Judaism, Christianity and « their Indissoluble Difference ».

« Jacob Taubes »

Jacob Taubes wrote an article, The controversy between Judaism and Christianity, whose subtitle reads: « Considerations on their indissoluble difference« i, in which he densely summed up what he views as the essence of the « impossible dialogue between « the Synagogue » and « the Church » ».

This non-dialogue has been going on for two millennia, and will only end at the end of time, in all probability.

The popular expression « Judeo-Christian tradition » is often used. But it is meaningless. Above all, it impedes a full understanding of the « fundamental » differences in the « controversial questions concerning the Jewish and Christian religions » that « continue to influence every moment of our lives ». ii

From the outset, Jacob Taubes asserts that no concession on the part of Judaism towards Christianity is possible. The opposition is frontal, radical, absolute, irremediable.

In order for two parties to begin any kind of debate, at the very least, they must recognize each other’s legitimate right to participate in that debate.

However, these really basic conditions are not even fulfilled…

One party does not recognize the other. Christianity means nothing to Judaism. Christianity has absolutely no religious legitimacy for the latter:

« For the Jewish faith, the Christian religion in general and the body of the Christian Church in particular have no religious significance. For the Church, there is a Jewish « mystery, » but the Synagogue knows no « Christian » mystery of any kind. For Jewish belief, the Christian Church cannot have any religious significance; and the division of historical time into a « before Christ » and an « after Christ » cannot be recognized by the Synagogue. Moreover, it cannot even be recognized as something that, though meaningless to the Jewish people, represents a truth to the rest of the world. » iii

The denial of Christianity by Judaism is implacable, definitive. Christianity is not « recognized » by Judaism. It has intrinsically no « religious significance ». This absence of « religious significance » is not limited to the « Jewish people ». Nor does Judaism recognize any religious « significance » for religions from « the rest of the world ».

It is useless to expect from Jacob Taubes scholarly comparisons and fine analyses comparing Jewish and Christian theological elements in order to try to deepen the terms of a common questioning.

A major element of the Christian faith is only « blasphemy » from the Jewish point of view:

« But, from the Jewish point of view, the division into « Father » and « Son » operates a cleavage of the divine being; the Synagogue looked at it, and still looks at it, simply as blasphemy. » iv

In theory, and in good faith, for the sake of the « controversy », Jacob Taubes could have evoked, on this question of the « Father » and the « Son », the troubling passages of the Zohar which deal with the generation of Elohim following the « union » of the One with Wisdom (Hokhmah)v.

Is the « Father-Son-Holy Spirit » Trinity structurally analogous to the Trinity of « the One, Hokhmah and Elohim »?

Does it offer points of comparison with the revelation made to Moses under a formal Trinitarian formula: « Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh » (Ex. 3:14) or with the strange Trinitarian expression of Deuteronomy: « YHVH, Elohenou, YHVH » (Deut. 6:4)?

Maybe so. Maybe not. But this is not the bottom line for Taubes: he is not at all interested in a thorough confrontation of texts and ideas on such opaque and metaphysical subjects.

This lack of interest in comparative hermeneutics is all the more striking because Taubes immediately admits that Judaism, in its long history, has in fact fallen back a great deal on its supposed « rigid monotheism »:

« The recent insistence on rigid monotheism as the defining characteristic of Jewish religious life is contradicted by a fact that contemporary Jewish thinkers tend to dismiss: the centuries-long predominance of the Lurian Kabbalah in Judaism. The Kabbalah has developed theological speculations that can only be compared to Gnostic (and pagan) mythologies. The mythical unity of the divine King and the divine Queen, the speculation on Adam Kadmon, the mythology of the ten sephirot, which are not attributes but manifestations of the divine, of different essences, poses a challenge to any historian of religion who claims to judge what is Jewish and what is not according to the criterion of a « rigid monotheism ». The Jewish religion would not have been able to cope with the explosion of Kabbalistic mythologization if its fundamental and determining characteristic had been a rigid monotheism. » vi

Even more astonishing, Jacob Taubes, after having denied any kind of « religious significance » to Christianity, affirms however that « Christianity is a typically Jewish heresy »:

