The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

why did the Baali Tosafot put the Rambam into Charem?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/5/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,799 times Debate No: 116254
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (304)
Votes (0)




The schools of hermeneutics developed by the Tannaim exerted a strong influence upon how Rabbi Yechuda Ha'Nasi organized the 6 Orders of the Mishna. Hillel taught 7 rules, Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael developed competing systems of hermeneutics. Rabbi Yose HaGelili developed 39 rules of hermeneutics. Yet Rabbi Yosef Karo preferred reliance upon commentaries over the discipline of hermeneutics as the primary tool by which to interpret the Talmud. Why?

The subtle change in direction of Jewish scholarship requires close analysis. Rabbeinu Yonah cousin of the Ramban strongly opposed the writings of the Rambam. The latter scholar, organized his Mishna Torah based upon the logic of Aristotle. The Rambam bemoaned his return to Egypt yet assimilated to ancient Greek philosophy. His code of halacha destroyed the warp and woof of the fabric of the Talmud: the relationship between Halacha and Aggadita. The criticism opposing the Mishna Torah codification entails much more than Greek philosophy as many post crisis Talmudic scholars erroneously emphatically emphasize.

How did the Reshonim lose touch with the Tannaim hermeneutical rules of interpretation? Logic no generation holds a monopoly. G'lut, by definition HaShem hides his face from His people. The Reshonim and Achronim scholars lived in g'lut. The Tannaim did not live in g'lut. The p'shat commentaries made upon the Talmud sharply contrast with the style of the Tannaim. The 7th rule of Hillel: learn a specific within the context of its sugia. The Reshonim p'shat commentaries on the Talmud do not learn within the context of sugiot, but rather line by line, here a little there a little; they ignored the mussar rebuke of the prophets of the NaCH.

The classic commentaries made by the Reshonim did not integrate the halachic/aggadic fabric of the Talmud into a single whole. Does Midrash define the scholarship of the Gaonim and contrast with the Reshonim efforts to codify the halacha? Maharsha wrote a commentary on the French schools commentaries on the Talmud, combined with a study of the Aggadic sources of the Talmud had a tremendous impact upon the direction taken by later scholarship. His commentary dramatically failed to integrate Aggadita of the Talmud with Midrashim's linkage to the T'NaCH. The hermeneutics of the Tannaim apply first and foremost to the T'NaCH literature.

G'lut Jewry, exists as a secondary domain within the far more powerful domains dominated by the Church and Mosque. The Church translated the Hebrew T'NaCH and added chapters and verses. This action undermined the sugia Order of the T'NaCH literature. Learning the NaCH in context, the 7th rule of Hillel, essentially depended upon talmidim discerning between sugia and sugia within the NaCH literature. The commentaries made by the Reshonim became so dominant, that the מקראות גדולות purged the sugiot separations by which our forefathers originally ordered the NaCH organization, all together from the NaCH! How did this error occur? Rabbi Yosef Karo preferred reliance upon commentaries over hermeneutics.

The commentaries made upon the NaCH focused upon P'shat. But did the Framers of the NaCH intend to teach P'shat? No. The Framers of the NaCH taught mussar. A prophet, by definition, commands mussar because mussar has applicability to the hearts and souls of all generations of bnai brit Israel.

In the tragic dispute with the erroneous direction taken by the Rambam, later the Tur, followed by the Shul'chan A'ruch, the anti-Rambam sh'itta failed to understand how hermeneutics functions. This famous sh'itta of learning developed by the Tannaim worked hand in hand together with the 13 middot Moshe the prophet orally heard on Yom Kippor 40 days after the sin of the golden calf. All the systems of hermeneutics work based upon the 7th rule of Hillel, learn a specific within the context of its sugia and Oral Torah middot. The middot function as wheels within wheels; talmidim have an obligation to count the Name of HaShem on a 13 middot repeating/revolving basis within all the Books of both the Torah and the NaCH.

