The result of our covenant with dead.
The result of our covenant with dead.
HarHaBayit:
'We failed! We didn't throw of the Mountain: Amalek's descendants and their Israeli friends! The Erev Rav! We must be at war until all terrorists are dead! In and around Eretz Yisrael. The day after, we need to vote for an Elohim fearing Government. Then let us start to Pray and to talk about a new government. Every Jew and non-Jew must accept and respect Jewish Law. Voting's yes, but a new high Court system Jewish Law in all Eretz Yisrael: Including Aza, Yudea and Samaria. So that we may become a real blessing for the whole world as it was in the time of the Kingdom of HaMeleg David. Yes, real Teshuva and Study our Source: The Torah. The Sifri (a treatise on the derivation of Torah law from the exegesis of the verses of Numbers and Deuteronomy, written during the time of the Mishnah by Rav) says, "The Jewish people were commanded three mitzvos upon entering Israel: appointing for them-selves a king, building themselves a Sanctuary and wiping out the descendants of Amalek."
Look Click: https://fb.watch/r0HhSftzj1/
Shemot (Exodus) - Chapter 25
8And they shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell in their midst חוְעָ֥שׂוּ לִ֖י מִקְדָּ֑שׁ וְשָֽׁכַנְתִּ֖י בְּתוֹכָֽם: And they shall make Me a sanctuary: And they shall make in My name a house of sanctity. וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ: וְעָשׂוּ לִשְׁמִי בֵּית קְדֻשָּׁה: 9according to all that I show you, the pattern of the Mishkan and the pattern of all its vessels; and so shall you do. טכְּכֹ֗ל אֲשֶׁ֤ר אֲנִי֙ מַרְאֶ֣ה אֽוֹתְךָ֔ אֵ֚ת תַּבְנִ֣ית הַמִּשְׁכָּ֔ן וְאֵ֖ת תַּבְנִ֣ית כָּל־כֵּלָ֑יו וְכֵ֖ן תַּֽעֲשֽׂוּ: according to all that I show you: here, the pattern of the Mishkan. This verse is connected to the verse above it: “And they shall make Me a sanctuary…” according to all that I show you. כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אֽוֹתְךָ: כָּאן את תבנית המשכן, הַמִּקְרָא הַזֶּה מְחֻבָּר לַמִּקְרָא שֶׁלְּמַעְלָה הֵימֶנּוּ וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ:
Eretz Yisrael in Jewish Scriptures Click: 
Source (Hebrew) Translation (English)
The Tefilah l’Shalom Medinat Yisra’el (“Prayer for the Welfare of the State of Israel”) was composed by Rabbi Yitsḥak haLevi Hertzog (1888-1959), edited by Shmuel Yosef (S.Y.) Agnon (1888-1970), and first published in the newspaper Ha-Tsofeh on 20 September 1948.
This prayer was instituted at the time by the Chief Rabbis of Israel, Rabbi Hertzog and Rabbi Ben Tsiyon Meir Ḥai Uziel. According to the custom of the Ashkenazic communities, the time for reciting the prayer was set between the end of the Torah reading and the haftara for the return of the Torah scroll to its place in the Holy Ark. In Sephardic communities, it is customary to recite the prayer at the time of the removal of the Torah scroll from the Holy Ark. (At this point in prayer, it was customary the prayer “Hanoten Tshuah”, blessing the ruler of the state and their immediate family.)
Because the State of Israel is referred to as “the beginning of the sprouting/growth of our redemption,” the prayer was not universally accepted. This expression, and the reservations about the state in general, are some of the reasons why non-Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews do not recite it in their synagogues. In fact, the recitation of this prayer and, to a lesser extent, the prayer for the safety of IDF soldiers, became one of the main differences between prayer in Ḥaredi synagogues and prayers in National Religious Zionist synagogues in Israel and in the Diaspora.
מי שברך לחיילי צה״ל | Mi sheBerakh for the Welfare of Israel Defense Forces Soldiers, by Rabbi Shlomo Goren (1956); amended by Dr. Alex Sinclair (2012)
| 8And they shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell in their midst | חוְעָ֥שׂוּ לִ֖י מִקְדָּ֑שׁ וְשָֽׁכַנְתִּ֖י בְּתוֹכָֽם: | |
| And they shall make Me a sanctuary: And they shall make in My name a house of sanctity. | וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ: וְעָשׂוּ לִשְׁמִי בֵּית קְדֻשָּׁה: | |
| 9according to all that I show you, the pattern of the Mishkan and the pattern of all its vessels; and so shall you do. | טכְּכֹ֗ל אֲשֶׁ֤ר אֲנִי֙ מַרְאֶ֣ה אֽוֹתְךָ֔ אֵ֚ת תַּבְנִ֣ית הַמִּשְׁכָּ֔ן וְאֵ֖ת תַּבְנִ֣ית כָּל־כֵּלָ֑יו וְכֵ֖ן תַּֽעֲשֽׂוּ: | |
| according to all that I show you: here, the pattern of the Mishkan. This verse is connected to the verse above it: “And they shall make Me a sanctuary…” according to all that I show you. | כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אֽוֹתְךָ: כָּאן את תבנית המשכן, הַמִּקְרָא הַזֶּה מְחֻבָּר לַמִּקְרָא שֶׁלְּמַעְלָה הֵימֶנּוּ וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ: |
| Source (Hebrew) | Translation (English) |
|---|
The Tefilah l’Shalom Medinat Yisra’el (“Prayer for the Welfare of the State of Israel”) was composed by Rabbi Yitsḥak haLevi Hertzog (1888-1959), edited by Shmuel Yosef (S.Y.) Agnon (1888-1970), and first published in the newspaper Ha-Tsofeh on 20 September 1948.
This prayer was instituted at the time by the Chief Rabbis of Israel, Rabbi Hertzog and Rabbi Ben Tsiyon Meir Ḥai Uziel. According to the custom of the Ashkenazic communities, the time for reciting the prayer was set between the end of the Torah reading and the haftara for the return of the Torah scroll to its place in the Holy Ark. In Sephardic communities, it is customary to recite the prayer at the time of the removal of the Torah scroll from the Holy Ark. (At this point in prayer, it was customary the prayer “Hanoten Tshuah”, blessing the ruler of the state and their immediate family.)
Because the State of Israel is referred to as “the beginning of the sprouting/growth of our redemption,” the prayer was not universally accepted. This expression, and the reservations about the state in general, are some of the reasons why non-Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews do not recite it in their synagogues. In fact, the recitation of this prayer and, to a lesser extent, the prayer for the safety of IDF soldiers, became one of the main differences between prayer in Ḥaredi synagogues and prayers in National Religious Zionist synagogues in Israel and in the Diaspora.
Source (Hebrew) Translation (English)
In recent months, thanks to the combination of cell phone cameras and YouTube, we’ve witnessed Israel Defense Force soldiers acting in deeply troubling ways. We’ve seen soldiers standing by while a civilian shoots live ammunition at Palestinian protesters, we saw Lt. Col. Shaul Eisner assault an unarmed Danish civilian with the butt of a rifle, and, before that, the killing at close range of Mustafa Tamimi, a protester in the Palestinian village Nebi Saleh. Many of these occurrences are regularly reported in Haaretz, but they don’t find their way as often, or as prominently, into other media outlets.
The most generous explanation for this phenomenon is that individuals, in a series of isolated incidents, fail to uphold the IDF code of conduct. More sobering explanations point to a widespread culture in the IDF whereby such conduct is tolerated and routine. Indeed, when the Eisner case was reported, the most shocking aspect of the YouTube video was the utter indifference to Eisner’s act by the six or seven other soldiers milling around. What we saw as a horrific, unforgiveable, outrage, they saw as boring and un-noteworthy.
I was on the receiving end of such an incident last year, while I was observing a non-violent demonstration against the occupation in the West Bank, and got caught up in tear gas that was fired indiscriminately at women, children, and observers. Since then, I’ve found it hard to say the prayer for the IDF that appears in all Israeli prayer books, and which my community, like most synagogues in Israel, reads aloud every Shabbat.
The prayer, written by Rabbi Shlomo Goren in the early years of the state, does not, to my mind, adequately respond to the ethical challenges that IDF soldiers face in exercising power over civilian communities, where things are much more complicated than state-against-state war.
But our response to troubling issues cannot simply to be cease from engagement with the issue. That’s true if the troubling issue is, say, Eishet Ḥayil (the poem traditionally sung by a husband to a wife on Friday night; while parts of it are beautiful, parts of it are also rather sexist); and it is also true if the troubling issue is inappropriate use of force by the IDF.
As engaged Jews who love the Jewish tradition but are troubled by particular aspects of it, my wife and I sing an amended version of Eishet Ḥayil on Friday nights. In doing this, we join countless other Jews who try to develop an active relationship with liturgy that more closely reflects their values.
As engaged Jewish Zionists, the time has come to do the same with the prayer for the IDF. Above is my suggested amendation. The text is the regular version of the prayer as found in the popular Rinat Israel siddur. The middle section is my suggested addition.
The Biblical verse quoted is from the story of Sodom and Gemorrah, where Abraham berates God for seeking to harm innocent people along with the wicked. To my mind, it’s an extremely appropriate analogy to much of what goes on today: there are wicked people out there who seek to harm us, and it’s good that the army protects us from them. But all too often, some soldiers (and some Israelis in general) don’t do enough to distinguish between those who are genuinely evil, and innocent people (including Palestinians, left-wing Israelis, and internationals) who are legitimately protesting the occupation. Amending the prayer for the IDF is one way to raise awareness about that uncomfortable fact, and begin a public, Jewish, Zionist conversation about it.
| Source (Hebrew) | Translation (English) |
|---|---|
In recent months, thanks to the combination of cell phone cameras and YouTube, we’ve witnessed Israel Defense Force soldiers acting in deeply troubling ways. We’ve seen soldiers standing by while a civilian shoots live ammunition at Palestinian protesters, we saw Lt. Col. Shaul Eisner assault an unarmed Danish civilian with the butt of a rifle, and, before that, the killing at close range of Mustafa Tamimi, a protester in the Palestinian village Nebi Saleh. Many of these occurrences are regularly reported in Haaretz, but they don’t find their way as often, or as prominently, into other media outlets.
The most generous explanation for this phenomenon is that individuals, in a series of isolated incidents, fail to uphold the IDF code of conduct. More sobering explanations point to a widespread culture in the IDF whereby such conduct is tolerated and routine. Indeed, when the Eisner case was reported, the most shocking aspect of the YouTube video was the utter indifference to Eisner’s act by the six or seven other soldiers milling around. What we saw as a horrific, unforgiveable, outrage, they saw as boring and un-noteworthy.
I was on the receiving end of such an incident last year, while I was observing a non-violent demonstration against the occupation in the West Bank, and got caught up in tear gas that was fired indiscriminately at women, children, and observers. Since then, I’ve found it hard to say the prayer for the IDF that appears in all Israeli prayer books, and which my community, like most synagogues in Israel, reads aloud every Shabbat.
The prayer, written by Rabbi Shlomo Goren in the early years of the state, does not, to my mind, adequately respond to the ethical challenges that IDF soldiers face in exercising power over civilian communities, where things are much more complicated than state-against-state war.
But our response to troubling issues cannot simply to be cease from engagement with the issue. That’s true if the troubling issue is, say, Eishet Ḥayil (the poem traditionally sung by a husband to a wife on Friday night; while parts of it are beautiful, parts of it are also rather sexist); and it is also true if the troubling issue is inappropriate use of force by the IDF.
As engaged Jews who love the Jewish tradition but are troubled by particular aspects of it, my wife and I sing an amended version of Eishet Ḥayil on Friday nights. In doing this, we join countless other Jews who try to develop an active relationship with liturgy that more closely reflects their values.