« Christian history, Jesus’ claim to the title of Messiah and Pauline theology of Christ as the end of the Law are not at all « singular » events for Judaism, but are things that regularly recur in the fundamental Jewish frame (Grundmuster)of religious existence. As I have already said, Christian history does not constitute a « mystery » for the Jewish religion. Christianity represents a « typical » crisis in Jewish history, which expresses a typically Jewish « heresy »: antinomistic messianism – the belief that with the coming of the Messiah, what is decisive for salvation is not the observance of the Law, but faith in the Messiah. » vii

But if Christianity is, for Judaism, a « typically Jewish heresy », does this not recognize it as a form of « significance » in the eyes of Judaism, if only because of its antinomic opposition? The fact that forms of heresy, at least formally analogous to Christianity, may have appeared in a recurring manner within Judaism itself, does not this imply the presence of a subterranean question, always at work, in the darkness of the foundations?

Judaism seems indeed to suffer from certain structural « weaknesses », at least according to the opinion of Jacob Taubes :

« The weakness of all modern Jewish theology – and not only modern – is that it fails to designate Halakhah, the Law, as its alpha and omega. Since the period of Emancipation, the Jewish religion has been in crisis because it lost its center when Halakhah lost its central position and binding force in Jewish thought and life. From the moment Halakhah ceases to be the determining force in Jewish life, the door is open to all the anti-halakhic (antinomistic) and disguised Christian assumptions that are prevalent in secularized modern Christian society. » viii

On the one hand, Christianity has no « religious significance », according to Jacob Taubes.

On the other hand, Christianity threatens Halakhah in its very foundation, which is of the order of the Law, and in its « ultimate » principle, justice:

« Halakhah is essentially based on the principle of representation: the intention of man’s heart and soul must be manifested and represented in his daily life. Therefore the Halakhah must become « external » and « legal », it must deal with the details of life because it is only in the details of life that the covenant between God and man can be presented. (…) Halakhah is the Law because justice is the ultimate principle: ecstatic or pseudo-ecstatic religiosity can see in the sobriety of justice only dead legalism and external ceremonialism, just as anarchy can conceive law and order only as tyranny and oppression. » ix

Here we are at the core. For Taubes, Judaism has as its essential foundations Law and Justice, which are radically opposed to the « principle of love »:

« The controversy between the Jewish religion and the Christian religion refers to the eternal conflict between the principle of the Law and the principle of love. The « yoke of the Law » is challenged by the enthusiasm of love. But in the end, only the « justice of the Law » could question the arbitrariness of love. » x

Let’s summarize:

-Judaism does not give any religious significance to Christianity, nor does it recognize any meaning for the « rest of the world ».

-In reality Christianity is only a « Jewish heresy », as there have been so many others.

-Judaism is threatened by Christianity in that it deeply undermines Halakhah in a modern, secularized Christian society.

-The two essential principles of Judaism are the Law and justice.

-The essential principle of Christianity is love, but this principle is « arbitrary », -Judaism must question the « principle of love » through the « justice of the Law ».

Logically, the above points are inconsistent with each other when considered as a whole.

But logic has little to do with this debate, which is not, and probably cannot be « logical ».

Therefore, one has to use something other than logic.

But what? Vision? Intuition? Prophecy?

One reads, right at the very end of the Torah, its very last sentence:

« No prophet like Moses has ever risen in Israel, whom YHVH knew face to face. »xi

Let’s presume that the Torah tells the ultimate truth about this. How could it be otherwise?

Then, maybe, « He » could have risen out of Israel?

The Masters of Israel, from blessed memory, also testified, according to Moses de Leon:

« He has not risen in Israel, but He has risen among the nations of the world.» xii

The Masters cited the example of Balaam. He is a prophet, undeniably, since « God presented Himself (vayiqar) to Balaam » (Num. 23:4), but Balaam still is a « sulphurous » prophet.

However Balaam « stood up » before the end of the Torah. Which leaves open the question of other prophets « standing up » after the Torah was completed…

It is up to us, who belong to the nations of the world, to reflect and meditate on the prophets who may have risen – no longer in Israel, since none could possibly have « risen » in Israel since Moses – but among the « nations of the world ».

And this according to the testimony, not only of the Torah, but of the illustrious Jewish Masters who commented on it.