The Order of sugiot within the Torah literature goes by the divisions of the פ/chapter and ס/sugia. Counting the Name of HaShem located within the Torah and NaCH on a revolving middot basis quickly permits talmidim to compare sugiot of the Torah and NaCH with other sugiot sharing the exact same middot Order. Making a depth analysis based upon a shared middot common denominator opens the mussar of the Torah and NaCH for the eyes of all generations of Israel to see!

Hermeneutic sh'itta turns the Holy Writings of the T'NaCH as the primary commentaries written to explain the Torah and NaCH. The mussar instruction learned from the Torah and NaCH, defines the p'shat of the Aggadic drosh made back to the T'NaCH literature. Once a talmid learns p'shat, this requires making a measured/middot comparison and contrast within the literature of the NaCH, this learning gains insight into the mussar instruction taught by the prophet(s), to which the Aggadita drosh attains p'shat. This p'shat now defines the intent a person has when he keeps and observes the halachot learned out of that specific Mishna; herein a talmid of Talmud integrates the warp and woof into a consistent teaching of the intent of Rabbi's Mishna. The failure of the anti-Rambam scholars to grasp how to correctly learn the hermeneutic sh'itta developed by the Tannaim, combined with the disaster of the Goyim burning 24 cartloads of Talmudic manuscripts, destroyed the anti-Rambam opposition to the direction of learning that the axis Mishna Torah/Tur/Shul'chan A'ruch took the Jewish people.

Torah logic views the written text as the deduction - the black fire; the induction inference made upon the given deduction - the white fire - an explanation of the Ramban's introduction to his commentary to on Chumash. This unique Torah logic stands separated and opposed to the logic system developed by the Greek philosophers. The Torah commandment not to return back to Egypt, nor to follow the customs and cultures of the nations Egypt and Canaan, the meaning of this commandment - do not assimilate unto the ways manners/cultures of the none brit Goyim. Assimilation most essentially defines the sin of avoda zara in all the literature of the T'NaCH.

One Torah/Talmud not two. The domain of the T'NaCH stands in relation to our Mishna as the owner of the house; whereas the domain of the Talmud compares to the poor man receiving tzeddaka.


See this, its too much characters to post here, 10 pages, and this is as best a defense for Rambam as I could write:
Debate Round No. 1


Your opening thesis statement has nothing what so ever to do with this debate. No one argues against the Rambam's making a concise summarization of halacha, both l'maseh ilo'maseh. All the other halachic codes limit their posok halacha to laws applicable to Jewry living in g'lut. Next, that you felt the need to write 10 pages, this violates the terms of the terms. You unlike the Rambam lack the skills to edit what you wish to say. Its quite telling that your opening thesis statement totally ignores this debate. Did the Baali Tosafot place the Rambam into charem and what reasons did they have to place the Rambam into charem?

The next error, in your opening paragraph, Mosc vs. the Rambam, this has again nothing to do with this debate. Next error, my personal beliefs have nothing what so ever to do with this debate. Next error, halacha and aggadita exist as two separate planes. No halachic posek included aggadita in any of their codes. 6 blatant errors in your opening paragraph.

Next paragraph, what does "broke the Sha's mean? Using undefined terms, utter none sense. Fact the Rambam by making separate halachic groupings and not giving his sources for his halachic rulings - all commentators on the Rambam agree that he erred in this decision. The only pure none sense - your total and complete ignorance of the Magged Mishna and the Kesef Mishna commentaries made upon the Mishna Torah. I could include others but these two qualify as the most respected commentaries on the Rambam's work.

The Rif and the Rosh made a halachic codification applicable for Jews living in G'lut. Halacha its completely separate from Aggadita. Duh. The Rambam was not the first to write a halachic code, the B'hag, Rif, and Rosh, and Ron wrote halachic codes! The Rambam made halachic rulings: sacrifices for example, which have no halachic applicability to Jews living in G'lut. But this would not have presented any difficulty had the Rambam not fundamentally erred in excluding the sources of his posok halachic rulings, permitting scholars to learn his posok halacha in the context of the Talmud itself. This opinion represents the criticism of the Rosh against the Rambam based upon the 7th hermeneutical rule of Hillel the Elder.

