• Levels of agreement (thought, talk, act). Shulchan Aruch = false

    From Jos Boersema@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 9 16:06:32 2024
    title: How a 500-Year-Old Book Shaped Jewish Practice | The Jewish Story source: Unpacked
    link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxrt7_d35rA

    Someone said something about not following the Rabbis for some reason,
    and I concur with that conclusion, although you can derive this
    conclusion from the Torah itself ...

    Reply ...

    The Torah says about itself, that it is a clear law, and _you do not
    have to go over the water or into heaven to have it explained to you:_
    Deut. 30:12-13. It even adds that it is _in your heart._ Rabbi means
    _teacher,_ but you do not have to follow a teacher.

    There is however a different thing, which is a judge. In as much as
    Rabbis take the role of _judges,_ you will have to accept their rulings
    on court cases and to conduct those procedures. This means you cannot
    set a prisoner free, who has been put in jail by such a judge. You can
    still disagree in thinking and talking, but you cannot act out and go
    against the court (which would basically be an act of war).

    However if these Judges conduct the law in an evil way, you also
    no longer have to follow these courts and decisions either, because
    Exodus 23:2, _you shall not side with the mighty._ In this case, you
    (my interpretation) _can_ free a prisoner who has been improsed by such "judges" (who rule based on evil, whose rulings are evil). Now the war
    becomes justified. The judges should be overthrown and put themselves
    before a new court, who is not evil.

    Hence: the Rabbis and everyone else can argue for as much as they
    like, and this can even be a good thing because it talks about the law,
    which is itself the law. You could say this is a debate about the finer
    points between good, better, best. When it comes to a court case, the
    quality of what is acceptable drops to: the ruling should at least not
    be evil, but you only have to agree if it is not evil, to the extend
    of not acting strongly against it. Once the ruling is not evil and/or
    based on evil ideas (example: punishing someone to flogging because they
    helped someone rebuild their house and everything went well, which is an extreme example), you can at least all agree that it was not evil and
    therefore maintain the unity of practice (of what is done). On a court
    case, there is only one final verdict by the judge.

    Example: rest on Shabbos. Some Rabbis, apparently acting as judges and
    with the power from the community to do so, have set limits on how far
    you could walk. You can then ask: is this an evil ? You could argue
    that at some extreme limit like not even one step at all, it become so straining that it becomes an evil. If the limit at least allows normal
    house life, it is probably not evil anymore. You can still disagree with
    the stringency of it, but if it is not _evil,_ you can accept it. Then
    in another village they have another Rabbi-Judge with a different limit,
    but so long as it is not _evil_ it can both be ok, and we can all spend
    our lives debating the finer points of good, better, best, and perhaps
    never ultimately resolving it, while realizing that for one village this
    may be better, and for another community something else - so long as it achieves the basics of the law at minimum.

    The Rabbis however, have overthrown the Torah by instituting the
    _prosbul._ They are therefore, so to say, not kosher. I don't know
    what their legal status should be. You could argue that they are a
    sort of gentiles, and that their communities are similar to churches
    and other gentile religious and secular orders. The _prosbul_ is in
    the Shulchan Aruch, which makes the entire work illegal and to be
    rejected. The question is then: is the prosbul an evil ? I think that
    you can debate this issue back and forth. It depends on how strict you
    want to be. However, to not nullify the loan to a suffering poor person (Jewish), may well constitute an evil, especially if you think that not
    giving help to such a person is already a possible form of evil. It hence becomes debatable whether or not the Rabbis deserve to be overthrown by
    force, and to block their rulings actively and effectively, due to the
    evil nature of a law they think they have passed, but it is not a law (prosbul).

    How does heaven answer this question ? Heaven has overthrown Israel
    and its Rabbis, not long after Hillel the Elder overthrew the Torah
    from the highest power at the 2nd Temple. I guess this settles the
    question. The Rabbis do not have to be followed at all. They need to do Teshuvah instead. Israel will remain in exile, so long as they follow Rabbinical Judaism, and suffer the worsening curses, until only so few
    remain who are loyal, that they shall Redeem themselves, and hopefully
    never go back to such lies as the prosbul. Heter iska is another lie
    in the Shulchan Aruch, made up by Rambam, who is therefore also "not
    kosher". They are traitors, who have acused the exile.

    P.S. I don't think it is only about the prosbul though, causing the
    exile. It is a greater complex of law breaking and phony law making,
    including one of the worst things which ISrael has done, which is to
    forsake the Jubilee on land (free land for all has to be a right, or
    this species is probably doomed due to its own evil).

    --
    Economic & political ideology, worked out into Constitutional models,
    with a multi-facetted implementation plan. http://market.socialism.nl

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)