38 thoughts on “Isaiah 26:2-3”

  1. I’ve always struggled with this verse, Frank. When I read “righteous nation” it makes me think collective belief instead of individual faith but I may be misinterpreting it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It may be both. That’s a good question to ask the Holy Spirit though. Usually in the morning upon waking up the answers arrive. I am now wondering myself after your comment. Blessings, Laura!

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Why Torah views the new testament and koran as avoda zara. The definition of abomination!

    Israel only accepted two commandments at Sinai before we feared that we would surely die and therefore demanded that Moshe receive the rest of the Torah. What’s the “rest of the Torah”, not just the 611 commandments within the language of the Written Torah but all the halachot capable of rising to the sanctity of time oriented tohor commandments from the Torah itself! Herein defines the intent of the 1st Sinai commandment … to obey the revelation of HaShem לשמה.

    LORD not the Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment and therefore LORD comes under the 2nd Sinai commandment. The same apples to God, Yahweh, Jesus or Allah etc.

    The day of Shabbat approaches, but this tohor time oriented commandment does not rest at one day of not doing מלאכה/work but all the rest of the six days of not doing forbidden עבודה on the 6 days of “shabbat”. Raising positive and negative commandments – which do not require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna to tohor time oriented commandments which do require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna – as learned in the first Book of the Written Torah – בראשית. This first word of the Torah בראשית, it contains both a רמז, meaning words
    within words of ראש בית, ברית אש, and ב’ ראשית but more it contains a סוד: the idea of tohor time oriented commandments which includes all the halachot contained within the Talmud! Hence the Gra taught the kabbalah that בראשית contains all the commandments of the Torah. Torah, by definition includes all the Halachot of the Talmud, according to the B’HaG’s Hilchot Gadolot, a commentary that Pre-Adamites the Creation of Adam and the Garden.

    The next three Books of the Written Torah contain תולדות commandments; positive and negative commandments do not require k’vanna as do tohor time oriented commandments. What distinguishes a tohor time oriented commandment from תולדות commandments and halachot contained within the Talmud? A tohor time oriented commandment requires the dedication of the Yatzir Ha’Tov which breathes tohor spirits from within the heart. The בנין אב/precedent by which Torah common law\משנה תורה/ learns בכל לבבך\כם within the kre’a shma as publicly taught by Rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi in one of his Mishnaot within the mesechta of ברכות, the concept of עבודת השם – the key יסוד (which contains סוד) of doing mitzvot לשמה, a person must dedicate tohor middot (( The revelation of the 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe at Horev 40 days after the substitute theology known as the sin of the Golden Calf )), by sanctifying a tohor spirit which breathes within the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the heart. JeZeus when asked by his disciples did not understand this fundamental and basic kabbalah/סוד. He taught his disciples: “Our Father who lives in Heaven …” Wrong. Tefillah a matter of the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the Heart. Dedicating a spirit does not compare to blowing air from the lungs as expressed through the precedent of blowing the Shofar. Its not the blowing of the shofar that elevates this mitzva unto a time oriented tohor commandment! But rather the affixation of t’keah, tru’ah, and sh’varim to the positive, negative commandments all as tohor time oriented commandments which remember the oaths the Avot Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov swore the oath ( ONE in the opening p’suk of kre’a shma. ), to serve HaShem לשמה through time oriented commandments.

    Because both the gospels and new testament never teach this fundamental סוד\יסוד Jews recognize JeZeus as a false messiah. M0-0-Ham-Madd referred to JeZeus as a prophet. Despite the heretic Rambam’s validation of Islam, neither it nor Xtianity bases their judicial courts strictly upon the revelation of Torah common law. Its this fundamental and most basic of errors which exposes both JeZeus and Moo-Ham-Madd as Av tumah false prophets.

    The gospel narrative very much resembles the style of rabbi Natan’s validation of Sabbatai Zevi – the Ottoman mystic. The Pauline replacement theology famously known for its “Original Sin & expulsion of Adam from the Garden” false paradigm, served to subvert the core oath alliance acceptance of Torah curses. Specifically, that the worship of avoda zarah results in g’lut/exile of the chosen Cohen people. Both Xtianity and Islam ignore the chosen Cohen People – the central them of Torah blessings of the oath brit alliance.

    Raising Torah commandments from static positive & negative commandments to dynamic Oral Torah time oriented commandments – this latter type of Torah commandment requires employment of either the toldot positive and negative commandments or prophetic mussar found within the language of T’NaCH mussar common law – raises static statute law fixed ritual Greek/Roman fossilized commandments to dynamic Oral Torah living commandments – which requires k’vanna. Neither the imaginary man Roman fiction – JeZeus, nor the false prophet M0-0 – Ham – Madd, did not gasp the k’vanna of tohor time oriented commandment such as expressed through the mitzva of Shabbat and tefillah.

    Both of these counterfeit religions introduce a perversion of the tefillah דאורייתא known as קריא שמע. This tefillah from the Torah requires tefillen which permits a chosen Cohen Jew to swear a Torah oath which specifically remembers the 3 oaths sworn by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov wherein they cut an oath brit which creates the chosen Cohen people, in all generations – throughout time – through the sanctification of tohor time-oriented commandments. Therefore the last word ONE, does not testify to belief in Monotheism – an Av tumah avoda zarah belief system – but rather that a Jew, in any generation wherein he lives accepts the 3 oaths sworn by the Avot as ONE within his Yatzir Ha’Tov. The theology of monotheism, it defines Avoda Zarah far more clearly than does the worship of wood or stone idols.

    Like

    1. Thank you for posting, mosckerr. I realized I blocked you a few years back, but I removed that block. Hopefully you can post now.

      Since we last discussed things, which I think was in 2021, I have discovered Henry B. Smith Jr’s Rabbinic Deflation Hypothesis for the Genesis 5 and 11 chronologies. If I recall, you view these chronologies as non-historical so the issue likely doesn’t matter to you.

      But I wonder if you find it credible that the rabbis of the 1st-2nd centuries AD might have changed these chronologies to discredit Jesus as the Messiah based on Daniel 9 prophesies.

