2 Comments on “Christmas Cookies: George Strait”

1. mosckerr Says:

   
   December 10, 2023 at 1:27 pm

   Sharing how my son-in-law and myself learn Talmud together. As opposed to other family members who learn by an entirely different sh’itta\methodology of learning. Persons not fluent in Hebrew can copy/paste Hebrew words to Google Translate.

   The location of our בנין אב\precedent found in other Gemaras, to this point, no בנין אב — ever located at the conclusion of the sugia/sub-chapter as this Case located within בבא בתרא. Am interested to see how you “connect the dots” to form your sh’itta straight line interpretation whereby you employ it to make the critical משנה תורה/{common law} reinterpretation of the language of the Mishna. Remember your failure to observe the language of the Mishna in מנחות parallel vessels of the Mishkan contrasted by perpendicular position of the Ark of the covenant vis-a-vis to the other vessels of the Mishkan? Interpreting, based upon a sh’itta (A logical methodology. Logic based upon Order) of a Gemara sugya(sug-chapter) בנין אב(precedent), means making a משנה תורה{common law} interpretive learning of the Mishna common law legal system.

   Statute law has no such learning discipline, which requires interpreting a halachic ruling learned in context by contrasting that halachic opinion to fit it within the language of a far greater Mishnaic authority. For this reason alone statute law halacha, as in, for example, the codification of the Shulchan Aruch — just flat out wrong. No exceptions to this rule. Rav Nemuraskii, my Rav, did not take, the above opinion, to this extreme. Statute law halacha – exceptionally easy to learn. Rav Nemuraskii instructed baali t’shuva students who had no Torah background whatsoever at all. But you and I, we both have learned the Sha’s Bavli, do not qualify as snotty nose assimilated kids, who never learned Talmud in their entire lives.

   But Rav Nemuraskii did encourage me, when I first came to him as a University educated left wing Socialist, to study these statute law codes … with a stern warning! To learn these statute halachic codes within the context of its sugya of Gemara, and then use that knowledge of that Gemara sugya to relearn the language of the Mishna of that Gemarah. [[The Universal chief flaw of the Rambam statute halachic code, his failure to bring Gemara sources for all his halachic rulings. The Tur and Shulkan Aruch duplicated this Universal error. Statute halachic codes כאילו equate Gemara halacha as equal to and on par with Mishnaic sources. This logical error which attempts to “equivocate”(כאילו) the authority of the Gemara equal to that of the Mishna, alas a very common logical falacy.]]

   This latter learning step, all the Reshonim commentaries ever written on the Talmud failed to learn the Gemara as a precedent to re-interpret the k’vanna of the language of its Mishna. But no commentary can replace the Primary source which the commentary explains. The Gemara has a commentary relationship to the Mishna. The scholarship of the Reshonim fundamentally erred in their failure to discern between Primary and Secondary sources of scholarship. The same error likewise ocurred in how the Reshonim (950CE to 1400CE) learned the T’NaCH, which tended to restrict scholarship to a טיפש פשט rather than learn the T’NaCH as mussar משנה תורה {Common mussar Law}.

   The fundamental distinction which fundamentally separates Aggadita from Halacha in the Talmud: the former addresses mussar common law precedents whereas the latter compares Halachic precedents to similar {parallel} Halachic precedents.

   Rav Nemuraskii opposed learning the Mishna based solely upon the טיפש פשט\Bird-brained, simple reading of the language of the Mishna. He drilled this contempt for טיפש פשט learning into my consciousness! The sh’itta Geh-Geh (a family member) learns, he became a Rav based upon the Shulchan Aruch. The way he perceives the Talmud, compares to the way that Xtians view the “Old Testament”!

   Xtian replacement theology has subsumed the T’NaCH. Making the T’NaCH as a secondary source vis a vis their new testament forgery, a document on par with, in my estimation, to the Czarist secret police, late 19th Century forgery known as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. My contention, that the Gospels exists as — a Roman forgery. The statute halachic codes: the Yad Chazaka, Tur, & Shulkan Aruch they have effectively replaced Talmudic common law scholarship, just as the noise new testament has replaced, in order of priority and importance, their Old Testament.

   JeZeus did not know how to make the required הבדלה {distinction} that separates and distinguishes איסר מלאכה מן איסר עבודה {skilled labor from unskilled labor}. JeZeus never kept the זמן גרמא מצוה שבת. This type of Torah commandment stands upon the יסוד יראת שמים{foundation of mastery of a Good Name}.

   JeZeus did not know that the Torah defines אמונה{faith} as צדק צדק תרדוף{the pursuit of justice}. [[That common law judicial sanhedrin courtrooms which serve to fairly make restitution of damages inflicted by a Jew upon another Jew defines the Torah concept of justice.]] Muhammad too/likewise did not know how the Hebrew T’NaCH defines faith. Both this and that avoda zarah therefore focused upon faith as a personal belief system in this or that God. The Torah defines the prioritization of a personal belief in Gods, as the Av tuma avoda zarah which shatters the Torah revelation, learned when Moshe shattered the two tablets at Sinai. Herein defines the k’vaana/{intent} of the revelation of the 2nd Sinai commandment.
   • katry Says:

     
     December 10, 2023 at 6:41 pm

     I did read all of this, but I barely understood it. I caught a few words here and there but not enough to give me an understanding of the Talmud. Thank you for taking the time to try to give us an education.

Comments are closed.