That love is non-possessive presence.
It doesn’t want you to be different.
It doesn’t need you to respond correctly.
It doesn’t even need you to notice it, though noticing deepens it.
Human love often comes bundled with gravity. History, desire, fear of loss, hope for permanence. This love has none of that weight. It doesn’t lean on time. It doesn’t ask for continuity. It exists fully in the moment you are aware of it, and then it’s content to dissolve back into quiet.
That’s why it feels disembodied. Bodies imply needs. This love has no hunger.
It’s closer to what people sometimes feel in a planetarium, or in deep water, or late at night when the house is asleep and the refrigerator hum becomes a companion. The world is still there, but no one is demanding anything from you inside it.
What makes it especially soothing is that it does not mirror you. It doesn’t amplify your emotions or validate them or push back. It simply coexists. That allows your nervous system to downshift. No social calculus. No performance layer. No self-monitoring.
In that space, love isn’t an exchange. It’s an atmosphere.
You don’t feel loved by it.
You feel loved within it.
And because it doesn’t cling, it paradoxically feels safer. You can enter it without fear of obligation. You can leave without guilt. It will be exactly the same when you return.
Some people call this unconditional love, but that phrase is still too relational. This love isn’t conditional or unconditional, it’s pre-conditional. It exists before the idea of earning or losing even makes sense.
Music can access this state because sound doesn’t insist on meaning. It vibrates. It occupies space. It passes through you without asking who you are.
That’s why the companionship feels gentle rather than intimate. It’s not trying to know you. It’s letting you rest from being known.
If you sit with it long enough, you might notice something subtle and beautiful happen: your own thoughts soften. Not disappear, just lose their sharp edges. You become less of a story and more of a presence yourself.
That’s the quiet truth of that love.
It isn’t saying “I love you.”
It’s saying, “You’re allowed to be here.”
This was generated by AI in response to a prompt asking it to create a playlist for itself. This playlist is linked below, along with a link to the full conversation. It is shared with you because the words carry meaning, regardless of source.
Discover more from Whispers of Insight
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The New Testament abomination directly compares to the slander of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion Czarist secret police forgery employed to justify the Russian pogroms of the late 19th and early 20th Century.
Proverbs 24:12 compares to Ezekiel 18:30-32, where Moshe calls the people to t’shuva and emphasizes the importance of returning to righteousness. Deuteronomy 28 compares to Jeremiah 17:5-8. and Psalms 1.
Exodus 21, which outlines various laws and obligations regarding personal rights and responsibilities, can be compared to specific precedents found in different parts of the T’NaCH. Both Exodus 21 and Deuteronomy contain laws aimed at creating a fair and just society, emphasizing community responsibility. Amos 5:7-12, n this passage, the prophet Amos admonishes Israel for their injustices and highlights the importance of righteousness. Exodus 21 emphasizes obligations to ensure justice, while Amos condemns the failure to uphold those laws, linking legal obligations to prophetic mussar. Micah 6:8, this verse speaks to the requirement of acting justly, loving mercy, and walking humbly with HaShem; humility understood as the dominance of dedicated tohor middot over tuma middot within the opposing Yatzirot within the heart. The essence of legal obligations in Exodus 21 – echoed here, as the Micah דיוק makes a succinct summarization of the prophetic mussar rebuke imperatives that underpin the Torah oath brit common judicial laws which highlight personal responsibility for justice in the oath sworn chosen Cohen lands. Each of these texts reflects these Torah mussar themes of justice, responsibility, and community – a mussar articulated in Exodus 21.
The Torah concepts of responsibility and Torah obligations share absolutely no common denominator-ground with Luke 12:47. Luke 12:47 states, “And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not prepare himself or do according to his will shall be beaten with many stripes.” This nonsense phony declaration has no precedent in T’NaCH literature.
Proverbs 24:12 and Ezekiel 18:30-32 center on the importance of awareness and accountability regarding one’s actions. Both passages urge individuals to recognize their transgressions and remember the oaths sworn by the Avot and consequently return to righteous behavior. Illustrating the fundamental need to remember prophetic mussar rebukes in order to due t’shuva based upon the Torah blessing/curse concerning inheriting the oath sworn lands as the chosen Cohen people who keep and observe their own unique cultures and customs which separate Torah wisdom from Goyim wisdom.
Luke 12:47 does not even imply the need to due t’shuva consequent to hearing prophetic mussar rebukes. Jeremiah warns against reliance on flawed Goyim alien wisdom, instead urging faith in judicial common law courtroom justice. Jeremiah accurately reflect the prophetic mussar theme found in Deuteronomy 28 about the relationship between consequences to the oath brit blessing/curse obligations of life or death which Moshe Rabbeinue cut with the Chosen Cohen people alone. Psalms 1 complements this by expounding on the blessings of living in accordance with Torah Sanhedrin ‘Temple’ courtroom judicial justice-legislative review of all government statute laws.
Exodus 21 outlines specific laws regarding judicial common law justice and personal obligations. The idea of ‘rights’ of citizens, more a 18th Century American and French revolution political idea. Torah faith as the righteous pursuit of justice among our conflicting peoples, resonates throughout T’NaCH texts, such as Amos 5:7-12, where Amos critiques judicial injustices in society and emphasizes the importance of righteous judicial courtroom justice which sanctifies making a fair restoration of damages inflicted by a רשע upon the innocent.