      Here is a link to Smith Jr’s paper: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/icc_proceedings/vol8/iss1/48/

      Blessings!

      Like

      1. Impossible. The Hebrew T’NaCH does not include the Book of Daniel in with the other Books of the Prophets. The Gemara of Megillah openly teaches that Daniel a mystic not a prophet. Later source, if learned correctly follow and obey the sealed masoret/traditions of T’NaCH and Talmud. Just that simple. People who despised the sealing of the T’NaCH and Talmud can float whatever bull shit floats their boats, it does not change the facts.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I agree that the Book of Daniel, although in the T’NaCH, is in the section of writings not the section of prophets. However, the Gemara of Megillah, as part of the Talmud, is not in the T’NaCH at all. I view it as comparable to church tradition or the writings of the church fathers.

          I am working now on a post on how to build a messianic chronology based on Daniel 9:24-27.

          Blessings!

          Like

          1. The Talmud stands upon the foundation of the T’NaCH prophetic mussar common law. Whereas the Talmud reflects a halachic ritual common law legal system. Like a loom has a warp & its opposing weft threads.

            Both the T’NaCH prophetic mussar common law legalism & the Talmudic ritual common law legalism, both this and that stand upon the foundation of Oral Torah פרדס as revealed in the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva.

            Impossible to grasp the Oral Torah common law commandment of Moshiach without Prophetic and Torah precedents.. Oral Torah = common law. The 5th Book of the Torah has two names. 1) דברים and 2) משנה תורה. Rabbi Yechuda the Prince of the Great Sanhedrin and author of the Mishna name this 6 Orders of Jewish common law based upon the Torah Book of דברים having the second name within the words of the Torah itself משנה תורה which means “Common Law”. The Book of Daniel, like all the Books in the Holy Writings of the T’NaCH serves to interpret the language of the Books of the Prophets. This model serves as the paradigm how the Gemara functions as a legal common law commentary to the Mishna. Just as the Written Torah serves as the model paradigm for how the Books of the Prophets serve as a “commentary” of Oral Torah common law, based upon the משנה תורה. Just that simple. Thats how the system works. You Xtians for 2000+ years have ignored the Law. And what have you profited by all your empty theology and creeds? Blood libels, host desecrations, pogroms, Inquisition war-crimes, g’lut/gulags which both Hitler and Stalin used as models, culminated in the Shoah. Your religion has no good name reputation. Hence your own man/God rebukes you: By their fruits you shall know them.

            Like

              1. The religion of xtianity produced the fruits of the Shoah. Post WWII Xtianity a dead religion in exile. Jews have restored to govern our homeland and rule it as an independent nation. Xtians rot in exile, waiting for the 2nd coming of their imaginary Man-God.

                Like

                1. I am still curious about your view of Henry B. Smith Jr’s claim that the rabbis of the 2nd century AD changed the dates of the Genesis 5 and 11 chronologies to discredit Jesus being the Messiah: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/icc_proceedings/vol8/iss1/48/

                  If I understand the oral Torah correctly, I think the rabbis do believe that they have the authority and are justified in changing the written Torah to suit their purposes, but I might be wrong about that.

                  Blessings, mosckerr!

                  Like

                  1. Greetings Frank,

                    [[changed the dates of the Genesis 5 and 11]] Do not know what this phrase means. T’NaCH does not teach history but rather prophetic mussar. Henry B. Smith Jr’s claim, just that “a claim”. This person reads Torah as a history document – False.

                    The Torah states: Do not add or subtract from this Torah. So no the inheritors of the P’rushim ie the rabbis do not have the authority to change the Written Constitution of the Republic any more than the President or Congress can change the Constitution of the US. The revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev spins around the central axis that the Torah has 70 faces. Oral Torah interprets the k’vanna of the Written Torah language based upon making a different perspective of Torah intent. A blue print gives Front Top and Side views which permit a contractor to see a three-dimensional design from a two-dimensional piece of paper. No different than a diamond has thousands of different facets. So your premise most definitely incorrect.

                    Regards,
                    Moshe

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. It’s good that they do not have the authority to make such changes. I am glad you confirmed that. So, if they did, it would be worse than (or as bad as) an evangelical preacher caught in adultery.

                      I do view the T’NaCH as history as well as prophetic mussar.

                      I might have my post on Daniel 9:24-27 ready by tomorrow. It combines the Messianic chronologies of Rick Lanser from Associates for Biblical Research and Michael Rood. I know you don’t view Daniel as prophetic, but I think there is prophecy there.

                      Blessings, Moshe!

                      Like

                    2. Yes it would duplicate Jimmy Swaggarts’ “I have sinned”! Confession following getting caught in a hotel with a whore; Jim Bakker and Tammy Faye Bakker fraud; or Oral Roberts threatening not to come down from his “Prayer Tower” till he received 6 million dollars, which a greyhound dog racer/gambler gave him. LOL These examples what I remember before making aliyah in 1991. I have not kept up with how Xtian frauds or television evangelists back them have evolved bilking stupid gullible American believers to give away their money.

                      Like

                    3. Goyim read their worthless silly bible translations and debate history. Bunk. Torah commands prophetic mussar which applies only to the chosen Cohen people, for only the chosen Cohen people of the seed of Avraham the father of a multitude of Goyim, only this chosen people accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai.

                      Like

                    4. the Open Siddur Project ✍ פְּרוֺיֶקְט הַסִּדּוּר הַפָּתוּחַ

                      Aharon N. Varady (transcription)·opensiddur.org·8h ago

                      Concluding Prayer for Hallel in the Home Service for the Festival of Passover, by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy (1896)

                      This is a concluding prayer in the Hallel service at the Passover seder by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy to his Haggadah or Home Service for the Festival of Passover (1896) pp. 32-34. The prayer does not appear in subsequent editions. The prayer threads the needle between the particularly Jewish communal focus of Passover and the…

                      What separates תפילה from תחנון? A blessing requires שם ומלכות. Shemone Esrei does not contain שם ומלכות. Yet it functions as the definition of a blessing. As does kadesh, which also lacks שם ומלכות. For that matter so does ברכת כהנים וגם כן קריא שמע. The k’vanna of חנון has nothing to do with the formal prayer written in the Siddur. Why? Because all these “mitzvot” qualify as tohor time oriented commandments which require k’vanna. What’s the k’vanna of תחנון through which it defines תפילה?