Your failure to take into account the criticism of Rabbano Yona, the Rabbi which first condemned the works of the Rambam as heretical, compares to ignoring the elephant in the china closet. Did the Baali Tosafot - the grand children of Rashi - did or did not they agree with the Rabbano Yona's condemnation of the Rambam? Your ad hominem argument which pretends that I personally oppose the Rambam - that's just blatantly absurd. Again the opening Title of this debate, which you have totally ignored, Did the Baali Tosafot - not Mosc - agree to put the Rambam into charem? The major plant of the anti-Rambam condemnation of all the writings of the Rambam, not just the Mishna Torah but the Moreh Nevukim as well -which your 10 pages of none sense likewise totally fails to address - they condemned the Rambam's code because it by definition deviated from the learning of the Tannaim rules of hermeneutics. That your 10 pages of none sense fails to address the criticisms made, not by Mosc, but by the anti-Rambam rabbis; combined with the pro-Rambam position taken by Yosef Karo, author of the Beit Yosef - his chief work, as opposed to the Shul'chan A'ruch which functioned as, so to speak, the Cliff Notes of his Beit Yosef - who favored reliance upon commentaries over the Tannaim hemeneutical rules of interpretation.

Your failure to at all address my opening arguments at all, proves that you only shadow box. You write your belief system totally independent of the topics which my opening argument addressed. This disqualifies your trash as valid to discuss a debate to determine whether the Baali Tosafot agreed to place the Rambam into charem. Any one who knows the rules of debate can easily recognize that your failure to abide by the rules of an honest debate. This debate does not exist as a prize fighter boxing match between two opponents. Your title to you 10 pages of masturbation none sense poses this debate as between you and myself.

This failure on your part to address the Title of the Debate, whose challenge you accepted, proves conclusively that you lied and actually did not accept the challenge to this debate: Why did the Baali Tosafot agree to put the Rambam into charem?

Instead you ramble making ad hominem declarations which you wrote in a bold headline type jabbering about my confusion if its permitted to poskin halacha from Aggadita. You declare that the Baali Tosafot poskined halacha from aggadita and NEVER bring a single example of the Baali Tosafot doing what you claim! That's a lie. The Rambam in hilchot Malch'im - the laws of Kings - makes a ruling on the 7 mitzvot bnai noach - the only possible source being the Tractate of Sanhedrin in the Talmud. There in that Tractate, the Gemara employs ""AGGADITAH"" and speaks about the 7 mitzvot bnai noach!

Talmud stands upon the foundations of the Torah. The 5th Book of the Torah, D'varim, in the subject of trief meat, teaches that one can either give the trief meat to a Ger Toshav or a person can sell that trief meat to a Na'Cree. The Talmud, being a commentary to the Torah, in Baba Kama/First Gate, teaches upon the Na'Cree - it learns this type of Goy, living within the borders of Judea, qualifies as a hostile stateless refugee foreigner who has fled his former country and now temporarily resides within the borders of the Jewish State. The Gemara of Sanhedrin, whose Aggadita speaks about the 7 mitzvot of bnai noach, that Gemara teaches on the other type of Goy living within the borders of the Jewish state - namely the gere toshav/temporary resident.

What distinguishes between a Gere Toshav from a Na'Cree? The former has political and civil rights, the latter has no rights. Why does the Toshav enjoy rights whereas the stateless refugee has no rights? The temporary resident Toshav swears a limited oath upon his life that as long as he lives within the borders of Judea that he will keep the 7 mitzvot. The stateless refugee Na'Cree refuses to make such a limited alliance with the Jewish people and therefore merits no basis of trust between this Goy(im) and the Jewish people.