Vast program!


iJacob Taubes. « The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009.

iiJacob Taubes. « The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference. « Time is running out. From worship to culture. Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. p.101

iiiJacob Taubes. « The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. p. 105

ivJacob Taubes. « The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. . p. 104

vSee my article on this blog: How the Elohim Were Begotten | Metaxu. Le blog de Philippe Quéau.

viJacob Taubes. « The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. . p. 111

viiJacob Taubes. »The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. p. 113

viii« The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. p. 114-115

ix« The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. p. 115

xJacob Taubes. « The controversy between Judaism and Christianity: Considerations on their indissoluble difference ». In « Time is running out. From worship to culture » (« Le temps presse ». Du culte à la culture. ) Ed. du Seuil. Paris, 2009. Seuil. 2009. p. 117

xiDt. 34,10

xiiQuoted by Moses de Leon. The sicle of the Sanctuary (Chequel ha-Qodesh). Translation Charles Mopsik. Ed. Verdier. 1996. p. 103

4 réflexions sur “Judaism, Christianity and « their Indissoluble Difference ».

  1. Tiqqun Ha’O’lam. Building the 3rd Temple. The mitzva dedication which defines the k’vanna of the anointing of the bnai brit Cohen nation — as Moshiach.

    Alchemy – a philosophical attempt to rationally understand natural properties found within nature. Also referred to as “natural science”, this study dominated the best minds in countries from China to Europe. According to René Descartes’, a French philosopher, mathematician, and scientist, the inventor of analytical geometry. His philosophy classified “reality” into a metaphysical mind–body dualism. He theorized two types of substances, which he called – matter and mind. According to his philosophy, Physical “matter” qualifies as deterministic and natural—and so belongs to natural philosophy. Whereas everything that occurs within the “mind” exists as conscious, personal choices; and therefore non-natural. Consequently Descartes excluded human thought, dreams, and visions – as processes outside the domain of “natural science”.

    Plato, the Stoics, and even later Gnostic speculations favored ‘a Demiurge’; an artisan-like figure responsible for fashioning and maintaining the physical universe. This concept attempts to degrade the monotheistic Biblical Creator of the Universe. The Gnostic idea of ‘the demiurge’, qualifies as an interpretation which postulates the lower status of the Biblical God within the Genesis creation story. This ‘demiurge’, an inferior lesser God, fashioned the universe in obedience to the command of some ‘other’ all powerful God.

    Gnostic ideology reflects an idea, something akin to a bi-polar dualism. It views the material universe as evil, while the non-material world as good. The Gnostic notions about the evil nature of the demiurge, and the Pauline concept of “Original Sin”, both theologies piggyback the need for a some messiac figure to save man-kind from sin. The demiurge creator of the physical world, closely compares to the Xtian mythology of the fallen Angel Satan. The Church leadership during the Dark Ages rejected the Gnostic Gospels, they condemned Gnosticism as a heretical theology of messiah Jesus.

    But both the Pauline ‘fall of Man’ and the Gnostic ‘Demiurge’, qualify as teleological theologies; physico-theological, or argument from design, or intelligent design etc arguments. These postulations, their conjecture rhetoric attempts to interpret the Biblical Creation of the Universe story, and the pressing need of ‘fallen Man’ for some divine savior\redeemer. All the Gospel stories depict the sin-less nature of messiah Jesus. This divine messiah, He saves the human race from the sin of Adam who ate from the Tree of Good and Evil, and consequently brought the curse of death upon all humanity. The sacrifice of sin-less Jesus serves to atone for the inherited sin: the racial humanity of Man. Race, comparable to the multitude of spoken languages, forever divides Man against himself.

    The alchemy expressed in Aristotle’s philosophy, the latter offers 4 explanations which attempt to contain the question “Why” concerning the Creation of the Universe – divided into a so-called Magnum opus: Material, Formal, Efficient, and Final ((Causes)). These 4 “causes” compare, so to speak, to the theory of Gravity, and its influence and impact upon physical matter. The ancient attempts to classify motion compares to debates over evolution in modern day parlance. About as useful as tits on a boar hog; on par with the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial – a lot of highfalutin hogwash which accomplished absolutely nothing.

    Classic alchemy practiced during the dark and middle ages sought to transmute an inferior substance into a valuable substance. This “science” became known as chrysopoeia, the search for the philosopher’s stone – meaning the artificial production of gold. This search for the holy grail\philosopher’s stone also included attempts to discover elixirs of immortality – panacea cures for all diseases.

