gods. Therefore both religions do not define faith as the pursuit of justice, but rather belief in the theologies about these Word-gods.

      [[[ Also, when you speak of the erasure of Jewish self-determination through revisionist Palestinian narratives, I hear both an intellectual rebuttal and a deep historical wound. Is your critique aimed primarily at the political manipulation of language and borders—or also at the erasure of Jewish covenantal memory from the land itself? ]]]

      Unlike the Xtian and Muslims theologies which promote some pie in the sky Universal Monotheism God, the revelation of the Torah at Sinai revealed the local tribal God of Israel. When David fled from king Shaul he declared as he entered g’lut lands: “I have been forced to abandon God”. Just as the Great and Small Sanhedrin courts only have jurisdiction within the borders of the Jewish state so too the local God of Israel. Herein the answer given to the Holocaust survivor who said to me: “I was in Auschwitz, Where was God?” When I lived in the US and Xtian people asked me if I was a religious Jew? I responded with: I am an atheist praise God. But even living within the borders of the oath sworn brit alliance lands I habitually respond to Goyim with “I am an atheist – praise God”. Meaning, I do not believe in any theological/creed construct of Word-gods – praise God. LOL Torah, its deep and requires a sense of humor.

      The curse of g’lut-exile of my people almost immediately caused Jews to lose the wisdom how to do mitzvot לשמה. G’lut Jewry does not understand how to employ and work our Yatrir HaTov within our hearts. The בנין אב-precedent of blowing the shofer serves as a פרט to define the כלל of Yatzir HaTov. Meaning, to blow a shofar requires air from the lungs. But to blow a spirit from the Yatzir HaTov within the heart requires the k’vanna, (all time-oriented commandments require k’vanna) the dedication of defined tohor middot spirits. This כללי-general idea of tohor middot, it defines the dedication of the middah of חנון.

      Herein a definition of 3 of the 13 tohor middot which a person dedicates through Yatzir Tov k’vannot from within their hearts. Jews uprooted from our homelands by both the Babylonians and Romans caused the g’lut cursed survivors to lose this kabbalah wisdom which defines how to do mitzvot לשמה.

      LikeLike

      Reply
3. 

   mosckerr

   September 5, 2025 at 4:56 am

   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.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   1. 

      mosckerr

      September 10, 2025 at 8:07 am

      How to study and comprehend both the T’NaCH and Talmud as common law.

      To study Talmudic common law its important to discern fundamental distinctions in scholarship down through the Ages. Perhaps the Rif halachic commentary serves as the split between two distinct bodies of law as different from the Pacific Ocean from the Atlantic Ocean.

      The most essential skill required to understand how to correctly interpret Talmudic common law, the wisdom how to make the required דיוק/logical inference\. Neither T’NaCH common law nor Talmudic common law simply read as if they existed as novels pulled down from the shelf. The skill to study these Primary Sources does not turn to reading commentaries, made upon these Primary Sources which define the classic culture and customs practiced by societies of the chosen Cohen people through Av commandments known as time-oriented mitzvot.

      Even the most shallow cursory translations of the Hebrew T’NaCH and Talmud; Xtianity placed their “word of God” translations upon cult of personality pedestals; they differentiate between the word of God from the words of Man – complete total religious rhetoric nonsense. Still, even a quick glance at their sophomoric “moronic” translations a person “skilled” immediately sees: absolutely no reference to tohor vs. tumah middot; the distinction made between judicial legislative review common law vs. Nicene Creed statute law dictates.

      Their apostle Paul declares “the faithful” as not under the law, oblivious that civilizations without law exist in a state of confusion chaos and political anarchy. Never has any “believer” made the logical דיוק and grasped the fundamental distinctions which separate judicial common law – in possession of legislative review – Torah constitutional mandate, from statute law produced from Parliaments, Legislatures, our Councils – such as the above mentioned Nicene council.