                      Word translations amount to tits on a boar hog when the new born piglets are ravenous and the sow died after giving birth! The 5th middah of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev – חנון, serves as the functioning root שרש of the term תחנון תפילה. The tohor time-oriented commandment of תפילה learns from the additional metaphor of תחנון. Consider the Order of the Shemone Esrei blessings … 3 + 13 + 3 blessings. 6 Yom Tov and 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe, 40 days after the ערב רב Israelites – Jews assimilated and intermarried with Egyptians, no different from the kapo Jewish women who slept with Nazis. This ערב רב, according to the Torah – as expressed in the memory to war against Amalek/antisemitism – they lacked fear of אלהים. This same ערב רב referred to their Golden Calf substitute theology by the name אלהים. This tie-in explains the k’vanna of the term “fear of heaven”.

                      The ערב רב Jews lacked “fear of Heaven”, and therefore their avoda zarah profaned the 2nd Sinai commandment. Hence when Jews assimilate and intermarry with Goyim who do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai (neither the Xtian Bible nor Muslim Koran ever once brings the שם השם first revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment – the greatest commandment of the entire Torah revelation at Sinai and Horev! Do Jews serve to obey the Torah revelation לשמה או לא לשמה? Observance of all the Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot hangs on this simple question.

                      Therefore תפילת תחנון interprets the k’vanna of תפילה, through the concept that a person stands before a Sefer Torah and dedicated specific and defined tohor middot which breath life into the hearts of the Yatrir HaTov of the chosen Cohen oath brit people. The verb תפילה most essentially entails the k’vanna of swearing a Torah oath. What Torah oath? The dedication, think korban, of some specified tohor middot…. Hence the concept of תפילת תחנון.

                      Like

                    5. “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.

                      Like

                    6. Tefillah does NOT translate to prayer. Tefillah requires שם ומלכות, prayer – as found in saying Tehillem – does not fundamentally require שם ומלכות. What does this mean? מאי נפקא מינא in Aramaic Talmud. Answer: שם ומלכות meaning the dedication of a tohor middah revealed to Moshe at Horev לשמה by means of swearing a Torah oath through which the Avot cut a brit which continually creates from nothing the Chosen Cohen people children of the Avot. Hence: tefillah, as a tohor time oriented commandment calls upon the God of the Avot in the first blessing.

                      Praying Tehillem by stark contranst exist as a positive commandment which does not require k’vanna. Only tohor time oriented commandments which dedicate specified tohor middot through swearing a Torah oath, (Tefillah called Amidah b/c a person ideally stands before a Sefer Torah in the beit knesset.), qualify as comparable to the oaths wherein the Avot swore the brit oath which continually creates from nothing the chosen Cohen people. Hence the first blessing of the קריא שמע שחרית twice states תמיד מעשה בראשית.

                      Because the Book of בראשית introduces the Av mitzva of tohor time-oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as its k’vanna. Prophetic mussar defines specified tohor middot first revealed to Moshe as the revelation of the Oral Torah at Sinai. Hence when the portion of Israel did their service in the Beit HaMikdash within the Beit Knesset they read the Creation story of the opening Book of בראשית which introduces the Av Torah commandments of tohor time-oriented commandments.

                      Consequently if a bnai brit does even minor Torah commandments such as shooing the mother bird off her brood of eggs or even rabbinic commandments like Shemone Esrei or lighting the Hanukkah lights or reading the Book of M’gillat Esther, the B’HaG introduced the chiddush that elevating mitzvot to Av tohor time-oriented commandments raises these rabbinic mitzvot to mitzvot from the Torah!

                      The distinction between Tefillah and the tachanun prayer

                      the Open Siddur Project ✍ פְּרוֺיֶקְט הַסִּדּוּר הַפָּתוּחַ

                      Aharon N. Varady (transcription)·opensiddur.org·

                      Concluding Prayer for Hallel in the Home Service for the Festival of Passover, by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy (1896)
                      This is a concluding prayer in the Hallel service at the Passover seder by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy to his Haggadah or Home Service for the Festival of Passover (1896) pp. 32-34. The prayer does not appear in subsequent editions. The prayer threads the needle between the particularly Jewish communal focus of Passover and the…

                      Moshe Kerr: What separates תפילה from תחנון? A blessing requires שם ומלכות. Shemone Esrei does not contain שם ומלכות. Yet it functions as the definition of a blessing. As does kadesh, which also lacks שם ומלכות. For that matter so does ברכת כהנים וגם כן קריא שמע. The k’vanna of חנון has nothing to do with the formal prayer written in the Siddur. Why? Because all these “mitzvot” qualify as tohor time oriented commandments which require k’vanna. What’s the k’vanna of תחנון through which it defines תפילה?

                      Word translations amount to tits on a boar hog when the new born piglets are ravenous and the sow died after giving birth! The 5th middah of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev – חנון, serves as the functioning root שרש of the term תחנון תפילה. The tohor time-oriented commandment of תפילה learns from the additional metaphor of תחנון. Consider the Order of the Shemone Esrei blessings … 3 + 13 + 3 blessings. 6 Yom Tov and 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe, 40 days after the ערב רב Israelites – Jews assimilated and intermarried with Egyptians, no different from the kapo Jewish women who slept with Nazis. This ערב רב, according to the Torah – as expressed in the memory to war against Amalek/antisemitism – they lacked fear of אלהים. This same ערב רב referred to their Golden Calf substitute theology by the name אלהים. This tie-in explains the k’vanna of the term “fear of heaven”.