As engaged Jewish Zionists, the time has come to do the same with the prayer for the IDF. Above is my suggested amendation. The text is the regular version of the prayer as found in the popular Rinat Israel siddur. The middle section is my suggested addition.
The Biblical verse quoted is from the story of Sodom and Gemorrah, where Abraham berates God for seeking to harm innocent people along with the wicked. To my mind, it’s an extremely appropriate analogy to much of what goes on today: there are wicked people out there who seek to harm us, and it’s good that the army protects us from them. But all too often, some soldiers (and some Israelis in general) don’t do enough to distinguish between those who are genuinely evil, and innocent people (including Palestinians, left-wing Israelis, and internationals) who are legitimately protesting the occupation. Amending the prayer for the IDF is one way to raise awareness about that uncomfortable fact, and begin a public, Jewish, Zionist conversation about it.
תְּפִלָּה לְפִדְיוֹן שְׁבוּיִם | Prayer for the Redemption of Israelis Taken Captive [during the war begun on Shemini Atseret 5784], by Rabbi Ofer Sabath Beit Halachmi (2023)
Source (Hebrew) Translation (English)
| Source (Hebrew) | Translation (English) |
|---|---|
This prayer for the liberation of abducted Israeli citizens and military personnel was offered by Rabbi Ofer Sabath Beit Halachmi in response to the war initiated by Hamas from Gaza on Shemini Atseret 5784. The English translation was prepared by Rabbi Dr. Rachel Sabath Beit Halachmi.
|
The
result of our covenant with dead. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amalek Nemesis of G‑dliness Based on the
teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe Courtesy of MeaningfulLife.com  The people
of Israel journeyed . . . and they camped in
Rephidim . . .
[Moses] named the place “Challenge and Strife,” because
of the strife of the people of Israel and their challenging of G‑d,
saying, “Is G‑d amongst us or not?” Then came Amalek and attacked Israel in
Rephidim . . . (Exodus 17:1–8) Remember what Amalek did to you on the road, on
your way out of Egypt. That he encountered you on the way, and cut off those
lagging to your rear, when you were tired and exhausted; he did not fear G‑d.
Therefore . . . you must obliterate the memory of Amalek from
under the heavens. Do not forget. (Deuteronomy 25:17–19) The Jewish people had just experienced one of the
greatest manifestations of divine power in history. Ten supernatural plagues
had compelled the mightiest nation on earth to free them from their
servitude. The sea had split before them, and manna had rained from
the heavens to nourish them. How could they possibly question, “Is G‑d
amongst us or not?” Yet such is the nature of doubt. There is doubt that is
based on a rational query. There is doubt that rises from the doubter’s
subjective motives and desires. But then there is doubt pure and simple:
irrational doubt, doubt more powerful than reason. Doubt that neutralizes the
most convincing arguments and the most inspiring experiences with nothing
more than a cynical shrug. Such was the doubt that left the Jewish people
susceptible to attack from Amalek. Amalek, in the spiritual sphere, is the
essence of baseless, irrational indifference. In the words of
the Midrash: To what is the incident (of Amalek) comparable? To a
boiling tub of water which no creature was able to enter. Along came one
evildoer and jumped into it. Although he was burned, he cooled it for the
others. So, too, when Israel came out of Egypt, and G‑d split the
sea before them and drowned the Egyptians within it, the fear of them fell
upon all the nations. But when Amalek came and challenged them, although he
received his due from them, he cooled1 the awe of the
nations of the world for them.2 This is why Amalek, and what he represents, constitutes
the archenemy of the Jewish people and their mission in life. As Moses
proclaimed following the war with Amalek, “G‑d has sworn by His throne; G‑d
is at war with Amalek for all generations.”3 Truth can refute the
logical arguments offered against it. Truth can prevail even over man’s
selfish drives and desires, for intrinsic to the nature of man is the axiom
that “the mind rules over the heart”—that
it is within a person’s capacity to so thoroughly appreciate a truth that it
is ingrained in his character and implemented in his behavior. But man’s
rational faculties are powerless against the challenge of an Amalek who leaps
into the boiling tub, who brazenly mocks the truth and cools man’s most
inspired moments with nothing more than a dismissive “So what?” The
Bottleneck Amalek attacked Israel “on the road, on [the] way out of
Egypt,” as they were headed toward Mount Sinai to receive G‑d’s Torah and
their mandate as His people. Here, too, history mirrors the inner workings of
the soul: the timing of the historical Amalek’s attack describes the internal
circumstances under which the pestilence of baseless doubt rears its head. In the Passover Haggadah we say: “In every
generation one must see himself as if he personally came out
of Mitzrayim.” Mitzrayim,
the Hebrew word for Egypt, means “narrow straits”; on the personal level,
this refers to what chassidic teaching calls the “narrowness of the neck”
which interposes between the mind and the heart. Just as physically the head and the heart are joined by a
narrow passageway, the neck, so it is in the spiritual-psychological sense.
For while the mind possesses an innate superiority over the heart, it is a
most difficult and challenging task for a person to exercise this
superiority—to direct and mold his feelings and desires to conform with what
he knows to be right. This is the “Exodus from Mitzrayim”
that is incumbent on each and every generation: the individual challenge to
negotiate the narrow straits of one’s internal “neck,” to overcome the
material enticements, the emotional subjectivity, the ego and self-interest
which undermine the mind’s authority over the heart and impede its influence
on the person’s character and behavior. As long as a person is still imprisoned in his
personal mitzrayim, he faces many challenges to his integrity. As
long as he has not succeeded in establishing his mind as the axis on which
all else revolves, his base instincts and traits—such as greed, anger, the
quest for power and instant gratification—may get the better of him. But once
he achieves his personal “Exodus” from the narrow straits of his psyche, once
he establishes his knowledge and understanding of the truth as the
determining force in his life, the battle is all but won. He may be
confronted with negative ideas and rationalizations, but free of the
distortions of self-interest, the truth will triumph. He may be tempted by
negative drives and desires, but if in his life the mind rules the heart, it
will curb and ultimately transform them. But there remains one enemy which threatens also the
post-Exodus individual: Amalek. Amalek “knows his Master and consciously
rebels against Him.” Amalek does not challenge the truth with arguments, or
even with selfish motivations; he just disregards it. To the axiom, “Do truth
because it is true,” Amalek says, “So what?” Armed with nothing but his chutzpah,
Amalek jumps into the boiling tub, contests the incontestable. And in doing
so, he cools its impact. Beyond
Reason How is one to respond to Amalek? How is one to deal with
the apathy, the cynicism, the senseless doubt within? The formula that
the Torah proposes is encapsulated in a single word: Zachor—“Remember.” In his Tanya,4 Rabbi Schneur
Zalman of Liadi discusses the faith in G‑d that is integral to the
Jewish soul. Faith is not something that must be attained; it need only be
revealed, for it is woven into the very fabric of the soul’s essence. Faith,
continues Rabbi Schneur Zalman, transcends reason. Through faith one relates
to the infinite truth of G‑d in its totality, unlike the perception achieved
by reason, which is defined and limited by the finite nature of the human
mind. Thus Rabbi Schneur Zalman explains the amazing fact that,
throughout Jewish history, many thousands of Jews have sacrificed their lives
rather than renounce their faith and their bond with the Almighty—including
many who had little conscious knowledge and appreciation of their Jewishness,
and did not practice it in their daily lives. At their moment of truth, when
they perceived that their very identity as Jews was at stake, their intrinsic
faith—a faith that knows no bounds or equivocations—came to light, and
overpowered all else. Amalek is irrational and totally unresponsive to reason;
the answer to Amalek is likewise supra-rational. The Jew’s response to Amalek
is to remember: to call forth his soul’s reserves of
supra-rational faith, a faith which may lie buried and forgotten under a mass
of mundane involvements and entanglements. A faith which, when remembered,
can meet his every moral challenge, rational or not. FOOTNOTES The Hebrew word karcha, “he encountered you,”
employed by the verse to describe Amalek’s attack on Israel, also translates
as “he cooled you.” Midrash
Tanchuma, Ki Teitzei 9. Chapters 18–19. Based
on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe Based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi
Menachem Mendel Schneerson; adapted by Yanki
Tauber. Originally published in Week in Review. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Devarim (Deuteronomy) - Chapter 25
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Mufti and the Führer (November 1941)  The Mufti sent Hitler
15 drafts of declarations he wanted Germany and Italy to
make concerning the Middle East. One called on the two countries to declare
the illegality of the Jewish home in Palestine.
Furthermore, “they accord to Palestine and to other Arab countries the right
to solve the problem of the Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab
countries, in accordance with the interest of the Arabs and, by the same
method, that the question is now being settled in the Axis countries.”1 On November
28, 1941, the Mufti
met with Hitler, who told him the Jews were
his foremost enemy. The Nazi dictator rebuffed the Mufti’s requests for a
declaration in support of the Arabs, however, telling him the time was not
right. The Mufti offered Hitler his “thanks for the sympathy which he had
always shown for the Arab and especially Palestinian cause, and to which he
had given clear expression in his public speeches....The Arabs were Germany’s
natural friends because they had the same enemies as had Germany,
namely....the Jews....” Hitler replied: Germany stood for
uncompromising war against the Jews. That naturally included active
opposition to the Jewish national home in Palestine....Germany would furnish
positive and practical aid to the Arabs involved in the same
struggle....Germany’s objective [is]...solely the destruction of the Jewish
element residing in the Arab sphere....In that hour the Mufti would be the
most authoritative spokesman for the Arab world. The Mufti thanked Hitler
profusely.2 Two German historians
say that Hitler had a plan to extend the Holocaust to
the Middle East and had forged an alliance with Arab nationalists. This is
perhaps why Hitler met with the Mufti and provided him a budget of 750,000
Reichsmark per month to foment a jihad in Palestine.
The alliance did not alter Hitler’s racist views toward Arabs
reflected in his refusal to shake the Mufti’s hand or drink coffee with
him.3 In 1945, Yugoslavia sought
to indict the Mufti as a war criminal for his role in recruiting 20,000
Muslim volunteers for the SS,
who participated in the killing of Jews in Croatia and Hungary. He
escaped from French detention in 1946, however, and continued his fight
against the Jews from Cairo and
later Beirut. He
died in 1974. A document attesting
to the connection between Nazi Germany
and the Mufti was released in March 2017. In the letter published
by the National Library of Israel Archives, SS
Chief Heinrich Himmler heaps praise upon Mufti
al-Husseini, stating that the Nazi leadership has been closely
following the battle of freedom-seeking Arabs - and especially in Palestine -
against the Jewish invaders. Himmler ends the letter by bidding the
Mufti warm wishes for the continuation of your battle until the big
victory. This letter was delivered in the Fall of 1943,
two years after the Mufti's famous meeting with Adolf Hitler.4 Sources: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The other day the
question was put to me why so many keep saying that Palestinians are an
invented people. A simple question with
a complex answer. Until the late 19th
century, the term Palestinian was used as a regional term. Residents living in
the region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean identified
themselves primarily in terms of religion: Muslims felt far stronger bonds
with remote co-religionists than with nearby Jews and Christians. Living in
that area did not imply any sense of common political purpose or sense of
discrete peoplehood or nationhood. An identity as a
people is one precursor to nationhood. And nationhood is the presence of
common identity together with the three key elements of sovereignty,
self-determination and self-sufficiency. The “Palestinians”
have never had this, and they still don’t have it. The concept that such a
people exists is being forced on the world to achieve a base political goal. In actual fact, the
deliberate creation of the “Palestinian people” as a discrete entity in 1967,
and the political group known as the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
in 1964 was for the political purpose of destroying a sovereign and legally
mandated Jewish state. Till that point in
time, nor, it will be shown, after that
time, was there ever ANY sense or mention of a “Palestinian” people or nation. The term Palestinian
was ALWAYS followed by a descriptive noun – Arab; ie Palestinian Arab. According to
Palestinian historian Muhammad Y. Muslih, during the entire 400 year period
of Ottoman rule (1517-1918), before the British set up the 30-year-long
Palestine Mandate, “There was no political unit known as Palestine.” When the Islamic
armies conquered the Levant, they adopted the administrative name used by the
Byzantines and dubbed part of Palestina Prima (“the first Palestine”) – more
or less today’s Jerusalem area and the Shfela [coastal plain] – as “Jund
Filastin.” Jund means “army;” Jund Filastin means “the Palestine military
command.” In other words, the name did not signify the national identity of a
“Palestinian people” who lived in the land, but instead, a military district,
in line with the Byzantine nomenclature. Until Israel was
re-established as a nation in 1948, Palestine was the term for the territory
between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. The word Palestinian was
applied to anyone living in that area. As late as 1909 the
first recorded Arab to use the term “Palestinian” was Farid Georges Kassab, a
Beirut-based Orthodox Christian who, in 1909, espoused sympathy for Zionism.