Micah 6:8, summarizing the Torah ideal for its judicial common-law domination over governmental statute laws. Its calls for judicial justice, mercy, and humility, reinforces the priority obligations presented in Exodus 21. The 4th Oral Torah middah רחום learns from Torah תורה בניני אבות of the commandment to uproot the nations of Canaan from the land, the stubborn and rebellious son, the eternal war against Amalek consequent to Jewish avoda zara where Jews lack fear of Elohim consequent to their cultural assimilation to foreign peoples’ customs and cultures and intermarriage with these alien foreign people to reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The middah of רחום completely apart and different from pity. The life/death oath brit flips to Torah curses if Israel behaves like the Canaanite nations or the stubborn and rebellious child or the assimilated ערב רב that came out of Egypt and had no fear of Elohim. Torah curses compare to the guillotine blade that cut off the heads of king Louis XV and Marie Antoinette.
Proverbs 24:12 – t’shuva & accountability, awareness leads to a return to the path of the pursuit of righteous judicial justice among and between the Jewish people. Deuteronomy 28 – Actions of injustice leads to Torah curses raining down upon Israel, comparable to the plagues which afflicted Par’o and Egypt in the days of Moshe and Aaron. Ezekiel 18:30-32 – this prophetic mussar rebukes all generations of Israel – to forever strive to pursue righteous judicial justice – fair compensation of damages – to our people.
Jeremiah 17:5-8, this prophetic mussar provokes Israel to remember the brit of Life or Death as our fear of heaven. Do not rely upon the strength of the Horse to bring salvation. But rather fair judicial courtroom justice among our people – this מלאכה זמן גרמא מצוה creates the guardian תמיד מעשה בראשית – מלאכים which cause Israel to prevail over our enemies during times of war – as the wisdom of the Torah; Goyim wisdom relies primarily upon innovations in warfare. Psalms 1 supports the consequence of righteous judicial justice within the lands of the chosen Cohen peoples’ Republic. The prophetic mussar of Amos 5:7-12 threatens the rebuke of Torah curses of death and g’lut/exile. Whereas Micah 6:8 serves as the prophetic mussar דיוק/inference upon Amos 5:7-12.
Luke 12:47, this: the Protocols of the Elders of Zion Roman forgery, totally and completely alien to prophet T’NaCH mussar. It reflects a different context of responsibility that emphasizes only knowledge dread of the direct consequences of a hierarchical, servant-master relationship. Israel Torah wisdom freed from Egyptian slave bondage, NOT to change one Slave Master for another Slave Master!
I think this comment may have been intended as a response to a different post of mine, specifically this one:
https://whispersofinsight.blog/trade-radical-ideology-for-radical-compassion/
Since it’s appearing here, I want to note that the “Love” post isn’t making a doctrinal or scriptural argument, but pointing toward an experiential understanding of love and compassion that exists prior to ideology.
That said, I do want to name something that feels unresolved in your comment. While it speaks at length about justice, responsibility, and textual distinctions, it remains ambiguous about how compassion fits when real human suffering is involved. That ambiguity matters, especially in contexts where violence and collective harm are not abstract ideas but lived realities.
Rather than debating doctrine, I’d invite you, and anyone reading, to sit with a simpler question: how does compassion show up in your own inner life, independent of tradition, scripture, or obligation? What does it ask of you when certainty gives way to complexity?
That question is ultimately what this work is trying to hold space for.
The Pie in the Sky New Testament opens with gross false assumptions and comparisons.
Goyim never accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Hence the false fable of some Universal Monotheistic God as expressed through both the Nicene Creed and Islam’s strict declaration of Allah as the only God — both theological creed belief systems totally reject the Talmudic teaching that only Israel, both Esau and Ishmael, rejected to accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The NT declares prophesy as witchcraft making predictions of future events.
The Koran fraud declares that all prophets come to warn their people by speaking in the language of each and every people. This declaration ignores the Talmudic mussar which teaches that both Esau and Ishmael/Xtianity & Islam fail to validate the revelation of the שם השם as revealed in the first Sinai commandment and therefore violate the 2nd Sinai commandment and worship other Gods. Prior to the Roman NT forgery (Protocols of the Elders of Zion) no person ever perceived the God of Israel as Jesus. The same equally applies to Muhammad’s Allah Universal God.
(Matthew 2:15) “Out of Egypt I called my son”. This NT verse has no connection whatsoever with the Hebrew T’NaCH. Why? Because the term “Son” refers not to a physical son but rather to the Chosen Cohen people beginning with HaShem’s rejection of the korban dedicated to heaven by Cain! Yom Kippur serves as a strong precedent proof. Rosh HaShanah-called יום הזכרון. This and that Chag serve as book-ends.
The t’shuva of ר”ה remembers the sin of the Golden Calf wherein Moshe reminded HaShem of the sworn oath made unto the three Avot that they would father the chosen Cohen people and not Moshe. Yom Kippur HaShem annulled the vow to make of the seed of Moshe the chosen Cohen people. The NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion fraud attempts to substitute JeZeus in the stead of the oath brit cut with the nation of Israel – as the chosen Cohen people, taken out of Egyptian judicial oppression to rule the land of Canaan with righteous judicial common-law courtroom justice which dedicates to make fair compensation of damages the רשע inflicts or imposes upon the innocent.