                      The ערב רב Jews lacked “fear of Heaven”, and therefore their avoda zarah profaned the 2nd Sinai commandment. Hence when Jews assimilate and intermarry with Goyim who do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai (neither the Xtian Bible nor Muslim Koran ever once brings the שם השם first revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment – the greatest commandment of the entire Torah revelation at Sinai and Horev! Do Jews serve to obey the Torah revelation לשמה או לא לשמה? Observance of all the Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot hangs on this simple question.

                      Therefore תפילת תחנון interprets the k’vanna of תפילה, through the concept that a person stands before a Sefer Torah and dedicated specific and defined tohor middot which breath life into the hearts of the Yatrir HaTov of the chosen Cohen oath brit people. The verb תפילה most essentially entails the k’vanna of swearing a Torah oath. What Torah oath? The dedication, think korban, of some specified tohor middot…. Hence the concept of תפילת תחנון.

                      Like

                    7. Liberal kapo Jews utterly abhorred by Israelis. Why? The tone presented in this text below—despite its sharp rebuke and contempt for diaspora Liberal Judaism—from my perspective, represents an interpretation of tohor middat haRachamim (pure attribute of compassion).

                      “Open rebuke simply better than hidden love.” – Mishlei 27:5 The tone seeks only a cactus like external surface prick, in order to frame the spiritual interior meat of רחום; the rejection of sentimentalism, and the prioritization of a deep commitment to the collective soul of Am Yisrael, the chosen Cohen People. An impassion call for t’shuva. A warning that assimilation and intermarriage, this Av tuma avoda zarah, it opens our People to Torah curses, like the plagues which afflicted Par’o.

                      This tochacha/rebuke likewise calls upon the tohor midda of חנון, the כלל to the dedication of defined tohor middot. Rather than limit itself to the דיוק פרט of רחום. Which ironically embraces the philosophy of Rambam, who taught in his Moreh, that the more a Man can say that which a subject “is not”, the greater clarity that person gains to understand the positive aspects of an abstract undefinable idea.

                      “Tikkun Olam”, serves as a popular concept primarily associated with Reform Judaism and lacks influence in Israel. In the U.S. and other diaspora communities, Reform Judaism’s embrace of tikkun olam has become a cornerstone—seen through philanthropic work, social justice activism, and universalist values. This highlights the divide between Israelis and G’lut Jewry. David Friedman’s 2016 comment calling J Street members “far worse than kapos,” implies that liberal Jews are actively betraying their people

                      Many Israelis see Liberal Judaism as alien to Israeli reality, where Jewish identity and community structures provide intrinsic meaning (e.g., one commenter said Reform Judaism is “unnecessary in Israel” because secular Jewish life already satisfies that need) . Turning “tikkun olam” into a universalist, politically progressive doctrine, directly compares to the Xtian and Muslim Monotheism Universal God avoda zarah violation of the 2nd Sinai commandment.

                      American Reform leaders have repeatedly said that diaspora Jews must oppose “misguided” Israeli policies, including regarding ultra‑Orthodox influence and Arab‑Israeli democracy. They totally ignore the vision of political zionism which strives to achieve Jewish self-determination within the borders of a Jewish Middle East country. PM Sharon permitted Palestinian self-determination and free elections in 2005. He risks Jewish civil war to give Arabs a stake in the self-determination action.

                      Jews abroad who joined with Arab anti-Israel propaganda, protests, and violence post Oct7th have undermined Israel’s sovereignty and assisted the UN and ICC/ICJ efforts to dismantle the Jewish state or at the least impose a foreign cease-fire wherein Israel surrendered to the Gaza surprise attack of Oct 7th. The Israeli Chief Rabbinate maintains that Reform Judaism is “uprooting Judaism” and refuses to recognize its conversions, marriages, burials. Official discrimination and cultural marginalization casts g’lut assimilated Jewry unto the dhimmi gutter. Not because Israelis hate foreign Jewish devils. But because alien Jews living in exile suffer from a cultural gulf that far exceeds the span of the Atlantic Ocean.

                      Given Israel’s ongoing security crises and existential threats, public dissent by diaspora Jews—like U.S. Reform leaders urging “opposition to misguided policies”—perceived as political interference meant to weaken Israeli resolve . For many Israelis, it feels like these outsiders place themselves above or even undermining Israel’s sovereignty.

                      Zionist ideology historically devalued diaspora life—seeing true Jewish life as rooted in Israel, not scattered and assimilated abroad. Modern national‑Zionist Israelis often view diaspora liberalism as a cultural betrayal, a manifestation of exile that nationalist Zionism sought to overcome. Israelis live in a constant state of preparedness due to mandatory service, violence, and geopolitical precariousness. Diaspora Jews, especially in Western countries, often experience minority life in pluralistic democracies, focused on rights, social justice, and integration. When diaspora criticisms mirror Western progressive rhetoric, many Israelis see this as tone-deaf at best, and existential threat at worst.

                      Times of Israel reported Ambassador Friedman calling J Street members “far worse than kapos” for supporting a two-state solution—a sign he views their dissent as voluntary betrayal, darker than coerced collaboration. Kapo diaspora liberals have abandoned Israel’s endangered community during its darkest hours. This psychological echo of the Holocaust-era betrayal wherein g’lut Jews choose Western moral comfort over solidarity with a state under siege, causes Israelis to hold these kapo Jews in complete and utter contempt. Jews in foreign countries calling Israel a Nazi state, they expect that Israelis would not respond with utter revulsion?!

                      The gulf that separates two completely different cultures and peoples band-aids like Kotel arrangements, communal dialogues and religious inclusion amount to tits on a boar hog. G’lut Jews simply not part of the Israeli chosen Cohen people.

                      The Talmud functions as both a guide & model to establish legal systems within the Jewish state. G’lut Jewish racist prejudice limits the Talmud strictly and only as an archaic religion of out-dated and out-classed Orthodox fundamentalism. The Liberal “interpretation” of ancient texts which that alien liberal religion holds both T’NaCH and Talmud in disdain and contempt, emphasizes the cultural gap which separates Jews from non-Jewish Jews. Their gross declaratin: ‘Berlin as their Jerusalem’, that absolute abomination never forgotten nor forgiven; it perhaps best qualifies as Liberal Judaism’s distorted interpretation of Chesed. But such “chesed” qualifies merely as a tuma treif bird; an idea that does not fly with Israelis.