Kassab’s 1909 book stated that “the Orthodox Palestinian Ottomans call
themselves Arabs, and are in fact Arabs.” Even Kassab decried the use of the
term “Palestinian” Arab. Nevertheless, apart from the ancient indigenous Jews
in the Levant, the largely Muslim Arab population identified only as Arab and
ONLY with the start of the British mandate, was the term used to describe
both Jew and Arab. So, the term Palestinian did not take on its current
popular meaning until the mid-20th century and was used as a regional
reference. On a related tangent,
in 1948, the invasion of Israel by 6 pan-Arab armies had NOTHING to do with
creating an Arab Palestinian state but ALL to do with a classic imperialist
Muslim scramble for Palestinian territory. Had they succeeded, as the first
secretary-general of the Arab League, Abdel Rahman Azzam, admitted to a
British reporter, Transjordan “was to swallow up the central hill regions of
Palestine with access to the Mediterranean at Gaza. The Egyptians would get
the Negev. The Galilee would go to Syria, except that the coastal part as far
as Acre would be added to Lebanon.” Had Israel lost the
war, its territory would have been divided among the invading Arab forces.
The name Palestine would have vanished into the dustbin of history. So, are the
“Palestinians” an invented people for purely political (anti-semitic)
purposes? Well, even Mandate
Palestinian Arab leaders during the British mandate era (1920-48) who, as
products of the Ottoman imperial system where religion constituted the
linchpin of the socio-political order of things, had no real grasp of the
phenomenon of nationalism. Hence, they had no interest in the evolution of a
distinct Palestinian nation, or acknowledging a Palestinian “people”, because
there simply wasn’t one. As an example that
there was no concept of “Palestinian” nationhood or peoplehood, the April
1920 pogrom in Jerusalem was not in the name of independence of the
“Palestinian people” of the Mandate area, but under the demand for its
incorporation into the (short-lived) Syrian kingdom, headed by Faisal ibn
Hussein of Mecca…. In 1926, the Arab
Executive Committee still referred to Palestine as the unlawfully severed
southern part of “the one country of Syria, with its one population of the same language,
origin, customs, and religious beliefs (emphasis mine), and its natural boundaries, as I
pointed out earlier. In July 1937, the Arab
Higher Committee (AHC) justified its rejection of the Peel Commission’s
recommendation for the partition of Palestine on the grounds that “this
country does not belong only to [the] Palestine Arabs (that qualifying noun
again….) but to the whole Arab and
Muslim Worlds (emphasis
mine).” And finally, as late
as August 1947, three months before the passing of the U.N. resolution
partitioning Mandate Palestine into Arab and Jewish states, the AHC’s
mouthpiece, al-Wahda, advocated the incorporation of Palestine (and Transjordan) into
“Greater Syria (emphasis
mine).” No, there was no
concept of a “Palestinian people” but rather, always one of Palestinian Arabs who were part of the wider
Arab Muslim ummah. How did they then
suddenly appear as homogeneous ethnic group in 1967 when not even the Arab
High Commission had ever heard of them? There are
undereducated misconceptions too that pan-Arabism was of no consequence in
the dialogue surrounding the authenticity of the “Palestinian” “people”. This
is untrue. Even the younger
generation of post 1948 Arab activists supported this ideal as evidenced by
Ahmad Shuqeiri, a Lebanon-born politician of mixed Egyptian, Hijazi, and
Turkish descent who served as the Arab League’s deputy secretary-general. As
he put it, “Palestine is part and parcel in the Arab homeland.” Asked to clarify which
part of the “Arab homeland” this specific territory belonged, he added that
Palestine “is nothing but southern Syria.” And so, it is no
surprise that Yasser Arafat, the (Egyptian born and educated) father of the
“Palestinian people” followed this pan-Arab line. The 1964 PLO charter
defined the Palestinians as “an integral part of the Arab nation”, rather than a distinct
nationality (emphasis mine)
and vowed allegiance to the ideal of pan-Arab unity – that is, to Palestine’s
eventual assimilation into “the greater Arab homeland.” In 1996, even that
bastion which proclaims itself as the leader in the “struggle” for the
Palestinian “people”, Hamas, said this, “Islamic and traditional views reject
the notion of establishing an independent Palestinian state … In the past,
there was no independent Palestinian state. … [Hence] our main goal is to
establish a great Islamic state, be it pan-Arabic or pan-Islamic…
This…land…is not the property of the Palestinians…. This land is the property
of all Muslims in all parts of the world.” (senior Hamas leader Mahmud
Zahar, 1996) And finally, on this
line of reasoning, it is not possible to go past the words of Azmi Bishara,
founding leader of the nationalist Balad Party (with seats in the Israeli
parliament since 1999). In a statement he made in 2002 he said: “My Palestinian identity
never precedes my Arab identity…. I don’t think there is a Palestinian
nation, there is [only] an Arab nation…. “ Not much more needs to
be said; the concept of a Palestinian “people” engaged in a struggle of
“liberation” from a colonial Jewish “oppressor” is a purposely misleading
one, invented solely for the purpose of de-legitimising the Jewish state and
its people. The Levantine Arabs,
up to and including 1948 , ALWAYS identified firstly on the basis of religion
and secondly on the basis of ethnicity. Thus the Levant contained Christian ARABS, Muslim ARABS but only and always,
Jews. In other words, the identity of those Arabs who today would like to be known as an
ancient “Palestinian “people” have in actual fact NO distinguishing markers
of a discrete peoplehood (ever) given that their identity is mostly based on
shared customs and beliefs of their Arab Muslim brothers, ALL of them
mediated by Islam. Till 1967, nobody had
ever heard of the “Palestinians” as a people, let alone a “people” steeped in
antiquity. Its subsequent use is merely a political tool to delegitimise the
Jewish claim to what was left of the division of the British Mandate into two
projected Arab Muslim entities and one Jewish one. However, there are
those who will use meaningless terms like endogenesis and ethnogenesis in an
attempt to pointlessly philosophise with words that have no concrete impact
on the issue to hand. Besides, the concept
of a homogeneous, ethnic and disparate “Palestinian people” (endo/ethno
genesis) is frankly ludicrous when one considers that through centuries of
Muslim imperialism right down to the end of Ottoman Empire in 1918, caliphs
and other rulers brought in hundreds of thousands of soldier slaves loyal to
their pay masters. The Tulunides brought
in Turks and Negroes. The Fatamids
introduced Berbers, Slavs, Greeks, Kurds, and mercenaries of all kinds. The Mamelukes imported
legions of Georgians and Circassians. Saladin brought in
150,000 Persians who were given lands in Galilee and the Sidon district for
their services. In the fourteenth
century, 18,000 Yurate Tartars from the Euphrates were brought in, soon
followed by 20,000 Ashiri and 4,000 Mongols who occupied the Jordan Valley
and settled from Jerusalem south!! Mongols… In 1830, as a further
example, Mehemet [Muhammad] Ali colonized Jaffa and Nablus (Jewish Schem
before the arab invasion and occupation…) with Egyptian soldiers and their
Sudanese allies. So much so that british estimates of the 13,000 inhabitants
of Jaffa, for example, ran at 8,000 Turco-Egyptians, 4,000 Greeks and
Armenians, and 1,000 Maronites. The british did not consider that there were
any Arabs at all in that city. …. For her/his part, it
would be a brave soul who would deny the constancy of the presence of the Jewish
PEOPLE in the Levant over the past 3,000 years. No, the whole concept
of a “Palestinian people” is a base political strategy invented not to build
a state but to destroy a neighbouring one. For this reason, many who are
knowledgeable on this issue will continue to say they are an invented
“people”. Today, while the term
Palestinian is applied to the Arabic-speaking residents of what is largely
the State of Israel, this usage is purposely misleading because for most of
human history, a “Palestinian” was simply a person born or living in that
land with no connotation of being a “people”. When used in reference
only to non-Jews, it implies an historical claim to the territory in
opposition to Israel. In reality, the concept of Palestine as a nation-state
in opposition to Israel or as a racial group ( a “people”) predating the
presence of Jewish inhabitants is historically false and is currently pushed
as part of a broader strategy of delegitimising Jewish connection to the Land
of Israel. The tactic of the myth
of a “Palestinian people” is simple yet sophisticated: preaching and
dispersing lies and distortions of reality. History proves that the bigger
the lie and the more common its reiteration, the more it is accepted as
authentic and genuine. After all, who can
believe that an entire national leadership would dare to totally distort and
fabricate history in full? But the notion of a
“Palestinian people” has been forced on Europe and America through the ploy
of telling all players what they want to hear. To a guilty Europe,
where there is a high level of guilt and remorse about its own colonialist
past, the creation of Israel is pitched as an excess of a bygone European
colonialist era where Europe is directly blamed for the creation of the
Jewish state. To the Americans,
where many feel guilt and remorse over historic racism, the Palestinians
depict Israel as a racist state, which treats them in the same way as African
Americans were treated. And for the broader
international community and for human rights organizations, Israel is a cruel
occupier that violates all human rights and freedoms of the Palestinians. But no matter the myth
of a Palestinian “people”, ANY Palestinian national identity is
overwhelmingly founded, and heavily predicated, on the negation of Jewish and
Israeli identity, rather than on positive attributes or real history. Arguably, the
international community’s enabling and legitimizing of the wishes of a group
of people with such an open hatred of a neighbouring sovereign state may be
down to simple things: Oil, wilful naiveté, anti-semitism, and a politically
correct unwillingness to offer any challenge to such falsehoods. In the end though, it
matters little. The modern re-constituted Jewish State of Israel and the
Jewish people are celebrating 71 years of existence as contributing members
of the family of nations; without the need to revise, falsify or fabricate
its 3000 year old history. The same cannot be
said for the Palestinian “people”. Shabbat Shalom. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Alan
Meyer is a retired educator with an interest in the Arab-Israeli conflict,
photography and Australian road trips. Source: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-invention-of-the-palestinian-people/ |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 The Six-Day War, also known as the June War, 1967 Arab–Israeli War or Third Arab–Israeli War, was fought between Israel and a coalition of Arab states (primarily Egypt, Syria, and Jordan) from 5 to 10 June 1967. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The start of the agreements with Amalek…… The Chief Rabbi of Israel, Rabbi
Shlomo Goren ztz’l, acted firmly and tirelessly to preserve Jewish
sovereignty on the Temple Mount * In his book about the Temple Mount, he
explained why it is imperative to move up from the Kotel, and pray on the
Temple Mount * Rabbi Goren’s struggle against the decision of the Government
and Defense Minister Moshe Dayan to relinquish the Temple Mount to the Muslim
Waqf * The politicians used the rabbi’s prohibition of entering the Temple
Mount as a pretext to hand it over to the enemy * Blessed are those who go up
to the Temple Mount according to Jewish law, for they strengthen our
sovereignty over the Temple Mount and the entire Land of Israel Rabbi Goren’s Decision
to Print his Book about the Temple Mount Next week on the 24th day
of the Jewish month Mar Cheshvan (Monday) will be twenty years since the
death of the Chief Rabbi of Israel, the Gaon, Rabbi Shlomo Goren ztz’l.