    Jewish alchemy views mitzvot as something which surpasses the value of gold. Hence the secret פרדס kabbala taught by Rabbi Akiva wherein he explained the revelation of the Oral Torah revelation to Moshe at Horev; the chrysopoeia of rabbinic Judaism seeks to transmute rabbinic mitzvot unto Torah mitzvot. The kabbala taught by virtually all the prophets of Israel centered itself upon defining the k’vanna of tefillah, as expressed through the Shemone Esrei.

    This alchemy, also known as Tiqqun Ha’O’lam seeks to rebuild the Temple of Jerusalem – a mitzva which the anoited Moshiach achieves. The alchemy of this esoteric concept of faith, transmutes wood and stone used to build the Temple of Solomon —– unto righteous\tohor halachic rulings which establish the diplomacy of justice among and between the Jewish people within the borders of our homeland. Expressed through lateral common law courtrooms based upon the model of the Great Sanhedrin; how these halachic precedents define the k’vanna of each and every Mishna. To likewise affix, through wisdom, that defined Mishna to a specific blessing within the language of the prophetic Shemone Esrei. This secret wisdom requires knowledge of how to learn the k’vanna of esoteric Aggadita and Midrashic stories – wherein students of the Talmud affix prophetic mussar as the defining k’vanna of halachic mitzvot.


  2. Leadership qualities and מעשה בראשית. An additional introduction to the Rif halachic commentary to ראש השנה. An attempt to explain the k’vanna of the Siddur.

    A key concept of leadership, it makes an order of priorities. Leadership begins with the designation of labor for Men and Women. The תרי”ג commandments have 3 basic divisions. Positive and Negative commandments, the observance of these commandments, primarily designated for women and secondarily an obligation upon men. The observance of positive time oriented commandments the sole obligation of men within bnai brit Torah society.

    The Torah concept of סמיכה directly learns from the dedication of a korban by a Cohen. The dedication of Moshiach, perhaps the most famous “descendant” dedication of intent – to keep and obey the commandments. The organization and established Order within the pages of the Chumash systematically arranged by פ and ס; chapter and sugia/subchapter. The sages of the Talmud debated whether סמיכות חפשית\learning by adjoining or adjacent ideas applies strictly to דברים or this learning technique applies equally to all 5 Books of the Torah.

    All agree that סמיכות המצגים\association of ideas/ applies to the משנה תורה\דברים. The dispute among the sages, does this sh’itta of learning equally apply to the other 4 Books of the Torah? The sh’itta practiced by this author, that סמיכות המצגים applies across the board for the entire Torah. This opinion, bases itself upon the Order of the Siddur. The k’vanna of the Siddur, from beginning to end, based upon מסיח\to speak; tefilla stands in place of korbanot. Tefilla: מסיח סמכות עליונה\to speak “aimed at” the most high.

    The k’vanna of the Siddur avoda, to do positive time oriented commandments. Specifically to elevate a non Torah commandment unto a Torah commandment. The morning dedication of tefilla begins with the ברוך שאמר והיה העולם. What does this thesis statement refer to? Answer: מעשה בראשית. The kabbala of מעשה בראשית measures (the middot) – the dedication of t’shuva within our hearts.

    The 2nd paraghaph of ברוך שאמר brings a rabbinic blessing containing שם ומלכות. From the verses of Tehillim thereafter till reaching מלך אל חי העולמים … The general term מלך directly refers to middot. אל refers to Divine wisdom. חי refers to the סוד of מעשה בראשית. And העולמים refers to the application of מעשה בראשית to all generations of the Cohen bnai brit chosen people. The sages council not to interrupt with outside conversations, because such an action destroys the power of סמיכות חפשית. This concept defines the k’vanna of the entire Siddur – the avoda of dedicating positive time oriented commandments unto HaShem.

    Women daaven from the Siddur, but they have no Torah obligation to do positive time oriented commandments. The crux of the Siddur, centers upon male Yidden dedicating positive time oriented commandments through aliya\the elevation of rabbinic commandments, like saying Tehillem, unto a the תרי”ג positive time oriented commandment! Tallit and tefillen exist as positive time oriented commandments. These commandments require k’vanna. K’vanna requires Talmud. All the avoda of the halachot learned in Sha’s, its possible to affix these halachot as A. the k’vanna of a Mishna. And B. Affix that Mishna to a specific middle blessing within the language of the Shemone Esrei; therein elevating these rabbinic commandments unto the דאורייתא commandment of tefilla.