      Torah, as a Constitutional document compares to the US basic law Constitution rather than to religious belief systems. The latter makes its most fundamental appeal to powerful emotions rather than to rational logic. T’NaCH/Talmudic legal reasoning spins around the central axis of פרדס inductive logic as best understood through rabbi Ishmaels 13 methodologies how to interpret the written Jewish Primary Sources which shape and define classic culture and customs practiced by the chosen Cohen people through the k’vanna of doing tohor time-oriented commandments. Herein defines the יסוד upon which all Torah oath britot – pursuit of justice faith – stands.

      Human conflict defines the nature of the opposing Yatzirot within the heart; this fundamental -understanding stands upon the בנין אב-precedent of Yaacov vs. Esau wrestling within the womb of Rivka. The sages perceive the heart as a chamber which houses the two opposing sets of tohor/tuma middot, comparable to the womb which houses developing children.

      The Torah employs korbanot משל as the central (נמשל (דיוק wherein the chosen cohen people as a civilization dedicate differentiated tohor middot holy unto our God. Its the definition of tohor middot wherein the k’vanna of doing tohor time-oriented mitzvot differentiated from תולדות positive and negative Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot – which do not require כוונה.

      The written Torah serves as the יסוד, the NaCH prophets and holy writings the ground floor, and the Talmud and Midrashic sources the 2nd floor of classic rabbinic Primary Sources of scholarship. Next comes the generations of scholars known as the Sovaraim Talmudic scholars 450-600 CE, they further edited the Talmudic texts sealed by Rav Ashi and Ravina. The wisdom of editing most essentially shapes and separates a good newspaper from yellow journalism rags. It seems to me that the Roman forgery new testament, compares both to yellow journalism rags and the Czarist secret police publication of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

      This editing skill makes a fundamental דיוק which separates the priority of Cohen culture and custom from תולדות Jewish law and ethics. The latter follows the former, similar to a dog on a leash. Both T’NaCH and Talmud/Midrash stand upon the central kabbalah of פרדס and 13 middot of rabbi Yishmael’s explanation of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive logic sh’itta.

      Fraudulent counterfeit copies of the Torah constitution, converted into religious belief system theologies; the latter directly compare to propaganda rhetoric which defined Josef Goebbels propaganda yellow journalism from 1923 to 1945. This political rhetoric stood upon sensationalist techniques used to popularize the Nazi agenda. The Roman false messiah new testament and Muhammad’s Koran poetry made their appeal to emotions rather than inductive reasoning.

      The Battle of Guadalete, where the Muslim forces, led by Tariq ibn Ziyad, defeated the Visigoth king Roderic; this battle, considered the decisive moment that opened the way for the Muslim conquest of Spain. Following the victory at Guadalete, Muslim forces quickly advanced through the Iberian Peninsula. Within a few years, they captured major cities, including Toledo, Seville, and Córdoba. By the end of 711, much of the southern part of Spain dominated by Muslim culture and customs. The Umayyad Caliphate established this Spanish foothold, which endured for several centuries, leading to significant cultural, social and political changes in the region.

      But conquered Spain made a lasting impact upon Muslim culture as well. The re-discovery of the ancient Greek texts, which the church concealed immediately after Constantine became emperor in 306 CE. This decision by the Church, threatened by the Gods of Greece and Rome, to bury the Greek enlightenment – resulted in a period known as the Dark Ages. The Muslim re-discovery of the ancient Greek enlightenment – cast off Catholic repression, whose policies had destroyed the culture and customs practiced by the ancient Romans, in order to promote the Xtian ‘good news’ gospel. The re-discovery of Greek deductive reasoning both church and mosque now emphatically embraced. Greek deductive reasoning likewise caused the Spanish Jewish ‘Golden Age’ and the European Renaissance to flower and grow.

      The 2nd Sinai Commandment, commonly referred to as the negative commandment of “avoda zarah”, the sages interpreted through the תולדות בניני אבות-precedents of 1. Do not copy Goyim cultures and customs and 2. Do not intermarry with Goyim who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The definition of avoda zarah, the Av tuma spirit breathed by the Yatzir Haraw within the heart, the rediscovery of the ancient Greek enlightenment re-ignited the Civil War wounds which the lights of Hanukkah designated to remember. Alas g’lut Jewry prioritized the forms of faith rather than the substance of faith. Jews lit the Hanukkah lights as a ritual religious observance rather than as an Av tohor time-oriented commandment which requires prophetic k’vanna.