In these days, when Har Habayit (the Temple Mount) is in the headlines, it is
worth mentioning segments from his book “Har Habayit”, which he published a
year before his death. In his book, he investigates in detail the site of
the Mikdash (Holy Temple) and the azarot (Temple
courtyards), areas that are forbidden to enter even after immersion in
a mikveh (a bath used for the
purpose of ritual immersion in Judaism), The time was the days of the second
Rabin government, which conducted agreements with the PLO terrorist
organization, and handed over parts of the Land of Israel to our enemies. In
his introduction to the book he wrote: “Currently, when Jewish sovereignty
over the Temple Mount is in danger, Mount Moriah is liable to become the
subject of negotiation between us and the Arabs, and unfortunately, there are
politicians who are willing to negotiate our sovereignty over the Temple
Mount, relying on the alleged prohibition of the Chief Rabbinate to enter Har
Habayit. This prohibition is liable to be used as an excuse to hand over the
nation’s Kodesh ha’Kodashim (inner sanctum) to the Muslims.
Therefore, I decided to publish the book now, from which it will be proven
that there are large areas of the Temple Mount which all Jews are permitted
to enter, according to all halakhic opinions, after immersion in a mikveh…”(p.15). The Reasons for the ‘Heter‘ The Temple Mount is composed of two
areas. The first, which is the smallest area, includes the site of the Holy
Temple and the courtyards, and is called machaneh shechina (the inner azara), which nowadays is forbidden to
enter because we cannot be cleansed from tumat met (defilement
of the dead). The second area, which includes the majority of the Temple
Mount, is called machaneh levia, and it is permitted to enter
these areas today after immersion. Indeed, in the years preceding the
establishment of the State of Israel the rabbis, including Rabbi Kook ztz’l,
instructed not to enter the Temple Mount at all, for fear that people might
go beyond the permitted areas and enter forbidden places. Three factors prompted Rabbi Goren
to permit going up to the majority of areas on the Temple Mount: 1) the
precise mapping of the Temple Mount conducted by the I.D.F. Engineer Corps
under his orders after the liberation of the Temple Mount; with these maps,
it was possible to accurately determine which areas were permitted to enter
according to all halakhic opinions. 2) The many testimonies that for more
than a thousand years after the destruction of the Holy Temple, Gedolei
Yisrael (eminent rabbis) used to pray on the Temple Mount in the
permitted areas. 3) The threat to Jewish sovereignty on the Temple Mount. There is room to add that one of the
motivations for placing the warning signs not to enter the Temple Mount might
have been so as not to provoke the Muslims and leaders who ruled Israel at
the time, and in events of riots, did not properly protect the Jews. Lowering Ourselves to
the Kotel – The Result of the Sufferings of Exile Rabbi Goren wrote about his feelings
after the Six Day War: “I could not escape the feeling that from a historic
perspective, assigning the Western Wall plaza for Jewish prayer was nothing
but the result of the expulsion of the Jews from the Temple Mount by the
Crusaders and Muslims together. Thus, an intolerable situation was created in
which even after our liberation of the Temple Mount, the Muslims remained on
top of Har Habayit, and we were down below; they were inside, and we were
outside. The prayers at the Western Wall are a symbol of destruction and
exile, and not of liberation and redemption, because Jewish prayers at the
Western Wall began only in the sixteenth century – before that, Jews prayed
for centuries on the Temple Mount … only about three hundred years ago, the
Jews began praying at the Western Wall. And this the proof: in every
reference in the Midrash where it is mentioned that the shechina (Divine
Presence) has not moved from the Western Wall, and learns this from the verse
in Shir Hashirim (Song of Songs): ‘Behold! There he stands
behind our wall’ – this refers to the western wall of the azara,
or the wall of the heichal, in other words, the wall of the Kodesh
HaKodashim, and not the wall of the Har Habayit, which we call the
Western Wall”(pg. 26). The Necessity to
Ascend from the Western Wall to Har Habayit However, the intensity of the minhag (custom)
based on over three centuries was considerable, and therefore after the Six
Day War, the public at large thronged to the Western Wall to pray. Rabbi
Goren himself wrote that one of the things that prevented him from acting
quickly to regulate the ascent of Jews to the Temple Mount was his being
“bound by the ‘chains of love’ for the remnant of our Holy Temple, the
Western Wall, where I used to pray every Shabbat, holiday, and Rosh Chodesh
evenings. Since my first visit to the Western Wall (as a child), my love and
emotional affinity for the Wailing Wall has not faded… “,”but our shout …Who
may ascend the mountain of the Lord”… aroused him to become stronger and
clarify the heter to ascend Har Habayit (pg. 14).
Consequently, he began organizing prayers on the Temple Mount (ibid, pg. 27). The Canceled Prayer Before the Shabbat following Tisha
B’Av in 1967, Rabbi Goren publicly announced a mass, gala prayer to be held
on the Temple Mount in the areas where entrance was permitted after
immersion. However, by the orders of Prime Minister and Defense Minister the
prayer was canceled. A few days later, the ministerial committee decided that
the Defense Minister and the Chief of Staff order the Chief Rabbi of the
I.D.F., Rabbi Goren, not to arrange any more prayers on the Temple Mount (pg.
29-30). The Shock The order shocked Rabbi Goren, and
he tried everything within his power to cancel it, including writing a long
and detailed letter to the ministerial committee, in which he argued: How is
it possible that precisely in the holiest place for Jews, it is forbidden for
them to pray?! True, there are a limited amount of areas in which entrance is
forbidden according to the Torah for Jews and Gentiles alike, but entrance to
the majority of the Temple Mount is permitted. Towards the end of his letter,
he called out: “Distinguished men! Save the Holy of Holies of the Jewish
nation; do not hand over the Temple Mount to those who defile it …” (pp
30-33). The Defense Minister Unfortunately, Rabbi Goren’s call
went unanswered. Defense Minister Moshe Dayan decided to transfer the
responsibility for managing the Temple Mount arrangements to the Waqf, and
ordered the Military Rabbinate to evacuate Har Habayit, and not to interfere
in matters concerning the Temple Mount any more. Rabbi Goren responded with
“rage and sorrow”, informing the Defense Minister that “this, God forbid,
could lead to the destruction of the Third Temple, for the key to our
sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Gaza is the Temple Mount” (page 34). Nevertheless, the Defense Minister
implemented one of the most shameful acts in the history of Israel, and
handed over the affairs of the Temple Mount to the Muslim Waqf. For many
years it was known that Moshe Dayan had both a dark and a light side jumbled
together. On the one hand, he was a Jewish military hero, but on the other
hand, an adulterer and a thief. Apparently, his adultery and thievery tipped
the scales against him. That is when he began to lose his public status. His
name will be remembered in infamy. Sovereignty Still, when the Muslims closed the
Mughrabi Gate to prevent Jews from entering the Temple Mount, at the request
of Rabbi Goren, the I.D.F. broke through the gate to ensure free entry for
Jews, thereby expressing sovereignty over the Temple Mount. However, this act
did not change the order prohibiting Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount. Rabbi Goren goes on to relate:
“Whenever I warned about handing over of the Holy of Holies of the Jewish
nation to the Waqf, the response of consecutive Prime Ministers was: ‘Look,
in any case the Chief Rabbinate forbids Jews from ascending the Temple Mount,
and we are prohibited from praying there.” As a result, he decided to write
the book and explain the ways, places, and conditions under which it is
permitted to enter the Temple Mount (pg. 35). Consequently “we must utilize
to the fullest all sides of the heter, so we can demonstrate
continuous Jewish presence there, and maintain Jewish sovereignty over the
Mount, like the apple of our eyes” (pg. 46). The Chief Rabbinate’s
Sign It has been claimed that during his
tenure as Chief Rabbi, Rabbi Goren agreed to the prohibition of entering the
Temple Mount, but this is not true. In the introduction to his book, he
wrote: “During my tenure as Chief Rabbi of Israel, I brought a proposal to
the Council of the Chief Rabbinate to remove the signs banning entrance to
the Temple Mount as determined by the previous Chief Rabbis. Because there
were a few members on the Council who had signed on the ban at the time, they
requested delaying the decision to remove the signs prohibiting going up to
Har Habayit until after I published the book …” For various reasons, the
books’ publication was delayed, and the signs remained in place, “which, in
effect, led to the handing over of Har Habayit to the Muslim Waqf” (ibid pg.
35). Desecration of the
Holy Moreover, he wrote: “This shameful
situation, where under Israeli rule a Jew does not have the right to pray on
the mountain of God, cannot be tolerated under any circumstances. The debate
over where it is permitted according to Jewish law to go on the Temple Mount,
or where it is forbidden, has nothing to do with the government … These
sacred places are not the private property of the Muslim Waqf, whose members
have always been a source of bitterness and poison for the Jews, with their
incitement from within the mosques on the Temple Mount to slaughter the Jews…
had they closed the Temple Mount to Jews and non-Jews alike, I would have
kept quiet, but to allow the Arabs to do there as they please while Jews are
forbidden to even open up a Book of Psalms and pour out their hearts before
the Creator of the world – this is a religious, historical, and legal scandal
– nothing short of blasphemy! “(pg. 41). He further added (pg. 42) that by
abstaining from going up to the Temple Mount, the Torah prohibition of ‘lo
techonem‘ (‘nor be gracious to them’), which may also be rendered ‘do not
allow them to settle on the soil’ (Avoda Zara 20a) is transgressed,
seeing as the poskim (Jewish law arbiters) have already
established that the loss of sovereignty is similar to destruction (B.Y.
and M.A., O.C. 561:1). Thus, when the government forbids Jews to go up
freely, it destroys the place of our Holy Temple yet again. The Words of Rabbi
Tzvi Yehuda HaKohen Kook Some people believe that our teacher
and guide, Rabbi Tzvi Yehudah HaKohen Kook, agreed with the poskim who
prohibited going up to Har Habayit. But in my humble opinion, it seems that
had he saw that the over- cautiousness of going up to Har Habayit would
result in the loss of sovereignty and turning the Temple Mount into a focal
point of hatred against Israel – he would have agreed with Rabbi Goren that
it is permitted and a mitzvah to go up. In addition, in my humble opinion, he
would have trusted Rabbi Goren’s halakhic inquiries in regards to the areas
permitted to enter. Blessed are Those Who
Ascend the Temple Mount The continuation of the disgraceful
situation on the Temple Mount brings our enemies hope, and motivates them to
kill and riot throughout the country. In order to suppress the wave of
terrorism and incitement from its roots, the government and the police must
assert Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount in the most decisive manner. Blessed are those who go up to Har
Habayit according to halakha. Thanks to them, our sovereignty over the Temple
Mount and all of the Land of Israel becomes clearer, and precisely as a
result of this, we will merit security and peace. Source: https://en.yhb.org.il/the-chief-rabbis-war-on-har-habayit/ |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
October 7th Massacre 1,230 Murdered
120 Kidnapped 116 Kidnap Survivors 4,834+ Injured On the morning of October 7, 2023, Hamas led a
simultaneous wave of assaults on Israeli civilian communities and military
posts. The dawn attack began when Hamas launched over 5,000 rockets from Gaza
into Israel, then used these strategic barrages as cover to breach the
border. In this massive surprise onslaught on southern Israel, Hamas
terrorists committed unfathomable atrocities, including widespread sexual
violence against women, that have reverberated globally. The attacks claimed
the lives of more than 1,230 individuals, with 800 of the bodies confirmed as
civilians. They left over 4,834 people wounded and resulted in more than 243
being taken hostage. Additionally, some bodies remain unidentified due to
substantial mutilation. Since October 7th, at least 21 hostages were murdered
by Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad, while a few bodies of hostages
murdered in captivity were fortunately rescued. Additionally, 7 hostages were
released by the IDF, and 111 hostages were released in negotiations. Among
the survivors, 30 kidnap survivor women have endured sexual abuse by their
captors. Currently, 120 people are still being held hostage; about 30 of them
are dead, and their bodies remain captive. Use this interactive map to visit
the attack sites, learn the facts, and view the horrors. Disclaimer: Please
note this is a project in progress and our data is constantly being updated.