    The leadership of the rabbinic sages of the Talmud, they designated the order of labor of men and women in the Cohen nation national walk before HaShem throughout all generations for eternity. Women have no Torah obligation to have children, yet women birth children in every generation! So too apply all the positive time oriented commandments to women. As a woman chooses to birth children so too she can choose to dedicate positive time oriented commandments. And the same rule equally applies to Men. Observance of positive and negative commandments primarily rests upon women to dedicate and do. But men too can choose to do and observe positive and negative commandments.

    The issue of ‘choice’, to do commandments totally invalidates the guilt trip theology of ”SIN”; if a person does not do and keeps the commandments. The tuma theology of messiah Jesus and his cross sacrifice which the apostles claim atones for the SINS of mankind, this false and foreign assimilationist theology has no connection or basis from within the Torah. Jews who believe in Jesus as the messiah, this avoda zara places them under the מעשה בראשית din of כרת.

    The opening blessing (two before, followed by kre’a shma, concluded by the third blessing) twice brings
    בכל יום תמיד מעשה בראשית
    in the opening and conclusion of this first rabbinic blessing which contains שם ומלכות. All the other blessings that follow – they depend\rely upon this opening blessing which contains שם ומלכות. But why the necessity to repete בכל יום תמיד מעשה בראשית at the conclusion of the first opening rabbinic blessing to the kre’a shma?

    Another unique quality within the language of this opening blessing, the contrast of Order as found in this blessing to that of the Order found in the Shabbat additional tefilla.
    אל ברוך גדול דעה … כנגד … תכנת שבת רצית קרבנותיה
    Again, why did the Framers of the Siddur emphasize a particular order of the Hebrew alphabet?

    The Written Torah parshaot contain 2 Crowns which define the Torah. Parshat
    בחקתי: וזכרתי את בריתי יעקוב ואף את בריתי יצחק ואף את בריתי אברהם אזכר והארץ אזכר.
    And Parshat כי תבוא always read before ראש השנה. The Parsha located at the end of the Book ויקרא, the Crown of Gaula – the redemption from g’lut. The Parsha located toward the end of the Book דברים, the Crown of G’lut – the repeating exile of the Cohen nation – condemned for the crimes made by our people – we choose to assimilate unto foreign cultures and customs; we both profane and abandon the oath brit ways of the chosen Cohen nation; making a Torah blessing qualifies as swearing a Torah oath. These two Crowns of the Torah – the responsibility of Torah faith rests upon the shoulders of each and every generation of bnai brit Israel.

    The emphasis of the order of the Hebrew alphabet letters teaches the k’vanna of מעשה בראשית, as expressed through tefilla. The additional tefilla said on Shabbot bases itself upon the מעשה בראשית brit of Gaula. Whereas the Shemone Esrei validate – by answering Amen – to the Torah curses which define g’lut; learned from the plagues with destroyed Par’o and Egypt in the days of Moshe and Aaron. The Order of the Shemone Esrei, in its turn, learns from בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך.

    The heart contains plural Yatzirot. Also the soul – has multiple facets; the multiple faceted soul learns from the 12 stones upon the breastplate of Aaron. Each and every Yom Tov, as expressed daily in the six blessings which surround the middle blessings within the Shemone Esrei (3 + 13 + 3)\613, they affix to the Divine Names of the multiple faceted nefesh. Ya\Pesach; Ha’El\Shevuoth; El\Rosh HaShanna; Elohim\Yom Kippur; El Shaddai\Sukkot; and Eish Ha’Elohim\Shemini Atzeret. The Divine Name of the faceted nefesh dedicated on Shabbot – shalom. These dedication of ‘lights’, they learn from the menorah.

    Tefilla – the defining positive time oriented commandment – a duty of the heart like all other positive time oriented commandments. The Spirit of HaShem, expressed through middot, forever lives within the brit Cohen national hearts. My Sanhedrin peers thought they could translate the Siddur to their flaw concept of bnai Noach – which they based upon the erroneous halacha of the Rambam. Impossible to translate a positive time oriented mitzva into words! Equal and like reasoning explains my opposition to the Art Scroll siddur and Talmudic translations. The distinction between the Yom Tov tefilla from the Shabbot tefilla, compares to rear and front sights in a rifle. K’vanna continually aligns the two sights to take aim and dedicate middot unto HaShem – whose Spirit dwells within the bnai brit hearts, and not in the heavens above.