      The Dark Ages witnessed the destruction of the Roman road system. Scattered Jewish communities lacked the means to communicate with one another. Questions asked to the Geonim in Iraq sometimes took a Century or more before they received a response. This reality caused the rise of the Reshonim scholars. None the less, despite the Reshon innovation, Jewish scattered communities required more immediate Talmudic guidance.

      Talmudic inductive logic requires years of intense scholarship to learn and master. This reality set the stage for the classic debate between the Rabbi Isaac Alfasi, the Rif vs. the Rabbi Meir ben Baruch of Rothenburg, born in Germany, also known as the Baal Hamaor. Rashba, or Rabbi Shlomo ben Abraham ibn Aderet, a medieval rabbi from Spain, active in the late 13th and early 14th centuries. Renowned for his extensive commentaries on the Talmud and his responsa, which addressed a wide range of legal and ethical issues. Rashba, a strong defender of Maimonides’ philosophical approach to Judaism and contributed disastrously to the development of Jewish law during his time. Religious halachic code vs. the disciplined study of the Talmud through precedents, the sh’itta practiced by the Rashi/Baali Tosafot school in France. However, the relationship between the Rif and the Tosafists – more about differing approaches to Talmudic study and halachic decision-making rather than direct criticism.

      The Baal Hamaor criticized the Rif’s prioritization of simple halachic codification because it failed to convey the precedent based scholarship of Talmudic common law. The Rif code did not take the halachot and make a משנה תורה reinterpretation of the language of the Mishna. Herein a succinct summation of the Baal Hamaor’s criticism of the Rif code. The Mishneh Torah by Maimonides (the Rambam) represents a significant shift in the approach to Jewish law, moving towards a more systematic and codified statute law form of halacha that a rare few scholars today argue departs from the traditional Talmudic case-based reasoning.

      These Spanish ‘Golden Age’ rabbis extinguished the lights of Hanukkah. They had forbidden avoda zara “sex” with the re-discovered ancient Greek syllogism deductive reasoning. Ibn Ezra, from Spain, his son converted to Islam. Assimilation and Jewish intermarriage caused the collapse of Spanish Jewry long before the Spanish monarchy forced the mass expulsion of Jews in 1492. Av tuma avoda zara releases Torah curses upon our people similar to those experienced by Par’o in the days of Moshe and Aaron. By definition assimilated ערב רב Jews lack the knowledge and required education to keep and observe the culture and customs which the T’NaCH and Talmud establish as the society of the Cohen people.

      Rabbi Mordechai ben Hillel, known for his work “Mordechai,” failed to differentiation between judicial common law and legislative statute law. In his commentaries, Rabbi Mordechai often focused on the application of Talmudic principles to practical legal situations, some interpret as a watered down form of common law. Why? His scholarship fails to emphasize פרדס inductive logic. He would derive rulings based on precedents and interpretations of the Talmud, reflecting a judicial approach that values case law and established practices. But he failed to validate in the process the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva.

      His work implies a distinction between the authority of rabbinic rulings (which can evolve through judicial interpretation) and the fixed nature of certain laws derived from the Torah or established by the Sanhedrin. This ignores the halacha base Gemara משנה תורה re-interpretations made upon the language of the Mishna based upon a specific sugya of Gemara. He utterly failed to discern Av Torah time-oriented commandments which require k’vanna from secondary positive and negative commandments; or how much more so, Talmudic halachic ritual observances… all of which do not require k’vanna, comparable to positive and negative Torah commandments. This failure/collapse of Torah mitzvot scholarship ultimately caused post Rambam Civil War Jews to fail to read the written Torah as a common law legal system wherein פרדס logic compares positive and negative commandments as precedents in order to elevate a any Torah or Talmudic mitzva unto an Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandment. And likewise Bavli/Yerushalmi halachot as precedents to elevate the language of a given Mishna unto tohor time oriented commandments!