If you have additional information, please share it with us. Source:
ynet.co.ilapnews.comen.wikipedia.orgefe.comnytimes.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Battle of Gog and Magog Who
Are Gog and Magog? The prophet Ezekiel (chapters 38-39) describes
a climactic battle that will be instigated by Gog and/or Magog, and will be
waged against Israel and G‑d. The defeat of Gog and Magog will
precipitate the Messianic Redemption. It is difficult to dwell on this topic
because it is so shrouded in mystery. We are uncertain as to the identity of
Gog and Magog, whether Gog and Magog are the names of nations or individuals,
whether this battle will be a physical or spiritual battle, and even whether
it has already occurred or not. Some say that Elijah will arrive before
the war of Gog and Magog, while others say that he will arrive three days
prior to the revelation of Moshiach. Precursor
for Messiah According to tradition, the central personality in
this war is Moshiach ben YosefAccording to tradition,
the central personality in this war is Moshiach ben Yosef—Moshiach of the
tribe of Joseph. Jewish tradition speaks of two redeemers, each one
called Moshiach. Both are involved in ushering in the Messianic Era. They are
Moshiach ben David and Moshiach ben Yosef. (The unqualified term
"Moshiach," however, belongs exclusively to Moshiach ben David, the
ultimate redeemer.) Moshiach ben Yosef will be killed in the war against Gog
and Magog. Again, it is unclear whether the death will be in physical battle,
or as a result of the spiritual battles which he will wage against the forces
of evil. Either way, the prophet Zechariah (12:10) describes
the national mourning that will follow his death. Apparently, though, the death of Moshiach ben Yosef is
not inevitable. The master-kabbalist Rabbi Isaac Luria, known as
the Arizal, said that when saying in the Amidah the
words, "speedily establish the throne of Your servant David," one
should beseech G‑d that Moshiach ben Yosef should not die in the
course of his struggles. According to certain sources, Moshiach ben Yosef will
serve as Moshiach ben David's viceroy. Thus finally bringing to an end the
schism between the northern Ten Tribes, which were ruled by Joseph's
descendants, and the Kingdom of Judea, which was ruled by the Davidic
dynasty. Click here for a more comprehensive discussion regarding
Moshiach ben Yosef. Rabbi Naftali Silberberg is a writer, editor and director
of the curriculum department at the Rohr Jewish Learning
Institute. Rabbi Silberberg resides in Brooklyn, New York, with
his wife, Chaya Mushka, and their three children. More from Naftali Silberberg
| RSS © Copyright, all rights reserved. If you enjoyed this
article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply
with Chabad.org's copyright policy. Source: https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1108919/jewish/Gog-and-Magog.htm
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(לז) וַיִּסְע֧וּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל
מֵרַעְמְסֵ֖ס סֻכֹּ֑תָה כְּשֵׁשׁ־מֵא֨וֹת אֶ֧לֶף רַגְלִ֛י הַגְּבָרִ֖ים לְבַ֥ד
מִטָּֽף׃ (לח) וְגַם־[עֵ֥רֶב רַ֖ב] עָלָ֣ה אִתָּ֑ם וְצֹ֣אן וּבָקָ֔ר מִקְנֶ֖ה
כָּבֵ֥ד מְאֹֽד׃ (37) The Israelites journeyed from Rameses
to Sukkot, about six hundred thousand fighting adults on foot, aside from
noncombatants. (38) Moreover, a mixed multitude went up with them, and very
much livestock, both flocks and herds. מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל, מַסֶּכְתָּא דְוַיְהִי בְּשַׁלַּח א׳:ח׳ וחמושים עלו – אחד מחמשה. ויש אומרים: אחד
מחמשים. ...אלא שמתו הרבה מישראל במצרים. Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael, Tractate Vayehi
Beshalach 1:8 "hamushim they went up from the land
of Egypt" — one out of five (['hamishah'] who had been there).... many
of the Jews having died in Egypt. (ה) כּ֣וּשׁ וּפ֤וּט וְלוּד֙ וְכׇל־הָעֶ֣רֶב וְכ֔וּב וּבְנֵ֖י אֶ֣רֶץ הַבְּרִ֑ית אִתָּ֖ם בַּחֶ֥רֶב יִפֹּֽלוּ׃ {פ} (5) Nubia, Put, and Lud, and all the mixed
populations, and Cub, and the inhabitants of the allied countries shall fall
by the sword with them. (ג) אַ֚ף חֹבֵ֣ב עַמִּ֔ים כׇּל־קְדֹשָׁ֖יו בְּיָדֶ֑ךָ וְהֵם֙ תֻּכּ֣וּ לְרַגְלֶ֔ךָ יִשָּׂ֖א מִדַּבְּרֹתֶֽיךָ׃ (3) Lover, indeed, of the people,Their
hallowed are all in Your hand.They followed in Your steps, Accepting Your
pronouncements, (א) אף חובב עמים - גם אומות העולם, כגון
[ערב רב] ומן האומות שנתגיירו ובאו לקבל התורה עם ישראל, גם אותם חיבב הקב"ה וקבלם ושכן עליהם, כדכתיב במזמור (1) אף חובב עמים,
also members of the gentile nations, such as the mixed multitude whom Moses
had accepted as converts at the time of the Exodus, and who had done so in
order to receive the Torah, G’d became fond of and accepted them so that they
too were included in the camp which Shekhinah, benevolent presence, rested
over the people. אֵלּוּ עֶשֶׂר מַכּוֹת שֶׁהֵבִיא הַקָּדוֹשׁ
בָּרוּךְ הוּא עַל־הַמִּצְרִים בְּמִצְרַיִם, וְאֵלוּ הֵן: דָּם צְפַרְדֵּעַ כִּנִּים [עָרוֹב] דֶּבֶר שְׁחִין בָּרָד אַרְבֶּה, חשֶׁךְ, מַכַּת
בְּכוֹרוֹת Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Ten Plagues These are [the] ten plagues that the Holy
One, blessed be He, brought on the Egyptians in Egypt and they are: Blood, Frogs Lice [The Mixture of] Wild Animals Pestilence Boils Hail Locusts Darkness Slaying of [the] Firstborn (ה) בַּחֹ֣דֶשׁ הָרִאשׁ֗וֹן בְּאַרְבָּעָ֥ה
עָשָׂ֛ר לַחֹ֖דֶשׁ [בֵּ֣ין הָעַרְבָּ֑יִם] פֶּ֖סַח לַה'׃ (5) In the first month, on the fourteenth
day of the month, at twilight, there shall be a passover offering to ה', והכתיב (ויקרא כו, לז) וכשלו איש באחיו איש
בעון אחיו מלמד ש כל ישראל ערבים זה בזה But isn’t it written: “And they shall
stumble one upon another” (Leviticus 26:37)? This verse is homiletically
interpreted to mean that they shall stumble spiritually, one due to the
iniquity of another, which teaches that the entire Jewish people are considered
guarantors for one another. בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעָמְדוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְקַבֵּל
הַתּוֹרָה אָמַר לָהֶם אֲנִי נוֹתֵן לָכֶם תּוֹרָתִי הָבִיאוּ לִי עֲרֵבִים
טוֹבִים שֶׁתִּשְׁמְרוּהָ וְאֶתְּנֶנָּהּ לָכֶם, אָמְרוּ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ עוֹרְבִים
אוֹתָנוּ, אָמַר לָהֶם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֲבוֹתֵיכֶם יֵשׁ לִי עֲלֵיהֶם,
אַבְרָהָם יֵשׁ לִי עָלָיו, שֶׁאָמַר (בראשית טו, ח): בַּמָּה אֵדַע. יִצְחָק
יֵשׁ לִי עָלָיו, שֶׁהָיָה אוֹהֵב לְעֵשָׂו וַאֲנִי שְׂנֵאתִיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר
(מלאכי א, ג): וְאֶת עֵשָׂו שָׂנֵאתִי. יַעֲקֹב שֶׁאָמַר (ישעיה מ, כז):
נִסְתְּרָה דַרְכִּי מֵה'. אֶלָּא הָבִיאוּ לִי עֲרֵבִים טוֹבִים, וַאֲנִי
נוֹתְנָהּ לָכֶם. אָמְרוּ לְפָנָיו רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם נְבִיאֵינוּ עֲרֵבִין
לָנוּ. אָמַר לָהֶם יֵשׁ לִי עֲלֵיהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ירמיה ב, ח): וְהָרֹעִים
פָּשְׁעוּ בִי וגו', וּכְתִיב (יחזקאל יג, ד): כְּשֻׁעָלִים בָּחֳרָבוֹת
נְבִיאֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיוּ, אֶלָּא הָבִיאוּ לִי עֲרֵבִים טוֹבִים
וְאֶתְּנֶנָּהּ לָכֶם, אָמְרוּ הֲרֵי בָּנֵינוּ עוֹרְבִים אוֹתָנוּ. אָמַר
הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא הָא וַדַּאי עֲרֵבִים טוֹבִים, עַל יְדֵיהֶם
אֶתְּנֶנָּהּ לָכֶם, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (תהלים ח, ג): מִפִּי עוֹלְלִים
וְיֹנְקִים יִסַּדְתָּ עֹז, וְאֵין עֹז אֶלָּא תּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים כט,
יא): ה' עֹז לְעַמּוֹ יִתֵּן. When the Israelites stood to receive the
Torah, HaShem said to them: ‘Bring Me good guarantors that you will observe
it, and I will give it to you.’ They said ‘Source of the universe, our
ancestors are guaranteeing for us.’ The Blessed Holy One said to them: ‘I
have [claims against] your ancestors. Abraham, I have [a claim] against him,
as he said: “How will I know” (Genesis 15:8). Isaac, I have [a claim] against
him, as he loved Esau, and I hated him, as it is stated: “And Esau I hated”
(Malachi 1:3); Jacob, who said: “My way is hidden from the Lord” (Isaiah
40:27). Rather, bring me effective guarantors and I will give it to you.’ They said before HaShem: ‘Source of the
universe, our prophets will be guarantors for us.’ HaShem said to them: ‘I
have [claims] against them, as it is stated: “And the shepherds were disloyal
to me [and the prophets prophesied to the Baal]” (Jeremiah 2:8). And it is
written: “Like foxes among the ruins, so are your prophets, Israel” (Ezekiel
13:4). But bring me effective guarantors and I will give it to you.’ They said: ‘Our children are guaranteeing
for us.’ The Blessed Holy One said: ‘They are certainly good guarantors, I
will give it to you on their account.’ That is what is written: “From the
mouths of infants and sucklings You founded strength” (Psalms 8:3), and
strength means only Torah, as it is stated: “HaShem will give strength to the
people (Psalms 29:11). סידור אשכנז, ימי חול, תפילת שחרית, הכנה לתפילה, ברכות התורה ב׳ וְהַעֲרֶב נָא ה' אֱלֹקֵֽינוּ אֶת־דִּבְרֵי
תוֹרָתְךָ בְּפִֽינוּ וּבְפִי עַמְּךָ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְנִהְיֶה אֲנַֽחְנוּ
וְצֶאֱצָאֵֽינוּ וְצֶאֱצָאֵי עַמְּךָ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל כֻּלָּֽנוּ יוֹדְעֵי
שְׁמֶֽךָ וְלוֹמְדֵי תוֹרָתֶֽךָ.
