Extremely Embarrassing Contradictions Between The

Talmud And Science

Share:

The Babylonian Talmud (including rabbinic literature as a whole) is full

of internal contradictions and contradictions with the Bible (see article
222 embarrassing contradictions in the Talmud). In addition, the
Talmud contains many hundreds of embarrassing contradictions with
science, proving that the Talmud cannot be a divinely inspired book, as
the rabbis like to claim in an attempt to impose their power and status
on the public.

Here are some example contradictions between

science and the Talmud:
• According to the Talmud, the gestation period of the snake (the
female snake) is sevenyears (Bavli, 8:11)
– while according to science it is known that the pregnancy lasts only a
few months.
• How would the Sages check whether awoman is a virgin? Rabban
Gamliel sat a woman, naked, on a barrel of wine and smelled her
mouth. If he smelled wine from her mouth? She is not a virgin. If she
didn't smell wine from her mouth? Virgin. Since, and the chrome of
 the virgins blocks the smell of wine from passing from the woman's
penis, up to her mouth. (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Ketubah, Page
10, Page 2)
Needless to say, according to science, it really doesn't work that way.
By the way, Rabbi Aryeh Stern, admits and tries to rationalize: "We
can't explain, and maybe the natures were different back then. (Rabbi
Stern, Head of the Institute of Clear Halacha)
• According to the Sages, the noise of thunder is due to thefriction of
the clouds with the stars in thesky (Bavli, Blessings 59:11).
– While according to science, it is known that thunder is the sound
generated when lightning heats the air around them to a very high
temperature; This air spreads rapidly and then contracts as it cools
down; The action of expansion and contraction causes the formation
of sound waves called thunder.
• According to the Talmud, the chicken does not have a lung (Bavli,
Holin 57:11).
– Scientifically, it is known that the lungs are an integral part of the
inner parts of the chicken.
• According to the Talmud, theearth is flatand not round, and when the
first person lives on the earth, his body stretches from one end to the
other of the world. (Bavli, Celebration 12:11)
– From a scientific point of view, it is known to all that the shape of the
earth is spherical and not flat (hence its name: earth).
• In the Talmud (Bavli, Shabbat 16:72) it is established that lice are not
created from the result of mating but fromthe sweat of man, from
human flesh or from old clothes.
– It is scientifically clear that the Sages were wrong; Lice are a type of
parasitic insect that, like other animals, form from mating.
• The Sages taught that there is a type of mouse that is halfmeat and
half earth, andis also not created as a result of mating (Bavli, Holin
127:11).
– Almost needless to say, science does not recognize a mouse made of
half earth and half meat, which is created from the earth (as Rashi
interpreted the passage).
• According to the Talmud (Bavli, Holin 52:12-53:11), a cat, a wolf, and a
lion havevenom that comes out of their clawsand may defile the
animals that are fit for food (see also Rashi's commentary on the
matter).
 – From a scientific point of view, it is known to all that these animals
do not cast venom from their nails since they have no venom at all.
• The sages of the Talmud stated that thetrachea was divided into
three: the lung, the liver, and the heart (Bavli, Holin 45:72).
– Scientifically, it is known that the trachea goes to the lungs only and
splits into two: one for the left lung and the other for the right.
• According to the Talmud, a breastfeeding woman does not have
menstrual blood, since the blood becomes the milk that thebaby
suckles. (Bavli, Nida 9:11).
– Scientifically, it is known that when a woman breastfeeds, she does
not ovulate and therefore does not have menstruation. (Her blood
does not turn into milk..)
• According to the Talmud,a pregnant woman can be transferred again.
(Bavli, Ketubah 39:11)
– It is scientifically clear that during pregnancy the woman does not
ovulate and therefore there can be no further pregnancy.
• Rabbi Judah decreed that in the sea there are creatures thatare half
human bodies and half fish bodies, which Rashi called "sirens" (Bavli,
Bechorot 8:11).
– Needless to say, the Little Mermaid exists only in children's fairy
tales...
• TheBabylonian Talmud (Megillah 6:11) referred to the city of Tiberias
and asked: "Why was its name called Tiberias?" The answer of the
Talmud: "That which sits in the navel of the Land of Israel."
From a historical perspective, it is clear that this is a miserable mistake, since
Tiberias was named after the emperor Tiberius.
• Maimonidesargued that the Earth dwells at the center of the universe,
while the Sun and the planets orbit it: "All these wheels that surround
the whole world are round a sphere, and the earth depends in the
middle" (Mishneh Torah, Halachot Yesodei Torah, Chapter 3).
From an astronomical point of view, it is clear to every rabbi that ifka
mestabra; The Earth moves around the Sun and does not dwell in the center
of the universe.
• The Sagesstated that in order to recover from the fever, one must sit
at a crossroads and catch ants. After the patient has put the ant into a
copper tube, he must say to her: "Carry and draw on you." If this
virtue did not help, he would carry a new jug, go to the river and say to
 him: "A river is a river, lending me a jug of water to the guest who has
had the opportunity to me." Then the jug will turn seven times over its
head, pour it behind it, and it will say: "A river is a river, take the water
that you have given me, that the guest who had the opportunity to
me, in his day came and in his day went" (Bavli, Shabbat 66:72). [1]
From a medical point of view, it is almost needless to say that this
prescription will not give rise to medicine from malaria fever! This disease is
caused by mosquitoes that transmit the malaria parasites from a sick person
to a healthy person. Malaria can be eradicated by using means to prevent
mosquito bites and medications to prevent the onset of the disease.
• In theMishna (Tractate Ohalot, chapter 1) it is established that in the
body a person has "eleven ribs".
Physiologically,it is known that there are 12 ribs on each side of the body
and not 11. It is interesting that the Maharal of Prague,[2] in his book Tiferet
Yisrael (on the mask of Olot 1), also admitted: "And I also saw and checked
the beast myself and saw that it had thirteen ribs on each side; And in man
we saw that he had 12 ribs on each side."
• InTractate Derech Eretzchapter 7 it is said that "this world is like the
eyeball of a man, white in it, it is an ocean sea, which surrounds the
whole world, black in it, it will return." In other words, according to
the Sages, the land and the sea are like the eyeball and the pupil; That
is, one land surrounded entirely by water.
Topographically, it is clear that the map of the world does not look like this,
since the earth's surface is mostly covered with water, but the land areas are
divided and scattered into several separate continents.
• In theMidrash ShemotRabbah (Parashat Ba, Parashat 15) it is said:
"Three hundred and sixty-five windows that G-d created in heaven,
one hundred and eighty-three in the east and one hundred and eighty-
two in the west, of which He created for the sun and from which He
created for Levana..." That is, according to the Sages, the sunlight does
not penetrate the earth except through windows installed by God in
the sky.
From a scientific point of view, it is almost unnecessary to say that sunlight
never penetrates through 365 windows in the sky, but through the layer of
the atmosphere that surrounds the Earth.
 • In theBabylonian Talmud (Pesachim 44:12), the Sages affirm the
opinion of the nations of the world, according to which: "By day, the
sun walks down from the sky and at night, down from the ground."
That is, during the day the sun is under the sky and at night it descends
and lies underground.
Scientificallyit is known that the position of the sun remains constant and
does not change in the morning or at night; On the contrary, it is the Earth
and the Moon that change their position, as they orbit around the sun.
• InTractate Pesachim44:11, it is said that "he shall give thousands of
prizes of hui alma." That is, according to the Talmud, the size of the
Earth is 6,000 horseshoes (about 24,000 km).
From a scientific point of view, it is known that the earth's average diameter
is 12,742 km and its circumference at the equator is 40,075 km.
• The Sagesargued that "this world is made and divided into three parts;
A third of water, a third of a desert, a third of a settlement" (Otzar
Midrashim, Brita Dammas Bereshit[3]).
Topographically, it is known that at least two-thirds of the world is covered
with water (and not just one third, as stated in the Midrash).
• In the Babylonian Talmud (Niddah 30:72), R. Ishmael states that,
unlike a male fetus, whose creation is completed after 40 days, the
creation of the organs of a female fetus is completed only after 80
days.
Scientifically, it is known that when it comes to completing the body's
organs, there is no significant difference between a male fetus and a female
fetus (their organs are perfect around the 8th week of pregnancy).
• The BabylonianTalmud states three causes of falling sickness
(epilepsy[4]): "who stands before the candle naked... And the apricot
is his bed by the light of the candle... used as his bed on a bed that a
baby slept on." InTractate Shabbat61:11 it is stated that the epilepsy
disorder can be cured by writing an amulet made by an expert.
From a medical point of viewit is known that epilepsy disorder is not caused
by the above reasons, but due to a congenital or developmental injury that
causes electrical changes in the brain that lead to epilepsy; These are genetic
factors that may be inherited; In the causes related to complications in
childbirth or in cases of developmental disorders. It is interesting that
elsewhere the Sages contradicted themselves and admitted – albeit by hint –
to a hereditary cause of the fall sickness. [5] Contrary to the words of the
Sages, no cure for the disease has yet been found, but it can be restrained by
medicinal means.
• The sages of the Talmud (Bavli, Vows 54:72) stated that eating fish is
difficult for the eyes, that is, it does not benefit the eyes and may even
harm them.
But in the field of nutritional sciencesthere is no proof or hint that eating
fish impairs the functioning of the eyes; On the contrary, a study from
Harvard University, which examined about 40,000 women over a 10-year
period, found that those who reported eating one or more servings of fish
per week were found to be significantly less likely to develop an eye disease
that causes vision loss. The researchers attributed this to omega-3 fatty
acids, which are found in fish. It is not surprising, therefore, why the
American Heart Association recommended consuming fish or fish oil at least
twice a week. By the way, the Sages contradicted not only science but also
themselves, for in other places they actually celebrate the virtues of eating
fish. [6]
• For medicine from rabies, theSagesrecommended the following
remedy: to create an amulet from the skin of a hyena and write on it
the following spell: "I have called me Klyros", or: "Kennedy Kennedy
Clorus, ye ye ye Lord armies Amen Sala" (Bavli, Yuma 84:11).
Medically, it is known that rabies is an infectious disease caused by the
rabies virus; Thus, treatment of the disease is carried out by the first
vaccination, which is usually given by injection into the patient's abdomen
immediately upon the bite; and sub-vaccines, which are given after about
seven or ten days.
• The Sagesvehemently demanded that the mohel performing the
circumcision suck the blood of the circumcised baby in his mouth and
even added: "The island of Umna dal meitz, danger is", that is: a sap
that does not suck – a danger is for the baby (Bavli, Shabbat 133:72).
Medical sciencehas found that the opposite is true: not only is there no
medical need for sucking the blood, but it is better to avoid it because doing
so can contaminate the open wound and endanger the baby's life; Therefore,
the Association of Pediatricians wrote to the Ministry of Health, demanding
that this practice be stopped.
 • According tothe Mishna (Tractate Ohalot 1), there are 248 organs in a
person's body. [7] R. Ishmael and R. Akiva found that, in relation to
men, a woman's body contains a greater number of organs (253 or
252 organs). [8]
Physiologically,this is a double mistake; First, it is known that in the human
body there are at most 210 organs; Secondly, the number of organs in the
body of the man and the woman is the same.
• In theBabylonian Talmud (Shabbat 135:11), the Sages stated that a
baby born in the eighth month of pregnancy "certainly will not live,
and therefore the Sabbath is not forfeited" (i.e., there is no
justification for desecrating the Sabbath for him and trying to save him
because he has no chances of life anyway). [9]
From a medical point of view, this is a miserable mistake and evidence, the
last adjudicators admitted: "No medical certificate should be found for this...
In fact... We do not trust in anything the share of the mother's pregnancy
months, and especially rely on the signs of his physical development." [10]
The rabbis even admitted that today the Talmud's assertion should not be
considered, "but rather every baby born equally... And they even desecrate
the Sabbath to save his life." [11] In short, even the commentators of the
Talmud argue that one should not follow the opinion of the Talmud on this
issue. [12]
• The Babylonian Talmud (Talmud9:72) describes a controversy
surrounding the origin of the rains: "R. Eliezer says: The whole world
from the waters of the ocean he drinks... Rabbi Yehoshua said to him,
"And the waters of the ocean are salty." He said, "Installs thickly." R.
Joshua says: The whole world from the upper waters he drinks... But
what I uphold and Ed will rise from the earth, teaches that the clouds
rise and rise to heaven, and open their mouths as a nod and receive
water from a meter." Here a double contradiction is revealed between
the Talmud and science: A-R. Eliezer is indeed right in saying that the
rain comes from the clouds that form from the sea, but he is wrong in
saying that the water becomes sweet only when it is in the clouds
(since it is known that in the process of evaporation, the salt remains
in the sea and does not rise to the sky); The second contradiction with
science is revealed in the position of R. Joshua, who argued that the
clouds rise to the sky empty as a barrel and only then are filled with
the upper waters.
[1] Annotated from Aramaic by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz.
[2] In the 16th century, he was a rabbi, a halachic authority, and a kabbalist.
[3] Edited by J.D. Eisenstein, 1915: 318.
[4] A disease mentioned in the Talmud as "forced" (see annotation of R. Idan
Steinsaltz to Tractate Pesachim 12:12).
[5] Bavli, Yevmot 64:72.
[6] Dr. Yoel Rafal, "Jewish Holidays: A Useful Encyclopedia for Shabbat and
the Holiday", 1990: 73.
[7] An organ, according to rabbinic law, must include "flesh, tendons, and
bones" (Bavli, Cholin 12:72).
[8] Bavli, Premieres 45:11.
[9] Steinsaltz annotation to Bavli, Shabbat 135:11.
[10] From the additions on the Talmud page to Steinsaltz, ibid.
[11] From "Studies" on the page of the Talmud to Steinsaltz, ibid.
[12] The religious website "Dialogue" raised the question: "Is there a source
for the issue of childbirth in the eighth month because I heard rumors that it
is not good to give birth in this month." Contrary to the opinion of the
Talmud, pay attention to the answer of Rabbi Binyamin Shauli: "There is
nothing wrong with giving birth in this month except that the fetus is not yet
fully ripe." According to the Talmud: "Certainly he shall not live"; But
according to Rabbi Shauli: "There is nothing wrong with this month." See
link:http://www.hidabroot.org/question/42844
As a reminder, on the study of this Talmud ("Torah and Art") the State of
Israel pours and wastes billions of shekels every year – directly from the
taxpayers' money!
Responses To The Claims Of Rabbi Michael Avraham

Share:

We were pleased to see that Rabbi Michael Avraham watched a video about
the myth of theOral Torahand decided to respond, here is our reference to
his main claims:

Pharisee-Rabbinical Tradition vs. Residents of God

in Sinai
"There is clear documentation that it [the residents] began to develop
long before the destruction. In our tradition, we go through things that
were said by the sages at the beginning of the Second Temple... So why
did they [the rabbis] invent the oral law? Hillel the Elder applies the
virtues of the sermon, which are the foundation of the Oral Law, to the
laws of the Passover sacrifice on Shabbat (see Pesachim 67a)." [Rabbi
Michael Avraham]
Response:
In this passage, the Rabbi seeks to provide a reference to the development of
the residents prior to the destruction of the Second Temple. In fact, we have
no problem with the assumption that the tradition of rabbinic law was viable
before it was written in the 2nd-5th centuries CE. The only reservation we
have has to do with the sanctity or heavenly validity of the residents, but
note, in order to justify the character of the residents, Rabbi Avraham wrote
a reference to the Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 66:11, but as they will argue
immediately, there are a number of problems with his approach:
• In order to give validity to the residents, the rabbi was assisted by the
residents themselves. But it is clear that this is a logical fallacy, since
the Talmud cannot attest to itself, as the Sages say: "No man testifies
to himself" (Bavli, Ketubah 27:72). This is a classic circular fallacy.
• By the way, we wish to present you with a challenge: please read the
relevant page from the Passover tractate for yourself and check
whether the aforementioned page indeed confirms in any way the
validity of the residents, as the Rabbi claimed.
• In fact, this passage once again exposes the nakedness of the
residents, both because it does not contain a single shred of reference
to those "three main conditions... that every novice police investigator
and criminal jurist knows," as the rabbi condescendingly wrote in
another article; [2] and because there is no solid evidence of a causal
relationship between the written Torah and the residents.

You will be after many

"First, I did not find in my poverty the sermon in the Tractate Sanhedrin
that takes the three words "be after many" and takes them out of
context (ignoring the word "no" before them). It is doubtful to me
whether there is such a sermon (for some reason in the video they
strayed from their path and did not bring the quote here)." [Rabbi
Michael Avraham]
Response:
In this article,[3] Rabbi Michael Avraham is required to write in Exodus 23:2:
"There will be no many after the detriment of...", but not only does he not
address the omission of the word "no" from the passage in the Talmud, he
also claims that the quote (from Eitan and Moti's video) probably does not
exist because he did not locate it in the Tractate Sanhedrin.
Well, the Rabbi did not find the quote because it was taken from Tractate
Baba Metzia 59:72 and not from Sanhedrin. Baba Metzia tells the story of
Aknai's oven and how the sages decided whether the oven was pure or
impure. As you may recall, Rabbi Eliezer brought "all the answers in the
world" and even after the daughter of all came out of heaven and sided with
his position, the sages – led by Rabbi Yehoshua – continued to resist and
decided that bat kol should not be trusted because the majority was decisive.
The reliance on the decision of the majority was based on the verse from
Exodus 23, when it completely reverses what is said in it.
In short, in his learned answer, Rabbi Avraham not only ignored the merits of
the matter and explained why the rabbis distorted the verse just to justify
their claim; As we have seen, he even searched for the verse in the wrong
place and therefore concluded that the quote is not available at all.