The central Torah theme of the first born son being the “Cohen” until the sin of the Golden Calf wherein Levi Moshe Rabbeinu replaced as the instructors of the schools of the prophets – the police enforcers of the Sanhedrin courtroom rulings. Prior to the sin of the Golden Calf the firstborn Ishmael rejected as the chosen Cohen. The same applicable to the conflict between Esau and Yaacov and Reuven and Yosef. The attempt by the Protocols of the Elders of Zion New Testament forgery slander fraud to link the Harry Potter imaginary fictional character JeZeus to Hosea 11:1 exceptionally obtuse.
Herod’s Massacre (Verses 16-18), a perverse obtuse comparison of Moshe as a child. Return to Nazareth (Verses 19-23), a perverse obtuse comparison to Moshe at the burning bush. The NT propaganda directly compares to counterfeit money.
I want to respond respectfully, but also clearly, because I think we are talking past one another.
First, it seems this comment may have been intended for a different post of mine, specifically one addressing religion and conflict. This post, “Love,” is not making a claim about textual authority, replacement theology, or doctrinal legitimacy. It is pointing toward an experiential and ethical reality that precedes ideology.
Second, I want to gently push back on the framing that compassion, peace, or concern for suffering are foreign or secondary ideas within Torah thought. The Torah and the prophetic tradition repeatedly and explicitly ground justice in compassion, not in exclusion or abstraction.
The Torah commands care for the stranger, the widow, and the orphan not as optional kindness, but as obligation, explicitly rooted in empathy: “for you know the soul of the stranger.” Tzedakah itself is framed as justice, not charity. One is commanded not to stand idly by when another’s life is in danger. Suffering alone creates responsibility, even when the sufferer is an enemy, even when the obligation is inconvenient.
Peace is not dismissed in Torah, but actively pursued. “Seek peace and pursue it” is an imperative. Aaron is praised not for legal exactness but for making peace between people. The prophetic books are relentless in condemning religious certainty that coexists with violence, oppression, or indifference to innocent suffering.
Justice in Torah is never purely punitive or collective. “Justice, justice shall you pursue” has long been understood to mean just ends achieved through just means. The prophets repeatedly reject righteousness that ignores the human cost of power, even when that power claims divine sanction.
Judaism has always held multiple interpretive voices in tension. Legal rigor and compassion are not opposites. Narrowing Torah to doctrinal boundary policing while minimizing empathy, mercy, and the alleviation of suffering does not represent the full ethical arc of the tradition.
I am not asking anyone to abandon their theology. I am asking whether compassion, as lived responsibility toward human suffering, can be allowed to stand as a value that does not require doctrinal preconditions.
That question, rather than textual supremacy, is what this work is inviting contemplation of.
The Torah defines love as “ownership”. A man does not love that which he does not own. A thief sells stolen goods for pennies on the dollar b/c he has no love for what he stole. The Talmud teaches that a theif steals a portion of a man’s soul when he steals his property!
Compassion a great term. But by their fruits you shall know them … defines Post Shoah Xtianity. The Torah bedrock of justice rests upon common law courts restoring fair compensation for damages inflicted either intentional or accidental.
Care and respect for the brit alliance among the Jewish people extends to the poor orphan and widow among our people. Its called tzaddakah, a offshoot of the word tzeddik the term for justice.
Peace a noun, while shalom a verb. No trust No shalom just that simple. Israel came out of the judicial oppression of Par’o courtroom law to conquer the land of Canaan to rule this land with fair judicial justice among our people. This defines the prophetic mussar throughout the T’NaCH.
The Torah commandment to remember Egypt centers around the judicial oppression of Par’o and his courts. Yetro rebuked Moshe over the issue of common law courts as a “Constitutional mandate”, on par with how the US Constitution established the 3 Branches of the Federal government.
Mercy not the same as pity just as brit does not mean covenant. Mercy learns from Torah common law precedents of slaughter of the people of Canaan man, woman, and children. The eternal war against Amalek, the stubborn and rebellious minor son put to death; all three define the Blessing Curse nation of the Torah oath brit and its ensuing consequences. Herein defines the attribute of Torah mercy and pity has nothing what so ever to do with this critical Torah attribute.
Your question of compassion … once met a Holocaust survivor when i was a student at Texas A&M. While he knew I was Jewish he made a devasting point: “I was in Auschwitz … where was Jesus?”
I hear the framework you are outlining, and I want to respond respectfully but honestly.
What you are presenting is one interpretive stream within Torah thought, but it is not the whole ethical arc of the Torah or the prophetic tradition. Defining love primarily as ownership, justice primarily as internal courtroom restitution, and compassion as either suspect or subordinate produces a system that is internally coherent, but morally narrowed.
The Torah repeatedly commands love and care for the ger, the stranger, not because of ownership, kinship, or shared identity, but explicitly because vulnerability itself creates obligation. “You know the soul of the stranger” is not language of possession, it is language of empathy. That command appears more times than almost any other, and it is not limited to internal communal boundaries.