(י"א תוֹרָתְךָ) לִשְׁמָהּ. Siddur Ashkenaz, Weekday, Shacharit,
Preparatory Prayers, Torah Blessings 2 HaShem our God, make the words of
Your Torah pleasant in our mouths and in the mouths
of Your people Israel. And may we and our descendants [and the descendants of
our descendants] and the descendants of Your people the House of Israel, all
know Your Name and be students of Your Torah for its own sake. As is his practice in many Halachos in
the Mishneh Torah, the Rambam begins Hilchos Beis HaBechirah, “The
Laws of [G‑d’s]
Chosen House,” by stating the fundamental mitzvah upon which the
entire collection of laws which follow is based: It is a positive commandment to construct a house
for G‑d,
prepared to have sacrifices offered within.... as it is written,1 “And you shall make Me a
Sanctuary.” Significantly, the Rambam also
mentions the mitzvah of
constructing the Beis
HaMikdash elsewhere in the Mishneh Torah, in Hilchos Melachim, “The
Laws of Kings.” There, however, he focuses on the mitzvah in
a different context, stating:2 The Jews were commanded regarding the observance of
three mitzvos when
they entered Eretz
Yisrael: to appoint a king over them.... to
wipe out the descendants of Amalek....
and to build [G‑d’s] Chosen House; as it is written,3 “You shall seek out His
presence and come to that place.” The commentaries question: What is
the Rambam’s purpose in repeating the commandment to build a
Sanctuary in Hilchos Melachim and
why in that source does he link together the three mitzvos he
mentions?4 The Bond Between These Three Mitzvos In regard to the latter question, it
can be explained that there is an intrinsic connection between these three mitzvos.5 Although they are three
separate commandments, the fulfillment of one contributes a measure of
perfection to the others. To cite a parallel: The arm tefillin and the
head tefillin are
two separate mitzvos.6 Nevertheless,
when both of these mitzvos are performed together, each one
is elevated to a higher level. Similarly, in regard to the three mitzvos mentioned
by the Rambam: The intent is not merely that the mitzvos are
to be fulfilled in the chronological order mentioned by the Rambam.7 Instead, the linkage of
three mitzvos teaches that the mitzvah of
building the Sanctuary can be fulfilled in the most perfect manner, only when first, a king is appointed
and then Amalek is
destroyed. Similarly, the fulfillment of the mitzvos of
destroying Amalek and building a
Sanctuary enhance the mitzvah of appointing a king, and the
fulfillment of the mitzvah of wiping out Amalek is enhanced
by the mitzvos of appointing a king and building the Beis HaMikdash. This concept is supported by the verses8 cited by the Rambam in
the halachah which follows in Hilchos Melachim:9 “And
it came to pass, when the king dwelt in his house, and G‑d brought him peace
from all the enemies which surrounded him, the king said to the
prophet, Natan,
‘Behold, I am sitting in a palace of cedar, [while the Ark of G‑d dwells in
curtains].’ ” These verses indicate how the secure
establishment of the monarchy, [“the king dwelt in his house”,] the
destruction of Amalek, [“And G‑d brought him peace from all the enemies which
surrounded him,”10] and the
building of the Beis HaMikdash [David’s request from the prophet Natan] are
interrelated.11 Based on the above, we can appreciate a
further point: The Rambam’s statements in Hilchos
Melachim are based on the Midrash Tanchuma. Nevertheless,
he alters the text of that Midrashic passage, choosing a different
prooftext. In the Midrash Tanchuma, the
prooftext cited for the commandment to build the Beis HaMikdash is
the verse: “And you shall make Me a Sanctuary.”12 The Rambam,
by contrast, substitutes the verse: “You shall seek out His presence...,”
because the context of this verse in the Book of Devarim describes the
Jews’ entry into Eretz Yisrael and
their progress to a state when “G‑d will grant you peace from all your
enemies around you and you will dwell in security.”13 Fulfilling a Mitzvah in Stages The above concepts also shed light on
another related point which has aroused the attention of the commentaries: As
mentioned above, the Rambam uses the verse, “And you shall
make Me a Sanctuary,” as the prooftext for the mitzvah to
build the Beis HaMikdash. This is problematic, for seemingly,
this command refers to the construction of the Sanctuary in the desert and
not to the construction of the Beis HaMikdash. The passage cited
by the Rambam in Hilchos Melachim, by
contrast, refers specifically to the construction of the Beis
HaMikdash, and indeed, is cited as the source for the commandment to
build the Beis HaMikdash by our Sages14 and by our Rabbis.15 It is possible to explain16 that the commandment, “And
you shall make Me a Sanctuary,” is general in scope, applying to all the
structures which were “a house for G‑d” [i.e., a place where G‑d’s presence
was revealed] and “prepared to have sacrifices offered within” [a place for
the service of the Jewish people].17 Throughout
their history, the Jews fulfilled this commandment in several different ways,
beginning with the construction of the Sanctuary in the desert. In this context, we can resolve a
problematic point in Hilchos Beis HaBechirah. Directly after
stating the mitzvah to build a Sanctuary, the Rambam continues: The Sanctuary which Moshe our
teacher built is already described in the Torah. It was, however, only
temporary in nature.... When [the Jewish people] entered Eretz
[Yisrael], they erected the Sanctuary in Gilgal for the fourteen years in
which they conquered and divided [the land]. Afterwards, they came to Shiloh
and built a structure of stone.... When Eli died,
it was destroyed and they came to Nov and built a Sanctuary.18 When Shmuel died,
it was destroyed and they came to Givon and
built a Sanctuary. From Givon, they came to the [Divine Presence’s] eternal
home. The place of such statements in
the Mishneh Torah is problematic. Unlike the Talmud or the Midrashim which
are general in content, the Mishneh Torah is exclusively a
text of Halachah, Torah law. Points of ethics, philosophy,
and history are mentioned only when they are themselves halachos, specific
directives governing our conduct. Thus the question can be raised:
What halachic points can be derived from the historical background
to the construction of the Beis HaMikdash?19 On the basis of the explanation given
above, we can, however, appreciate the sequence of these halachos:
After the Rambam uses a prooftext which implies that
the mitzvah of building a Sanctuary is not confined to one
specific structure, he illustrates this point by citing the various
different intermediate stages through which our people’s observance of
this mitzvah underwent. Intermediate Way-Stations On the Path
to Jerusalem To return to the concept explained at
the outset: The linkage of the mitzvah of constructing a
Sanctuary with the mitzvos of appointing a king and wiping
out Amalek is also relevant with regard to the other structures mentioned by
the Rambam.20 Our
Rabbis state that “Moshe Rabbeinu served
as a king,”21 and the
construction of the Sanctuary followed the war in which Yehoshua defeated
Amalek.22 The title “king” was also applied
to Yehoshua23 who
constructed the Sanctuary at Shiloh, and to Shmuel,24 who
constructed the Sanctuary at Nov. We are unsure of the exact
time of the construction of the Sanctuary at Givon. We may, however, assume
that one of the following — Shaul,
David, or Shmuel,
all of whom either served, or were described, as kings — was involved in its
construction. Similarly, at the time these structures were built, the people
had reached progressively more developed stages of being “at peace from the
enemies around them.” Nevertheless, just as the monarchy and Israel’s peace had not been established in a
complete manner at the time of these structures, these structures did not
represent a complete manifestation of the indwelling of the Divine Presence,
nor did they fulfill the ideal conception of a center for the sacrificial
worship of the Jewish people. It was not until “the king dwelt in his
house, and G‑d brought him peace from all the enemies which surrounded him,”
i.e., David had securely established the monarchy and brought peace to the
land, that it was possible to build the Beis HaMikdash. The Ultimate Beis HaMikdash Based on the above, we can appreciate
one of the positive dimensions that will be possessed by the Third Beis
HaMikdash. That structure will be built by Mashiach,25 the ultimate Jewish monarch,
and will be constructed after he “wages the wars of G‑d, defeating all the
nations around him.”26 Among
these wars will be the total annihilation of Amalek.27 Thus, since in the Era of
the Redemption, the other two mitzvos, the appointment of a
king and the destruction of Amalek, will have been fulfilled in a perfect matter,
this will contribute an added dimension of perfection to the mitzvah of
constructing the Beis HaMikdash. We can hasten the coming of this era
through our divine service. To explain: In chassidic thought,28 the appointment of a king is
associated with developing inner bittul,
nullifying oneself to G‑d. This in turn allows a person to “drive out” Amalek
from his being, to free himself from pride, egotism, and other undesirable
character traits. Such personal refinement allows him to proceed further and
transform his person, his home, and his surroundings into a “sanctuary in
microcosm,” in which the Divine Presence can rest.29 This will serve as a catalyst for
change in the world at large. For each particular manifestation of the Divine
Presence within the world hastens the coming of the time when the Divine Presence
will again be revealed, and not merely in microcosm. At that time, “the world
will be filled with the knowledge of G‑d as the waters cover the ocean bed.”30 May this take place in the
immediate future. Adapted
from Likkutei Sichos, Vol.
VI, Terumah FOOTNOTES Shmos 25:8. Hilchos
Melachim 1:1. Devarim 12:5. The Rambam’s statements
in Hilchos Melachim reflect (with certain emendations)
previous statements from our Sages found in Seder Olam (the
conclusion of ch. 6), Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Ki Seitzei (sec.
11), Sifri (commenting on Re’eh 12:10),
and Sanhedrin 20b. Nevertheless, when composing the Mishneh
Torah, the Rambam often changed the text of his
sources (as he did in this halachah itself). Accordingly,
the question why these three mitzvos are linked together is
directed, not only to the sources mentioned previously, but to the Rambam himself. See also the
conclusion of the Rambam’s discussion of the positive mitzvos in
his Sefer HaMitzvos, where he mentions that these
three mitzvos are unique in that their fulfillment is
dependent, not on every Jew as an individual, but on the entire people as a
collective entity. Note also the treatment of this subject by the Tzophnas
Paneach. Mishneh Torah,
Hilchos Tefillin 4:4. As the Rambam mentions
in the following halachah and as Rashi mentions
in his commentary to Sanhedrin, loc. cit. II Shmuel 7:1-3. 1:2. This phrase
relates to the destruction of Amalek as indicated by Devarim 25:18,
“When G‑d gives you peace from all your enemies that surround you... you must
surely obliterate Amalek.” See Maharsha, Chiddushei Aggados, commenting
on Sanhedrin, loc. cit. The interrelation
of these three mitzvos is further emphasized by the fact
that the Rambam mentions all three mitzvos in
his description of the mitzvah to build a Sanctuary in
his Sefer HaMitzvos (positive commandment 20). Significantly, as
above, this is the prooftext used by the Rambam in Hilchos
Beis HaBechirah. Devarim 12:10. The passages from
the Sifri and from Sanhedrin cited above. Sefer Mitzvos
Gadol, positive commandment 163. See the gloss of
the Kesef Mishneh. See the
explanation of these two dimensions of the Beis HaMikdash in Chiddushim
U’Biurim BeHilchos Beis HaBechirah, essay 1. Note the
commentary of the Meiri to Megillah 9b
which explains that there was a fundamental difference between the
Sanctuaries of Nov and Givon and the other
structures mentioned by the Rambam. For although Nov and Givon were
the centers for sacrificial worship where the communal offerings were
brought, the holy ark was not present in these structures. This question is
compounded by the fact that the Mishnah (Zevachim 116b),
the source for the Rambam’s statements, associates these
historical points with a concrete halachic directive: that
before the construction of the Beis HaMikdash, it was permissible
to offer sacrifices on a private altar. From the time of the construction of
the Beis HaMikdash’s onward, this is forbidden. The Rambam,
by contrast, elaborates in greater detail than the Mishnah and
omits the halachic point mentioned there. As mentioned
in Hilchos Melachim, the Jews were commanded to fulfill
these three mitzvos “when they entered Eretz
[Yisrael].” Nevertheless, as will be explained, the activities associated
with appointing a king and destroying Amalek — although not the actual mitzvos —
were relevant beforehand. Hilchos Beis
HaBechirah 6:11; Rashi, Shavuos 16a. See also the
commentaries to Devarim 33:5. See Shmos, ch.