      The French Tosafot school of common law, despite placing the works of the Rambam into נידוי in 1232 utterly collapsed with the public burning of the Talmud in Paris 1242. The Tosafot commentary likewise failed to link Written Torah common law learned through precedents to Talmudic common law whose halachic precedents make a re-interpretations upon the language of the Mishna. Like a blue-print front/top\side views. Precedents function as “the 70 faces to the Torah common law legal system”. This fundamental basic, the Tosafot commentary to the Talmud utterly failed to emphasize.

      Common law compares to the metaphor of opposing rivers, where Statute Law exists as a completely different river from Judicial Common law Legislative Review. Therefore which early Reshonim scholars fundamentally challenged the Rif Code of Halacha for its failure to differentiate between T’NaCH/Talmudic Common law legislative review – as a Constitutional mandate from the Written Torah from Parliament/legislature statute law – which the Rambam, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch codes of statute law utterly and totally undermined? The avoda zara of the latter directly compares to the sin of the Golden Calf which attempted a substitute theology wherein the cursed ערב רב attempted to replace the word אלהים for the 1st Sinai revelation Spirit Divine Presence within the tohor middot which breath life into the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the hearts of the chosen Cohen people throughout all generations.

      LikeLike

      Reply
4. 

   mosckerr

   September 12, 2025 at 2:43 am

   Have encountered a Xtian believer whose opinion merits discussion.

   Frank Hubeny says:

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

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

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

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

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

   mosckerr says:

   September 11, 2025 at 10:27 pm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

   LikeLike

   Reply
   1. 

      mosckerr

      September 17, 2025 at 1:17 am

      קידושין

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

      LikeLike

      Reply
5. 

   mosckerr

   September 21, 2025 at 2:31 am

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

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

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

   For a ger toshav to violate one of the 7 mitzvot – this qualifies as a Capital Crime/death penalty offence. Only a Sanhedrin court could judicate a Capital Crime/death penalty case. The jurisdiction of all Sanhedrin courts, only within the borders of Judea. Hence the absurd notion that the 7 mitzvot Bnai Noach applies Universally to all Goyim, simply pie in the sky bat shit crazy.

   The Torah in the Book of D’varim defines two types of Goyim; the ger toshav in mesechta Sanhedrin and the Nacree/Canaani in Baba Kama. Concerning treif meat the Book of D’varim writes: permitted to give the treif meat to the ger toshav or sell the treif meat to the Canaani. The Talmud defines the Chumash. It does not rule independent from the Written Torah Constitutional Mandate.

   Mesechta Sanhedrin whose Aggada addresses the 7 mitzvot bnai noach therefore refers to the ger toshav of the Torah. Mesechta Baba Kama whose Halacha rules that an Israel exempt to pay damages to a Nacree for damages inflicted upon his goods or person – this mesechta refers to Canaani in the Book of D’varim. Therefore the idea that Ger Toshav/Bnai Noach refers to all Goyim in all lands, utterly absurd.

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

   LikeLike

   Reply
   1. 

      mosckerr

      December 4, 2025 at 7:31 am

      Understanding how Chag Hanukkah a mitzva דאורייתא
      Shabbat a זימן גרמא מצוה.

      All time-oriented commandments require making a fundamental הבדלה which separates Av time-oriented commandments which require כוונה from toldot קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה מצוות שלא צריך כוונה. להבדיל בין מלאכה מן עבודה

      Am a yid attempting t’shuva after coming to Israel in 1991. Rejected the Rambam’s Sefer Ha’Mitzvot in favor of the B’HaG vision of Torah commandments. For a time-oriented commandment example: tefillah; Rambam’s introduction rejects the B’HaG’s order of mitzvot. Let’s focus upon his 5th positive commandment – tefillah. The B’HaG learns the opening Mishna of ברכות – that קריא שמע תפילה דאורייתא. The Rambam, based upon the criticism made by the RambaN, ruled that tefillah Shemone Esrei דאורייתא.

      A fundamental error on par with his error concerning forced קידושין על ידי ביאה with a young minor child who lacks the mental maturity to understand the “k’vanna” of the time oriented mitzva of קידושין. This fundamental flaw in the Sefer Ha’Mitzvot which divides the תרי”ג מצוות into positive & negative commandments and ignores Av tohor time-oriented commandments an error that makes his scholarship totally treif. On par with his perversion of 4 part inductive logic פרדס – the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva, Yishmael, and Yossi Yossi Galili. Assimilated Rambam relied upon the 3 part deductive syllogism logic of Plato and Aristotle; Rambam blew out the lights of Hanukkah and caused the Jewish people a tragic ירידות הדורות, Israel forgot the Oral Torah as the Hanukkah blessing in the bencher testifies.