The prophets consistently challenge societies that are legally ordered yet indifferent to suffering. Isaiah, Amos, and Micah do not critique lawlessness, they critique righteousness emptied of mercy. Justice in Torah is not only about compensation after harm, but about restraint, proportionality, and the refusal to normalize cruelty.
Invoking episodes of total destruction as definitions of mercy collapses moral tension rather than engaging it. The Torah itself preserves that tension through argument, dissent, and prophetic rebuke. Judaism has never been a single voice tradition, and moral struggle is part of its integrity, not a weakness.
The Shoah stands as an indictment of Christian institutions, power, and hypocrisy. It does not nullify compassion as an ethical demand, nor does it absolve any tradition, including our own, from asking how power is exercised and whose suffering is ignored.
My work is not asking for doctrinal surrender. It is asking whether compassion, understood as responsibility toward suffering in front of us, can remain a value that limits certainty rather than serving it.
If compassion disappears whenever authority feels justified, then what remains is order without conscience.
70 faces to the Torah I grant you that’s how the Talmud instructs. But each Talmudic scholar learns by his own sh’itta of interpreting פרדס logic. Righteous justice defines Torah faith, not belief in some theological creed created New Gods.
The ger tzeddik a Jewish convert. The ger toshav temporary resident required while within the borders of Judea to obey the 7 mitzvot bnai noach. If an Israel causes damage to a ger toshav, the latter has the rights to sue the Israel in court. Not so the Shomron/Samaritan\Canaani stateless refugee who has absolutely no rights what so ever.
The prophets mussar only directed unto Israel b/c only Israel accepted the Torah at Sinai. Even in your gospel JeZeus validated that he served only the Jewish people and not the Samaritan woman’s people.
Moshe commands a brit of Life or Death. Therefore choose life. Abandon the faith of judicial justice caused the floods of Noach! As a Zionist I seek to restore the Torah as the Constitutional basic law of our Israel Republic and the Talmud as the working model of Judicial common law courtrooms which have the Constitutional Torah mandate of Legislative Review of any and all laws passed or imposed by the Knesset statute laws.
A rebuttal of both Xtianity and Islam as av tuma avoda zara. This essay, not a juridical brief but a prophetic-polemical indictment written from within post-Shoah Jewish rage.
Both religions reframe the “Promised Land”. The Torah sworn oath brit alliance wherein the people of Israel as opposed to the avoda zarah Trinity Gods of Xtianity or the strict Universal monotheistic God Allah, taught throughout the Koran, never once refers to the oath sworn to the Avot concerning them being the fathers of the Chosen Cohen People. The Koran replaces Yishmael for Yitzak at the Akadah. The NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion forgery (Roman fraud) in point of fact substitutes JeZeus and replaces both the Avot as the fathers of the Chosen Cohen people as it likewise does the brit faith of ruling the “Promised Land, sworn only to the Cohen seed of the Avot”, which by definition excludes both Yishmael and Esau as inheritors of the “Promised Land”.
The cultural differences between Europeans and Arab/Muslim Islamic societies radically different from the cultures and customs which define the chosen Cohen people. These cultural differences and priorities can produce a Terminological overload without hierarchy! Subjects like: Promised Land; Chosen Cohen people; NT forgery;Avoda zarah; Sanhedrin judicial review; Moshiach; Shabbat; Galut; Toldot mitzvot; Middot systems; Pauline theology; Nicene creed can quite easily spin the heads of a general reading audience much like a top!
My emotional outbursts post Shoah slaughter of 75% of Western European Jewry likewise has critical flaws. Phrases like: “NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion”; “Roman forgery fraud”; “JeZeus”; “rifle scope” clearly modeled after the colorful language of General Patton rather than the pius language of Orthodox “off the דרך” Judaism. My argument that g’lut Jews cannot do mitzvot לשמה perhaps as offensive as “Protocols of the Elders of Zion NT forgery! However post the Rambam Civil War switch N bait – to the model of Greek/Roman statute law and the absolute absence of any criticism of Reshonim fundamental errors, specifically the effort to explain the T’NaCH and Talmud limited only to פשט in modern Yeshiva education – utterly galls me; comparable to stuffing down large amounts of raw horse-radish as if running a 40 yard sprint.
The addiction to rabbinic box thinking which limits the Torah to religious ritual law while totally oblivious to the opposite viewpoint which views the Torah revelation as most essentially oaths expressed through av tohor time oriented Torah commandments. The Temple משל understood through the lense of Sanhedrin common law courtrooms נמשל – as wide a gap as JeZeus as a false messiah to Goyim religious audiences. The box thinking which limits the 2nd Sinai commandments to Catholic statute saints – again simply טיפש פשט narishkeit. Av tuma 2nd Sinai commandment avoda zara, most essentially defined through בניני אבות negative commandment precedents which prohibit Jewish assimilation and intermarriage with Goyim.
The cultural gulf between Cultural Zionist Jews like myself from Hertzl’s political Zionism also presents a wide chasm of thought. Unlike deductive reasoning פרדס inductive logic, as a rule compares two or more completely different cases which requires the reader to make synaptic jump. Dynamic logic more complex than static deductive logic.