Isaiah 29
In another article, Rabbi Avraham attacks Eitan and Moti's use of Isaiah
29:13-14, where it is said: "And the Lord of Ostrich said, 'This nation shall
approach with its mouth and lips as my liver, and its heart shall be far from
me, and you shall be in awe of the matzah of the people of Lameda.
Therefore, I am a marvelous Joseph of this nation, a wonder and a wonder,
and the wisdom of his sages has been lost, and the intelligence of his sons
will be hidden." Jesus Christ quoted this passage (Mark 7:7) when he proved
to the scribes and Pharisees their preference for tradition over the word of
God, but Rabbi Abraham writes:
The speaker [in the video to Eitan and Moti] concludes his sermon with a
pathetically serious face, as if it were a sermon on the mountain, quoting the
verses from Isaiah 29 about "Lost Bint Nabunio", with the assumption in the
background that whoever hears or reads these verses immediately
understands what it is about and they actually obviate the need for the
whole video. Its purpose is to leave us with our thoughts as these verses
(against the background of dramatic music) echo in our heads, as a blow to
the entire rabbinical tradition... I rub my eyes in amazement and look for
what I missed. Where in these verses is there even a hint of such a
statement? In my poverty I really couldn't find any. This segment is really a
symbolic and fitting ending to this whole miserable video. [4]
First of all, consider that Rabbi Avraham did not even pay attention to the
fact that he misquoted the verse: it is not said "the wisdom of his sages has
been lost," as the Rabbi wrote, but rather: "The wisdom of his sages has been
lost." Second, the Rabbi makes no effort to refute Eitan and Moti's claim and
does not present any evidence relating to the merits of the matter. In short,
there is not a single substantive claim in his words that contradicts the
relevance of these verses, Isaiah 29, which proves the religious leaders. In
this case, it is an ad hominem logical fallacy, in which morality is attacked,
instead of confronting the message.

1. The Rabbinical Finance Industry

"What was the problem with inventing, as part of the oral law, an absolute
obligation from Daurita that every person should give a quarter of his money
to the sages, or build a house for them? The law of enrichment that appears
in the Torah could easily be expanded, and I can think of another priesthood
and priesthood of very simple midrashic techniques to "prove" the existence
of such a duty in the tools of the oral law. [5]" [Rabbi Michael Avraham]
Here, the Rabbi wishes to clarify that there is no statement in the Talmud
that encourages the granting of funds to rabbis and talmidei chachamim.
Ironically, the Talmud is full of such sayings, here are examples that are
plastered on its face:
• A." Every host is a wise student in his own home and enjoys his assets,
and the scriptures put on him as if he were always sacrificing" (Bavli,
Blessings 10:72).
• B." Anyone who lays a stock in the pocket of the disciples of the sages,
wins and sits in a yeshiva of ma'aleh that is said: "In the shadow of
wisdom in the shadow of money" (Pesachim 53:72).
• C." Rish said to Kish: "Rabbanan does not need netirota... And R. Judah
said: Manda – this is the king's dish; Excise – this is Golgotha money;
And he went – this is Arnona" (Baba Batra 7:72).
• D." The disciples of the Sages do not set out to do themselves with the
whole crowd in the building and excavation of a state and the like, so
that they will not be disgraced before the nations of the earth. And
there is no charge from them for the building of the walls and the
 repair of the gates and the salaries of the guards and the like, nor for
the king's gift. And they are not obligated to give the tax, between a
tax that is fixed on the people of the city and a tax that is fixed on each
and every person..." (Mishneh Torah for Rambam, Halachot Talmud
Torah, 6).
• e." And if there was a commodity for a wise student, let him sell first;
And there is no one of the members of the market to sell, until he sells
it" (ibid.).
• and." Every man of Israel is bound by the Talmud Torah... And those
who are unable to learn, because they do not know how to study at
all, or because of the harassment they have, will be enough for others
who study" (Shulchan Aruch, Yod Siman Rama6).

2. Rabbi Michael Avraham argues thatthe written Torah itself tells of an

oral Torah that exists adjacent to it, "In the laws of the Hebrew
mother, the Torah said: 'And if his son is destined as the law of the
daughters, he shall do unto her' (Exodus 22:9). What is the same
sentence of understanding that the verse alludes to? Nowhere is it
written what it is. It must be said that these are laws that were known
and accepted among the people."
Answer: As a matter of fact, the Torah (and the entire Bible, for that matter)
does not tell of an oral Torah that existed in conjunction with the written
one. In fact, the idea of the residents first arose only about 1,500 years after
the giving of the Torah in Sinai; The only scriptures attesting to the residents
are found in the residents itself, so this cannot be relied upon.
Moreover, the Law of Moses was handed over to the priests, not the
Pharisees, who emerged on the stage of history only during the Second
Temple period. The priests were responsible for implementing the Torah,
reading the Torah against the people, and studying it (Leviticus 10:8-11;
Deuteronomy 10:8-10, 17:18, 31:9; Joshua 13:14; Ezekiel 44:15, 23-24, etc.).
Therefore, the role of the priests – and not of any other group – was to
ensure the correct interpretation of the Torah and its actual application.
Research in the field found that the tradition of observance practiced by the
priests was rejected by the tradition of the Pharisees (rabbis). From this it
follows that the rabbinical residency is not faithful to the source that the
priests received from Sinai. [1]
Regarding the law of adoption, Exodus 21:7-11, what is written in the
"Biblical Encyclopedia" proves that there is no need for any particular talmud
for the authentic understanding of these verses. [2] Dr. Mordechai Sabato, a
religious man himself, also proved that these verses can be understood in a
simple way directly from the context, without any reliance on any tradition.
[3]
By the way, the "Trial of the Daughters" (Exodus 21:9) proves that the
Talmud does not reflect the correct annotation of the Torah, since even the
commentators of the tradition did not agree among themselves on the
correct annotation of this phrase. And Doc is there.

3. Rabbi Michael Avraham: "In the torah portion that will come out, the
Torah forbade the return of his ex-wife after she married another
man: "For a man shall take a wife and her husband, and if he did not
like it, he found nothing in her, and he wrote her a "book of excisions"
and gave it to her and sent from his house. And she left his house and
went and became another man.... " (Deuteronomy 24:1-4). This is a
long enslaved sentence that ends with "The first husband whom she
sent will not be able to return to take her," and is the teaching that the
Torah intended to renew here. The Torah did not mean here the new
one who needs to write a book of excisions for the purpose of divorce.
The matter of a book of excisions was written by the way of Orha. And
does not retire from what it is. Here, too, it must be said that it was
known in the Talmud, nor is it mentioned here or anywhere else in the
Torah how a woman is carried. It must be said that all these laws were
oral."
Answer:Yaakov Yohanan Rabinovich, a religious professor of law and an
expert in Jewish law, addressed the subject of divorce in the Bible,[4] and
found that formulas for a divorce deed ("Sefer Keteret") were common in the
ancient Near East in biblical times and have allusions in the Bible as well.
By the way, even in this case, the multiplicity of controversies in the
residents' literature regarding the content of the get deed and the grounds
for divorce indicates that the Sages also relied on different traditions in
Israel, which were passed down over the generations. [5]
Prof. Alexander Rofeh, of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, studied in
depth the subject of divorce in the Bible. In his article "Divorce in the Bible
and the Meaning of the Book of Crete",[6] he affirms that the tradition of the
Book of Crete, although echoed in other books of the Bible (Isaiah 50:1, for
example), was probably imported into biblical literature from the customs of
neighboring nations. However, the biblical book of excisions is still unique in
nature, which allows a woman to remarry but forbids her to return to her
first husband (Deuteronomy 24:4). Prof. Rofeh goes on to show how it is
possible to reconstruct the contents of the Book of Excisions based on key
passages in the Bible, even without the help of the residents.

4. Rabbi Avraham Michael: "In the torah portion that will come out, the
Torah warned not to beat the condemned person to lash more than
forty plagues: "And if the son of the wicked beating, etc., forty would
be prepared, he would not add" (Deuteronomy 24:2-3). The Torah did
not tell us when we were condemned to lashes. Here, too, it must be
said that the Torah relied on oral tradition."
Answer: Relying on this verse to establish the Talmud is presumptively self-
flagellating, because in this case, rabbinic law contradicted the Torah on the
right and on the left. Here are three examples of this:
•
InDeuteronomy25:1-3 it is said: "For there shall be a quarrel between
men and they shall approach judgment and judgment and justify the
righteous and condemn the wicked. And there was the mother of the
son of the wicked beating, and the judge was overthrown and beaten
in front of him in order to be wicked in number. Forty shall not be
prepared lest ye inflict a great blow upon these, and your brother shall
be cursed before your eyes." The phrase 'to his wickedness in
number', means "depending on the severity of the transfer."[7]In other
words, if a person deserves the punishment of lashes, he must be
beaten according to the gravity of his sin (verse 2), and in any case no
more than forty blows (verse 3).[8]However,rabbinic lawdeviated from
the commandments of the Torah and established a principle,
"according to which the number of blows in each punishment of lashes
will be thirty-nine, regardless of the severity oftheoffense."[9]That is,
according to theTorah, the number of plagues is determined by the
severity of the offense; According to theSages (Bavli, Makkah22:11),
the number of lashes will be 39 in each case.[10]
•
The rabbinic tradition has sinned by taking a verse out of context and
distorting a critical word; As mentioned above, inDeuteronomy25:3 it
 is said: "Forty shall not prepare, lest he be beaten with a great blow,
and your brother shall be cursed before your eyes." The
Sagesconfused the phrase "leko" with the expression "nakla", as if to
say: Those who have suffered lashes (beatings) are exempt from the
punishment of Crete (Bavli, Megillah7:72). [11] But in biblical Hebrew,
the meaning of the phrase "nakla" has nothing to do with spanking,
but rather means disgrace and lack of status.[12]It should also be noted
that the two expressions are derived from different roots: 'lashes',
derived from the root to KH; While 'Nakla', cut from the root Klah. [13]
• Deuteronomy25:3 accurately describes the number of blows to which
a person who is found guilty is committed: "Forty shall not perish, lest
he be beaten with a great blow, and your brother shall be cursed
before your eyes." Although the Torah emphasizes that the
commandments of Moses should not be detracted from
(Deuteronomy 4:2, 13:1), the Sages stated on their own accord: "How
much does Malkin him? Forty lacks one" (Mishna, Tractate Maccabees
III). That is, the Torah commands: 40 plagues; The residents state: 39.

5. Rabbi Michael Avraham: "It is certain that the written Torah was given
in order for it to be fulfilled, but without a resident it is not applicable.
Many commandments inherently need minimal interpretation in order
to implement them. The Torah said in general: "This month is for you
Rosh Chodesh." According to which months are counted to be used for
white months adapted to the bread??"
Answer: As we noted above, the Torah was given to the tribesmen of Levi –
and especially to the priests – for safekeeping. Therefore, the application of
the Torah was in their hands and not in the hands of the Pharisees sect that
emerged some 1500 years later.
As for the issue of the quorum of months according to the sun or the white,
this also proves beyond any doubt that the rabbinic tradition contradicted
the tradition of the priests and finally imitated it altogether; Scholars of the
Second Temple period have found a fundamental controversy between the
calculations of the solar priestly calendar and the rabbinic tradition, which
depends on the moon. The alternate calendar encouraged by the Sages
expresses the struggles for control of the Jewish people, which began
between the various sects during the Second Temple period. [14] Prof.
Rachel Elior comments: "It is reasonable to assume that the choice of sages
for a lunar calendar, whose number of days varies, in the first century CE
after the destruction, during the period of Roman rule over the Land of
Israel, is related not only to the desire to establish a calendar different from
the ancient and pre-calculated solar priestly Sabbath calendar of the sons of
Zadok, but is mainly related to the choice of a calendar that differs from the
new Roman calendar, which was a pre-calculated solar calendar..." [15]
Dr. Eyal Regev, a senior lecturer at Bar-Ilan University, shows in his book that
the reliance on the lunar calendar led the Pharisees to make halachic rulings
that clearly and openly contradicted the laws of the priests, who relied on a
solar calendar. [16] In this regard, the following are two examples of the
contradiction between the residents and the Torah:
•
Leviticus23:2 lists the jewish holidays, as determined by God Himself.
The scripture emphasizes that these are "the days of the Lord that you
will read with these holy scriptures are my dates." The dates belong to
G-d and He has determined the exact date on which they should be
celebrated. In verse 27 it is said: "But in this decade of the seventh
new, the day of the villages is a holy scripture for you." Yom Kippur,
therefore, must take place every year exactly on the 10th of
Tishrei.[17]And here, this fact did not prevent the Sages from
desecrating the Day of Atonement with a determined forehead by
changingthedate to eleven in Tishrei[18]Even though they knew that this
was a mistake (Bavli, Rosh
Hashanah25:11).[19]AndMaimonidesjustified them, saying: "A court
that sanctified the month – between Shuggin, between Muta'in,
between Anusin – is sacred, and everything must be corrected on a
day that they sanctified: even though it knew that they had made a
mistake, they must be trusted."[20]
• InLeviticus23:15, it is written: "And you have been told from the day
after the Sabbath from the day you brought Umar the momentum of
seven innocent Sabbaths will be." That is, the counting of the Omer
must take place on the Sunday of the week within the feast of matzah.
The Judaism of Halachachanged the date and ruled that the counting
should begin "from the next day of Yom Tov" (Rashi), that is, on the
16th of Nissan. This interpretation is fraught with at least two
difficulties:1-The biblical simplification of the commandment from the
day after the "Sabbath" and everywhere in the Torah where it is said
"The Sabbath" in the Knowledge of God, it does not refer to anything
 but the seventh day of the week; 2- The rabbis also admit that, unlike
the other dates in the Torah, shavuot (the ceremony of lifting the
Omer) does not have a fixed date and depends entirely on the end of
the counting of the Omer.[21]But because Halacha has decreed that the
counting must be started every year from the 16th of Nissan, shavuot
will fall regularly on the sixth day of Sivan! In conclusion, due to the
Sages' misinterpretation of the phrase "from the next day of Shabbat,"
those who follow their method are forced to indicate the lifting of the
Omer on the wrong date; Moreover, according to the Torah, shavuot
does not have an explicit date and is set only at the end of the
counting of the Omer; Nevertheless, the rabbis contradicted what was
written by ruling a fixed date for the holiday, and as a result,
completely obscured the need for the counting of the Omer.
6. Rabbi Michael Avraham: "And "Thou shalt not do any work" (Exodus
20:8), "And on the seventh day you shall return" (Exodus 23:12), etc.
But what are the forbidden crafts? In the Torah, only plowing,
harvesting (Exodus 34:22) and burning fire (Exodus 3:3) were
interpreted. Can anyone assume that the Torah forbade plowing and
harvesting and burning fire, and permitted sowing and threshing and
construction and contradiction and the like? The Torah explicitly tells
us that in the days of Moses, the woodcutters were executed on the
Sabbath, and the work of the authority was certainly not stated in the
Torah, and it must be said that he knew it orally, and on this basis they
killed him."
Answer: Since the Torah was given to the priests, for implementation,
observance and study, it can be assumed that they received all the
instructions necessary for the observance of the commandments of the
Torah. The matter of forbidden crafts on Shabbat once again exposes the
nakedness of the residents for several reasons:
• In theBabylonian Talmud (Shabbat 49:72), the Sages discuss the origin
of the quorum of the thirty-nine forefathers ofthecrafts that are
forbidden on Shabbat(according to Halacha). Rabbi Haninabelieved
that the number was set against "the same works that were in the
Tabernacle." Butother rabbisdisagreed: "This number of forty lacks
one is against the number of times that the words 'craft', 'craft' and
'craft' are written in the Torah, which in total in the Torah forty lacks
one." However, both claims are inconsistent withthe Torah: The
Mishna (TractateShabbat, chapter 7) does list 39 fathers of crafts that
 are forbidden on Shabbat, but most of them have no trace of the
Torah.[22]As evidence, the sages of the Talmud debated the question of
the origin of the 39 crafts and were forced to give a variety of
contradictory excuses for this.[23] As we have seen above, according to
some rabbis, the number of crafts is determined in light of the fact
that the words 'craft', 'craft' and 'craft' appear 39 times in the Torah of
Moses. But a simple examination shows that this is not the case; The
word 'craft' appears at least 24 times; 'His craft' – at least 4 times; and
'Craft' – over 20. In total, more than 48 times.
• TheMishna (TractateShabbat, chapter 7) lists 39 fathers of crafts that
are forbidden on Shabbat, two of which are called "the salted" (i.e., to
salt) and "the processor" (i.e., to process). But theGemara[24]
andMaimonides[25] pat the face of the Mishna and claim that "the
salt and the processor" are not two different crafts but rather the
same, because the salting of the skin is a form of processing.
Therefore, they added, one of them should be removed from the list
and the drawing work should be inserted in its place. [26]
• Inthe Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 122:72) it is stated: "A man takes a
corns to injure the egozine in him." The sages were divided as to
whether the "kornas" was a tool whose work was to prohibit or permit
and did not reach an agreement, but rather the dispute was marked
by a tie.[27]Such a controversy clearly proves that there was not a single
interpretive tradition given in Sinai and transmitted orally.
• InNumbers15, a man is caught gathering wood on Shabbat "and they
will put him on guard because he has not retired from what he will do
to him" (verse 34). God then commanded Moses to stone him (verse
3). This story raises at least two difficult questions regarding the oral
law:
• If Moses had already accepted the Oral Law in all its interpretations
before you, why didn't he know that the man had to be stoned?
• In the Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Sanhedrin 18:2) it is written that
Moses did not know what was the right way to kill that man. But this
does not make sense, because according to the oral law, the man must
be stoned to death.[28]If this matter is clearly mentioned in the Oral
Law, it means that this information was given to Moses along with the
written Torah (as the rabbis repeatedly claim). [29]However, Moses did
not know how to act, but had to consult with God in order to
understand what the proper course of action was. Conclusion:
According to the scriptures, it is not possible that Moses was given an
 oral law in which Moses could find the halachic answer to the
difficulty.