      His statute law code utterly worthless when learning the Gemara. The example of the opening sugya of קידושין brings the common law precedents of etrog and כוי. To understand the limitations of the 3 ways a baal acquires a woman as a wife which do not apply to a young girl due to her lack of maturity – similar to etrog. Rambam’s statute law (assimilated to Roman statute law which organized law into categories), none of the super commentaries starting with the כסף משנה/Karo caught his fundamental error.

      Talmudic common law (court-room judicial law) brings precedents (בניני אבות) which re-interpret (משנה תורה-common law) the intent of the language of the Mishna based upon a completely different perspective. Like the Front/Top\Side views of a blue-print permits the קבלן to construct a 3 dimensional building from a 2 dimensional blue-print. The Rambam erred when he ruled that ביאה achieves קידושין even in a young child who lacks the mental maturity to understand how a man who rapes her acquires her as his wife.

      In short the halachic rulings made by this assimilated Jew utterly treif. In 1232 the Rabbis of Paris/Baali Tosafot agreed with the court of Rabbeinu Yonah in Spain and placed the ban of נידוי upon the Rambam. 10 years later the king of France together with the Pope decreed the burning of the Talmud in France. Rabbeinu Yona duplicated the error wherein the two warring brothers, Aristobulus II and Hyrcanus II, invited Roman general Pompey into the walls of Jerusalem to resolve their dynastic dispute. The Hasmonean kingdom fell without even a whimper. What a disgrace.

      Unlike the Tzeddukim who lost the Hannukah Civil War, Karaite Rambam won the identical Civil War wherein Jews forgot the Oral Torah פרדס logic system; the Talmud compares to the warp\weft of a loom – halacha/aggada. דרוש ופשט affixed to the Aggada which makes a drosh onto T’NaCH prophetic mussar (T’NaCH like the Talmud a common law legalism); רמז וסוד weave prophetic mussar “p’shat” determining the k’vanna of halachic mitzvot. The B’HaG rules that raising mitzvot to Av tohor time-oriented commandments makes these rabbinic mitzvot into דאורייתא commandments.

      This sh’itta of learning “acquired” from Rav Aaron Nemuraskii a talmid of rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv. Rabbi Nemuraskii did not teach this sh’itta of learning to his sons because he feared they would suffer isolation and disgrace. Rabbi Elyashiv did not teach this sh’itta to his sons Moshe and Binyamin, both of whom danced at my wedding, I suspect for the same exact reason. As a person attempting to remember the ways of my forefathers ie t’shuva, the risk of isolation and disgrace much more far removed.

      Hanukkah clearly a post Torah rabbinic commandment. That’s if a person “shoe boxes” Torah commandments into Moshe commandments and post Moshe commandments as the Rambam did. This latter רשע totally assimilated like the Karaim and before them the Tzeddukim; all these religious sects or leaders believed and embraced as the Primary basis of their faith absolute trust and acceptance of ancient Greek Philosophy over the secondary Torah revelation at Sinai and Horev. The Rambam no different from those earlier/contemporary Jewish cults and/or sects who deny the Oral Torah revelation at Horev. Obviously this includes the writers of the New Testament.

      Rabbi Akiva taught a kabbalah touching the Oral Torah revelation at Horev which defines it as a rational inductive reasoning logic system. Its known as the פרדס four part inductive comparison logic which measures Case/Rule cases to other previous judicial Case\Rule cases – precedents — בניני אבות. Judicial common law establishes law through courtroom rulings rather than cult of personality authority figures or legislative law. One of the central meanings of משנה תורה – Legislative Review.