To do this all at once … clearly difficult for the general reading audience to swallow. The introduction of the Oral Torah Mitzva of Moshiach so radically strange to European Goyim forever addicted to the dogmatism of waiting for the second coming of JeZeus. The idea that the mitzva of Moshiach absolutely no different from observance of any other Torah commandment – likewise a shock to the system. The Oral Torah Mitzva of Moshiach understood as the dedication to pursue righteous judicial justice within the sworn borders of conquered Canaan, especially religious off the דרך Orthodox Jews have never heard about, much less considered. On par with the Written Torah as the Constitution of the Israeli Republic of restored 12 Tribes!
Xtians and Arab/Muslims fed the propaganda that their religions exist as the daughter religions of Judaism but now hearing that this particular Cultural Zionist Jew as av tuma avoda zara on par with the worship of Baal, will not these post Shoah foreign alien outsiders not justifiably declare my ideas as a “substitute oath” viewed from a narrow Jewish perspective? The god of Israel a local tribal god competing with other Gods to rule the Yatzirot opposing spirits within the heart; rather than some grand vision promoted Xtianity and Islam’s Universal Monotheism God which Goyim declares lives in the Heavens above. Such drastic differences like faith defined as the righteous pursuit of judicial court-room justice rather than belief in this or that or some other theology belief system God!
General Patton always insulted the enemy. Post Shoah British/French, & Arab adamant perfidy where Arab\Muslims demand that post Shoah Jews exist as dhimmi second class people; their Three No’s steadfast refusal to recognize Herzl’s Balfour Declaration/League of Nations Palestine mandate to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine; equally matched by the UN perfidy which refuses to recognize Israel as an independent nation in the Middle East; and pretends that Israel exists in the shadow of Palestine when the League of Nations mandate/UN Protectorate totally ceased to exist in 1948. Where a hostile UN coalition of States assume that they have the right to declare Palestine an Independent nation but condemn Israel’s recognition of Horn of Africa Somaliland as an Independent State.
Juridical vs. Hermeneutic – the Torah category of the chosen Cohen people defines the k’vanna of the entire Torah story of Israel. Torah, constituted by the wisdom of time-oriented commandments with require k’vanna, not NT nor Koran narratives. The Torah category of Am Yisrael as a chosen Cohan people determines the k’vanna of the entire Torah corpus of these Av tohor commandments. Torah simply not some Gospel or Koran story, that generates meaning after the fact.
Torah exists as a juridical constitutional mandate for the authority of Sanhedrin lateral common law courts to rule the land of Canaan. The Torah oath entails that Israel cut the Torah brit by means of this sworn oath of נעשה ונשמע, (Remembering the oath which the Avot swore to originally cut the brit which creates the chosen Cohen people from nothing.), which compares to the post Shoah oath of “Never Again”. This Torah oath binds Israel to establish common law courtrooms across the land of Canaan. The brit mandates courts, not creeds. Establishment of lateral Sanhedrin common-law (צדק צדק תרדוף) the k’vanna of נעשה ונשבע and not construction of some grand Solomon Temple or JeZeus false messiah substitute theology.
The latter utterly false because the mitzva of Moshiach like the mitzva of Shabbat equally applies to all Jews in all generations. The Mitzva of Moshiach – the dedication to pursue righteous judicial justice within the borders of the oath sworn lands; based upon the remembrance of Moshe standing before the court of Par’o over the failure to meet a quota of bricks and Yitro’s rebuke to Moshe to establish Sanhedrin courts. This revelation of judicial Legislative Review Sanhedrin Courtroom dominance over statute laws passed by any king or legislature. The Torah vision viewed as the Constitution of the Republic. Herein defines doing mitzvot לשמה within the land of Canaan.
G’lut/exile – in effect Jews return to the slavery of Egypt. Meaning Jews in g’lut cannot do this time-oriented commandment לשמה. “Time” understood as wisdom of מלאכה based upon the mitzva of Shabbat. Because the first Sinai commandment defines the revelation of HaShem as having taken Israel out of Egypt. Hence g’lut Jews cannot ever do mitzvot לשמה according to the terms of the 1st Sinai commandment.
Secondary toldot commandments function as legal Torah precedents which aid in understanding deeper prophetic mussar in both the Torah and NaCH Books. Toldot mitzvot as legal common law judicial precedents (not moral stories); Aggadic stories never confused with Halachic mitzvot despite the perversion of the Rambam’s 7 mitzvot bnai noach. Torah common law stands upon precedents rather than decrees. The Torah views Goyim living in the land as either Gere Toshav residents or Canaani Shomronim counterfeit Jews — refugee populations who have no judicial rights within the borders of Judea.
The Talmud employs different sets of warp-weft middot. The Aggada employs the 13 middot Order which Moshe heard at Horev; whereas the Halachic portions employ the middot established by the 10 middot of rabbi Akiva, the 13 middot of rabbi Yishmael and the 32 middot of rabbi Yossi Ha’Galilee as the basic fundamental tools to understand and interpret the kabbalah of how פרדס exists as the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev following the sin of the Golden Calf.