7. Rabbi Michael Avraham: "The written Torah itself grants authority to

the residents, saying: "For it will be astonishing from you anything
between blood and blood between law and law, and you have risen up
to the judge who will be in those days."
Answer: Relying on this verse also cuts down the branch on which it wishes
to sit. The rabbis therefore use these verses as proof of authority over Israel
that was ostensibly granted to them by God through the Sanhedrin, for the
present and for the future.[30]
The Sages even distorted verse 11 in such a way that even if they tell you
that right is left and left is right, and it is clear to you that this is a mistake,
even then you must obey them.[31]
Here are some fundamental problems with such an interpretation:
• We have already shown that, contrary to the claims of the Sages, the
Sanhedrin was established only during the Second Temple period, and
not before.
• The beginning of the passage makes it clear that only when an
individual faces a specific legal dispute, only then must he go, on his
own initiative, to the judge in order to tell him the word of the trial
(verse 8). None of the above verses gives judges the right to enact new
laws; These verses guide them on how to judge according to the Torah
(verse 11).[32]According to the same passage, the role of the judges was
to judge according to the laws of the Torah only, not to add to it new
commandments and laws that have nothing to do with, in most cases,
the written Torah.
•
The Sagesbelieve that the "judge" (verse 9) is actually the rabbis
themselves, but ignore the fact that in biblical times, the priests also
served as judges. Legal matters were often considered matters related
to the Temple, so it was only natural for the priests to deal with the
implementation of the judgments.[33]Therefore, there is no reason to
assume that the word "judge" in this context refers to rabbis or
Pharisees, who are first mentioned only towards the end of the
Second Temple period.[34]
• The Babylonian Talmud (Nida 19:11) interprets the phrase in verse 8
"between blood and blood" as saying "in matters of purity and
 impurity, between pure blood and impure blood." However, the true
meaning of the verse in its context does not relate to different types of
blood, but refers to criminal law, murders, manslaughter, etc.[35]This
clearly proves that it is not possible that these verses gave the rabbis
any authority to make judgments, since they were not even able to
understand their authentic meaning in their context of the entire
Torah.
• As mentioned above, according to the Bible, the priests were the
recipients of the Torah. They bore both the responsibility to teach the
People of Israel the Torah and the responsibility to preserve it in order
to pass it on to future generations.[36]Therefore, they – and not the
rabbis – were the ones who knew how to apply the Torah and judge
according to it, in the best possible way.
[1] See: Prof. Kana Wahrman, "Between the Bible and the Mishna", 2015, pp. 48-54.

[2] Edited by Moshe David Cassuto, I: Av – Atarim, 1950, pp. 431-433.

[3] In the book: "A Gift to Amos: A Collection of Studies in Biblical Interpretation Submitted to Amos Hacham", 2007, pp. 183-184.

[4] In: Biblical Encyclopedia, 2:2-Zetter, 1954, pp. 551-554.

[5] See examples of this, in Prof. Hanoch Albeck's book, Introduction to the Talmuds, 1969.

[6] In: Tarbitz 78, 4, 2009, pp. 437-446.

[7] Yaakov Haim Tigai, Bible for Israel: A Scientific Interpretation of the Bible – Deuteronomy – Vol. 2, published by: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem with

Oved Y.L. Magnes, 2016: 612.

[8] Moshe Weinfeld and Cohen-Zemach David (eds.), Encyclopedia of the World of the Bible – Deuteronomy, 2002: 188.

[9] Ibid., p. 612.

[10] Shmuel Vergon, "Shadal's Critical Attitude towards the Rabbinic Interpretation of Halacha that Contradicts the Biblical Text," JSIJ 2, 2003, pp. 97-122 (p.

109).

[11] See: Rabbi Prof. David Hartman, Love and Terror in the Encounter with God: The Theological Legacy of Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveit chik, 2006, p. 130.

[12] This is clear from 1 Samuel 18:23; Isaiah 3:5; Proverbs 12:9; And also, from Jonathan's translation of Deuteronomy 25:3; and the Dictionary of Biblical

Hebrew (M. Z. Kadri, 2007: 728).

[13] See the explanation in the New Ibn Shoshan Dictionary (1971): for the entry "Lekka" (p. 1181) and for the entry "Nakla" (p. 1721).

[14] See: Rachel Elior, Memory and Womanhood: The Sudan of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2009, pp. 155-161.

[15] Ibid., p. 161.

[16] Eyal Regev, The Sadducees and Their Laws: On Religion and Society in the Second Temple Period, 2005, p. 91.

[17] The date of Yom Kippur, on the 10th of the seventh month, is repeated throughout the Torah (see Leviticus 16:29, 25:9; and Numbers 29:7).

[18] By the way, the Midrash of Psalms4 reveals that the same law applies to other times, such as Rosh Hashanah: "G-d, what the Sanhedrin of Mateh Guzerin,

he upholds, and what is it? On Rosh Hashanah, when the Sanhedrin sits down and says: Rosh Hashanah is done on the second of Saturday, or on the third on
Saturday, immediately G-d sits up there a Sanhedrin of the server angels... And the same day that Israel decreed is the day of Rosh Hashanah even to the God of

Jacob, whom he upholds their decree, and agrees by them."

[19] In the Steinsaltz edition of this section of the Talmud, it is stated: "Since these words of R. Joshua were known, Rabban Gamliel sent him a decree: I decree

that you should come with me... "On the Day of Atonement, which applies to your account, which is according to our account, th e eleventh of Tishrei. When R.

Akiva found R. Yehoshua when he was straitting that the president had been forced to desecrate the Day of Atonement at his own expense, R. Akiva told R.

Yehoshua: "I have to learn that everything that Rabban Gamliel did in the kiddush of the month is made...".

[20] Mishneh Torah, Halachot Kiddush of the Month, Chap. 2.

[21] Rabbi Amnon Bezeq, "To this Day", 2013: 417-419.

[22] Moreover, two crafts in the list of the eight mishnahs are called: "salted" (i.e., to salt) and "to process" (i.e., to process). However, the Talmud (Bavli,

Shabbat 75:72) and the Rambam (in his commentary on the laws of Shabbat, chapter 7) corrected that the "molten and processed" were not two different

crafts, but rather the same, because the salting of the skin is a form of processing. For them, one of them should therefore be removed from the list and the

work of drawing should be inserted in its place. It should be noted that Maimonides even goes so far as to say that the Tanna who wrote this Mishna committed

a crime in doing so: "And the crime of the Tanna in remembering it at the time of writing and putting it of the affairs of th e writer."

[23] Yitzhak D. Gilat, Chapters in the Course of Halacha, Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992: 32-36.

[24] Bavli, Shabbat 75:12.

[25] In his annotation to the laws of Shabbat, chapter 7.

[26] It should be noted that Maimonides even goes so far as to say that the Tanna who wrote this Mishna committed a crime in doing so: "And the crime of the

Tanna in remembering it at the time of writing and putting it of the affairs of the writer."

[27] "Tico" (or: "tie") is a Talmudic term that indicates a lack of decision on a halachic issue. For this purpose, see Rabbi Ronen Neuwirth's book, "Touching Time:

The Holidays as an Experience in the World of the Midrash", 2016: 218; In addition, rabbi Yehuda Fruman's article on the Da'at website, at the

link:http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/toshba/hatalmud/b4-2.htm

[28] Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Shabbat 1.

[29] Talmud Yerushalmi 28:1.

[30] Bavli Talmud, Tractate Sotah Ma,A. See Discussions: Zvi Kurzweil, "The Test System" by Rabbi Mordechai Breuer, edited by Yosef Ofer, Tavnot Publishing,

2005, p. 267. And also: Yitzhak D. Gilat, "Chapters in the Course of Halacha", Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992, p. 344.

[31] Midrash Song of Songs Rabba A. In this interpretation of the verse, Maimonides argues: "Even if I tell you about a right that is left or a left that is right, the

language of Rashi, and our answer will even think in your heart that they are wrong and it is simple in your eyes when you know between your right and your left

– do as they command."

[32] See also in their context: verses 11-20.

[33] Moshe Weinfeld and Cohen-Zemach David (eds.), The World of the Bible – Deuteronomy, Ra'anana, Chronicles Publishing Ltd., 2002, p. 142.

[34] Rappaport, A., in: Menachem Stern, (ed.), "The History of the Land of Israel – The Hellenistic Period and the Hasmonean State (332-37 BCE)", Yad Yitzhak

Ben-Zvi, Keter Publishing, Jerusalem, 1981, pp. 256-257.

[35] Yaakov Tigai, Bible for Israel: "A Scientific Interpretation of the Bible – Deuteronomy" – Vol. 2, 16, 11-12, published by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem,

Am Oved Y.L. Magnes, 2016, p. 456.

And also: "Preface to the Interpretation of the Mishna" by Maimonides, pp. 4-22; See also: "Discovering the Hidden: Interpretation and Halachah in the Qumran

Scrolls" by C. Wahrman and A. Shemesh, published by the Bialik Institute, 2011, p. 142.

[36] Rachel Elior, "Memory and Womanhood: The Secret of the Dead Sea Scrolls", published by the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute, 2009, pp. 150-152.

[1] From the website: http://www.mikyab.net/ Writings/References-to-igods/

[2] On this web page: http://www.mikyab.net/%d7%9b%d7%aa%d7%91%d7%99%d7%9d/%d7%94%d7%aa%d7%99%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%95%d7%aa-

%d7%9c%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%98%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99-igod/%d7%94%d7%aa%d7%99%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%95%d7%aa-%d7%9c%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%98%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99-

%d7%94%d7%a2%d7%a8%d7%95%d7%a5-%d7%94%d7%9e%d7%99%d7%a1%d7%99%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%a8%d7%99-igod-%d7%aa%d7%95/
[3] On the webpage: http://www.mikyab.net/%d7%9b%d7%aa%d7%91%d7%99%d7%9d/%d7%94%d7%aa%d7%99%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%95%d7%aa-

%d7%9c%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%98%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99-igod/%d7%94%d7%aa%d7%99%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%95%d7%aa-%d7%9c%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%98%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99-

%d7%94%d7%a2%d7%a8%d7%95%d7%a5-%d7%94%d7%9e%d7%99%d7%a1%d7%99%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%a8%d7%99-igod-%d7%aa-4/

[4] On the webpage: http://www.mikyab.net/%d7%9b%d7%aa%d7%91%d7%99%d7%9d/%d7%94%d7%aa%d7%99%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%95%d7%aa-

%d7%9c%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%98%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99-igod/%d7%aa%d7%95%d7%a9%d7%91%d7%a2-%d7%95%d7%9e%d7%96%d7%99%d7%9e%d7%95%d7%aa-

%d7%94%d7%a8%d7%91%d7%a0%d7%99%d7%9d-%d7%a1%d7%99%d7%9b%d7%95%d7%9d/

[5] On the webpage: http://www.mikyab.net/%d7%9b%d7%aa%d7%91%d7%99%d7%9d/%d7%94%d7%aa%d7%99%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%95%d7%aa-

%d7%9c%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%98%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99-igod/%d7%94%d7%aa%d7%99%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%95%d7%aa-%d7%9c%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%98%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99-

%d7%94%d7%a2%d7%a8%d7%95%d7%a5-%d7%94%d7%9e%d7%99%d7%a1%d7%99%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%a8%d7%99-igod-%d7%aa%d7%95/

222 New Contradictions Between The "Oral Law" And

The Written Torah

Contradictions in the Oral Torah Talmud Mishna Halacha

Share:

You might be surprised to hear this—but the term "oral law" doesn't
appear anywhere in the Bible! As a matter of fact, such an "oral law" is
not mentioned at all by any of the prophets, kings or scribes in the
entire Bible. Nevertheless, the rabbis believe that Moses was given an
oral law at Mount Sinai, one that gives them the power, authority and
control over the Jewish people. For example, Rabbi Shlomo ben Eliyahu
writes, "All the interpretations we interpret were given to Moses at
Sinai." They believe that the oral law is "the living word of God."
Therefore, we should expect that there will be no contradictions
between the written law and the oral law, if it is truly given by God. But
there are indeed thousands of contradictions between the Talmud (the
"Oral Law") and the Bible (Torah Written Prophets). Therefore, it is not
possible that rabbinic law is from God. The following is therefore an
abbreviated list of 222 contradictions that have changed from the
ocean depths of rabbinic literature. (In addition, see a list ofvery
embarrassing contradictions between the Talmud and science.)

This article is a follow-up to the video TheMyth of the Oral Law.

See also a supplementary article: Embarrassing contradictions between the

Talmud and science.