                      The term “kapo”, historically, a loaded term that refers to Jewish prisoners appointed by Nazis to oversee other Jewish prisoners in concentration camps. Such as removing the gold fillings of Jews slaughtered in the gas chambers. Using this term as a description of liberal Jews, suggests a deep-seated anger and repulsive reaction towards screaming liberal Jews shouting “Not in our Name”, following the Oct 7th abomination.

                      This utter detestation and complete revulsion of g’lut Jewry, it reflects a broader sentiment among many Israelis. We feel that liberal Jewish critiques of Israel, they joins hands with our enemies, and seek to undermine our country’s security and legitimacy. This makes Liberal g’lut Jews no different than Arab bomb makers. A huge and significant cultural and ideological divide, much larger than the Atlantic ocean separates Israelis and diaspora Jews like oil and water. Particularly, those Jews who identify with Liberal or Reform movements. This cultural divide stems from differing experiences, values, and interpretations of Jewish identity and responsibility. Reform Jewish mothers never have to bury their children after putting them on a school bus.

                      The Talmud, serves together with the T’NaCH and Siddur – as foundational texts which establish the working model for judicial common-law Federal courtrooms within the Israeli Republic. Israelis perceive the T’NaCH, aggadah, and midrashim as the basis to derive and interpret the ethical prophetic mussar frameworks foundations of our Republic/nation-state of Israel.

                      This fundamental difference of priority and emphasis, it underscores the huge gulf which divides and separates Israeli from g’lut Jewry. The latter tuma-Jews choose and prefer to live in foreign lands. Liberal Reform tuma-Jews prioritize modern interpretations and social justice concerns and practices expressed through alien Goyim cultures and customs. Their attempts to stamp those alien cultures and customs upon tohor-Israelis, directly compares to the Hanukkah Civil War where the corrupt tuma-Tzeddukim likewise attempted to turn Jerusalem into a Greek Polis and cause our people to forget the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva 4 part inductive reasoning Oral Torah Jewish genius … replaced by foreign ancient Greek philosophy, like Aristotle’s 3 part deductive logic/syllogism model.

                      Liberal Reform tuma-Judaism slandered both the T’NaCH and Talmud and referred to both as archaic. Therefore their attempt to impose their corrupt, alien ethical model-monopoly; their repeated attempts to dictate, as if liberal tuma-Jews compare to the Av-tuma UN, how foreign tuma-Jews in distant lands, assimilated cultures, and inter-married customs of avoda zarah; their repeated attempts to dictate how to interpret and understand, these not just these basic and fundamental Primary source Jewish texts — that serve to shape and form Jewish culture and custom as a unique chosen Cohen people.

                      The arrogance of their presumption seeks to forcibly impose a One State Arab-Jewish democracy upon Zionism as the best ideal! Liberal Jews abhorred Zionism during the closing window of opportunity in the 1920s before Hitler. The British White Paper and FDR’s closure of US ports to Jews sealed the fate of Shoah Jewry in Europe.

                      Liberal Judaism interpretations apply strictly and only to tuma-g’lut Jews. Their assimilated and intermarried debauchery, merits nothing but utter contempt within the borders of the “Jewish Torah Constitutional Republic”, which a new generation of political Zionist Israelis, seeks to achieve Jewish self-determination within the borders of Israel – and actualize the k’vanna of the Balfour Declaration which launched political Zionism in 1917.

                      Chaim Weizmann publicly said in 1906: “Any deflection from Palestine was—well, a form of idolatry.” He emphasized that only by building on the ground in Palestine could a Jewish homeland be born—and that Jews elsewhere must support colonization and immigration. The phrase “Jews of the world, where are you?” fits the tone of Weizmann’s broader rhetorical stance—an urgent summons to global Jewry to move beyond political promises and take tangible, on-the-ground action.

                      Weizmann repeatedly challenged Jews in the diaspora to support immigration and nation-building in Palestine—telling Balfour, “We had Jerusalem when London was a marsh,” and warning of waves of Jewish refugees seeking refuge.

                      Av tuma Rabbi Stephen S. Wise pressured President Franklin D. Roosevelt to maintain strict U.S. immigration quotas and opposed changing the laws to admit more Jewish refugees. Wise through the public voice of the American Jewish Congress, the World Jewish Congress, supported Roosevelt. He cowardly refused to publicly challenge FDR’s White Paper policy. Wise emphasized the need to fight antisemitism in America rather than offer American shores as a safety life-line to European Jewry. In 1938, under Wise’s influence, Jewish institutions decided not to back legislation that would have loosened immigration laws to allow more Jewish refugees into the U.S.—explicitly agreeing “no Jewish organization would… sponsor a bill which would… alter the immigration laws”.

                      Between 1933–1945, only a fraction of the allowed immigration quota for German and Axis countries was utilized. Estimates suggest nearly 200,000 quota spots remained unused—lives that could have been saved. Jewish Liberal Reform leaders like Wise directly compare to Pope Pius XII – both Av tuma corruption chose “quiet diplomacy” and maintaining alignment with the Roosevelt administration over public advocacy for Holocaust refugees.

                      Historians like Rafael Medoff emphasize that Wise’s cautious approach—supported by his close relationship with FDR—slowed or blocked rescue efforts during crucial years of the Holocaust. Wise also prioritized Zionist aims in Palestine, despite the 1939 British White Paper! He claimed to favor immigration only to Palestine, but Reform American Jews never made aliyah to Israel in large numbers. He discouraged Jewish groups from lobbying Congress or mounting public pressure to open U.S. borders to Jewish refugees.