      The scholar known as the B’HaG, the last generation of the Talmudic scholars which preceded the Reshonim talmudic scholars. Gaonim 600 to 950CE. Reshonim 951- 1450 CE. The Rambam published his Yad Chazakah statute law halachic code in about 1185. In context, the Rabbeinu Tam – the leader of the common law Baali Tosafot French school of Talmudic scholarship – he died prior to the Rambam publishing his assimilated abomination code of halachic statute law.

      The Book known as Sefer Ha’Mitzvot the Rambam wrote as an introduction to his puke Yad narishkeit. In that book he classified the 613 Torah commandments limited strictly to the language of the Written Torah; akin to how Orthodox Xtians interpret the Creation story of sefer בראשית. The Rambam rejected the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s 4 part פרדס inductive logic format in favor of Plato and Aristotles 3 part syllogism deductive logic philosophy.

      The B’HaG preceded the Rambam by about 3 generations. As one of the last of the Gaonic school of Talmudic scholarship in Iraq, he too introduced his common law halachic codification הלכות גדולות, by first addressing Torah commandments. The B’HaG greatly influenced, even dominated the early Reshon – the Rif – and how he organized his common law halachic code. The Baali Tosafot approved of the court of Rabbeinu Yonah’s ban of נידוי upon this early Spinoza Rambam; in 1232 the rabbis in Paris place the ban of נידוי upon the Rambam. The Rif, two generations before the Rambam published his Greek/Roman statute law halachic perversion.

      The B’HaG’s “sefer Ha’Mitzvot” unlike the assimilated puke Rambam’s travesty codification of the so called 613 Torah commandments, which froze these commandments into, so to speak, an ice tray having two rows: positive and negative commandments. The Rambam failed to grasp the Av priority of tohor time-oriented Torah commandments!

      The B’HaG understood that if a T’NaCH\Talmudic scholar possessed the wisdom to elevate secondary commandments which do not require k’vanna to Av tohor time-oriented commandments which absolutely without exception require prophetic mussar as the k’vanna; then this special type of Av commandments possessed the power to make an aliya, to raise rabbinic commandments out of the din of g’lut, unto Torah commandments observed in ארץ ישראל in all future generation redeemed from the Torah curse of g’lut. This the “substance” rather than the “form” of Torah commandment observance has the power to raise rabbinic mitzvot unto Torah commandments.

      The Rambam puke – being a totally assimilated Jew clung to Greek philosophy rather than a scholars of the kabbalah of rabbis Akiva, Yishmael, Yossi Ha’Gallilee – the great Tannaim (scholars who preceded Rabbi Yechuda’s codification of Great Sanhedrin judicial rulings known as the Mishna). This “rabbi” who betrayed the substance of Rabbinic Judaism – teachers of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, who accepted the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven from the P’rushim – the Rambam’s complete and totally treif learning compares to the New Testament abomination.

      In conclusion: All time-oriented mitzvot are Av tohor commandments. Av mitzvot require כוונה, and the כוונה defined by prophetic mussar, not by the mechanistic performance of the act. Toldot mitzvot (קום ועשה / שב ואל תעשה without kavanah) rely on the Av-mitzvah to give them meaning by functioning as precedents within the language of the Written Torah.

      An example of elevating rabbinic to Torah commandments: Torah allows Sanhedrin to determine months — a human action becomes the Torah’s time. If a rabbinic commandment is aligned with an Av time-oriented mitzvah and framed through prophetic mussar, it ascends from din derabbanan to din d’oraita.

      The Rambam’s code, which freezes Sinai into a dead text divorced from the living Sanhedrin. Chanukkah as a Torah commandment categorically rejects Hellenistic assimilation. The establishment of both Chag Purim and Chanukkah – an act of Sanhedrin court authority. Once Ḥanukkah attaches itself to the Av-mitzvah of Hoda’ah on national geulah, its status automatically becomes דאורייתא — not because its lights – ancient, but because its kavanah dedicates a Jew to only interpret the Written Torah through פרדס Av-tohor time-oriented commandments.

      The Oral Torah functions as a common-law constitutional system (פרדס), NOT some Greek statute. A Torah obligation national oath brit commitment to pursue judicial justice within the borders of our Homeland, to make fair restitution of damages inflicted upon other. The substance and reason of the first Sinai commandment.

      LikeLike

      Reply