COUNT 7 LESS, THE NUMBERING IS WRONG

Recently, the rabbis have been trying to antagonize us with seemingly

"contradictions in the New Testament." Ironically, for every such
"contradiction", at least 50 contradictions can be easily found between the
residents and the Bible; The following is a collection of 222 contradictions
that have changed from the ocean depths of rabbinic literature.
8. The Talmudstates that King David was one of the descendants of the
prophet Mary: "David Nami? Miriam Cathy [=Ba], dictates (1
Chronicles 1:2): And Tama abandoned, the wife of a dog, and a dog
took Efrat and gave him a hole, and dictated (1 Samuel 17:17): And
David the son of a man of Efrati" (Bavli, Sotah11:12). But in the Bible
there is no mention that Miriam married and had children! Moreover,
the Sagesmake a double error there:First, they identify the prophet
Miriam with Puah[1]And with Efrat[2](i.e., Miriam had other names);
Secondly, the Sages claim in the same passage that King David is a
descendant of Caleb ben Hetzron and Efrat. In light of this, it should be
clarified:First of all, there is no hint in the Bible that the prophet
Miriam was also called "Pua" or "Efrat"; Second, fromthe Book of
Ruth(4:19) andMedhya (2:5-15)[3]It was found that King David was a
member of the Ram ben Hetzron dynasty (and not Caleb ben Hetzron,
as mentioned in the Talmud).
9. Rabbi Jonathansaid that anyone who says that the Queen of Sheba
was a woman is mistaken (Bavli, Baba Batra15:72). However, an
examination of 1 Kings (chapter 10:1-13) andDeuteronomy 2 (chapter
9:1-12) makes it clear beyond any doubt that the Queen of Sheba was
a woman in the full sense of the word.
10. One of the sages of theTalmudstated that the prophet "Malachi is
Mordechai"; Another rabbi decided that "Malachi is Ezra" (Bavli,
Megillah15:11). From this example, it can be learned that the Sages
are not satisfied with contradicting the Bible, but cancel even the
words of his friend. It is important to note that there is no indication
or hint in the Bible of the identification of the prophet Malachi with
the figure of Mordechai the Jew or Ezra the scribe (theBibledoes not
imply a connection between them).
11. No less than four times theBook of Estherreiterates that Lehmann had
ten sons (chapter 9:10-14). Nevertheless, and without any hint from
the text, theSagesdecided that "he had a hundred sons who had
Lehmann" (Midrash "Shohar Tov", 22).[4]
12. The Babylonian Talmudemphatically states that "Job was not and was
not created, but a parable was" (BabaBatra15:11).[5]However, this
claim completely contradicts theBible, for two reasons: The prophet
Ezekiel mentions Job in the same breath as Noah and Daniel and
describes the three as righteous people (Ezekiel14:14, 20). The
comparison of Job to two historical figures such as Noah and Daniel
weakens the Talmudic theory that he was never created; In R. Abba (in
the JerusalemTalmud, Sotah25:72) he pats the Babylonian in the face,
saying that Job married Dina, the daughter of the patriarch Jacob.[6]The
internal contradiction in the words of the Sages cannot stand, for it is
impossible for a fictitious figure such as Job to marry a historical figure
as a law!.. If Job was indeed a parable, those who said that he was
married to Dina are mistaken; On the other hand, if Job did indeed
marry Dina, the wise men who thought of him, for example, were
mistaken.
13. In Genesis1:28, God blesses Adam and Eve and commands them both:
"Procreate and multiply." Despite the obvious things, theMishna
states: "The man commands fertility and reproduction, but not the
woman" (Tractate Yevmot, 6). [7]
14. InJudges19:1-2 it is written: "In those days there was no king in Israel,
and there was no man of Levi living at the stern of Mount Ephraim,
and he would take a wife as a mistress from Bethlehem of Judah. and
feed his mistress and go from him to her father's house..." According
to the above, the man's mistress left him because she had been
prostituted. In complete disregard for the explicit ritual,the
Babylonian Talmudstated two completely different reasons for her
departure: "Rabbi Eviatar said: A fly found her; R. Jonathan said, "Nima
found her" (Gitin6:72). In other words, the first reasonlies in the fact
that the man found a fly in the food she served him, got angry with her
and she was forced to run away; According tothe second – and
grotesque, it should be noted – grounds – he found hair in her penis
and therefore she was forced to flee. In both cases, the Sages
completely contradicted the clear reason that the Bible brings – "and
feed on him his mistress."[8]
15. In Genesis25:1-2 it is said: "And Abraham took a woman named
Ketura. And give birth to him Zamran and Yakshen and Medan and
Madin and Yishbek and Shoah." The MidrashBereshit Rabbahstated
that Ketura "is Hagar" (Parashat 61, Chayei Sarah). The midrash
identifies Ketura as Hagar, but it is clear from what is written in the
Torah that the Sages were wrong, since verse 2 mentions Ketura's
children and the name Ishmael is not one of them. The mistake of the
midrash was also pointed out by the commentator R. Yitzchak
Abarbanel,[9]Who admitted that the opinion of the Sages in this case is
inconsistent with the simplicity of the Torah.
16. InExodus4:25 it is said: "And take a narrow bird and cut off the
foreskin of her son...". Here, black on white, it is written that Zipporah
cut off and circumcised her son's foreskin. The sages of the
Talmudfound it difficult to accept that a woman could perform a
circumcision and, in complete contradiction to what was said in the
Torah, stated: " And take – that is, that she did not take herself, but
told another to do so... And you cut off – that she told another man
and did..." (Bavli, Foreign Labor27:11). [10] In doing so, the Talmud
contradicted not the Torah alone, but rather the MidrashShemot
Rabbah, in which it is actually stated that Zipporah – and no one else –
was the one who cut off her son's foreskin (Seder Shemot, Parashat 5).
[11]
17. InGenesis6, it is written: "And God said to Noah the end of all flesh
came before me... Make you a cane gaffer tree do, do the thebes, and
atone for you from home and abroad in the village... And Esau rested
as much as God commanded him, so he did" (verses 13-14, 22). Based
on this description, theSagesstated that Noah built the ark for 120
years! [12] Rashiconfirmed this, saying, "And why did they bother with
this building? In order for the people of the flood generation to see
him, he has been engaged in it for a year." [13] However, based on the
relevant text, it is clear that the account compiled by the Sages is in
complete contradiction with the Torah; Before Noah began to build
the ark, it is said that his 3 sons were born – Shem, Ham and Japheth
(Genesis6:10); When they all came out of the ark, two years after the
Flood, it is said that there he was 100 years old (chapter 11:10). Now
the question arises as to how it is possible that Noah worked on the
construction of the ark for 120 years (as the Sages say), knowing that
Noah's sons were born before the flood broke out and before the start
of the construction of the ark and based on the fact that there he was
 100 years old when they left the ark?.. According to theSages'
account, there he had to be at least 121 years old[14] when he left the
ark after the flood, butthe Bibleclearly says that he was only 100 years
old!
18. InGenesis32:25-31 it is written: "And more Jacob alone and he will
fight with one another until dawn... And he said to me that the dawn
had risen, and he said, "I will not send you, but I will bless you... And
Jacob will no longer say your name, but the mother of Israel because
you have served with God and with people and you will be able to.
And Jacob will ask and he will say, "Your name is your name," and he
said, "Why would you ask for my name and bless him there." And
Jacob called the name of the place Peniel because I saw God face to
face and saved my soul." The above passage contains several
indicators that the man who struggled with Jacob was the angel of the
Lord: Jacob asks for his blessing (verse 27); The angel changes his
name to Israel,[15] because she sings with God (verse 29); The angel
does not reveal his name[16](verse 30); The angel blesses Jacob (verse
30); Jacob calls the name of the place "Peniel", because he saw the
face of God (verse 31). Moreover, Hosearepeats the story and
describes the man who struggled against Jacob as an angel of God
(12:4-5). The Sageswere not impressed by this and stated: "And more
Jacob alone and struggle with one another with him, it is Samal the
minister of Esau who asked to be killed" (Midrash Tanhoma, Parashat
Vayishlach, 8). That is, according to the Torah, the man was an angel of
God; According to the Sages, Satan. [17]
19. InGenesis8 it is said: "And God spoke unto Noah to say. Get out of the
taba you and your wife and your sons and the wives of your sons with
you... And Noah and his sons and his wife and the wives of his sons
went out with him... And He rested on the altar of the Lord, and he
took from all the pure beasts and from all the pure chicken, and Yael
went up at the altar" (verses 15-16, 18, 20). From the last sentence
(verse 20) it is clear that it was Noah who built an altar and put the
offerings on it. Despite this, and without any biblical justification,
theMidrash Tanhoma (Parashat Noah) stated that Noah "was not fit to
make a sacrifice and sacrificed his son under him." That is, even
though in the Torah it is written in black on white that Noah sacrificed
offerings at the altar,the midrashclaims that it was actually his son –
there. [18]
20. Genesis18:8 explicitly states that Abraham's three guests ate from the
refreshments he gave them, as it is written: "And he stood on them
under the tree and they ate." The Sagesteach that in fact they did not
eat at all (Bereshit Rabbah, Parashat Vayera).
21. The Torahstates that the month of spring (Nissan) is the first month of
the year (Exodus12:2, 13:4; Leviticus23:5). The rabbisdecreed that
Rosh Hashanah actually begins in the seventh month, i.e., Tishrei
(harvesting the Shulchan Aruch, the laws of Rosh Hashanah).
22. And as if to add sin to a crime, the rabbis added that "it is customary
to lilac on Rosh Hashanah eve after the morning prayer to the
cemetery to prostrate on the graves of the righteous" (Katzur
Shluchan Arukh, Laws oftheMonth of Elul). This is despite thefactthat
the Torah categorically forbids this unclean custom and even warns
that touching the grave and not purifying one's soul will be cut off
from the crowd of Israel (Numbers19:16-20).
23. InDeuteronomy10:12 it is clearly stated: "And now Israel, what is the
Lord your God, ask of your people, but to revere the Lord your God...".
However, the commentator "We have been in my life"[19](and many
like him) decided to add one letter to the word "what", in order to
justify his argument: "What does the Lord your God ask of your
people, do not call "what", but a hundred, that is: the hundred of the
Lord your God asks of your people... to imply in a reference way that a
person must bless a hundred blessings every day" (Parashat Aqab,
chapter 10). Note that not only did the commentator tuck a letter into
the original text, he also invented a commandment that is not written
in the Torah, according to which it is obligatory to bless one hundred
blessings a day.
24. From the descriptionin 2 Kings 4:17-37, it is clear without a shadow of
a doubt that the son of the shunmi woman died (and Elisha answered
with life), which is said: "And he sat on her knees until noon and died"
(verse 20), "And Elisha came home and behold the boy died" (verse
32). Rabbi MosheSofer was not impressed by the clear simplification
and stated inMaimonides' name that "the son of the Shunamit did not
really die" (The Chatam Sofer, Responsa 82, Yod Si' Shelach). [20]
25. InNumbers28 it is said: And in the heads of your newcomers you shall
sacrifice to the Lord bulls of cattle for years, and one ram of one-year-
old sheep seven shall die... "And one goat sinned to atone for you"
(verses 11, 22). Although the Torah says "to atone for you,"
theTalmudstates that these sacrifices were intended to be atonement
 for the sins of God, Rachmana-Litzlan: "The Almighty said: Bring
atonement on me that I have reduced the moon... "The Almighty said:
'This goat shall be atonement for having reduced the moon' (Bavli,
Holin67:2).[21]
26. The author ofEcclesiasteswarns us lest we become "books a lot of
endless, and a lot of flesh touching" (chapter 12). But pay attention to
the twoSages' interpretations of the same verse:1-"It does not mean
that he should be careful of doing them, but that he should be careful
and try to do them..." (Abarbanel, Preface to the Commentary on
Jeremiah); 2-"My son, be more careful with the words of the scribes
than the words of the Torah..." ("Innocent Torah", Ecclesiastes 12).
That is, their interpretation is completely opposite to the simplification
of the verse in Ecclesiastes and its context!
27. InGenesis39, the story of Potiphar's wife is told: "And the wife of his
masters shall bear her eyes to Joseph, and Tamer lay with me. Wiman
and Yamer al-the wife of his masters are my lords who do not know
with me what is in the house and all that he has given in my hand. He
is not greater in this house than me, nor has anything darkened from
me, but if you are his wife, and how shall I do this great evil and sin
against God" (verses 7-9). "Wiman", means: did not want,
refused.[22]For some reason, theSagesunderstood this in the opposite
way and stated: "It occurred to him to sleep with her, and saw the
image of his father in the window and retired from it" (Midrash
Aggadahon Parashat Vayechi, 49:24). That is to say: Joseph desired to
sleep with Potiphar's wife and had Jacob not appeared in the window,
he would surely have surrendered to his production.
28. The Old Testamentemphasizes that when the universe was created
and all that is in it, God did not consult anyone but did it alone, as it is
written: "You have redeemed and consumed from your belly, the Lord
has made every inclination of heaven alone from the background of
the earth, who is with me" (Isaiah44:24). [23] All this did not prevent
theSagesfrom ruling that when God sought to create man, He first
consulted and reigned in the angels of the server (Bavli,
Sanhedrin38:72). [24] The prophet Isaiah (40:12-14) emphasized that
God did not consult anything when He created His world. However, as