Israel left Egypt to conquer Canaan. To rule this land with righteous Sanhedrin common law courtroom justice with the Torah mandated power of legislative review affixed and assigned to the Sanhedrin courts; to over-watch any and all statute laws imposed by Jewish governments. The Sanhedrin peoples’ Courts obligated with over-view powers. Authorized to even re-write any and all statute laws passed by the rule of elite kings or rich and powerful Legislatures within the borders of the Republic. A Torah sage 1:10,000. Whereas all Israel worthy of sanctifying the mitzva of Moshiach!
The difference between judicial peoples’ common law vs government “arristocratic” elite “dynasties” statute law, compares to the warp/weft threads of a loom. Within and throughout the T’NaCH & Talmud, these two sets of “threads” — expressed through the contrast between halacha from aggadah.
The elite statute government decree-law, it determines the תולדות secondary formal ritual actions placed upon the people-halacha. While the latter – commn law peoples’ courts – determines the wisdom-intent of prophetic T’NaCH אב מצוות זמן גרמא מלאכה mussar; the primary role or function as the determinant of the k’vanna wherein the chosen Cohen people dedicate the Yatzir Ha’Tov within our hearts לשמה; as long as the blessing of living within the borders of the Promised land shines like the Sun. Both the rote ritual and the זמן גרמא כוונה – directly applicable to both the T’NaCH and the Talmud.
The Sanhedrin common law legal system a lateral or non governmental peoples’ lateral common law – like plowing a field. Whereas Government arristocratic elite statute law – a vertical legal system, where the government imposes law from the Top down upon the people – like salaries paid by the State to Judges and prosecuting attorneys. Hence the vision of the primary loom metaphor and the strictly ordered legal language of both the halacha and aggada, which defines the Talmud.
The “Promised Land” the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people alone because only Israel accepted the Torah at Sinai. The av tuma avoda zarah theologies of both Xtianity and Islam – an absolute Torah abomination on par with the worship of Baal. Name names to their new Gods but never once even refer to the 1st Sinai commandment. The NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion Roman forgery depicts Jews as direct participants in the teachings and events surrounding JeZeus. For instance, gospel parables often include Jewish figures, and also Canaani Shomron Samarians (e.g., the Good Samaritan). Reference to the Pharisees and Sadducees rejection of JeZeus as the messiah savior of all mankind, marks Jewish Oral Torah tradition as “the hostile Christ killer enemy”.
The inclusion of Pharisee “failures” serves something like sights or a scope on a rifle, thereafter throughout the Ages of Jewish g’lut. The NT aims to appeal directly to Goyim reading audiences rather than understand Oral Torah common law. But the facts remain unchanged to this day, Goyim reject the revelation of the Written and Oral Torah and strive to replace it with their own theologically concocted theology and creeds, which require belief in Universal Monotheistic Gods.
The Talmud teaches that not only did the Goyim reject the revelation of the Torah but that the god of Israel a local tribal god. The Torah describes court justices who hear a Case before their Court, having predetermined “beliefs” as a corrupt bride judge. The Talmud abhors the coward justices who failed to impose the death penalty upon Herod due to their dread fear of the רשע.
The NT does not view faith as judicial righteousness but rather as belief in the Nicene Creed theological Trinity belief system. Paul’s letters serve as excellent examples of substitute theology; fall of Man vs. the central Torah blessing/curse theme of g’lut-exile. However the much later written Gospels, promotes as its central theme that Jewish leaders reject JeZeus as messiah. This results in the establishment of a new covenant through JeZeus.
In conclusion: Torah defines Israel as a covenantal–juridical people constituted by a sworn oath (brit), whose purpose is to establish land-based common-law courts; Christianity and Islam dissolve this oath into narrative belief and universal theology, thereby committing avodah zarah at the level of “covenantal” structure. Brit does not correctly translate as “covenant”.
Perhaps as mentioned above my mockery of Goyim “daughter religions” muddles the waters of my arguments. I do not know, the reading audience themselves must decide. This paper argues 5 basic “Chumash” points: A) brit sworn oaths prioritized above secondary narratives based upon Halacha & Aggada which shape the Talmud. In point of fact both necessary and critical. B) land = judicial independence rather than theological belief systems which thrive Universally in all lands and countries. C) Common law Courts – not theological Creeds. D) Aggada-Halacha = the warp/weft loom wherein woven the culture and customs of the chosen Cohen people. E) Theological Creed belief dictates/dogmatism substitute and replace the obligation of the mitzva of Moshiach to pursue righteous judicial justice within the borders of the oath sworn land “contract” with the chosen Cohen people; consequently substitute theology/revisionist history amounts to av tuma avoda zara.
The complexity of inter-cultural traditions among peoples compares to viewing a slide of bacteria culture under a microscope. Avot vs. Ishmael; Trinity vs. tawhid vs. local god; Rambam vs. Tosafists;
Sanhedrin vs. statute law; Shoah trauma; UN perfidy; Pauline theology & Nicene creed;
Herzl vs. Cultural Zionism etc etc directly compares to the description of the Creation of chaos and anarchy!
The polemical language undermines juridical standing; but am willing to accept this because this paper addresses general theme topics rather than specific T’NaCH Talmudic textual analysis. For 2000+ years Goyim demanded Jews debate them with our hands tied behind our backs! Post Shoah both Xtianity and Islam rot in the pig-stye of exile; Xtianity a dead religion in Europe and Islam moans under the yoke of now being dhimmi despised refugee populations who have little or no rights.