The Rambam changed the parameters of Gere Toshav to a Universal commandment applicable to all Goyim anywhere on the planet earth! His halacha ignores the FACT that if a gere toshav Goy failed to keep the 7 mitzvot, the entire time he lived within the borders of Judea, that such a transgression falls under the heading of a Capital Crime, wherein the Sanhedrin could try that Goy and put him to death! The jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin courts, limited strictly and only within the borders of the Jewish State!

The Rambam's perverson of the 7 mitzvot bnai noach Aggadita into 7 Universal mitzvot applicable unto all Goyim living on the face of this earth, besides making a halachic posok from an Aggadic source - something which no other Reshon posek ever agreed to do - despite your blatant lie about the Baali Tosafot - if the Rambam's ruling merited respect, if a Goy in the US violated any of the 7 mitzvot then a Jewish court should try that Goy on a Death penalty Capital Crimes Case! Such a situation the Talmud NEVER envisioned nor mandated!

I have now less than 500 characters by the terms of the Debate.Org so i shall stop commenting upon your utter hogwash none sense which never addressed up to this point the Title of this Debate.


I see a tread. Mosc likes to harass and poke fun, but then doesn't offer when the time's up. My introduction was just that, an INTRODUCTION, explaining to others what the arguments are, who Rambam was, and what he did. It's not my fault mosc failed to read such vital headings. From my perspective, I'm not just answering one argument (why they placed him into charem, which is untrue; they never banned Rambam himself, just Moreh Nevukim and the Sefer ha-Madda), but many [including your last arguments over the span of a the last few weeks). Your personal beliefs do matter, because you espouse them. My point there was to prove that you've confused everything, which is unforgivable. You say Rambam was wicked for saying we could posek halacha from aggadah when it was really the French rabbis. I agree, I even said aggadah was written separately than halacha. I showed you how the Rif was really responsible, and how Rambam DID use aggadah in Mishneh Torah. What, you don't know what Sha's is? Gemara + Mishnah, sealed. I know he didn't give sources, some hated him for that, that's why the rabbis after Rambam gave a million footnotes after, which clogged smooth reading, this was a stylistic choice on his end, I'm sorry, what do you want me to do about it? I know of the other commentaries, I believe I cited them, if not, I definitely cited others. You cannot call me ignorant, it's just your last weapon because you have none else. Share my response to a rabbi you know, see if he thinks I'm "ignorant"!

Yes, others wrote their codes, I mentioned the Tur, did I not? That's an example, the Rif, Rosh, more examples. Rabbi Yosef Karo? The best, but you refuse him, you'd be wise not too. You seem to hate anyone who believed in reason and logic. Too bad. Why did Rambam do it? He ruled a legal coding for when we're out of g'lut, why, because who knows when the info will be useful.

Rabbano Yona, the cousin of Nachmanides? Yes, he was against Rambam's philosophical writings, yes, he did sign the charem, and yes, he did burn the books, but mosc is now a complete idiot: because he fails to recall Jewish history. What did Rabbano Yona do after? He saw all the folly and hurt he'd created and repented. In the synagogue of Montpellier, he publicly admitted to his mistake. How did he wish to repent? To travel to Israel, and prostrate on Rambam's grave, to be witnessed by 10 men for 7 days. He left, but was caught up in Toledo for the rest of his life; all his lectures, for the rest of his days, were quoting Rambam on all issues, left and right. Moreover, I proved to you that many rabbis, almost all of which you quoted, never observed any charem on Rambam's writings. It's just non-existent.

You then state that I never brought a source for Baali Tosafot permitting to poskin halacha from aggadah, BUT I DID! YOU JUST REFUSED TO READ IT! Three strikes, I think you're out.