strange as it may sound, the rabbis stated that he also consulted the
Torah before he created theworld. [25]
29. Rabbi Nehemiahsays that Pharaoh did not perish together with his
soldier (Michlita Derbi Ishmael)[26], even thoughin Exodus14:28 (and
 Psalm 136:15) it is clear from the entire context that the water
covered Pharaoh with all his troops and even "one of them did not
remain" (Psalm106:11).
30. The Sagesstated that "no one's prayer is heard, except in the
synagogue" (Bavli, Blessings6:72). However, the Bible is full of
examples of figures who prayed outside the synagogue and whose
prayers were heard, such as Abraham (Genesis 20:17); Moses
(Numbers 11:2, Deuteronomy 9:20-26); Hannah (Shmuel 1:1-19);
Jonah (Jonah 2:2); Job (Job 42:8-10).
31. The Torahcategorically and clearly forbids incest and the wedding of
relatives, as it is written: "No man, to all the rest of his flesh, you shall
not come near naked..." (Leviticus18:6-17) Nevertheless, rabbinic law
comes and rules: "It is a commandment to marry [to marry] the
daughter of his sister or the daughter of his brother" (abbreviation of
the Shulchan Aruch, Halachot Halachot 145:9).[27]Evidence that this
halacha is completely distorted is found in the will of R. Judah the
Pious, who dared to speak out against the Sages and ruled: "A man
shall not bear the daughter of his brother or the daughter of his sister"
(Letter 22).
32. InNumbers24:3, 15, Balaam is described as "a man who has closed his
eye." From verse 16, it can be easily understood that 'shut the eye'
means: visible.[28]But in the "Midrash Agada" (Parashat Balak, 24) not
only is it said exactly the opposite, but in honor of this they also
brazenly replaced the first letter with the word "shut up": "And the
man spoke innocently. Hence Balaam, Soma [blind] in one of his eyes
was; Don't call it 'innocent' but shut up."
33. The Sagesteach that Moses did not die (Bavli, Sotah13:72; [29] The
book "The Duration of Wisdom", Parashat and this is the blessing; and
the book "Page on Paper", Inscriptions: The Book of "The Offering of
Elijah" from the key of "Talmud", p. 34), although in Deuteronomy
34:5-6 it is explicitly written that Moses died and was buriedinthe land
of Moab.
34. The Talmudstates that 3 hours a day G-d sits "and plays with
Leviathan" (Bavli, TractateEzra 3:72). Although if you
readPsalm104:25-26, it is quite clear that the meaning of the verse
"Leviathan is that you have created to play with him", is that the
Leviathan is playing in the sea (the word 'in it' refers to the word 'the
sea', from verse 25).
35. Hillel the Elderamended the law of the "prosebol" (Mishna, Gitin4)
and effectively abolished the omission of obligations required bythe
Torah (Deuteronomy15:1-3). So severe was Hillel's ruling against the
Torah that the Amora Shmuel said of it: Prosebol is an insult to the
Torah, if I gather strength – unemployment! (Tractate Gitin, 36:2).
36. In the book ofShimoni's schoolbag (1 Samuel), it is said that anyone
who says that the sons of Samuel the prophet sinned is wrong, even
though1 Samuel 8:3 explicitly states that they "did not follow in his
[father's] footsteps and took the greed and vito judgment." In other
words, Shmuel's sons sinned in a big way (they greedy, took bribes,
and biased judgment)!
37. In theTalmud (Bavli, Tractate Yuma9:11), it is said that those who say
that the sons of Ali sinned are mistaken. But in1 Samuel it is explicitly
written that they were "the sons of Bil'el did not know the Lord"
(chapter 2:12); And also: "And the sin of the boys shall be very great"
(verse 17); Later in the chapter, it is said that they even dared to sleep
with "the women of the armies opened the tent of Moed" (verse 22);
Three verses later, their father hints to them that they have sinned
against God (verse 25); And if that was not enough, in verse 34 Ali is
told that his two sons would die in one day because of their evil deeds
(a self-fulfilled prophecy in chapter 4:17).
38. In theShimoni schoolbag (2 Samuel), it is said that anyone who says
that King David sinned is mistaken. However, in2 Samuel it is written:
"And what David did in the sight of the Lord was evil" (chapter 11:27);
In chapter 12, David confesses to Nathan and says, "I have sinned
against the Lord" (verse 13); And inPsalm51, David again confesses his
sin by begging God to erase his crime, to wash away his iniquity and to
cleanse us of his sin (verses 3-4), because "to you alone I have sinned
and the evil in your eyes I have done" (verse 6).
39. Inthe Shimoni schoolbag (1 Kings), it is said that anyone who says that
King Solomon sinned is mistaken. But in1 Kings it is written that "King
Solomon loved many negro women... "As the Lord said, 'Unto the
children of Israel, thou shalt not come in them' (chapter 11:1-2); He
had many horses for himself (Deuteronomy 29:25) and women (1
Kings 11:3),[30] who turned his heart after other gods (verse 2). In
verse 6, it is written that Solomon did evil in the eyes of God; In verse
7, it is written that Solomon erected altars of idols; In verse 9, it is
written: "And the Lord shall begrudge Solomon because his heart shall
be inclined from the people of the Lord, the God of Israel"; And in
 verse 14, it is written that following Solomon's misdeeds, God raised
up Satan for Solomon.
40. The Sagestaught that "the great honor of mankind, who rejects
[mitzvot] shall not do that in the Torah,"[31] that is, "many things have
allowed the uprooting of the word of Torah from sage and from the
dignity of mankind" (Rashi). Rabbi Aaron Lichtensteinexplains: "Rashi
mentions the Talmud in Yevamot, which concludes that sages can
decree a decree that will uproot anything from the Torah." [32] But in
the Torah (Deuteronomy4:3, 13:1), it is stated that it is forbidden to
add to or detract from the commandments ofthe Torah; And in
Deuteronomy 27:26 it is written that those who do not fulfill the
commandments of the Law are damned.
41. According to thePentateuch, the commandments of the Torah were
given by Moses (Exodus19:5) and not before. Accordingto the Sages,
the Talmud was also given by Moses (SafraBehar, Parashat 1). But
elsewhere, the rabbis claim that our forefathers – Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob – had time to learn and uphold the written Torah and the
residents.[33] So, on the one hand, the Sages claim that the written
and oral Torah was given by Moses; On the other hand, they say that
our ancestors learned the Torah even before the birth of Moses.
42. InGenesis9:1-7, God commands the sons of Noah at most four
commandments. However, the Sagesechoed from their hearts the
seven "commandments of the sons of Noah." [34] The problem
intensifies when one discovers that only two of the seven invented by
the rabbis appear in the biblical text; All the rest were simply invented
and put on a list on the nose and nose of the Torah!
43. The Torahcommands: "And that Yegor lives with you in your land, you
shall not be condemned with him. As a citizen of you, you will have a
stranger who lives with you and loves him as much as you do"
(Leviticus19:33-34). However,rabbinic lawstates that "the Gentiles
who are not among us and between them are at war... They must not
be saved; If they tended to die, such as seeing one of them fall into the
sea, it is not his virtue, which is said: "Thou shalt not stand on the
blood of thy neighbor" (Leviticus 19), and it is not thy neighbor"
(Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Halachot Murderer, 4). That is, when
meeting a drowning non-Jew, even in times of peace, one should not
try to save him or help him. Why? Because he is a gentile!
44. The Torahforbids us to lie (Exodus23:7; Leviticus19:11). And here, the
rabbis come and teach that, contrary to the words of the Torah,
 sometimes it is actually permissible and necessary not to tell the truth
and even to lie, especially if it comes to lying to non-Jews. [35]
45. In the Book ofEstherit is stated in a very simple and clear way: "And
Taman the queen and my wife come in the king's word... King
Ahasuerus said to bring the queen Vashti before him and not come"
(Chapter 1:12, 17). For some reason, theSagestook upon themselves
the authority to determine that the angel Gabriel gave rise to a queen
and two tails in the buttocks (!!!) and therefore was embarrassed to
accept Ahshvarush's invitation (Bavli, Megillah12:72).
46. On the subject of divorce, theTorah says: "For a man shall take a wife
and her husband, and if he does not like it, he finds in her a
wakefulness of the word, and he wrote a book of excision for her and
gave it to her and sent it from his house" (Deuteronomy24:1). That is
to say: the grounds for giving a get can only be prostitution or
adultery.[36]Despite these clear words,Beit Hillelcame and taught that a
husband can divorce his wife even if "the drilling stews...". AndRabbi
Akivaruled: "He even found another handsome one" (Bavli, Gitin71a).
[37]
47. The Bibletestifies to Daniel that he and his friends were "children who
had nothing in them and were good-looking and educated in all
wisdom and knowledge and savvy" (Daniel1:4)... "And these four
children, god gave them science and the intellect in every book and
wisdom. And Daniel understood in every vision and dreaming" (verse
17). Although theOld Testamentpraises Daniel's wisdom,Rabaclaims
that "Daniel made a mistake in Bahá'u'lláh," meaning that Daniel made
a mistake in the account he made in chapter 9 (Bavli, Megillah12:11).
48. In the Book ofEsther, chapter 2, it is said of Mordechai: "And Amen of
Hadassah is Esther the daughter of Dado because she does not have a
father and a mother, and the girl is beautiful and good-looking, and on
the death of her father and mother, Mordechai took a daughter for
him" (verse 7). The Sageswere not satisfied with the clear description
above and also gave Mordechai the following bizarre role: "Once he
repeated all the breastfeeding women and did not find Esther
breastfeeding, and he was breastfeeding" (Shimoni Schoolbag, Esther
chapter 2). In other words, Mordechai breastfed Esther himself.
49. InGenesis2 it is said: "And the Lord god created from the earth all the
beasts of the field and all the fowl of heaven, and he came to man to
see what he would call him, and all that man would call him a living
soul is his name. And man shall call names to all the beasts and to the
 birds of heaven and to all the beasts of the field..." (Verses 19-20). The
Sageswere not ashamed to state with grotesque rudeness that this act
"teaches that a man came upon every beast and beast and his mind
did not cool down until he came upon Eve" (Bavli, Yevmot63:11). That
is to say: Adam mated with each and every animal before he knew
Eve. [38]
50. The lion's share of theTorahis dedicated to the work of the sacrifices
and our atonement depends on it,[39]As it is written: "For the blood is in
the soul shall atone" (Leviticus17:11). Oddly enough, out of the 613
commandments, there is not a single one that relates to
prayer.[40]Nevertheless, the Sages taught that "prayer is greater
thanthesacrifices" (Bavli, Blessings32:72).[41]And in fact, because
prayer has completely replaced the victims.[42]
51. Inthe Torah of Mosesit is written: "And the salt of the deed of God,
and the letter of God is, engraved on the cheek" (Exodus32:16). The
word 'Herut' emphasizes the binding and fixed manner in the
commandments. However, in order to give themselves the freedom to
interpret the Torah as they wished and to separate other
commandments from their hearts, theSageschanged the scriptures
and stated: "Do not call 'liberty' but 'liberty'" (Pirkei Avot6).
52. InLeviticus23, the commandment "Read with them" is repeated three
times (verses 2, 4, 37). The intention: to read 'them' – the times of the
Lord – in their time, as determined by God. However,R. Akivacame
and exclaimed: "You... You... You" (Bavli, Rosh Hashanah25:11). That
is, Akiva deliberately misrepresented the scriptures in order to
emphasize that the setting of the dates is not in the hands of Heaven,
but is at the discretion of the rabbis.
53. In theSong of Haazinuit is written: "Outside of the sword and from the
rooms of terror, also-a fellow also a virgin suckles with a man of
return" (Deuteronomy32:25). That is, the object of bereavement and
terror will be men, women and children and the elderly. And here, in
the "Midrash Tannaim" for the book of Deuteronomy 32, they did not
refrain from changing the simplification and stating with a frown: "Do
not read with a 'man of return', but with a man of yeshiva, teaches
that they are all worthy of a yeshiva."
54. InIsaiah41:2 it is written: "The waters of the city from the east of
Jupiter shall call him at his foot...". Despite this, the MidrashBereshit
Rabbahdid not dislike the change in the text: "Do not call 'the city', but
illuminate...".
55. InExodus29:43 it is written: "And I consecrated her name to the
children of Israel and was sanctified with my liver." However, the
Sagesdid not distort the scriptures, and attributed a completely
different meaning to it: "Do not sacrifice 'in my honor' but in my
dignity" (Bavli, Zevahim15:72).
56. In Deuteronomy 33:4 it is written: "Torah tzva-leno Moses, morasha
Ecclesiastes of Jacob" (Deuteronomy33:4). The Sages distorted what
was said rudely in order to adapt it to the inclination of their hearts:
"The next on a girl from Ursa [in a dream] will look forward to the
Torah, which is said (Deuteronomy 33): TheTorah commands us
Moses, the legacy of Ecclesiastes of Jacob; Do not sacrifice 'morasha'
but from orsha" (Bavli, Blessings57:11).
57. In Isaiah3:3 it is said: "A fifty-year-old and pretentious minister and a
counselor and a wise man who is deaf and wise to whisper." The
Sagesdared to change the text, stating: "Do not call 'the minister of
fifty' but the minister of the pentateuch; The one who knows how to
marry and give in five pentateuchs of the Torah" (Bavli, Hagiga14:11).
58. InExodus12:17 it is written: "And you kept the matzos, for on this very
day I took your armies out of the land of Egypt and you kept this day
to your door, imitating the world." 'This day' refers to the holiday of
'matzah' from the beginning of the verse. Although the word "matzot"
is also repeated in verses 8, 15, 20, 39,R. Josiahallowed himself to
completely change its meaning and state that one should not read
"matzot", "but you have kept the commandments" (Michlita Derbi
Ishmael, Ba, Tractate Dafscha, Parashat 9).
59. InExodus25:18,20 it is written: "And you have made many years of