                      Av tuma Abraham Geiger, often called the “father of Reform Judaism”—openly declared “Berlin is our Jerusalem”. This phrase expressed a sweeping theological and cultural perversion. It reflects a sentiment that debased liberal Jews prioritized foreign cultural or secular identities. Reform Judaism rejected the traditional Jewish longing for a return to Zion. Instead, it embraced the idea of Jewish integration into its host nation—here, Germany. Geiger’s declaration made clear that Germany was their spiritual and communal center, not Palestine. Reform Judaism worships the American and French revolutions as their Gods. This religion of avoda zarah established citizens rights rather than serfs as their ‘human rights’ Nicene Creed. Reform congregations were called “Temples”; services conducted in German; prayers toward Jerusalem omitted from their gutted prayer-books. As one Reform leader explained, their allegiance lay primarily with their birth nation, not an ancient homeland.

                      But Israel does not compare to the feudal Confederate South, with its agricultural based economy; dependent upon slave labor! Jews living abroad, their opinions have parity with Americans living in Russia! Rebuke accusations of inauthenticity or a lack of commitment to Jewish heritage immediately come to mind whenever Liberal Jews denounce Israel across University campuses across the US and Europe.

                      Liberal Jews abhor the sealing of the T’NaCH, Talmud, Siddur and Midrashim. These ignorant amaratzim preach a Xtianized morality from their assimilated pulpits and soap-boxes. Their pie in the sky Top-down moralism of the Arab-Israeli conflict utterly ignores and discounts the impact of terrorism on Israeli perceptions and responses. The possibility that the Talmud serves as the interpretive lens for understanding the Mishnah, reinforcing the importance of traditional common law פרדס scholarship, used to shape modern Jewish common-law and ethics – completely and totally alien to this liberal tuma-Jewish minority populations in foreign countries.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    8. That is a very informative history, Moshe, of the dangers of Reform Judaism. I was only vaguely aware of this perspective before.

                      I agree with you and Mishlei 27:5 that open rebuke is better than hidden love. I also distrust liberalism.

                      However, I thought you were living in the US rather than Israel. I also wonder how your view that the T’NaCH is not at least in part an historical document does not indirectly align you with Reform Judaism.

                      Like

                    9. No cross over what so ever. T’NaCH commands prophetic mussar NOT history. Reform views both T’NaCH and Talmud as archaic history.

                      Like

                    10. I don’t know what “archaic history” is.

                      Either Adam actually lived less than 8000 years ago or he did not. Either he lived to be 930 years old (give or take 10 years) or he did not.

                      Liberals from a Christian perspective would say all of that is myth or mere moral teaching prophetic perhaps of the Messiah but nothing more. Some would also say these texts originated abut the time of Ezra with Moses and the Exodus also being myths. I don’t agree with them nor with the Documentary Hypothesis.

                      I wonder how you differ from these Christian liberals regarding the T’NaCH given your Jewish perspective.

                      Like

                    11. The story of Adam – prophetic mussar. Just that simple. Mussar not past tense but present tense. LOL

                      Greek mythology that’s Greek/Roman NT “history”. Xtianity does not exist without a physical JeZeus. Mythology does not equal to Mussar.

                      The Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach stands upon the foundation of korbanot. A korban requires an oath dedication לשמה. Xtianity does not know how to pronounce the שם השם לשמה. John 1:1 word is god – Wrong – just that simple. The mitzva of Moshiach requires Oral Torah wisdom which defines the k’vanna of the oath dedication of the mitzva of Moshiach based upon the precedent of a dedicated korban. What oath did Yitzak swear at the Akadah? Frank you have never asked this utterly essential question. Why? Because to ask such a question requires Oral Torah logic reasoning which the church has denied for 2000+years.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    12. Frank you continue to presume that the Roman forgery NT, originally written in Hebrew. Bunk. Its target audience ALWAYS Goyim and not Jews.

                      Dr. Janie van Rensburg and the notion of “Logos” in Xtian theology. This perspective aligns with traditional Christian beliefs about the nature of the “Crisis” JeZeus – substitution theology. Several early church fathers likewise discussed this substitution theology. Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 CE), in both “First Apology” and “Dialogue with Trypho;” Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202 CE), in “Against Heresies,” where he emphasized the role of “logos” in the creation and redemption of humanity. This falsely presumes that the local/tribal God of Israel lives as a Universal God. A key theme of both Xtian and Islamic substitute theology.

                      The Talmud, the codification of the Oral Torah פרדס logic system, teaches in the opening pages of mesechta Avoda Zarah that the generations of Adam prior to the birth of Noach utterly rejected the God whom only Israel accepted at Sinai. Your worthless bible translations “logos”, coupled with their later revised revisionist history/substitute theology, simply never accepted neither the first or second commandments of Sinai. Just that simple. The substitute theology of “logos” does not mean the Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment. The perversion of “son of god/messiah” – has no basis in the Oral Torah revelation at Horev. The church rejects the revelation of the Oral Torah 13 middot at Horev.

                      Origen (c. 185–253 CE), Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373 CE), Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376–444 CE) – all these silly Goyim theologians have likewise promoted this avoda zara. The facts, as clear as the Sun on a cloudless Summer Day, “logos” has nothing to do with the First Commandment of Sinai. Nothing in the Heavens, Earth or Seas compares to the revelation of this Divine Presence Spirit Name which breathes within the Yatzir HaTov of the chosen Cohen people.

                      The substitute theology replacement of JeZeus as a mythical messiah for the oath brit sworn to Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov that they would father the chosen Cohen people – absolute narishkeit. Yom Kippur eternally remembers that HaShem made t’shuva and annulled the vow to make of the descendants of Moshe the chosen Cohen people instead of the seed of Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov.

                      This revisionist substitute theology represents just a simple continuation of the Golden Calf substitute theology wherein the ערב רב, assimilated and intermarried Israelites, substituted the word אלהים for the revelation of the First Commandment Name. Substitution theology defines the avoda zarah of the Golden Calf for all generations.