You then accuse Rambam of using a source from aggadah in Sanhedrin 58a-b, the 7 mitzvot of Bnai Noach, to make it apply to all Gentiles worldwide, in short, halacha. Those who observe the laws, as given by Moshe Rabbeinu, become Chasidei Umot HaOlam, they're not the same as those who accept the laws purely on the basis of ethical reasons alone, like being obedient to G-d. He writes in Mishneh Torah, Shoftim, Melachim uMilchamot 8:11,

"Anyone who accepts upon himself the fulfillment of these seven mitzvot and is precise in their observance is considered one of 'the pious among the gentiles' and will merit a share in the world to come. This applies only when he accepts them and fulfills them because the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded them in the Torah [that's halacha!] and informed us through Moses, our teacher, that Noah's descendants had been commanded to fulfill them previously. However, if he fulfills them out of intellectual conviction, he is not a resident alien, nor of 'the pious among the gentiles,' nor of their wise men."

Rambam is not citing aggadah, but halacha, from Torah! Yes, Talmud Bavli took that halacha, and spun aggadah from it, but its source, its foundation, is Torah, which is halacha. Mosc, you conveniently forget that Mishneh Torah is an halachic work, authored in order to clarify and rule on Jewish law, it has absolutely nothing to do with aggadah, as aggadah is not halacha and does not determine the law. In effect, you are therefore mixing up two concepts which couldn't be more different, nor belong to each other, to come up with an erroneous conclusion. This only confirms to me that you cannot be Jewish in the traditional sense, how you ever learned that Rambam broke Sha's, and that he took aggadah to determine a certain halacha, is beyond me. Rambam said in Pirush Hamishna that aggadah are deep metaphors.

Oh, and you forgot my last and best argument: Klal Yisroel. If you reject them, mosc, then you reject all major Jewish teaching for the past few centuries. You're a min, you're not a Jew if you go down that rout. Imagine what would happen if we reacted like this to Talmud Bavli, or the Chumas? Mosc, you can't pick and choose, if the majority disagrees with you, that's something to think about, not reject.

I'm waiting for you to respond to this, will you? Or will you hide in the closet again? Klal Yisroel. Answer it.

P.S., What about his remarks on Zohar? How do we know if its authentic? Because it always had a straight line of transmission, all ashes of authentic Kabbalah agree. What did the Ari do, a mystic from Safed in the Galilee region of Ottoman Syria? He explained it, the code, R. Chaim Vital wrote down most of what the Ari said, other for his poems. Also, every custom of the Ari was scrutinized, and many were accepted, even against previous practice. Luria died in Safed on July 25, 1572, and is buried at the Old Jewish Cemetery, Safed

Those who say that the Rashbi didn't write Zohar don't have the revealed holiness. After all, Mashiach will come when all knowledge of the Zohar is espoused all over the world, you'll be shocked when that day comes. But what is Zohar? Simple. Zohar is a collection of commentaries on the Torah, intended to guide people who have already achieved high spiritual degrees to the root (origin) of their souls. (So it's really not for just anyone). It Zohar contains all the spiritual states that people experience as their souls evolve. At the end of the process, the souls achieve what Kabbalah refers to as "the end of correction," the highest level of spiritual wholeness.

To those without spiritual attainment, The Zohar reads like a collection of allegories and legends that can be interpreted and perceived differently by each individual. But to those with spiritual attainment, i.e. Kabbalists, The Zohar is a practical guide to inner actions that one performs in order to discover deeper, higher states of perception and sensation.
The 10 Sefirot is refence to kabbalistic teachings.
Debate Round No. 2


The Title of this debate: Why did the Baali Tosafot put the Rambam into charem? Mr. Church, my assimilated Jew opponent has never addressed this platform. He has jabbered in his ignorance about the Rabbano Tam. He loves to garble some obscure book, which I do not have. But the Rabbano Tam never quoted halacha from an Aggadic source in the Vilna Sha's. Being the grandson of Rashi, despite the noise which Mr Church chirps and chatters, Rabbano Tam followed the sh'itta of how Rashi studied the Aggadita. Of the some 60 to 80 Baali Tosafot, none to my knowledge made halachic rulings from Aggadic sources as did the Rambam. The Rambam stands all by himself among the Reshonim.