gold from a hard time, you shall do with them from both ends of the
atonement... And there were the cherubs with their wings on top, with
their wings on the village, and their faces against one another to the
village..." The Sagesrudely deviated from the Pest and interpreted:
"While Israel was on pilgrimage, he rolled up the veil to them and
showed them the cherubs that were naked [mating][43]They say to each
other, "See your affection before the place as the affection of male
and female" (Bavli, Yuma54:11).
60. InDeuteronomy24:16, it is written: "Fathers shall not be put to death
over sons, and sons shall not be put to death over fathers, and no one
shall be put to death." InEzekiel18 it is said: "The sinful soul is to die...
"A son shall not bear the father's penance, and a father shall not bear
the son's penance, the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon
 him, and the wickedness of wickedness shall be upon him" (verses 4,
20). Contrary to the clear and clear message of the Bible, the Sages
taught that "forthesake of vows, a man's wife died... "For the sake of
vows, sons die when they are small" (Bavli, Shabbat32:72);
TheRadakstated that "the little sons die for their fathers"; [44] And
Rashicommented that "the little ones die for the transgression of their
ancestors at the hands of heaven." [45] That is to say: The Biblesays
that sons shall not be put to death for the sins of their fathers; The
Talmudand leadingtraditional commentatorsteach that sons will be
put to death for their fathers.
61. Exodus20:4-5 clearly states: "Thou shalt not make a statue and any
image, which is in the heavens above and which is in the earth below
and which is in the water beneath the earth. You will not bow down to
them or worship them...". Not only is it forbidden to bow down to the
statues, the Torah also commands: "For destruction shall be
destroyed, and their tombstones shall be broken. and you have
worshiped the Lord your God" (23:24-25). The rabbisignored this,
because "the synagogue in Nehardea had a monument [a statue of a
man in the image of the king[46]], and a rabbi and Samuel and the
father of Samuel and Levi would come in and pray there" (Bavli, Rosh
Hashanah24:72).
62. The Torahforbids the existence of a male member in any way and calls
it an abomination (Leviticus18:22, 20:13). [47] In contrast,Maimonides
states: "Next on the remember... If the male was nine years old or
younger, they are both exempt." [48] Maimonides permits sexual
relations between two males, provided that one of them is still under
the age of nine. In doing so, it actually allows both homosexuality and
pedophilia, all under the auspices of Halacha.
63. In theMishna, it is ruled that "three years and one day old, sanctified
in the coming" (Tractate Nida, chapter 5). That is, a baby over the age
of three is allowed for marriage and embezzlement! [49] Rashieven
found a precedent for this in the Torah and stated that Isaac married
Rebecca when she was three years old. [50] But notice how Rebecca is
described one chapter earlier, inGenesis24: "And behold, Rebecca
came out... And a wake-up call. And the boy Tevet is very visible, a
virgin and no one knew, and the eye will come down and fill with grass
and canal. The servant rushed towards her and said, "The Gemayini is
a little bit of water from your jug." And she said, "Drink my lord, and
hurry up, and go down by her, and drink him." And you can water it
 and tell Gamlich too, 'I'll suck up to the mother-in-law to drink.' And
hurry up, and razor as a field, and excuse another god of the well to
suck, and suck into all his camels" (verses 15-20). Is this how a three-
year-old girl behaves?.. Even from the description of the first meeting
between Rebecca and Yitzhak, it is quite clear that she is a woman or
an adult girl: "And Rebecca looked up and saw Isaac and fell over the
camel. And say to the servant, who is this man walking in the field
towards us? And the servant said, he is my master. And take the veil
and cover yourself" (verses 64-65).
64. The Torahdraws a clear and abysmal boundary between the pure and
the unclean (Leviticus11:14). Nevertheless, the Babylonian
Talmudtells ofR. Meir, who would "say of pure uncleanness and show
him a face, a pure unclean and show him a face"; [51] OfSomachus, a
disciple of R. Meir, "who would say of every single thing of impurity
forty-eight tastes of impurity and of every single thing of purity forty-
eight tastes of purity"; and aboutan old student from Yavneh, "who
would purify the spawn with one hundred and fifty flavors" (Tractate
Eruvin13:72). In other words, by halachic falsifications, the Sages
allowed themselvestobecome pure "what is explicitly written in the
Torah that is unclean" (Steinsaltz annotation).
65. In the bookof Deuteronomy, theking commands that "he shall not
have many wives" (chapter 17:17). Despite the clear warning of the
Torah,Rabbi Judahdecided to get smarter and said, "He has a lot to
him, as long as he does not dedicate his heart." In other words,
contrary to the Torah commandment that the king would not have
many wives under any circumstances,the Talmudpermitted the
multiplicity of women under certain pretexts. [52] Maimonidesruled
that any man who is rich enough may marry "several women, even a
hundred, whether at once, or one after the other; And his wife cannot
delay him..." [53] It is important to say that although from a halachic
point of view a man can take one hundred wives, Maimonides
mentions that theSagesreduced this "only" to four, so that the
husband would have time to serve each of them at least once a
month. [54]
66. The book of Genesis (1:27, 2:21-23) explicitly states that on the sixth
day, God created one man (Adam) and one woman (Eve). And here,
with unprecedented brazenness, theSagesstated that God actually
created two wives for man; The first is Lilith and the second is Eve
(midrash "Alpha Beta Deben Sira").
67. IntheBook of Deuteronomy, the warning not to add even one
commandment to the Torah is reiterated (Deuteronomy 4:2, 13:1).
The rabbisignored this and added many mitzvot, right in the explicit
name of G-d, for example: wrapping oneself in a tallit, washing hands,
lighting candles[55] and parashat challah. [56]
68. In the order of creation, described inGenesis1, it is explicitly stated
that on the second day, God made "the heavens in the water, and
there was a distinction between water and water" (verse 6). Quite
simply, the Torah reports that on the second day the heavens became,
"and God called the heavens to heaven" (verse 8). The Sageswere not
satisfied with this and stated, without any confirmation from the Bible,
that on Monday God also created the angels: "When were the angels
created? R. Johanan said, "In the second, the angels were created"
(Bereishit Rabbah, Parashat 1).
69. InIsaiah43:7, it is said directly from the mouth of heroism, clearly and
sharply, that the whole creation was created in honor of God and for
Him. In contrast, theSagesrequired each and every person to say, "For
me, the world was created" (Mishna, Sanhedrin 4). R. Nachman of
Breslovcontinued this noble trend and stated that "it is necessary for a
man to say: The whole world was not created, but for me" (Likutei
Moharan5). [57]
70. According to theBible, it is clear that the creation of the world
preceded the Torah (Genesis1-2, 26; Exodus13-24; Psalms78, 14-15,
136). [58] On the other hand, according to theSages, the Torah
preceded the creation of the world (Midrash Tanhoma, Parashat
Bereishit; Yalkut Shimoni, Genesis Remez 2). [59]
71. The Law of Mosesemphasizes that there is only one God
(Deuteronomy6:4). This fact did not prevent the authorof the
Zohar[60] from stating that there are two Gods: "And on da and God
created man in his image in the image of Elakim (Teri Elohim haka,
sharp towards Dakar and sharp towards Nuqba[61])". Simply put, the
author of the Zohar sought to explain how it was possible for one God
to create in his image two different figures – male and female – and
therefore stated with a fierce forehead that there must be two Gods –
one male and one female.
72. From Genesis 18 (verses 1-3,16-22) it is perfectly clear that one of the
three people who visited Abraham was God himself! [62] The
plainness of the Bible did not preventthe Sagesfrom stating that the
three men were "Michael and Gabriel and Raphael" (Bavli, Bava
 Metzia86:72). [63] It is a pity that in order to avoid admitting the
obvious, the rabbis had to invent the angel "Raphael", which is not
mentioned at all in the Bible.
73. The Torah emphasizes that we must remember and keep the Sabbath
day to its sanctification, and this includes not only us, but all the
members of our household, including: "Thegarach that is in the gate"
(Exodus20:10; Deuteronomy5:14). Although the Sages
distortedthemeaning of "Hagar" and stated that it was a convert to
Judaism,[64] the meaning of Hagar in this case (and in general in the
Bible) is nothing more than a stranger and a alien. [65]
Notwithstanding the clear commandment not to employ the alienated
among us on Shabbat,[66] therabbis invented, out of nothing, the
phrase "non-Jew of Shabbat"[67] and stated that while it is forbidden
to ask the non-Jew to do a craft explicitly,[68] but to tell the non-Jew
by hint – it is permissible! [69] Did you get the peppering?.. It is
forbidden to say, it is permissible to imply! It is worth noting that the
rabbis who allow a non-Jew to imply to perform a craft on the Sabbath
rudely transgress the halachah in the "Shortening of the Shulchan
Aruch", which states: "And even to imply to him [a non-Jew] to do, it is
forbidden" (Mark 9, section 14). In any case, the phrase "gentile of
Shabbat" demonstrates how theSagesadded sin to a crime when,on
the one hand, they misrepresented the clear meaning of the phrase
"ger"; And on the other hand, they prevented him from restingon
theSabbath, as commanded by the Lord. [70]
74. InNumbers22 it is said: "Balaam will rise up in the morning and
bandage us and go with the ministers of Moab" (verse 21). Inspired by
this brief description, the author of the Zohar came to the perverse
and filthy conclusion that Balaam "would defile himself every night in
his ethno, and would do a conjugal act with her" ("Zohar for the
People", Genesis 2 – The Life of Sarah, The SerpentofHeaven, p. 118).
75. The Bibleclearly indicates that all human beings have souls, Jews and
Gentiles alike (e.g., Genesis2:7; Deuteronomy20:16; Joshua10:40;
Isaiah2:22, 1 Kings17:17). The Ari (R. Isaac Luria ben Solomon, 16th
century) was not convinced of this and stated that the Gentiles have
no spirit or soul and are not even equal to a kosher beast for food, but
rather a staff from it ("The Tree of Life", Heichal Avi'a, The Gate of
Shells, Chap. 2-3). [71]
76. The book ofJudges4 describes how Sisra fled the battle and arrived
defeated and exhausted at the tent of Yael, the wife of a friend of the
 Kini: "And Sura the lord of Sura said to him, 'Allah al-Tira, and he shall
remove the tent to her, and cover him with a blanket.' And he said to
her, 'I have watered a little water, for I am thirsty, and you shall open
the milk naud, and you shall water it and cover it.' And he said to her,
'There was an opening of the tent, and if anyone came, I would go and
say, 'There is a man here, and you said no.' And Yael, the wife of a
friend, shall take the stake of the tent and put Macbeth in her hand,
and she shall come to him in a latte, and she shall stick the stake in his
temple, and he shall fall asleep, and he shall fly and die" (verses 18-
21). Rabbi Yochanandid not relate to this and, based on a piyyut from
thepoetry of Deborah (Judges 5:27), gave free rein to the thought of
his adulterous heart; He shamelessly stated that before he fell asleep,
Sisra managed to kick Yael seven times (Bavli, Yevmot13:11: "Rabbi
Yochanan said: Seven on the same wicked grounds on the same day,
which is said (Judges 5:5): Between her legs as a shepherd, he lay
between her legs, as if he had fallen, as if he had fallen, where David
had fallen").
77. TheTorahexplicitly states that the sin for which the sons of Aaron
(Nadav and Avihu) were put to death was for sacrificing a foreign fire
that God did not command them (Leviticus10:1-2, 16:1; Numbers3:4,
26:61). R. Eliezerrejected the clear simplification and stated a
completely different reason: "The sons of Aaron did not die, until they
ordered halachah before Moses" (Bavli, Eruvin63:11). That is, in the
Torah it is written that they were put to death because they sacrificed
"before the Lord a foreign fire"; The Talmudsays: Because they taught
halachah to Moses.
78. In the book ofMalachi, a clear comparison is made between the
priests and the angel of the Lord, which is stated: "For the lips of the
priests shall keep their minds, and the Torah shall ask of him that the
angel of the Lord of hosts is" (chapter 2:7). Although the verse and the
entire context are clear in their intention to the priests of the tribe of
Levi (verses 1-8), the Sages allowed themselvestoselfishly distort the
scriptures by implying that verse 7 was directed at them, that is, at the
rabbis themselves: "'For the angel of the Lord of hosts is', if the rabbi
resembles the angel of the Lord, they will ask for the Torah from his
mouth" (Bavli, Tractates: Moed 17:11; Celebration15:72).
79. InGenesis9:20-22, it is said that after he came out of the ark, "And
Noah began to plant a vineyard. And he will drink from the wine and
he will be drunk and he will be revealed in a tent. And the father of
 Canaan feared his father's wakefulness and betrayed his two brothers
outside." Despite the clear description in the Torah, theSagesdid not
overcome their instincts and determined that there were two options
for understanding the passage: A-Ham castrated his father[72]; B-Ham
baal his father (Bavli, Sanhedrin11:11, Rashiconfirms this in his
commentary).
80. InExodus23:2, it is stated clearly and clearly, "You shall not be after
many to the detriment of the multitude, and you shall not answer the
multitude to incline after many to incite." In other words, if the villains
make a judgment, do not follow in their footsteps.[73]Nevertheless, in
order to sharpen his argument in the halachic argument with R. Eliezer
and to prove that it is obligatory to follow most of the halachic
rulings,R. Jeremiahomitted the word "no" from the passage, thereby
overturning the meaning of the verse (Bavli, Bava Metzia59:72).[74]
81. InExodus34:27 it is written: "And the Lord said unto Moses, 'Write