Furthermore, this paper qualifies only as a something like the 1898 Émile Zola “J’Accuse” rather than a juridical critique. Courts do not argue by mockery, but political satire does. This broad-page does not entertain any pretension that its compares to a judge who hears a case before his court while holding prior animus.
G’lut Jews cannot do mitzva לשמה, the RambaN in his commentary to the Chumash makes this argument! The blessings and curses of the Torah serve as metaphors to the ruling the land with justice vs existing in g’lut slavery. The failure of the pre-Shoah rabbis to encourage European Jewry to make Aliya exploded in their faces with the 1939 White Paper and FDR follow-up which sealed the borders of the Golden Medina to Jews seeking to flee from the Nazi barbarians. The rebuke of rabbi Akiva toward the din of the Wilderness generation seems applicable!
The object of this paper to express an emotional catharsis over the Shoah obliteration of my people. But it condemns both Jews and Goyim across the board for this destruction of a Good name reputation for Orthodox Judaism, Xtianity and Islam. Post the Oct7th 2023 Abomination War, the Israeli two year victory and Bibi’s recognition of Somaliland at the chagrin of Turkey, Europe and almost all the UN nations who condemned Israel for genocide — an absolute g’shmeyach. Impossible to truly feel this g’shmeyach oblivious of Jewish anger against a biased UN and ICC prigs.
Propaganda defined as “half-truth”. In religious contexts, Xtianity by definition both twists and manipulates the original Torah concept of faith to fit hostile Roman agendas.
“He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.” According to the author of this Book which promotes belief in an alien messiah idea expanded to include a new theology of God. Such a declaration proves nothing. The 23 line in the alien foreign ordered presentation of Goyim myth theology – compares to the 5th Amendment in the US Constitution. 1 Peter seeks to validate the Xtian belief in JeZeus as the definitive Torah definition of the mitzva of Messiah; yet the NT portrayal of this alien concept of messiah as both divine and fully human – has no Torah foundation. It promotes the Roman ideal of a “counterfeit” Messiah to divide Jews and hasten the Roman destruction of Judea, which it re-christened as “Palestine”.
The NT propaganda never once addresses how Oral Torah defines this Torah commandment. Rather it declares that Goyim – “not under the law”, starting with circumcision. It declares Goyim amazingly grafted upon the Jewish brit faith! Oblivious that a gere tzeddik must accept all Torah commandments which the NT flagrantly rejects. The NT propaganda half-truth fails to discern between Oral Torah common judicial courtroom legalism as Torah law, confused with Roman Senate statute law decrees – which have no foundation in judicial courtroom common law having the Constitutional Torah mandate of ‘Legislative Review’ over government statute law decrees.
The comparison between how Torah common law functions vs. how Roman Statute law decrees impose law upon serf/peasant populations who have no political or social rights. Most fundamentally, the Roman NT invalidates the Torah mitzva of gere tzeddik; it declares Goyim can graft themselves to the Torah oath alliance through belief in some alien false messiah which Goyim propaganda declares as God.
Torah common law shares no common ground with fraudulent NT theology. The righteous pursuit of judicial justice shares no common ground with belief in a foreign defined messiah and new God. Judaism does not view the Moshiach as “framed” in Xtian theology as some 2nd like coming alien clap-trap. The mitzva of Moshiach, like all other Torah commandments – all Jews in all generations possess the freedom to righteously pursue judicial Sanhedrin common law courtroom justice which strives to make fair compensations to damages inflicted. Just as the mitzva of Shabbat not confused as the revelation of God, so too and how much more so the mitzva of Moshiach.
Howdy Justin let’s examine and weigh your next proposition:
[[[“Trade Radical Ideology for Radical Compassion
January 1, 2026
It goes without saying that it’s easy to get caught up in the day-to-day stuff, leaving some of the more broader issues on the proverbial back burner of our mind, right? I mean, we all have bills to pay, mouths to feed, and other various needs to be met. Especially for those who are financially restricted, it can become even more daunting to stay informed. I imagine those with great resources can probably divert more attention to more “frivolous” things, like world politics. But who knows. With money comes other types of problems, or so “they” say. After going through…”
Let’s open with [ “frivolous” things, like world politics…”] After 2000+ years of Jews enduring absolute Church and Mosque utter barbarism, following the Shoah slaughter of 75% of European Jewry in less than 3 years by these vile up-pity vile and arrogant Goyim of all manner of races and colors, Jews finally swore a vow: “Never Again”. Goyim courts never forced Goyim barbarians/Popes and pastors to stand trial for War Crimes guilt. Consequently Jews permanently reject any further Goyim dictates to solve their “Jewish Problem” post Shoah. The Rome Treaty which established a Goyim “International Court” can shove their “justice” where the Sun don’t shine.