  3. How the Chaggim separate and distinguish the system & rule of law within a Torah Constitutional Republic of Tribes\States from the rule of law in Goyim countries and civilizations. טוב

    What distinguishes between 8th day Shemini atzeret in Israel with Simchat Torah on the 9th day in g’lut? According to the Gemara, Shemine atzeret qualifies as a Chag in its own right. Therefore this one day Chag compares to Chag Shevuoth. Just as Chag Shevuoth, like Chag Pesach and Chag Sukkot, has 6 days to offer the Musof Amida for the Chag if you did not say it the 1st day, so too Chag Shevuoth. Therefore just as this rule of the Chag applies equally with Chag Shevuoth, so too it likewise applies to Chag Shemini atzeret.

    This rule does not apply to Simchat Torah, Chag aliyat to the Torah רמז: to the land of Israel. Yom Ha’atzmaut learns from Simchat Torah. Just as on Simchat Torah we say the full Hallel and do not daven Tahanun, so too and how much more so, we likewise do the same on Yom Ha’atzmaut – a very very special and important day in the history of the Jewish people!The Gemara (Pesachim 117a) states: “The prophets instituted the recitation of Hallel at various times of the year and whenever Jews are redeemed from dire straits.” Rashi (s.v.Ve’al) adds that Chanukah serves as an important precedent for reciting Hallel to rejoice comparable to the redemption from Egyptian slavery. The Meiri (Pesachim 117a) writes that if a miracle happens to an individual or to a community of Jews, then that community may establish the day of redemption as a day for reciting Hallel without a Beracha. Only if the miracle occurred to all Jews, such as Chanukah, may we recite Hallel with a Beracha.

    Yom Ha’atzmaut clearly qualifies as a Chag similar to Purim, where 5 Arab armies invaded the newly declared Jewish State with the intent to complete the Nazi Shoah and throw the Jews of ארץ ישראל into the Sea. The same equally applies to the 2nd War of Israeli Independence, the 6 Day War, where Nasser declared his intent to accomplish what the Arabs failed in achieve in 1948! Commemorating the astonishing and outstanding Victory of ’67, to merits saying the full Hallel!

    Some argue that the restoration of the Bait Hamikdash constitutes redemption for the entire Jewish nation, but that restoration of Jewish sovereignty over a portion of Eretz Yisrael redeems only the Jews who reside in Eretz Yisrael. Utter narishkeit and complete drivel. King Shlomo failed to heed the council given by the prophet Natan … HaShem never commanded any Prince to build Him a House of Cedar. King Shlomo failed to weigh the last commandment which Moshe Rabbenu established as his Last Will and Testament to all generations of Israel … building the Cities of Refuge in order to establish the Federal small and Great Sanhedrin lateral Court system within the Republic of Tribes\States.

    Restoration of the Federal lateral Courtrooms legal system takes priority of importance over building a never commanded House of Cedar unto HaShem. Reestablishment of the Written Torah as the Constitution of the Chosen Cohen Republic does not negate the pre-existing rule of law established by the Knesset Parliament currently governing the Jewish State. Reestablishment of the Written Torah as the Constitution of the Jewish State in no shape, manner, or form qualifies as a revolution against the State established by secular Jewry in 1948. The rule of law role of the Federal Sanhedrin lateral common law courts, they functions through ‘legislative review’ of all laws passed by the Knesset or any other Tribal\State legislation within the Republic.

    The penal system common among Goyim nations, applies primarily for Goyim temporarily residing within the borders of the Jewish State. Public correction of bnai brit prisoners convicted of crimes, by the Torah rule of law, centers upon imposing lashes and compensation fines rather than building prisons to house prisoners. The rule of law within the Torah Constitutional society seeks to build respect among and between bnai brit allies, who view others among our People as strangers. Justice can not prevail within the oath sworn lands if our people lack the Will to discern between an unknown bnai brit Israel, from an unknown Goy alien stranger. The Torah specifically limits the number of lashes imposed upon a convicted bnai brit criminal, to emphasize the obligation among all bnai brit in a Torah Constitutional Republic, to respect the dignity of our people. Justice stands upon this יסוד, the Torah obligation to respect the dignity of our brit\allied People – who comprise the chosen Cohen nation.