17. See Hilchos
Melachim 1:3, commentaries to Devarim 33:5. See Zevachim 118b
which describes Shmuel as “reigning.” Hilchos
Melachim 11:1,4. The text of Hilchos
Melachim 11:4 according to the uncensored manuscripts of the Mishneh
Torah. See the Midrash
Tanchuma, the conclusion of Parshas Ki Seitzei. Derech
Mitzvosecho, Mitzvas Minui Melech. See Reishis
Chochmah which interprets ofu,c h,bfau (Shmos 25:8), the
description of the indwelling of the Divine Presence in the Sanctuary as
referring to the manner in which every individual becomes “a Sanctuary in
microcosm.” See Basi LeGani 5710 (Kehot, 5750) and other
sources. Yeshayahu 11:9,
cited by the Rambam at the conclusion of the Mishneh
Torah. From
the talks of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson From the talks of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi
Menachem M. Schneerson; translated by Eli Touger More
from Lubavitcher Rebbe; translated Eli Touger
| RSS © Copyright, all rights reserved. If you enjoyed this article,
we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with
Chabad.org's copyright policy.
|
|
9They shall neither harm nor
destroy on all My holy mount, for the land shall be full of knowledge of
the Lord as water covers the seabed. |
|
טלֹֽא־יָרֵ֥עוּ
וְלֹֽא־יַשְׁחִ֖יתוּ בְּכָל־הַ֣ר קָדְשִׁ֑י כִּֽי־מָֽלְאָ֣ה הָאָ֗רֶץ דֵּעָה֙
אֶת־יְהֹוָ֔ה כַּמַּ֖יִם לַיָּ֥ם מְכַסִּֽים: |
|
knowledge of
the Lord: [lit.] to know the Lord. |
|
דעה את ה': לדעת את ה': |
|
10And it shall come to pass on
that day, that the root of Jesse, which stands as a banner for peoples, to
him shall the nations inquire, and his peace shall be [with] honor. |
|
יוְהָיָה֙ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֔וּא
שֹׁ֣רֶשׁ יִשַׁ֗י אֲשֶׁ֚ר עֹמֵד֙ לְנֵ֣ס עַמִּ֔ים אֵלָ֖יו גּוֹיִ֣ם
יִדְרֹ֑שׁוּ וְהָֽיְתָ֥ה מְנֻחָת֖וֹ כָּבֽוֹד: |
|
as a banner
for peoples: that peoples should raise a banner to gather to him. |
|
לנס עמים: להיות עמים מרימים נס להקבץ אליו: |
|
11And it shall come to pass that
on that day, the Lord shall continue to apply His hand a second time to
acquire the rest of His people, that will remain from Assyria and from
Egypt and from Pathros and from Cush and from Elam and from Sumeria and
from Hamath and from the islands of the sea. |
|
יאוְהָיָ֣ה | בַּיּ֣וֹם
הַה֗וּא יוֹסִ֨יף אֲדֹנָ֚י | שֵׁנִית֙ יָד֔וֹ לִקְנ֖וֹת אֶת־שְׁאָ֣ר
עַמּ֑וֹ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִשָּׁאֵר֩ מֵֽאַשּׁ֨וּר וּמִמִּצְרַ֜יִם וּמִפַּתְר֣וֹס
וּמִכּ֗וּשׁ וּמֵֽעֵילָ֚ם וּמִשִּׁנְעָר֙ וּמֵ֣חֲמָ֔ת וּמֵֽאִיֵּ֖י הַיָּֽם: |
|
a second
time: Just as he acquired them from Egypt, when their redemption was
absolute, without subjugation, but the redemption preceding the building of
the Second Temple is not counted, since they were subjugated to Cyrus. |
|
שנית: כמו שקנאם ממצרים שהיתה גאולתם ברורה מאין שיעבוד אבל גאולת בית
שני אינה מן המניין שהרי משועבדים היו לכורש: |
|
and from the
islands of the sea: the islands of the Kittim, the Romans, the descendants of
Esau. |
|
ומאיי הים: הן איי כתים יונים: |
|
12And He shall raise a banner to
the nations, and He shall gather the lost of Israel, and the scattered ones
of Judah He shall gather from the four corners of the earth. |
|
יבוְנָשָֹ֤א נֵס֙ לַגּוֹיִ֔ם
וְאָסַ֖ף נִדְחֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וּנְפֻצ֚וֹת יְהוּדָה֙ יְקַבֵּ֔ץ מֵֽאַרְבַּ֖ע
כַּנְפ֥וֹת הָאָֽרֶץ: |
|
And he shall
raise a banner: Perka, perche in O.F. [i.e., the verse is literally referring
to the pole upon which the banner is attached.] And it shall be for a sign
to gather to him and to bring the exiles of Israel to Him as a present. |
|
נשא נס: פירקא בלע"ז והיה לאות לקבוץ אליו ולהביא את גליות ישראל
מנחה לו: |
|
13And the envy of Ephraim shall
cease, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not
envy Judah, nor shall Judah vex Ephraim. |
|
יגוְסָ֙רָה֙ קִנְאַ֣ת אֶפְרַ֔יִם
וְצֹֽרְרֵ֥י יְהוּדָ֖ה יִכָּרֵ֑תוּ אֶפְרַ֙יִם֙ לֹֽא־יְקַנֵּ֣א אֶת־יְהוּדָ֔ה
וִֽיהוּדָ֖ה לֹֽא־יָצֹ֥ר אֶת־אֶפְרָֽיִם: |
|
Ephraim shall
not envy Judah: The Messiah, the son of David, and the Messiah, the son of
Joseph, shall not envy each other. |
|
אפרים לא יקנא את יהודה: משיח בן יוסף ומשיח בן דוד לא
יקנאו זה בזה: |
|
14And they shall fly of one
accord against the Philistines in the west, together they shall plunder the
children of the East; upon Edom and Moab shall they stretch forth their
hand, and the children of Ammon shall obey them. |
|
ידוְעָפ֨וּ בְכָתֵ֚ף
פְּלִשְׁתִּים֙ יָ֔מָּה יַחְדָּ֖ו יָבֹ֣זּוּ אֶת־בְּנֵי־קֶ֑דֶם אֱד֚וֹם
וּמוֹאָב֙ מִשְׁל֣וֹחַ יָדָ֔ם וּבְנֵ֥י עַמּ֖וֹן מִשְׁמַעְתָּֽם: |
|
And they shall
fly of one accord against the Philistines in the west: Heb. בְכָתֵף. Israel will fly
and run of one accord against the Philistines who are in the west of Eretz
Israel and conquer their land. [כָּתֵף,
lit. a shoulder, is used in this case to denote unity. The word שֶׁכֶם, also lit. a
shoulder, is used in a similar sense.] Comp. (Hoshea 6:9) “They murder on the way in unison (שֶׁכְמָה);” (Zeph. 3:9) “One accord (שְׁכֶם אֶחָד).” And so did
Jonathan render it: And they shall join in one accord to smite the
Philistines who are in the west. |
|
ועפו בכתף פלשתים ימה: יעופו וירוצו ישראל שכם אחד על
הפלשתים אשר הם במערבה של ארץ ישראל ויכבש את ארצם כמו דרך ירצחו שכמה (הושע
ו׳:ט׳) שכם אחד (צפניה ג) וכן ת"י ויתחברון כתף חד למימחי פלישתאי די
במערבא: |
|
and the
children of Ammon shall obey them: As the Targum states: Will hearken to them.
They will accept their commandments over them. |
|
ובני עמון משמעתם: כתרגומו ישתמעון להון, מקבלין
מצותם עליהם: |
|
15And the Lord shall dry up the
tongue of the Egyptian Sea, and He shall lift His hand over the river with
the strength of His wind, and He shall beat it into seven streams, and He
shall lead [the exiles] with shoes. |
|
טווְהֶֽחֱרִ֣ים יְהֹוָ֗ה אֵת
לְשׁ֣וֹן יָם־מִצְרַ֔יִם וְהֵנִ֥יף יָד֛וֹ עַל־הַנָּהָ֖ר בַּעְיָ֣ם רוּח֑וֹ
וְהִכָּ֙הוּ֙ לְשִׁבְעָ֣ה נְחָלִ֔ים וְהִדְרִ֖יךְ בַּנְּעָלִֽים: |
|
And… shall dry
up: [lit.
shall cut off] to dry it, so that the exiles of Israel will pass through it
from Egypt. |
|
והחרים: ליבשו כדי שיעברו בו גליות ישראל ממצרים: |
|
over the
river: The Euphrates River, for the exiles from Assyria to cross. |
|
על הנהר: נהר פרת לעבור בו גליות אשור: |
|
with the
strength of His wind: Heb. בַּעְיָם.