                      The early church fathers you mentioned engaged with the concept of “Logos” in ways that sought to bridge Greek philosophical thought and Christian doctrine. The Mishna in Masechet Chagigah (Chapter 2, Mishnah 1). It states that anyone who contemplates the divine matters or the secrets of the universe—specifically what is above, below, or behind—should not have been born. Man simply incapable of comprehending the Divine; no more than an ant can grasp Human culture and civilizations. The Gospel Roman forgery of “logos” – simply a replacement theology revisionist history nonsense. Just that simple. Greek philosophy does not serve as the foundation upon which the Torah stands.

                      Like

                    13. Frank I rewrote my original response to you. Here’s the clarified revision.

                      Frank you continue to presume that the Roman forgery NT, originally written in Hebrew. Bunk. Its target audience ALWAYS Goyim and not Jews. This explains why the NT reflects none of the halachic, oath britot, or Constitutional foundations of the Written Torah first revealed at Sinai.

                      Dr. Janie van Rensburg and the notion of “Logos” in Xtian theology. This perspective aligns with traditional Xtian beliefs about the nature of the “Crisis” JeZeus – substitution theology. Several early church fathers likewise discussed this substitution theology. Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 CE), in both “First Apology” and “Dialogue with Trypho;” Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202 CE), in “Against Heresies,” where he emphasized the role of “logos” in the creation and redemption of humanity. This falsely presumes that the local/tribal God of Israel lives as a Universal God. A key theme of both Xtian and Islamic substitute theology.

                      Dr. Janie van Rensburg’s claim that Logos in John 1:1 was originally “Son”—this is just another layer of Christian revisionism. The entire “Logos” theology was developed by Church fathers like Justin Martyr and Irenaeus to blend Greek metaphysics with Roman theology, ultimately inventing a universalist “Christ” divorced from the פרט, tribal brit at Sinai. This classic substitute theology—replacing Israel’s national oath brit-inheritance-as the chosen Cohen people, with a mythical “son of god” and imagining that Goyim inherit spiritual truths which bypasses Torah altogether. Even Paul’s grafting metaphor does not go this far! It falsely fuses Greek metaphysics with Roman theological imperialism.

                      Let’s be clear: the Torah revelation revealed at Sinai, simply not a Hellenistic abstraction or a Neoplatonic emanation. The revelation at Horev (Sinai) – concrete, national, legal, and exclusive—bound by brit to the seed of Avraham, Yitzḥak, and Ya‘aqov. The Oral Torah’s פרדס system—especially as laid out in the opening sugya of Avodah Zarah—explains that the nations of the world rejected HaShem’s authority long before Sinai. Xtianity’s invention of “Logos” does not replace the oath brit sworn to the Avot. The NT false idea: that the tribal, covenantal God of Israel could somehow morph into a universal, metaphysical abstraction. This expresses the core lie of both Christian and Islamic theologies. They both erase the specificity of the brit—the national oath between HaShem and the seed of Avraham, Yitzḥak, and Ya‘aqov—and replace it with theological fiction. NT Greek “Logos” translations, tits on a boar hog – worthless.

                      The Talmud, the codification of the Oral Torah פרדס logic system, teaches, as just mentioned, in the opening pages of mesechta Avoda Zarah that the generations of Adam prior to the birth of Noach utterly rejected the בראשית God. Only Israel accepted this בראשית God at Sinai. Your worthless bible Greek translations of “logos”, coupled with their later revised revisionist history/substitute theology, simply never accepted neither the first or second commandments of Sinai. Just that simple. The substitute theology of “logos” does not mean the Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment. The perversion of “son of god/messiah” – has no basis in the Oral Torah revelation at Horev. The church rejects the revelation of the Oral Torah 13 middot at Horev. Let’s be clear: the God of Israel revealed at Sinai – not a Hellenistic abstraction or a Neoplatonic emanation. The Divine Name revealed at Sinai is not “Jesus,” “Yeshua,” or “Logos.”

                      Origen (c. 185–253 CE), Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373 CE), Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376–444 CE) – all these silly Goyim theologians have likewise promoted this avoda zara. The facts, as clear as the Sun on a cloudless Summer Day, “logos” has nothing to do with the First Commandment of Sinai. Nothing in the Heavens, Earth or Seas compares to the revelation of this Divine Presence Spirit Name which breathes within the Yatzir HaTov of the chosen Cohen people.

                      The substitute theology replacement of JeZeus as a mythical messiah for the oath brit sworn to Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov that they would father the chosen Cohen people – absolute narishkeit. Yom Kippur eternally remembers that HaShem made t’shuva and annulled the vow to make of the descendants of Moshe the chosen Cohen people instead of the seed of Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov. The gospel abomination perverts the anointing of king David dedicated to pursue judicial justice within the borders of the oath sworn lands, as the intent and k’vanna of the mitzva of Moshiach. The specific פרט, of the husband of Bat Sheva, defines the כלל of the anointing of David as king by the prophet Shmuel.

                      This revisionist substitute theology represents just a simple continuation of the Golden Calf substitute theology wherein the ערב רב, assimilated and intermarried Israelites, substituted the word אלהים for the revelation of the First Commandment Name. Substitution theology defines the avoda zarah of the Golden Calf for all generations.

                      The early church fathers you mentioned engaged with the concept of “Logos” in ways that sought to bridge Greek philosophical thought and Xtian doctrine. The Mishna in Masechet Chagigah (Chapter 2, Mishnah 1). It states that anyone who contemplates the divine matters or the secrets of the universe—specifically what is above, below, or behind—should not have been born. Man simply incapable of comprehending the Divine; no more than an ant can grasp Human culture and civilizations. The Gospel Roman forgery of “logos” – simply a replacement theology revisionist history nonsense. Just that simple. Greek philosophy does not serve as the foundation upon which the Torah stands.

                      Like

              2. Tefillah does NOT translate to prayer. Tefillah requires שם ומלכות, prayer – as found in saying Tehillem – does not fundamentally require שם ומלכות. What does this mean? מאי נפקא מינא in Aramaic Talmud. Answer: שם ומלכות meaning the dedication of a tohor middah revealed to Moshe at Horev לשמה by means of swearing a Torah oath through which the Avot cut a brit which continually creates from nothing the Chosen Cohen people children of the Avot. Hence: tefillah, as a tohor time oriented commandment calls upon the God of the Avot in the first blessing.