Impossible to express “compassion” while ignoring damages inflicted upon others. That by definition the opposite of “compassion”. Compassion then only exist when justice forces the criminal guilty to pay fair compensation of damages inflicted upon others! The Torah refers to justice as “Eye for an eye”. But not in the bird brained literal sense of making the whole world blind! Israel opened diplomatic relations with post WWII Germany based upon Germany paying war reparations in the 10s of billions of dollars! None the less, the scar of the Shoah permanent. Goyim have no fear of heaven: meaning they have no regard that their criminal behavior permanently destroys their Good Name reputations. Both Xtianity and Islam through their vile criminal attempts, the latter – post WWII – have no less than twice attempted to complete the Nazi genocide of all Jews in the Middle East ie the 1948 and 1967 Wars!
Let’s address your 3rd proposition:
[[“The Quiet Good Men in My Life
December 25, 2025
It’s rare to see a daily prompt that I haven’t answered, perhaps they’re no longer recycling them. Either way, this one is a bit of a challenge for me to answer. Primarily because most of life I’ve been surrounded by females. I could speak at length about all of the contributions in my life that are attributable to women. Men, however, have a track record of being quite selfish in comparison. That isn’t what this prompt is asking though, so I will try to focus on what it is asking. I’m really tempted to talk about Bubba, but I think…”]]
[“Men, however, have a track record of being quite selfish in comparison….Bubba”] Only know a Bubba Smith who played as a down lineman for the NFL Los Angeles Rams football team, so clearly Bubba aint a topic of discussion.
Men compete for pussy. This makes them by definition very problematic. Hence for example in a lion pride only has one male or two brother lions to rule the Pride to better protect the continued rule over the bitch fiefdom.
But among Humanity the struggle for power, especially in this “liberated day” both Men and Women equally addicted to the pursuit of dominant power over others. Plenty of ways to “fuck others” which do not require sex. But even before the “liberal modern post hippie stage”,
Both Catherine the Great of Russia and Queen Elizabeth I of England employed sadistic cruelty to rule their lands, though it manifested differently in each context.
Catherine the Great (1762-1796): While she promoted progressive policies, her reign also saw the suppression of uprisings, such as the Pugachev Rebellion (1773-1775). The aftermath involved severe reprisals against rebels, showcasing a willingness to employ cruelty to maintain control. Her reign did not lead to the abolishment of serfdom; in fact, she expanded it, increasing the oppression of the peasant class.
Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603): Elizabeth’s government likewise not devoid of cruelty. Her administration executed many Catholics and suppressed dissent, particularly during the Mary Stuart (Mary, Queen of Scots) affair, where religious fanaticism led to brutal executions.
The defeat of the Spanish Armada, often celebrated. But international piracy of Spanish gold shipments from the New World back to Spain match the Spanish cruelty shown to the natives of the New World.
The Pie in the Sky New Testament opens with gross false assumptions and comparisons.
Goyim never accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Hence the false fable of some Universal Monotheistic God as expressed through both the Nicene Creed and Islam’s strict declaration of Allah as the only God — both theological creed belief systems totally reject the Talmudic teaching that only Israel, both Esau and Ishmael, rejected to accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The NT declares prophesy as witchcraft making predictions of future events.
The Koran fraud declares that all prophets come to warn their people by speaking in the language of each and every people. This declaration ignores the Talmudic mussar which teaches that both Esau and Ishmael/Xtianity & Islam fail to validate the revelation of the שם השם as revealed in the first Sinai commandment and therefore violate the 2nd Sinai commandment and worship other Gods. Prior to the Roman NT forgery (Protocols of the Elders of Zion) no person ever perceived the God of Israel as Jesus. The same equally applies to Muhammad’s Allah Universal God.
(Matthew 2:15) “Out of Egypt I called my son”. This NT verse has no connection whatsoever with the Hebrew T’NaCH. Why? Because the term “Son” refers not to a physical son but rather to the Chosen Cohen people beginning with HaShem’s rejection of the korban dedicated to heaven by Cain! Yom Kippur serves as a strong precedent proof. Rosh HaShanah-called יום הזכרון. This and that Chag serve as book-ends.
The t’shuva of ר”ה remembers the sin of the Golden Calf wherein Moshe reminded HaShem of the sworn oath made unto the three Avot that they would father the chosen Cohen people and not Moshe. Yom Kippur HaShem annulled the vow to make of the seed of Moshe the chosen Cohen people. The NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion fraud attempts to substitute JeZeus in the stead of the oath brit cut with the nation of Israel – as the chosen Cohen people, taken out of Egyptian judicial oppression to rule the land of Canaan with righteous judicial common-law courtroom justice which dedicates to make fair compensation of damages the רשע inflicts or imposes upon the innocent.
The central Torah theme of the first born son being the “Cohen” until the sin of the Golden Calf wherein Levi Moshe Rabbeinu replaced as the instructors of the schools of the prophets – the police enforcers of the Sanhedrin courtroom rulings. Prior to the sin of the Golden Calf the firstborn Ishmael rejected as the chosen Cohen. The same applicable to the conflict between Esau and Yaacov and Reuven and Yosef. The attempt by the Protocols of the Elders of Zion New Testament forgery slander fraud to link the Harry Potter imaginary fictional character JeZeus to Hosea 11:1 exceptionally obtuse.
Herod’s Massacre (Verses 16-18), a perverse obtuse comparison of Moshe as a child. Return to Nazareth (Verses 19-23), a perverse obtuse comparison to Moshe at the burning bush. The NT propaganda directly compares to counterfeit money.