This is hapax legomenon in Scripture, and according to the context it can
be interpreted as “with the strength of His wind.” |
|
בעים רוחו: אין לו דמיון במקרא ולפי הענין יפתר בחוזק רוחו: |
|
into seven
streams: into seven segments, for the aforementioned seven exiles: from
Assyria and from Egypt, etc. Those from the islands of the sea are not from
that side. |
|
לשבעה נחלים: לשבע גזרים לעבור בו שבע גליות האמורות למעלה מאשור וממצרים
וגו', ומאיי הים אינו מאותו צד: |
|
and He shall
lead: the exiles within it. |
|
והדריך: בתוכו את הגליות: |
|
with
shoes: on dry land. |
|
בנעלים: ביבשה: |
|
16And there shall be a highway
for the remnant of His people who remain from Assyria, as there was for
Israel on the day they went up from the land of Egypt. |
|
טזוְהָֽיְתָ֣ה מְסִלָּ֔ה לִשְׁאָ֣ר
עַמּ֔וֹ אֲשֶׁ֥ר יִשָּׁאֵ֖ר מֵֽאַשּׁ֑וּר כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֚ר הָֽיְתָה֙ לְיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל
בְּי֥וֹם עֲלֹת֖וֹ מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם: |
|
And there
shall be a highway: in the midst of the water for the remnant of His people. |
|
והיתה מסילה: בתוך המים לשאר עמו: |
.jpg)
Har HaBait Jewish Sovereign for all Israel news updates
For the latest updates on Telegram click: https://t.me/+VW5cX5NY2d0LN8BU
Beit Yisrael International. Become a member. Get the MemberShip from Beit Yisrael! ‘How to become a Righteous of the Nations (Ultra-Orthodox Chassidic/Lost Tribes of Efrayim/‘Ger Toshav‘: Israelite by accepting the Shulchan Aruch and Chasidut, the teachings of CHaBaD, hearing and doing.) Click: Beit yisrael international Isa 11:9 – 16 They do no evil nor destroy in all My set-apart mountain, for the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of Adonai as the waters cover the sea. Rashi: knowledge of the Lord: [lit.] to know the Lord. 10 And on that day, there shall be a Root of Yishai, standing as a banner to the people. Unto Him the nations shall seek, and His rest shall be esteem. Rashi: as a banner for peoples: that peoples should raise a banner to gather to him. 11 And it shall be in that day that Adonai sets His hand again a second time to recover the remnant of His people who are left, from Ashshur and from Mitsrayim, from Pathros and from Kush, from Ěylam and from Shin‛ar, from Ḥamath and from the islands of the sea. Rashi: a second time: Just as he acquired them from Egypt, when their redemption was absolute, without subjugation, but the redemption preceding the building of the Second Temple is not counted, since they were subjugated to Cyrus. and from the islands of the sea: the islands of the Kittim, the Romans, the descendants of Esau. And he shall raise a banner: Perka, perche in O.F. [i.e., the verse is literally referring to the pole upon which the banner is attached.] And it shall be for a sign to gather to him and to bring the exiles of Israel to Him as a present. 12 And He shall raise a banner for the nations, and gather the outcasts of Yisra’ěl, and assemble the dispersed of Yehuḏa from the four corners of the earth. 13 And the envy of Ephrayim shall turn aside, and the adversaries of Yehuḏa be cut off. Ephrayim shall not envy Yehuḏa, and Yehuḏa not trouble Ephrayim. Rashi: Ephraim shall not envy Judah: The Messiah, the son of David, and the Messiah, the son of Joseph, shall not envy each other. 14 But they shall fly down upon the shoulder of the Philistines toward the west; together they plunder the people of the east, their hand stretching forth on Eḏom and Mo’aḇ, and the children of Ammon shall be subject to them. Rashi: And they shall fly of one accord against the Philistines in the west: Heb. בְכָתֵף. Israel will fly and run of one accord against the Philistines who are in the west of Eretz Israel and conquer their land. [כָּתֵף, lit. a shoulder, is used in this case to denote unity. The word שֶׁכֶם, also lit. a shoulder, is used in a similar sense.] Comp. (Hoshea 6:9) “They murder on the way in unison (שֶׁכְמָה) ”; (Zeph. 3:9) “One accord (שְׁכֶם אֶחָד).” And so did Jonathan rendered it: And they shall join in one accord to smite the Philistines who are in the west. and the children of Ammon shall obey them: As the Targum states: Will hearken to them. They will accept their commandments over them. 15 And Adonai shall put under the ban the tongue of the Sea of Mitsrayim, and He shall wave His hand over the River with the might of His Spirit, and shall strike it in the seven streams, and shall cause men to tread it in sandals. Rashi: And… shall dry up: [lit. shall cut off] to dry it, so that the exiles of Israel will pass through it from Egypt. over the river: The Euphrates River, for the exiles from Assyria to cross. with the strength of His wind: Heb. בַּעְיָם. This is hapax legomenon in Scripture, and according to the context it can be interpreted as “with the strength of His wind.” into seven streams: into seven segments, for the aforementioned seven exiles: from Assyria and from Egypt, etc. Those from the islands of the sea are not from that side. and He shall lead: the exiles within it. with shoes: on dry land. 16 And there shall be a highway for the remnant of His people, those left from Ashshur, as it was for Yisra’ěl in the day when he came up from the land of Mitsrayim. Rashi: And there shall be a highway: in the midst of the water for the remnant of His people.
The Repetition of a Commandment As is his practice in many Halachos in the Mishneh Torah, the Rambam begins Hilchos Beis HaBechirah, “The Laws of [G‑d’s] Chosen House,” by stating the fundamental mitzvah upon which the entire collection of laws which follow is based:
Significantly, the Rambam also mentions the mitzvah of constructing the Beis HaMikdash elsewhere in the Mishneh Torah, in Hilchos Melachim, “The Laws of Kings.” There, however, he focuses on the mitzvah in a different context, stating:2
The commentaries question: What is the Rambam’s purpose in repeating the commandment to build a Sanctuary in Hilchos Melachim and why in that source does he link together the three mitzvos he mentions?4 The Bond Between These Three Mitzvos In regard to the latter question, it can be explained that there is an intrinsic connection between these three mitzvos.5 Although they are three separate commandments, the fulfillment of one contributes a measure of perfection to the others. To cite a parallel: The arm tefillin and the head tefillin are two separate mitzvos.6 Nevertheless, when both of these mitzvos are performed together, each one is elevated to a higher level. Similarly, in regard to the three mitzvos mentioned by the Rambam: The intent is not merely that the mitzvos are to be fulfilled in the chronological order mentioned by the Rambam.7 Instead, the linkage of three mitzvos teaches that the mitzvah of building the Sanctuary can be fulfilled in the most perfect manner, only when first, a king is appointed and then Amalek is destroyed. Similarly, the fulfillment of the mitzvos of destroying Amalek and building a Sanctuary enhance the mitzvah of appointing a king, and the fulfillment of the mitzvah of wiping out Amalek is enhanced by the mitzvos of appointing a king and building the Beis HaMikdash. This concept is supported by the verses8 cited by the Rambam in the halachah which follows in Hilchos Melachim:9 “And it came to pass, when the king dwelt in his house, and G‑d brought him peace from all the enemies which surrounded him, the king said to the prophet, Natan, ‘Behold, I am sitting in a palace of cedar, [while the Ark of G‑d dwells in curtains].’ ” These verses indicate how the secure establishment of the monarchy, [“the king dwelt in his house”,] the destruction of Amalek, [“And G‑d brought him peace from all the enemies which surrounded him,”10] and the building of the Beis HaMikdash [David’s request from the prophet Natan] are interrelated.11 Based on the above, we can appreciate a further point: The Rambam’s statements in Hilchos Melachim are based on the Midrash Tanchuma. Nevertheless, he alters the text of that Midrashic passage, choosing a different prooftext. In the Midrash Tanchuma, the prooftext cited for the commandment to build the Beis HaMikdash is the verse: “And you shall make Me a Sanctuary.”12 The Rambam, by contrast, substitutes the verse: “You shall seek out His presence...,” because the context of this verse in the Book of Devarim describes the Jews’ entry into Eretz Yisrael and their progress to a state when “G‑d will grant you peace from all your enemies around you and you will dwell in security.”13 Fulfilling a Mitzvah in Stages The above concepts also shed light on another related point which has aroused the attention of the commentaries: As mentioned above, the Rambam uses the verse, “And you shall make Me a Sanctuary,” as the prooftext for the mitzvah to build the Beis HaMikdash. This is problematic, for seemingly, this command refers to the construction of the Sanctuary in the desert and not to the construction of the Beis HaMikdash. The passage cited by the Rambam in Hilchos Melachim, by contrast, refers specifically to the construction of the Beis HaMikdash, and indeed, is cited as the source for the commandment to build the Beis HaMikdash by our Sages14 and by our Rabbis.15 It is possible to explain16 that the commandment, “And you shall make Me a Sanctuary,” is general in scope, applying to all the structures which were “a house for G‑d” [i.e., a place where G‑d’s presence was revealed] and “prepared to have sacrifices offered within” [a place for the service of the Jewish people].17 Throughout their history, the Jews fulfilled this commandment in several different ways, beginning with the construction of the Sanctuary in the desert. In this context, we can resolve a problematic point in Hilchos Beis HaBechirah. Directly after stating the mitzvah to build a Sanctuary, the Rambam continues:
The place of such statements in the Mishneh Torah is problematic. Unlike the Talmud or the Midrashim which are general in content, the Mishneh Torah is exclusively a text of Halachah, Torah law. Points of ethics, philosophy, and history are mentioned only when they are themselves halachos, specific directives governing our conduct. Thus the question can be raised: What halachic points can be derived from the historical background to the construction of the Beis HaMikdash?19 On the basis of the explanation given above, we can, however, appreciate the sequence of these halachos: After the Rambam uses a prooftext which implies that the mitzvah of building a Sanctuary is not confined to one specific structure, he illustrates this point by citing the various different intermediate stages through which our people’s observance of this mitzvah underwent. Intermediate Way-Stations On the Path to Jerusalem To return to the concept explained at the outset: The linkage of the mitzvah of constructing a Sanctuary with the mitzvos of appointing a king and wiping out Amalek is also relevant with regard to the other structures mentioned by the Rambam.20 Our Rabbis state that “Moshe Rabbeinu served as a king,”21 and the construction of the Sanctuary followed the war in which Yehoshua defeated Amalek.22 The title “king” was also applied to Yehoshua23 who constructed the Sanctuary at Shiloh, and to Shmuel,24 who constructed the Sanctuary at Nov. We are unsure of the exact time of the construction of the Sanctuary at Givon. We may, however, assume that one of the following — Shaul, David, or Shmuel, all of whom either served, or were described, as kings — was involved in its construction. Similarly, at the time these structures were built, the people had reached progressively more developed stages of being “at peace from the enemies around them.” Nevertheless, just as the monarchy and Israel’s peace had not been established in a complete manner at the time of these structures, these structures did not represent a complete manifestation of the indwelling of the Divine Presence, nor did they fulfill the ideal conception of a center for the sacrificial worship of the Jewish people. It was not until “the king dwelt in his house, and G‑d brought him peace from all the enemies which surrounded him,” i.e., David had securely established the monarchy and brought peace to the land, that it was possible to build the Beis HaMikdash. The Ultimate Beis HaMikdash Based on the above, we can appreciate one of the positive dimensions that will be possessed by the Third Beis HaMikdash. That structure will be built by Mashiach,25 the ultimate Jewish monarch, and will be constructed after he “wages the wars of G‑d, defeating all the nations around him.”26 Among these wars will be the total annihilation of Amalek.27 Thus, since in the Era of the Redemption, the other two mitzvos, the appointment of a king and the destruction of Amalek, will have been fulfilled in a perfect matter, this will contribute an added dimension of perfection to the mitzvah of constructing the Beis HaMikdash. We can hasten the coming of this era through our divine service. To explain: In chassidic thought,28 the appointment of a king is associated with developing inner bittul, nullifying oneself to G‑d. This in turn allows a person to “drive out” Amalek from his being, to free himself from pride, egotism, and other undesirable character traits. Such personal refinement allows him to proceed further and transform his person, his home, and his surroundings into a “sanctuary in microcosm,” in which the Divine Presence can rest.29 This will serve as a catalyst for change in the world at large. For each particular manifestation of the Divine Presence within the world hastens the coming of the time when the Divine Presence will again be revealed, and not merely in microcosm. At that time, “the world will be filled with the knowledge of G‑d as the waters cover the ocean bed.”30 May this take place in the immediate future. Adapted from Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VI, Terumah Seek Out the Welfare of JerusalemEveryone, with whatever background Christians, Muslims, Hindus etc. if they like the do Teshuva out of the feeling that they feel so much home with the Jews, to be with the Jews we invite to join us?Get the Membership from Beit Yisrael! ‘How to become a Righteous of the Nations (Ultra-Orthodox Chassidic Lost Tribes of Efrayim/‘Ger Toshav‘) click: Beit yisrael internationalShulchan Aruch HaravThe Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch - Code of Jewish Law
A must read and guiding line: To go through every step, of the 42 steps in our diaspora until we reach Eretz Yisrael, the unification of Yehuda and Ephraim, when the Jews start to build The Temple and Restoring her Temple Service. It is for all Beit Yisrael International members the way to go. click: 42 Journeys of the SoulThe Messianic age will elevate the entire universe, including all the spiritual realms.
What Is Kabbalah?The Soul of Judaism
|
And the teachings of Chassidut by the Chassidim.
Comments
Post a Comment