Mr. Church writes: "who Rambam was". This falls outside of the parameters of this debate. Mr. Church declares "they never banned Rambam himself, just Moreh Nevukim and the Sefer ha-Madda". Bunk. The essence of the anti-Rambam movement during the period of the Reshonim centers upon the break which this heretic made with the hermeneutical rules of logic by which to interpret the sealed Masoret literature, established by the Tannaim scholars.

The Rambam did not know how to learn Aggadita, he did not know how it worked together with halacha. He never wrote any commentary upon the Aggadita, and the commentary written by his son failed to harmonize the warp and woof of the Talmud which the Rambam's Yad Hazaka ripped to shreds - this flagrantly violated the halacha established by both Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina - the compilers of the Sha's Bavli!

In his introduction to his Yad Hazaka, the Rambam declares that students need not further learn the Talmud to glean the halacha. The RoSH completely and totally rejected this arrogance! All commentators agree that the Rambam badly erred on this score. No dispute exists on this score - N O N E.

The Rambam did not understand halacha. He did clearly and concisely write opinions stating the halacha within the Talmud itself. For this reason many people praise his work. But behaving like a parrot, and encouraging religious bird brain-ism, that's an abomination! Halacha does not exist outside of the context of the Aggadic mussar p'shat.

Aggaditah makes a drosh upon the T'NaCH literature. The T'NaCH literature preceded the Talmud, and not the reverse. The Rambam's code learns halacha as if it had 2 legs to stand upon. The 2 legs of the Talmud, Halacha and Aggadita. The Rambam clearly did not understand this. The leg of Aggadita sends the student back to the T'NaCH mussar sources. The purpose of Aggadita, to learn mussar from the T'NaCH sources of the sealed masoret!

Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina compiled and sealed the Sha's Bavli with the intention that students learn the halacha together with its adjoining Aggadita. This represents the purpose of intent of the Gaonim, the scholars who preceded the Reshonim, who compiled Midrash Rabba. This latter compilation of Aggadic sources into a code of stories linked to the Order of the T'NaCH, this work of genius teaches how to correctly learn aggadita.

The Talmud stands upon the foundation of the Chumash/the 5 Books of Moshe the prophet. Rashi's unique theory of p'shat, which his commentary to the Chumash masterfully communicates, aligns verses with Aggadic and Midrashic sources. What Rashi did on the Chumash directly compares to what Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina did with their editing of the Sha's Bavli. Linked to each and every Mishna and Gemara commentary upon each and every Mishna ... Aggadita.

Based upon Rashi's sh'itta of p'shat in learning the Chumash, this master work teaches students of the Talmud how to learn Talmud correctly. By learning the Aggadic stories which quote specific verses from T'NaCH sources, based upon the 7th hermeneutical rule of Hillel's logic: learning in context, when the Aggadita, by quoting a specific verse, the intention - to cause the student to learn that verse within the contexts of its sub chapter/sugia as found within the literature of the T'NaCH. Why? To learn what mussar the T'NaCH teaches. Once a student grasps the mussar which the T'NaCH teaches, then when the student now learns the Aggaditah this mussar instruction learned from the T'NaCH literature transforms the Aggadic literature within the Talmud unto its P'shat - simple meaning.

Once a person attains the simple mussar understanding [defined as learning a matter from another matter] of the Aggadita, then all halachot which learn from this same Gemara source on a specific Mishna ... all the halachot from this Mishna/Gemara source attached the Mussar p'shat which one has defined the meaning of the Aggadita. This warp and woof Halacha/Aggadita connection herein defines how Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina - their intent when they compiled the Shas Bavli knitting together halacha and aggadita as one garment.