these things to you, for according to these things I have made a
covenant with you and Israel.'" That is, the covenant was not
concluded, but according to[75]The words written by Moses. In
complete defiance of the above verse,R. Yochanan stated: "G-d did
not make a covenant with Israel but for oral things" (Bavli, Gitin60:72).
That is, even though the Torah explicitly states that the covenant was
concluded according to the written words, theSagesbelieved exactly
the opposite: the covenant was concluded precisely according to the
oral words (i.e., according to the residents).
82. InDeuteronomy33:2 it is said: "The Lord of Sinai came and shone from
goat to death." It is interesting that even the fact that this sentence
was written by Moses the man of Elohim did not preventRabbi
Judahfrom changing the text and stating on his own accord that one
should not call "Messini", but "Sinai" (Shimoni schoolbag, Parashat
Yitro).[76]
83. Genesis4:1-2 clearly states: "And man knew his wife Eve, and gave
birth to Cain. and give birth to his brother Abel...". That is to say: Eve
gave birth to Cain and Abel from Adam. The Sageswere unable to
restrain their wild imagination and blatantly contradicted the Torah:
"This woman [Eve], all that is sown is pregnant and gives birth in a
predicament; A serpent rider came to her and passed Cain, and
afterwards, a man came to her and passed Abel" (Chapters of Derby
Eliezer21). Namely: The Torah states that Cain and Abel were born of
 ‫‪Adam and Eve; According to the Sages, Abel was indeed born of Adam‬‬
‫‪and Eve, but Cain was born from the pairing of Eve and the serpent...‬‬
‫‪84. Genesis18describes the visit of the three men to Abraham at Alonei‬‬
‫‪Mamra. As soon as Abraham notices them, he rushes "towards them‬‬
‫‪from the opening of the tent and they will bow down to the ground.‬‬
‫‪And the Lord said, "If I like you, do not pass over your servant" (verses‬‬
‫‪2-3). It is clear that Abraham identified one of the people as God, for‬‬
‫‪he speaks in a singular language and does not hesitate to call him‬‬
‫‪"master" (in the Bible, this adjective – with a frown under the letter N‬‬
‫‪– refers only to the God of Israel).[77]All this did not preventRashifrom‬‬
‫‪stating that Abraham considered the three men to be Arab idol‬‬
‫‪worshippers (in his commentary on verse 4).‬‬
‫חז"ל התעלמו מהאיסור החמור להוסיף או לגרוע ממצוות התורה (דברים ד' ‪ ,2‬י"ג ‪85.‬‬
‫‪ ) 1‬וגזרו על נשים מצוות אשר אינן מוזכרות בתנ"ך כמצוות לנשים בלבד‪" :‬על‬
‫שלוש עבירות נשים מתות בשעת לידתן‪ :‬על שאינן זהירות בנידה‪ ,‬ובחלה‪,‬‬
‫שימו לב‪ ,‬לא זו בלבד שהרבנים גזרו על ]‪').[78‬ובהדלקת הנר" (משנה‪ ,‬שבת פרק ב‬
‫הנשים שתי מצוות חדשות לגמרי (חלה והדלקת נרות)‪ ,‬הם אף איימו בעונש אשר‬
‫‪.‬אין לו זכר ושריד בתורה‬
‫מֹוריָך וְהָ יּו ‪86.‬‬
‫בישעיהו ל' ‪ 20‬נאמר‪ְ " :‬ונָתַ ן ָלכֶם ֲא ֹדנָי לֶחֶ ם צָ ר ּומַ יִם לָחַ ץ ְול ֹא־ ִי ָכנֵף עֹוד ֶ‬
‫"מֹוריָך"‬
‫ֶ‬ ‫ת־מֹוריָך"‪ .‬מהפסוק עצמו ומהקשרו המיידי‪ ,‬מובן כי המילה‬ ‫ֶ‬ ‫עֵ ינֶיָך רֹאֹות אֶ‬
‫מתייחסת לאלהים‪ .‬משום מה‪ ,‬בחרו שלושה מגדולי הפרשנים והפוסקים ביהדות‬
‫ר' ]‪,[79‬הרבנית להתנגד לפשט הברור של הפסוק; ר' דוד אברהם מנדלבוים‬
‫"מֹוריָך" מתייחסת ]‪[81‬ור' יצחק יוסף ]‪[80‬יצחק זילברשטיין‬ ‫ֶ‬ ‫הניחו כי המילה‬
‫אף מפרט כי לאור אותו פסוק‪"[82] ,‬דווקא לתמונות הרבנים עצמם ("ילקוט יוסף‬
‫מותר להדביק את תמונות הרבנים באלבום ועל קירות הבית)‪ .‬מעניין כי השלושה‬
‫סטו בגסות‪ ,‬לא רק מהמשמעות הברורה של הפסוק לאור הקשרו בפרק ל' כולו‪,‬‬
‫"מֹוריָך – ]‪,[84‬ושל מצודת דוד ]‪[83‬הם אף סתרו את פירושם של רש"י‬ ‫ֶ‬ ‫שקבעו‪:‬‬
‫‪".‬הקב"ה‪ ,‬המלמדך להועיל‬
‫ם־בחֻ קֹ תַ י ִת ְמאָ סּו… "ו ְִה ְפקַ ְד ִתי ֲעלֵיכֶם בֶ הָ לָה אֶ ת־ ‪87.‬‬ ‫בויקרא כ"ו ‪ 15-16‬נאמר‪" :‬ו ְִא ְ‬
‫ּומ ִדיבֹת נָפֶ ׁש ּוזְ ַרעְ תֶ ם ל ִָריק ז ְַר ֲעכֶם ַו ֲא ָכלֻהּו‬
‫הַ ַשחֶ פֶ ת וְאֶ ת־הַ קַ דַ חַ ת ְמכַּלֹות עֵ י ַניִם ְ‬
‫ֹאיְבֵ יכֶם"‪ .‬חז"ל שינו את הכתוב וקבעו‪" :‬בעוון חלה אין ברכה… "שנאמר‪ :‬אף אני‬
‫אעשה זאת לכם והפקדתי עליכם בהלה את השחפת ואת הקדחת…‪" .‬אל תקרי‬
‫בהלה אלא בחלה" (בבלי‪ ,‬שבת ל"ב ע"ב)‪ .‬במילים אחרות‪ ,‬התורה מזהירה כי אם‬
‫לא ילך העם בחוקות ה'‪ ,‬תבואנה עליו רעות חולות‪ .‬חכמי התלמוד שגו כפליים‬
‫כאשר ניצלו את פס' ‪ 16‬על‪-‬מנת לתרץ ולהצדיק את ִמ ְשנתם‪ :‬ראשית‪ ,‬הם שינו‬
‫את הטקסט מ'בהלה' ל'בחלה'; שנית ‪ ,‬הם הפכו את 'בהלה' למצוות הפרשת חלה‬
‫]‪.[85‬ובעשות זאת‪ ,‬הוסיפו מצווה שאינה מן התורה‬
‫בבראשית כ"ד ‪ , 39‬אומר דמשק אליעזר‪ָ " :‬ואֹמַ ר אֶ ל־ ֲאדֹנִ י ֻאלַי ל ֹא־תֵ לְֵך הָ ִא ָשה ‪88.‬‬
‫אַ חֲ ָרי"‪ .‬הניקוד וההקשר של המילה "אולי" ברורים כשמש ואין מקום לסטות‬
 ‫רש"י לא התרשם מנוסח המקרא וקבע‪" :‬אלי לא ]‪.[86‬מכוונת הפשט של הפסוק‬
‫תלך האשה – אֵ לַי כתיב"‪ .‬כלומר‪ :‬רש"י החליף את המילה "אולי"‪ ,‬במילה " אֵ לַי"‪.‬‬
‫‪.‬בכך‪ ,‬הוא שינה לחלוטין את המשמעות כדי שתתאים להבנתו שלו‬
‫ת־ד ָגנְֵך עֹוד מַ ֲאכָל ‪89.‬‬
‫ּובזְ רֹועַ עֻּזֹו ִאם־אֶ תֵ ן אֶ ְ‬‫ימינֹו ִ‬
‫בישעיהו ס"ב ‪ 8‬כתוב‪" :‬נִ ְׁשבַ ע ה' ִב ִ‬
‫ירֹוׁשְך ֲא ֶׁשר ָיגַעַ ְת בֹו"‪ .‬שימו לב לפרשנות מרחיקת‬ ‫לְ ֹאיְבַ יְִך ו ְִאם־י ְִׁשתּו ְבנֵי־ ֵנכָר ִת ֵ‬
‫הלכת שהעניקו חז"ל לפסוק‪" :‬א"ר יצחק‪ :‬מנין שהקב"ה מניח תפילין? שנאמר‬
‫(ישעיהו סב)‪ :‬נשבע ה' בימינו ובזרוע עוזו" (בבלי‪ ,‬ברכות ו' ע"א)‪ .‬נראה כי הרבנים‬
‫ימינֹו‬
‫'ב ִ‬‫לא השכילו להבין כי מדובר בתיאור מטאפורי בלבד; הם התייחסו לביטוי ִ‬
‫ּובזְ רֹועַ עֻּזֹו' באופן מילולי לחלוטין ובכך טעו פעמיים‪ :‬ראשית‪ ,‬הם למעשה רמזו לכך‬ ‫ִ‬
‫כי לאלוהים יש זרוע פיזית של ממש; שנית ‪ ,‬הם קבעו כי ה' מניח על זרועו‬
‫]‪.[87‬תפילין‬
‫קבעה ההלכה‪,[88] :‬חרף האיסור החמור להוסיף או לגרוע ממצוות מן התורה ‪90.‬‬
‫"נשים פסולות לעדות מן התורה‪ ,‬שנאמר‪' :‬על פי שניים עדים' (דברים י"ז‪– )6 ,‬‬
‫לא זו בלבד שהרבנים הוסיפו מצווה חדשה‪ ,‬אלא ]‪".[89‬לשון זכר‪ ,‬לא לשון נקבה‬
‫שההיגיון שעליו התבססו מעוות לחלוטין; שימו לב‪ ,‬לדברי הרמב"ם‪ ,‬כיוון שהפסוק‬
‫מספר דברים י"ז מדבר בלשון זכר‪ ,‬אין הנשים נכללות בו‪ .‬אך גם עשרת‬
‫נכתבו בלשון זכר; האם בשל כך פטורות הנשים גם מהן?‪ ..‬יתרה ]‪[90‬הדברות‬
‫מכך‪ ,‬המקרא עצמו מספק דוגמאות לכך שעדותן של נשים לא נפסלה‪ -1 :‬בבמדבר‬
‫כ"ז ‪ 1-5‬נעמדות בנות צלפחד לפני משה ושוטחות את טענתן ללא כל הסתייגות‬
‫משפטית מעצם עדותן; ‪ -2‬בספר מלכים ב' ג' ‪ 16-27‬מקבל שלמה את עדותן של‬
‫‪.‬שתי הנשים אשר עמדו לפניו‬
‫"ד ָר ֶכיהָ דַ ְר ֵכי־נֹעַ ם ְוכָל־נְ ִתיבֹותֶ יהָ ָׁשלֹום"‪ .‬מחבר ‪91.‬‬ ‫במשלי ג' ‪ 17‬נאמר על חכמת ה'‪ְ :‬‬
‫ירד לסוף דעתו של הפסוק ופירש‪" :‬למוד תורה מאהבה ]‪"[91‬מדרש "לקח טוב‬
‫וסוף הכבוד לבוא" (פרשת מסעי)‪ .‬גם הרמב"ם השכיל להבין כי הפסוק מתכוון‬
‫]‪".[92‬לתורה‪ ,‬וכתב‪" :‬גדול השלום‪ ,‬שכל התורה ניתנה לעשות שלום בעולם‬
‫מֹוׁשל בַ כְ ִסילִ ים"‪ .‬גם‬‫"ד ְב ֵרי חֲ כ ִָמים ְבנַחַ ת נִ ְׁשמָ עִ ים ִמ ַּזעֲקַ ת ֵ‬ ‫בקהלת ט' ‪ 17‬נאמר‪ִ :‬‬
‫את פסוק זה הבינו הרבנים כמדבר על דרכה של תורה להיאמר ולהישמע‬
‫בנחמיה ח' ‪ 10‬כתוב‪" :‬כִ י־חֶ ְדוַת יְהוָה ִהיא מָ עֻּזְ כֶם"‪ .‬לאור הפרק כולו‪.[93] ,‬בנחת‬
‫כלומר‪.[95] ,‬ב) תורה ;]‪[94‬ניתן לפרש את הביטוי 'חדוה' בשני אופנים‪ :‬א) שמחה‬
‫הלך יד ביד עם חדוה‪ .‬בניגוד ]‪,[96‬לימוד התורה‪ ,‬כפי שנעשה על ידי עזרא הסופר‬
‫לכל אלה‪ ,‬החליט ר' חנינא בר פפא להפוך את היוצרות ולקבוע‪" :‬פנים זועפות –‬
‫למקרא‪ ,‬כשאדם מלמד בנו תורה‪ ,‬צריך ללמדו באימה" (ילקוט שמעוני‪ ,‬שמות כ'‪,‬‬
‫‪).‬סימן רפ"ו‬
‫בויקרא כ"ג ‪ 2‬מפורטים מועדי ישראל‪ ,‬כפי שנקבעו על ידי אלהים בכבודו ובעצמו‪92. .‬‬
‫ר־ת ְק ְראּו אֹתָ ם ִמ ְק ָראֵ י קֹ דֶ ׁש אֵ ּלֶה הֵ ם‬
‫הכתוב מדגיש כי מדובר ב"מֹועֲדֵ י ה' ֲא ֶׁש ִ‬
‫מֹועֲדָ י"‪ .‬המועדים שייכים לה' והוא שקבע את התאריך המדויק בו יש לחגוג אותם‪.‬‬
‫בפס' ‪ 27‬נאמר‪" :‬אַ ְך בֶ עָ ׂש ֹור לַחֹ דֶ ׁש הַ ְש ִביעִ י הַ ּזֶה יֹום הַ כִ פ ִֻרים הּוא ִמ ְק ָרא־קֹ דֶ ׁש‬
‫]‪ .[97‬י ְִהיֶה ָלכֶם"‪ .‬יום כיפור‪ ,‬אם כן‪ ,‬חייב לחול כל שנה בדיוק בעשרה בתשרי‬
‫והנה‪ ,‬עובדה זו לא מנעה מחז"ל לחלל את יום הכיפורים במצח נחושה על ידי‬
 ‫[שינוי התאריך לאחד עשר בתשרי‬98] ‫ ראש‬,‫למרות שידעו כי מדובר בשגגה (בבלי‬
‫)השנה כ"ה ע"א‬.[99] – ‫ "בית דין שקידשו את החודש‬:‫ באמרו‬,‫והרמב"ם הצְ ִדיקם‬
‫ וחייבין הכול לתקן המועדות על‬,‫ בין אנוסין – הרי זה מקודש‬,‫ בין מוטעין‬,‫בין שוגגין‬
‫ חייב לסמוך עליהם‬,‫ אף על פי שזה ידע שטעו‬:‫"יום שקידשו בו‬.[100]
93. InGenesis40:10, the minister of the farms tells Joseph that he saw in
his dream a vine with three srigs. Joseph interprets the dream and
says: "The three shrags of three days are. In three days, the Pharaoh
will bear your head and you will return it to you, and you have given
the Pharaoh's cup in his hand..." (Verses 12-13). Later in the chapter, it
becomes clear that Joseph was right and his meaning came true one
by one: "And on the third day the day of the birth of Pharaoh, he made
a feast for all his slaves and carried the head of the minister of the
farms... "And he sat the minister of the farms on his drink, and gave
the glass on the palm of the pharaoh... "When Joseph solved for them"
(verses 20-21). But even though the scriptures make it clear that the
three srigim were not symbolized but three days, theSages came
andestablished radically different solutions: "R. Eliezersays: Three
srigim – this is Abraham, Isaac and Jacob"; "R. Joshua: Three Srigim –
This is Moses and Aaron and Miriam"; "R. Elazar hamodaisays: Three
srigim – this is a temple and a king and a high priest"; "R. Joshua ben
Levi: Three Srigim – These are the Well of the Pillar of Cloud and
Man"; "And R. Jeremiah bar Abbasaid: Three srigim – these are three
legs, which Israel ascends every year" (Yalkut Shimoni, Genesis 40).
Note that not only do the rabbis have the boldness of the forehead to
contradict Joseph's solution and the words of the Torah, they also do
not refrain from contradicting each other.
94. InGenesis41:26-27, Joseph interprets Pharaoh's dream and tells him
that "the seven cows of the seven years are here...", and the seven
empty cows and the shepherding of the seven years here." In verses
53-54, we learn that Joseph's solution turned out to be true: "And the
seven seven that were in the land of Egypt were consumed. And the
seven hungry men began to come, when Joseph said." In other words,
the Torah explicitly says that the seven good cows were seven good
years; The seven bad cows were seven years of famine. The
Sageswere not impressed by Joseph's solution and offered an
alternative: "The seven good cows, the seven daughters you give birth
to. Seven evil cows, seven girls you bury. And they said: The seven
good shabalim, the seven kingdoms you conquer. Seven evil shabalim,
 seven eparchies rebel against you" (MidrashBereshit Rabbah, Mekatz,
Parashah 89).
95. This is how the creation of the woman is described inGenesis2:21-22:
"The Lord god fell asleep on man and slept and took one of his ribs and
closed the flesh under it. And the Lord God took the rib that he took
from man to the woman, and she came to man." In short, God
anesthetized man, and from one of his ribs created the woman.
Despite the above clear and simple description,R. Shmuel bar
Nachmanestablished a new order of creation: "When G-d created
Adam, his faces were created and sawn and carried back, back here
and back here" (Bereishit Rabbah, chapter 8). In other words,
according to the Sages, from the very beginning, God created Adam
and Eve connected to each other on their backs and only afterwards,
sawed them in the middle to create two separate figures.
96. As it is written inGenesis2:21-22, before the creation of Eve, "The Lord
God fell asleep on man and slept and took one of his ribs... "And the
Lord God built the rib that he took from man to woman." That is, God
used one of the ribs of a man to create his wife. For some reason,
theSages adhered toa different version and stated that God created
Eve from Adam's tail (Bavli, Eruvin18:11). [101] In other words, even
though the verse explicitly states "rib," the rabbis say "tail."
97. According toNumbers19:16, "Whoever touches the field with a sword
or a dead man, or a grave, will be uncleaned for seven days."
Therefore, the Torah encourages us to avoid touching the dead or his
grave, let alone preaching to the dead (Deuteronomy18:11). In
complete defiance of the commandments of the Torah, the Sages
encourage their followers to engage in the cult of the dead and to
prostrate themselves on the graves of therighteous;[102]And as if that
were not enough, even to preach to the dead.[103]Most rabbis[104]They
are eager to reinforce this abominable custom, to the point that
Maimonides' reservations are not heard, but in a weakly answering
voice: "And the righteous, do not build a soul for them on their graves
– their words are their memory. and no one shall turn to the cemetery
visit" (Mishneh Torah, Book of Judges, Halachot Abel, Chapter 4). [105]
98. InDaniel12:1-3 it is said: "And at that time all that is written in the
book will escape with you. And many of the earthlings will give rise to
eternal life and to disgrace to the dragon of the world. And the
educated will be careful as the light of the heavens and the righteous
of the many as stars forever and ever." That is, unlike the righteous,
 who will rise to eternal life and warn of the glow of the heavens
forever and ever, the wicked will inherit a world (i.e., an eternal
disgrace).[106]). R. Akiva was apparently not impressed by God's words
and stated: "The judgment of the wicked in hell, twelve months"
(Mishna, Testimonies 2). In other words, the Bible says: "To the
dragon of the world"; Rabbi Akiva Defiant: Only a year!
99. InGenesis41:26, Joseph resolves Pharaoh's dream and explains to him
that "seven cows benefit seven years here." Verses 53-54 make it clear
that Joseph's solution turned out to be correct and accurate: "And the
seven seven that were in the land of Egypt were consumed. And the
seven hungry men began to come, when Joseph said." And here,
despite the fact that the Torah explicitly states that seven cows are
worth seven years, theSagesdid not hesitate to set a completely
different number of years: "R. Judah says: Fourteen years were... "R.
Nachman says: Twenty-eight years... "Rabanan Amarin: Forty-Two..."
(Shimoni schoolbag, Genesis 41, Mark 147).
100. Regarding the granting of loans among the people of Israel,
theTorahcategorically forbids taking interest and biting, which says: "If
money accompanies my people, the poor man with you, he will not
have as a wife who will not lubricate him bitten" (Exodus22:24); "Do
not take from him bitten and cultured" (Leviticus25:36); "Thou shalt
not give to thy brother a silver bite, a bite shall eat, eat, bite anything
that thou shalt have" (Deuteronomy23:20). The Sageswere not
impressed by the divine decree prohibiting the collection of bittens,
and decided – to the nose and wrath of the Torah – to permit the
interest, while ingeniously and peppering halachic law (Bavli, Baba
Metzia61:72).
101. InGenesis35:22 it is written: "And there shall be in the neighbor of