    The k’vanna and purpose of Chag Sukkot. טוב

    Chag Sukkot serves to sanctify postive time oriented commandments. This closing re’gel learns from tallit. The mitzva of tallit – forming a tent by means of this 4 cornered garment, which therein houses, all the תרי”ג commandments. If a Jew lives in a community which has no eruv. That Jew can place the four species in the sukkah and even on shabbot make a wave offering dedication of these four species! The four species learn from the four questions asked during the Seder night of Pesach. As tallit raises positive and negative commandments, which require no k’vanna, unto positive time oriented commandments, which do require k’vanna. So too and in similar vein the private domain of sukka – day or night – it makes an aliya of the Baal Shem Tov, meaning ‘Fear of Heaven’. The time of day does not define the required k’vanna of any positive time oriented commandment.

    The Rif held that ‘fear of heaven’ most essentially defines the k’vanna of any positive time oriented commandment; he held, for example, that if a person deposited a shofer before his Beit Din, that that Jew could come before his Court and blow the Shofer on the Shabbot! Making a wave offering dedication of the 4 species most essentially requires Baal Shem Tov\fear of heaven/ as the most important k’vanna a person MUST have at the moment of sanctifying the commandment to wave the 4 species before HaShem. The reputation and good name of a person, it can evaporate like the morning dew, through any stupid, rash decision made in an emotional moment. Our walk before HaShem, which the 4 species metaphorically represent, they, so to speak, expose where we stand at any particular moment in time?

    Do we continually strive to do t’shuva upon both our Ya’tzirot within our heart? Or do we become oblivious to the fire that continuously burns concealed within our being? The binding of the 4 species, the k’vanna of this mitzva, centers upon development of our awareness of emotional conflicts which continually erupt from within our hearts. The Yatzir within us compares to a hungry tiger concealed within the morass of jungle foliage – just waiting to pounce and transform or Good Name unto tuma trief!

    In our walk before HaShem throughout the coming year, the stability of our internal emotional awareness compares to that of a temporary Sukka. The wave offering of the 4 species weighs, it represents the instability of our emotional awareness starkly contrasted by our long term appreciation, joy, and thankfulness that HaShem transforms past, present, and future behaviorial maturity, comparable to the Sukka schach, tohor middot they transform rote positive and negative religious commandments unto positive time oriented commandments.

    Fear of Heaven arouses our Will to dedicate tohor middot, as our Yatzir Ha’Tov t’shuva dedication to HaShem. When the claws and fangs of our predatory Yatzir Ha’Ra pounces upon us, throughout the coming New Year, the tohor dedicated middot burning within our hearts, this Yatzir Ha’Tov, it protects and shields our Good Name. At the moment of that Heavenly test of our faith, HaShem remembers Avraham and Yitzak at the Akada!

    Hallel defines the k’vanna of saying the פסוקי דזמרה throughout the year. Saying Hallel with genuine joy, it defines the purpose and reason for saying the פסוקי דזמרה throughout the daily da’avening throughout the coming New Year. The essential k’vanna of the kabbala of מעשה בראשית it defines the indispensable substance which the unique relationship between the Hallel to the פסוקי דזמרה most essentially share. The blessing of made, which raises פסוקי דזמרה from a collection of Tehillem praises, to that of making a Torah brit oath, the enthusiasm and genuine pleasure we feel when we say Hallel during Chag Sukkot. Herein explains why Chag Sukkot qualifies as the time of our joy.

    Rainfall in a parched desert land, causes the hearts of farmers to exalt before their Creator. Chag Sukkot expresses the awareness of the chosen Cohen nation, and our great need for rain. What separates the oath sworn lands from all other countries and civilizations, the Cohen nation, our political and social stability as a people, hinges upon rainfall from the heavens in their required times and seasons. The metaphor of our absolute dependence upon rain, this mussar expresses our deepest needs, required upon all Cohen bnai brit, in all generations, for us to build a Good Name in our daily walk before HaShem. Buiding a Good Name and reputation has infinitely greater holiness than building a House of Cedar unto HaShem. Herein defines the purpose and meaning of life on this earth.


Votre commentaire

Choisissez une méthode de connexion pour poster votre commentaire:

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Google

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Google. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Connexion à %s

Ce site utilise Akismet pour réduire les indésirables. En savoir plus sur la façon dont les données de vos commentaires sont traitées.