The Rambam, he abandoned faith to the logical hermeneutical rules of logic developed by the Framers of the Mishna Code. The Rambam did not understand the linkage of faith between the T'NaCH and the later Talmud. The Rambam's code directly implies that a person should learn and keep the halacha for the sake of the halacha. The Rashi school embraced by the French rabbis who placed the Rambam into cherem teaches that students of the Talmud should learn and keep the halacha for the precise reason to remember the Mussar learned from the T'NaCH primary sources of Jewish faith.

The Rambam's code of law, did not give the Talmudic sources by which the Rambam made his posok halacha. This grieve error not only encouraged a bird brained observance of halacha for the halacha's sake; it discouraged students to learn the Aggaditah within the literature of the Sha's Bavli! All have universally condemned the Rambam for this great error.

I submit that the Baali Tosafot put the Rambam into charem, till this day, b/c his halachic code shattered the warp and woof/halacha and aggadita learning connection which united T'NaCH mussar with halachic actions of faith.

My opponent, like the Rambam does not know how to learn Talmud. He serves as an ideal witness by which the Rambam merits eternal condemnation! The Torah its one Torah. The Chumash and the Talmud do not stand separate and distinct. According to the Rashi, the head of the French Rabbis who later put the Rambam into eternal charem, just as the T'NaCH verses links up with Aggadita stories, so too halacha links up with Aggadita stories.

The stories of Aggadita do not have a deep meaning, if learned divorced from the T'NaCH sources. When Aggadita makes a drosh by quoting a verse. The student of Talmud must insert this verse within the contexts of the sub chapter/sugia which contains that verse. What question does the student then ask? What mussar does this sub chapter/sugia come to teach? This essential question defines the correct way to study Aggadic literature. If the student of the T'NaCH grasps the mussar instruction therein, this "revelation" defines the p'shat meaning of the much later Aggadic source! The Talmud weaves and knits halacha and aggadita together as one garment of faith.

Why keep the halacha? By affixing the p'shat learned from the Aggadita/T'NaCH connection, the mussar as taught by the prophets lives when a person keeps the halacha! The Rambam's code raped this concept of faith which learns Talmud together with the earlier Masoret of the T'NaCH literature. T'NaCH teaches mussar. The p'shat of correctly learning halacha - N O T because its written in the Shul'chan Aruch - R A T H E R students affix prophetic mussar unto halachic mitzvot observance.

Herein defines the French school sh'itta of how to learn Chumash and Talmud together. The heretic Rambam merits Universal condemnation not only because he organized his halachic code based upon the logic of Aristotle and not the logic of the Oral Torah revealed to Moshe the prophet, but just as evil, he caused later generations to step off the well trodden path/halacha.



See my link below, 7 pages:
Debate Round No. 3
304 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
What I wrote is public record. What Judaism says, The lies made by this liar do not interest nor concern me.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
Judiasm said you were talking about dick sizes and illiterate whores. Is this true?
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
This vile liar sought to slander me by calling me an atheist.
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
This was another lie. As a Jew, I do not believe in the Gods worshiped by Xtianity and Islam. This makes me an atheist. As a Jew to obey the commandments which Moshe the prophet commanded Israel to do in the Name of the God of Israel. Keeping the commandments defines faith in the God of Israel. Hence "Praise God". Therefore this makes me an atheist praise God.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
I posted the 300th comment!
Posted by asta 3 years ago
He called you Mr. Atheist. Was there justification to this?
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
Having non Jewish friends - that's not a problem. Calling or referring to Xtians as "brothers" that's totally f*cked up. He publicly lied about his sources.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
You also accused him of having non Jewish friends yet you have non Jewish friends.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
He did have better conduct then you did. Do you believe this?
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
Whoop I drove that dishonest liar from these boards! :))))))))))))).

The idea that the Rabbano Tam abandoned Rashi's sh'itta of learning Aggaditah and Midrashim in favor of the none Sh'itta which assimilationist Rambam who had no education in how to learn Aggaditah and Midrashim, This most vile slander coupled with the slander made by that wicked person against the Rif, It truly pleases me that that vile person no longer stains Debate. Org.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.