                Praying Tehillem by stark contranst exist as a positive commandment which does not require k’vanna. Only tohor time oriented commandments which dedicate specified tohor middot through swearing a Torah oath, (Tefillah called Amidah b/c a person ideally stands before a Sefer Torah in the beit knesset.), qualify as comparable to the oaths wherein the Avot swore the brit oath which continually creates from nothing the chosen Cohen people. Hence the first blessing of the קריא שמע שחרית twice states תמיד מעשה בראשית.

                Because the Book of בראשית introduces the Av mitzva of tohor time-oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as its k’vanna. Prophetic mussar defines specified tohor middot first revealed to Moshe as the revelation of the Oral Torah at Sinai. Hence when the portion of Israel did their service in the Beit HaMikdash within the Beit Knesset they read the Creation story of the opening Book of בראשית which introduces the Av Torah commandments of tohor time-oriented commandments.

                Consequently if a bnai brit does even minor Torah commandments such as shooing the mother bird off her brood of eggs or even rabbinic commandments like Shemone Esrei or lighting the Hanukkah lights or reading the Book of M’gillat Esther, the B’HaG introduced the chiddush that elevating mitzvot to Av tohor time-oriented commandments raises these rabbinic mitzvot to mitzvot from the Torah!

                The distinction between Tefillah and the tachanun prayer

                the Open Siddur Project ✍ פְּרוֺיֶקְט הַסִּדּוּר הַפָּתוּחַ

                Aharon N. Varady (transcription)·opensiddur.org·

                Concluding Prayer for Hallel in the Home Service for the Festival of Passover, by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy (1896)
                This is a concluding prayer in the Hallel service at the Passover seder by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy to his Haggadah or Home Service for the Festival of Passover (1896) pp. 32-34. The prayer does not appear in subsequent editions. The prayer threads the needle between the particularly Jewish communal focus of Passover and the…

                Moshe Kerr: What separates תפילה from תחנון? A blessing requires שם ומלכות. Shemone Esrei does not contain שם ומלכות. Yet it functions as the definition of a blessing. As does kadesh, which also lacks שם ומלכות. For that matter so does ברכת כהנים וגם כן קריא שמע. The k’vanna of חנון has nothing to do with the formal prayer written in the Siddur. Why? Because all these “mitzvot” qualify as tohor time oriented commandments which require k’vanna. What’s the k’vanna of תחנון through which it defines תפילה?

                Word translations amount to tits on a boar hog when the new born piglets are ravenous and the sow died after giving birth! The 5th middah of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev – חנון, serves as the functioning root שרש of the term תחנון תפילה. The tohor time-oriented commandment of תפילה learns from the additional metaphor of תחנון. Consider the Order of the Shemone Esrei blessings … 3 + 13 + 3 blessings. 6 Yom Tov and 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe, 40 days after the ערב רב Israelites – Jews assimilated and intermarried with Egyptians, no different from the kapo Jewish women who slept with Nazis. This ערב רב, according to the Torah – as expressed in the memory to war against Amalek/antisemitism – they lacked fear of אלהים. This same ערב רב referred to their Golden Calf substitute theology by the name אלהים. This tie-in explains the k’vanna of the term “fear of heaven”.

                The ערב רב Jews lacked “fear of Heaven”, and therefore their avoda zarah profaned the 2nd Sinai commandment. Hence when Jews assimilate and intermarry with Goyim who do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai (neither the Xtian Bible nor Muslim Koran ever once brings the שם השם first revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment – the greatest commandment of the entire Torah revelation at Sinai and Horev! Do Jews serve to obey the Torah revelation לשמה או לא לשמה? Observance of all the Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot hangs on this simple question.

                Therefore תפילת תחנון interprets the k’vanna of תפילה, through the concept that a person stands before a Sefer Torah and dedicated specific and defined tohor middot which breath life into the hearts of the Yatrir HaTov of the chosen Cohen oath brit people. The verb תפילה most essentially entails the k’vanna of swearing a Torah oath. What Torah oath? The dedication, think korban, of some specified tohor middot…. Hence the concept of תפילת תחנון.

                Like

      2. The 12 Day War has ended. The Tripartite Alliance US – India – Israel now dominates. The leadership of Bibi where he held back following the Oct 7th Abomination, where he did not commit the IDF into Gaza but waited for other Arab countries to join the War as did Lebanon and Syria and the Houthis. Thank you for your great leadership Bibi. The losers of this Middle East War … England and France broke off diplomatic relations with Israel over the Gaza war. The UN attempted to arrest the PM as a war-criminal. The UN, EU and Britain have zero say in shaping the post war ‘balance of power’ in the Middle East. Revenge for the UNSC 242 & 338 imperialist Resolutions! In this war the Quartet Powers exist comparable to tits on a boar hog. Another BIG LOSER of this the 12 Day War —- China. Post War, a massive expansion of the Abraham Accords.
        Iran Admits Defeat: Khamenei just lost the 12 day war
        🚨 BREAKING: China THREATENS Iran As Trump Confirms Ceasefire
        INDIA & ISRAEL’s Secret Plan to Reclaim POK — Mell Robbins Motivational Speaker. – YouTube

        Before the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities, Trump pulled out of the G-7 meeting and said the Macron did not know squat about the conflict in the Middle East.
        Trump blasts Macron, says early G7 exit has ‘nothing to do’ with an Israel-Iran ceasefire

        The collapse of post-WWII multilateral diplomacy in the Middle East. The rise of a multipolar alliance system where nations like India and Israel take the place once held by Britain and France. The exposure of Arab regimes who tacitly supported Hamas or Hezbollah and their strategic miscalculations. The irrelevance of Cold War-era frameworks, both legal and political, to the current reality. The Middle East’s future will no longer be decided in Geneva or Brussels, but in Jerusalem, Washington, and New Delhi…The irrelevance of Cold War-era frameworks, both legal and political, to the current reality.
        Iran: Who was Ayatollah Khomeini? | If You’re Listening

        Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.