Israel in that land, and Reuven shall go and lay down his father's
mistress, and he shall hear Israel...". In the blessing at the end of the
book, Jacob reminds Reuven of his exploits: "Reuven Bakri, you are my
life and the beginning of the oni you gave up a goat;" ... For you have
risen from your father's layers, so you have fallen into the midst of a
leaf" (49:3-4). Without blinking, theSageswrote an alternative version
of the story: "And he laid down his father's mistress, teaching that he
confused his father's bed and put it on it as if he were sleeping with
her" (Bavli, Shabbat55:72). In other words, the Biblesays, "And he
shall lie down in blaha"; The Talmudstates: "As if he were sleeping
with her."[107]
102. InDeuteronomy6:7 it is said: "And you memorized for your sons
and spoke to them in your sabbath in your house and in your walk
along the way and in your lying down and in your rising." In order to
justify the residents, theSages stated: "Do not happen 'and you have
memorized', but all three of them; A man will always triple his years: a
third in the Bible, a third in the Mishna, a third in the Talmud" (Bavli,
Kiddushin30:11). In doing so, the rabbis added sin to a crime; Not only
did they dare to change what was written in the Shema, they also
added a mitzvah that is not written in the Torah: a person must study
the Mishna and the Talmud two-thirds of his life.
103. InGenesis2:16-17, God decrees the following commandment to
man: "From every tree of the garden, eat, eat. And from the tree of
the knowledge of good and evil you will not eat of it because in the
day you will eat of it you will die." Despite the obvious words, R.
Judahsaid: "Adam the first was not commanded but for foreign labor
only, which is said: And the Lord God commanded man" (Bavli,
Sanhedrin56:72). In other words, the Torah explicitly states that God
commanded man not to eat from thetree of knowledge; But based on
the same verse (verse 16), theSagesstated that God commanded man
to do something else entirely– that he should not engage in foreign
labor.
104. InGenesis2:6-7 it is written: "Wad will rise from the earth and
water all the earth. And the Lord God created man from the earth and
breathed life into his nose, and man became a living soul." That is to
say: first G-d watered the earth and then created man. The sages of
the Talmudturned the tables upside down and stated that "grasses
came out and stood on the opening of the ground, until Adam came
first and asked for mercy on them and the rains fell and grew" (Bavli,
Minchas60:72). That is, according to theTorah, God first raised Ed
from the earth to irrigate the earth and then created man;
Accordingto the Sages, God first created man and only then did the
rains fall.
105. InGenesis1:29, God says to Adam and Eve: "Behold, I have given
you all the grass of the seed of a seed which is on the face of the earth,
and all the tree in which the fruit of a tree shall have a seed for you to
eat." And in chapter 9:3, it is said to the sons of Noah: "All that is alive
to you shall be eaten as a vegetable of grass, I have given you all." That
is to say: permission to eat meat was given only in the time of Noah.
Nevertheless,R. Judah ben Timadid not hesitate to change the order
 of Genesis, stating: "Adam, the first bearer in the Garden of Eden, was
and there were the angels of the servant who roasted meat for him
and filtered wine for him" (Bavli, Sanhedrin59:72). In other words,
according to theTorah, people began to eat meat after the flood;
According tothe Talmud, Adam first enjoyed meat already in the
Garden of Eden.
106. InGenesis38, it is said that Tamar saved herself from fire by
taking out the "seal and the wicks and the staff" which Judas entrusted
to her (verses 18-25). The Sagesclaim that this very headquarters was
nothing more than Moses' headquarters (Greater Genesis, Parashat
Vayeshev). This claim turns out to be bizarre and puzzling for two
reasons: first, it has no references in the Bible; Secondly, how is it
possible that the staff that Tamar received from Judah was that of
Moses, if at that time Moses had not yet been born?..
107. InGenesis49:13-14 it is written: "Zvolen to the shore of the seas
shall dwell and he to the shore of ships and his stern on their side.
Issachar Khmer caused a squabble between the lips." From this short
blessing, theSages ruled, "That Zebulon was engaged in prakmatia
[trade], and Issachar was engaged in the Torah, and Zebulon came and
fed him" (Bereshit Rabbah, Parashat Vayechi Tzat). [108] And the
Sages concluded that Issachar studied Gemara in a yeshiva? "Lying
among the lips, these are three rows of wise disciples, who are sitting
in front of them" (Ibid., tzach). In other words, without any biblical
foundation and in stark contrast to the true meaning of the word
"mashfatim" (meaning sheep pens[109] or stoves[110]),the rabbisdu
their hearts to an unwritten agreement between Zebulon and
Issachar, according to which Zevulun would finance his brother's
Gemara studies. [111]
108. Inthe book of Kings in chapter 10, it is said: "And Ahab has
seventy sons in Shimron..." (verse 1). The Sagesstated, out of nothing
and without any biblical endorsement, that in addition to this, Ahab
had seventy more sons in Jezreel (Esther RabbaParashat 1). [112]
109. InIsaiah1:15, it is written: "And in your interpretation as you
are, I will turn my eyes away from you even because you have
multiplied with prayers, and I have not heard your bloody hands full."
The Sagesignored this and stated on their own that "whoever prays is
answered" (Midrash Shohar Tov, Shmuel Parashat 2). [113] In other
words, the Biblewarns that under certain circumstances, even if we
 pray a lot, it will not necessarily be heard; [114] The Sagescategorically
promised that anyone who prays his prayers will be answered.
110. InGenesis1:1 it is clearly stated: "In the beginning, God created
the heavens and the earth." Against the above simple description,
theJerusalem Talmuddocuments how therabbis of Beit Hilleldecided
to change the order of creation and determine: "The earth is created
first and then the heavens" (Page 10,2 chapter 2 of Halacha 1
Gemara).
111. InNehemiah7:7 it is written: "The following with Zerbabel Jesus
Nehemiah Azariah Ramiah Nachmani Mordechai". In chapter 12:47 it
is said: "And all Israel in the days of Zerbabel and in the days of
Nehemiah, the shares of the servants and the gates are given every
day...". From the two verses above, it is clear beyond any doubt that
the names Nehemiah[115] and Zerubbabel describe two completely
different people. The Sageswere not impressed by this and stated:
"Zerubbabel was sown in Babylon and what is his name, Nehemiah
son of Hachaliah" (Bavli, Sanhedrin38:11). That is, from two
completely different personalities, the sages of the Talmud made one
person. For evidence that this is a mistake, we can quote R. Yaakov
Amedin,[116] who referred to the Sages' article and claimed that it
was "a puzzling thing, for it is against the simplicity of the scriptures
annotated in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah."
112. The Sagesestablished a biblical iron law, according to which
"Whoever is said in it: Go in peace, go and return. And whoever is
written in it: In peace, he has gone and has not returned" (Exodus
Rabbah, Parashat Shemot 5). [117] But here are 3 opposite examples
of this from the Bible:1-2Genesis28:20-21 Jacob vows to say if there
will be a God who stands and is conservative in this way who vertically
goes and gives me bread to eat and a garment to wear. And I returned
safely to my father's house, and the Lord was my God." It is then said
that he did indeed return safely (33:18-20); Before he went to war
against the People of Ammon, he vowed that "the one who came out
of my door towards me on my return in peace from the people of
Ammon and became the Lord and raised him up" (Judges11:31). In
verse 34, it is said that he would return home safely after subduing his
enemies; 3 In1 Samuel 29:7, Achish, king of Gat, calls David and says to
him, "And now again go in peace and do no evil, in the eyes of the
Philistine captains." It is later said that David did indeed return safely,
defeating his enemies and releasing the captives (29:11-30:19).
113. The order of creation, as described inGenesis 1, is quite
understandable: the fish of the sea was created on the fifth day
(verses 20-22) and the people on the sixth day (verse 27). The chapter
clearly indicates that there is a fundamental distinction between fish
and humans, and these are two completely different types of creation.
R. Judahwas not impressed by this and stated that in the sea there are
creatures that are half human-shaped and half fish-shaped (Bavli,
Genesis8:11). In his commentary on the passage,Rashirefers to them
as "sirens",[118]i.e., mermaids. In case you were wondering,
Halachain this matter states that mermaid is not kosher for food!
[119]
114. Psalm 119:126says, "A time to do unto the Lord your law." The
entire chapter is a song of praise and praise for the commandments of
the Torah and their existence, and therefore, from the context it is
understood that the intention of the verse is nothing more than that
instead of doing as God's commandments, we have chosen as a people
to violate them. The Talmudcompletely deviated from the clear
interpretation of the verse, stating: "According to these things, to tell
you things that by mouth you are not allowed to say in writing and
that in writing you are not allowed to say them here... "A time to do
unto G-d your law, say: It is better to uproot the Torah and do not
forget the Torah from Israel" (Bavli, 14:72). [120] Got it? So that the
Torah is not forgotten, it is better to uproot it! [121] In other words,
the Sages were willing to go as far as the absurd realms, as long as
they justified theexistence of the residents and its written statement.
115. In Joshua 5:4-5 it is written: "And this is what all the people
ofJoshuacame out of Egypt, all the men of war died in the desert on
the way out of Egypt. For words were all the people who came out and
all the children in the desert on their way out of Egypt to Mallow." In
other words, the text emphasizes that all the males who came out of
Egypt were circumcised. In contrast, theSagesargued that "Israel did
not seek to circumcise in Egypt, but all the circumcision was abolished
in Egypt, except for the tribe of Levi" (Exodus Rabbah, Parashat 19).
That is, in the Bible it is said "for words were all the people who came
out" of Egypt; The Sages decided that only the tribe of Levi was
circumcised.
116. InNehemiah8:15 it is said: "Go out of the mountain and bring
olive leaves and oil tree leaves and myrtle leaves and date leaves and
thick wood leaves to make a sect as it is written." From the above it is
 found that myrtle is not a thick tree! [122] And here, although the
verse enumerates different types of trees and distinguishes between
myrtle and thick wood, theSages argued: "We were myrtle we were
thick wood" (Bavli, Sukkah12:11). That is to say: according tothe
Talmud, myrtle and thick wood are the same. [123]
117. After all the work of creation has been completed, it is written:
"And God feared all that he had done, and it was very good, and there
was evening and morning on the sixth day" (Genesis1:31). R.
Nachman bar Shmuelwas not impressed by the context of the verse
and stated: "Here is very good – it created good. And here is very good
– it created evil" (Bereshit Rabbah, Parashat Bereishit 9). Similarly,
based on the verse: "And the Lord God created man..." (Gen 2:7),the
Sagesdecided that "there are two instincts created by G-d: one
created good and one created evil" (Bavli, Blessings61:11). These
assertions are extremely puzzling considering that the concept of
"good instinct" does not appear in the Bible, not even by hint! [124]
118. Exodus 19:25-20:4 explicitly states that Moses went down to the
people and informed them, in the name of the Lord, "All these things
to say. I am the Lord your God, who took you out of the land of Egypt
from the house of slaves. You will have no other gods over me. You
won't make a statue and any picture...". Chapter 32 describes how the
Israelites violated the prohibition on foreign labor when they bowed
down to the golden calf (verses 4-8). The Midrash Shemot Rabbah
(Parashat Ki-Tasha) describes how Moses quarrels with G-d and claims
to him that the Ten Commandments referred only to Moses and not to
the entire nation because they were spoken in the singular and not in
the plural. Therefore, according to the midrash, God cannot make
claims to the people, but to himself. It is important to note that the
midrash's argument therefore contains two weighty problems: a) the
Torah explicitly states that Moses went down to the people and
addressed them with the Ten Commandments (19:25); b) There is no
logic in the argument that says that because the Ten Commandments
were spoken in a singular language, they are not binding on the rule.
First, most of the commandments in the Torah are spoken in the
masculine form even though they address the whole of Israel; Second,
most of the commandments (including the Ten Commandments) are
spoken in the masculine-singular form, even though they address both
men and women.
119. In the book of Habakkuk 3:6 it is written: "Stand and measure
the land of the land and see and the rest of the nations and explode in
the mountains - until the hills of the world swam and walked forever
to him." The word "walks", which means "ways" and the meaning of
the phrase "walks of the world to him" is nothing more than "eternal
ways of action". However, on the basis of this verse, the Sages
concluded that "all those who differ in halachot every day are assured
that he is the son of the next world, which is said (Habakkuk 3):
Halachot Olam to him. Do not happen to walks, but to halachot" (Bavli,
Nida 73:11). Thus, the sages of the Talmud added sin to a crime: on
the one hand, they dared to change what was written in the Bible
according to their desires; On the other hand, they made a promise
that is not from the Bible, according to which all those who differ in
laws every day, will inherit the world to come.
120. Regarding the relationship between Mordechai and Esther, it is
written: "And there was an artist of Hadassah who is Esther bat-Dado
because she has no father and mother, and the girl is beautiful and
good-looking, and at the death of her father and mother, Mordechai
took him to a daughter" (Esther 2:7). Despite the clear description of
the relationship between the two, the Sages rudely stated that Esther
had a conjugal relationship with her cousin: "She would have stood in
the bosom of Ahshurush and dipped and sat in Mordechai's lap" (Bavli,
Megillah 13:72).
121. The Book of Esther 9:20-22 states: "And Mordechai wrote these
words and sent books to all the Jews in all the countries of King
Ahasuerus, near and far. They must have the fourteenth day of the
new maple and the fifteenth day of it each and every year. As the days
in which the Jews rested from their enemies and the new that became
for them from grief to joy and mourning to a good day, to make those
days of feast and joy and the sending of rations to one another and
gifts to the patriarchs." In disregard of the custom described above,
the Sages established a new commandment that does not appear in
the Old Testament: "From Yishiv Inish to Basumi in Puria to the point
of no knowledge between the damned of Haman and Baruch
Mordechai" (Bavli, Megillah 7:72). In other words, although the Bible
explicitly speaks of the voluntary practice of feast and joy, the Sages
came and commanded that it is obligatory to get drunk on Purim until
total loss of senses.
122. Despite the clear warning not to add mitzvot to the Torah
(Deuteronomy 4:2, 13:1), rabbinic law states that "all those who are
unclean – among men, among tools, whether they have been
uncleaned by the severe impurity of Torah, whether they have been
uncleaned by the uncleanness of their words – have no purity, but by
immersion in the water that is buried in the ground" (Mishneh Torah
for Rambam, Halachot Mikveh, chapter 1). But in stark contrast to
Halacha, the Law of Moses is full of examples of uncleans who are
purified not by immersion in a mikveh; For example, a woman who is
cleansed of her impurity by bringing an immigrant to the priest who
atones for her (Leviticus 12:1-8, 15:19-33); The leper is cleansed of his
impurity by the priest's atonement (Leviticus 14:19-20); On the Day of
Atonement, the priest cleanses all Israel of their impurities through
the blood of the atonement of the sin offering (Leviticus 16:16-30).
123. Rabbinic law stated, out of nothing, that the Torah commands
to make a distinction: "Matzot made from the Torah, to sanctify the
Sabbath day with things... And it is necessary to remember him at his
entrance, and at his exit; at the entrance at the kiddush of the day,
and at the exit at Havdalah" (Mishneh Torah for Rambam, Halachot
Shabbat, chapter 29). However, in the Law of Moses there is no
mention of the observance of the commandments of the Havdalah. An
examination of the places in the Pentateuch, where the
commandment to keep the Sabbath appears, reveals that there is no
mention of the commandments of Havdalah on the Sabbath night
(see, for example, Genesis 2:2-3; Exodus 20:8-11, 31:13-17, 35:2-3;
Leviticus 19:3, 30, 23:3; Numbers 28:9, 15:32-36; Deuteronomy 5:12-
15). Thus, despite the warning not to add mitzvot to the Torah
(Deuteronomy 4:2, 13:1), the rabbis added a mitzvah that was not and
was not created.
124. In Deuteronomy 17 it is said: "No one will put on you a king
whom the Lord your God will choose from among your brothers, and
you will put a king on you... "And he shall not multiply women, nor
shall his heart be broken, and silver and gold shall not multiply him
greatly" (verses 15, 17). Despite the explicit commandment not to
multiply women, the rabbis interpreted it not to multiply over
eighteen! R. Judah even chose to be wise, stating: "He is a rabbi, as
long as he does not dedicate his heart" (Bavli, Sanhedrin 21:11). In
other words, the Torah forbids the king to have many wives; The Sages
state that the intention is to settle "only" with 18 and R. Judah permits
 many even more than that, provided that there is no devotion to the
king's heart.
125. In Deuteronomy 8:10 it is said: "And you ate and swore and
blessed the Lord your God on the land that He gave you." In the Old
Testament, the term "seven" (in its various forms) describes the
feeling of satisfaction that follows eating or drinking (e.g., Amos 4:8;
Psalm 22:27). However, the Sages decided to reinvent biblical Hebrew
and stated: "And you ate – this is eating; And the seven – this is
drinking" (Bavli, Pesachim 49:72).
126. The Sages stated that wherever the phrase "tzav" is used, the
intention is that for the commandment there will be a "pocket
disadvantage", that is, money must be spent and lost (Midrash Pesikta
Zutra, Parashat Tzav). However, as Rabbi David Stav rightly remarked,
this statement is incorrect, for in Leviticus 6:2, for example, it is said:
"It is decreed of Aaron and his sons to say this is the law of the leaf...";
And in this case there is no pocket disadvantage, "for the priests do
not lose any of their property in the sacrifice of the burnt offering."
127. Hillel the Elder concluded that "they do not have a Messiah for
Israel who had already eaten in the days of Hezekiah" (Bavli, Sanhedrin
59:11). I want to say: The Messiah will not come because the
prophecies about Him have already been fulfilled in the days of
Hezekiah and the Redeemer was afraid to come. Although Hillel was
told that his words were nothing more than the presumption of "the
words of the living God" and that Halacha was always on his side, he
made a mistake in his calculations! Oddly enough, the Talmud itself
does not refrain from charging Hillel for his mistake: "[His Lord, the
Lord] forgives him to R. Hillel, who said things that are not really in
them! After all, Hezekiah [when he was] – in the first temple, while
Zechariah [prophesied] in the second temple... "Generations after
Hezekiah there is a prophecy not only for redemption but for the
coming of the Messiah."
128. Although the Torah categorically forbids taking interest and
biting when lending money to Israel (Exodus 22:24; Leviticus 25:37;
Deuteronomy 23:20), the Sages came and permitted a loan at interest
in a number of cases, such as: "Sages are permitted to borrow from
each other at interest"; Or: "A man is allowed to lend his sons and
household with interest in order to make them taste interest" (Bavli,
Bava Metzia 75a).
129. In Deuteronomy 25:4, it is said in an unequivocal manner: "Thou
shalt not block a bull in its threshing." That is to say: the bull should
not be restricted from eating while it is flapping the wheat. On the
nose and nose of the Torah, the Sages wisely stated that it is
permissible to block his mouth from eating if he flaps with only two
legs (Bavli, Bava Metzia 51:12).
130. In Genesis 8:6-7, it is written: "And there shall be the end of
forty days, and Noah shall open the window of Thebes, which he has
made. And he will send the evening and export again to the continent
of water above the land." From this simple description, the Sages were
not ashamed to make a chocha and an atlula at the expense of Noah;
According to the Shimoni schoolbag (Genesis 8, Mark 58), the raven
accused Noah of sending him out of the ark only so that he could carry
out his plot against his crowdy wife. It is possible that the crow's
suspicion was justified, since in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 18:72) and in
Rashi's commentary (Genesis 8:7) it is implied that Noah indeed lusted
to serve the crow's wife.
131. The Talmud states that "the ten tribes are not destined to
return" to the Land of Israel after the exile. This position contradicts
the biblical view that God would gather "all the families of Israel" and
bring them back to the land (Jeremiah 29:1, 14; 31:1, 8). The Midrash
"Shohar Tov" (on Psalm 147) acknowledged the error of the Sages
when he claimed: "'The rejected of Israel shall enter,' these are the ten
tribes."
132. In Genesis 38:6-10 it is written: "And Judas took a wife to his
firstborn and her name was Tamar. And the firstborn of Judah was
awake in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord died. And Judas said to
masturbate, come to your brother's wife, and raise up a seed for your
brother. And Onan knew that he would not have the seed, and that he
would come to his brother's wife and swim to the ground without
giving sperm to his brother. And he was evil in the eyes of the Lord,
who did and died with him as well." The wild and crude imagination of
the Sages led them to determine, on the basis of these verses, that
"awake and masturbating served against their will" (Bavli, Yevmot
34:72). In other words, Er and Masturbation had sex with Tamar. Not
only does the interpretation of the Talmud blatantly distort what is
written, it also contradicts the simplification, as Rashi understood:
"Evil in the eyes of G-d – the kneeling of Onan, the corruption of his
 seed... "And swim to the ground – a flap on the inside and a flap on
the outside."
133. In Genesis 34:1-2 it is said: "And Dina, the daughter of Leah,
who gave birth to Jacob, will go out to see the daughters of the land.
And he feared you, the son of a donkey, the president of the land, and
he took her and lay down with her and answered." Based on this
description, R. Shmuel bar Nachmani stated with a frown that Dina
"caused herself to have a son of a donkey come upon her"
(Ecclesiastes Rabba, Parashat 10). The Baal Midrash Aggadah (Parashat
Vayishlach) made a claim, shamelessly and without biblical references:
"Just as Leah was an exporter... That's how Dina was an exporter" (i.e.,
hacked). The Torah teaches that Dina's brothers blamed the assailant
and closed an account with him (Gen. 34:7, 25-31); On the other hand,
the Sages therefore chose to place the responsibility for the act and
the blame on the rapist.
134. Deuteronomy 18:9 says, "For you have come to the land which
the Lord your God has given you, and you shall not learn to do as the
abomination of those nations." Below are some of the abominable
customs that characterized the peoples of the earth, and one of them
is communication with the dead, which is said: "You shall not find in
you... preached to the dead" (verse 10). The severity of the
commandment not to preach to the dead did not make an impression
on wide circles within rabbinic Judaism. Thus, for example, according
to the author of the Zohar, the prohibition against demanding to the
dead is directed only at the Gentiles, while Israel is permitted,
provided that they go with their dead in repentance and penance, and
their intention is for the souls of the dead to pray for them; In Tractate
Simchot, chapter 8, it is said: "They go out to the cemetery and
command the dead for up to 30 days, and there is no fear of any of the
ways of the Amorites"; In the Talmud, the question arose: "Why do
they go to the cemetery?"; One of the answers was: "So that the dead
may ask for mercy on us" (Bavli, Taanit 16:11); In the "Shortening of
the Shulchan Aruch" is the encouragement to go to the cemetery,
immediately after prayer in the synagogue, in order to prostrate on
the tombs of the righteous and to multiply "pleas to awaken the holy
righteous... May they recommend well for us on judgment day."
135. In Jeremiah 10:2, the prophet speaks in the name of the Lord
and warns the house of Israel: "Through the nations, do not learn, and
from the signs of heaven to beneath him, for the nations shall die from
 what is done." 2 Kings 23:5 describes how King Josiah cleansed the
Temple of a multitude of bishin, including "the pipes for Baal to the
sun and the moon and the zodiac signs and the whole army of
heaven." Despite the clear warning to avoid acreage and the study of
astrology, the belief in luck was widespread among many of the Sages,
such as R. Joshua ben Levi, R. Ephes, R. Meir, R. Josiah, R. Shimon and
R. Yosef. Consider some of the things that were written "on the
notebook of R. Joshua ben Levi: Whoever [is born] on one of the
Sabbaths, be a man who is good or all evil... On the second of Shabbat,
there will be an irritable person... On Tuesday and Saturday... "Not
luck day causes, but hour luck causes... "Luck awaits, luck enriches –
and Israel is lucky" (Bavli, Shabbat 56:11). Raba, too, did not put his
hand in the plate and said: "My life, my son and my food – it is not
because of man that the thing depends, but in luck it depends."
136. The Talmud states that animals such as a wolf and a cat have
venom that they lay from their claws (Bavli, Holin 52:12-53). In the
"Book of Kuzari", R. Judah Halevi explains that since the Sages were
not naturalists and it is clear that they did not understand this
information from their hearts, it is self-evident that they received it
from Sinai (4th essay, 31); In the Mishneh Torah, Maimonides
reaffirms that these claims "all went to Moses of Sinai" (Halachot
Slaughter, chapter 5). There is a small problem with this theory: there
is no reference or hint in the Torah or in the entire Bible that the
above animals have venom coming out of their claws and, moreover, it
is known that from a zoological point of view there is no basis for this.
Rabbi Eliyahu Dassler was required to address this issue in his essay "A
Letter for Granted" and admitted the error of the Sages, but
commented that halacha should not be changed even if its taste was
annulled (Vol. 4, p. 355).
137. The name of Arafa, Naomi's daughter-in-law, appears only twice
in the Bible: "And they shall have wives from their fathers, where one
is Arafa and the other is Ruth, and they shall sit there for about ten
years... "And she shall change their voices and weep more, and kiss
her mother-in-law, and Ruth clings to her" (Ruth 1:4, 14). Based on this
brief description, the Sages allowed themselves to give free rein to
their wild imagination and stated with unimaginable rudeness that
Arafa's name was given to her because she had sex when she was
beheaded in front of the man's face: "that everything is behind her";
And because "everything has fertilized her" (Bavli, Sotah 42:72). R.
 Yitzchak was not satisfied with this and added a handful of his own
rudeness: "All that night when she retired from her mother-in-law, the
nakedness of a hundred people intervened in her" (Midrash Ruth
Rabbah, Parashat 2).
138. The Sages stated: "The one who deals with the Bible – Mada
and not Mada; In the Mishna – Mada and Nutlin for which she was
paid; Gemara – You have no greater dimension than this" (Bavli, Bava
Metzia 33:11). That is, according to the rabbis, dealing with the Bible is
equal to a zero-sum game, that is, there is no reward for those who
practice it! But the Bible is full of examples that show that ifka is
explained, for example: in Joshua 1:8 it is promised to those who will
practice the Torah and keep its commandments, "for then you will
succeed in your way and then you will be educated"; In Psalm 1:2-3,
the man who practiced the law of God is told that he will be "like a
tree planted on streams of water whose fruit will give in his time and
whose leaf is unyielding, and whatever he does will succeed"; Psalm
19:8-9 describes the wages of the Law of God in white kiddush letters:
the Torah restores the soul, makes me happy, and pleases the heart.
So, while the Bible abounds in examples that there is a reward for
those who practice the Bible; The sages of the Talmud decided that
the opposite was true.
139. After the creation of man and woman, it is said: "And God
feared all that he had done, and behold, very well..." (Genesis 1:31)
Even in Genesis 2:18-24, it is clear that a woman is considered a good
thing. In Proverbs 18:22, it is written: "Find a woman, find good, and
produce the will of the Lord." However, despite these passages, which
raise a woman's prestige and describe her as a blessing, the Sages
required every Jewish man to say once a day: "Blessed are you, G-d...
who did not smoke a woman" (prayer book, morning blessings). R.
Avraham Seba explains: "Let no woman smoke, that the woman
signified a curse" ("The Bundle of the Moor", at the beginning of
Parashat Vayitza).
140. Exodus 21:5-6 says: "And if the servant said, 'I have loved my
master, my wife and my son, I will not go free.' And his masters served
to the Elohim and served to the door or to the mezuzah, and his
masters shook his ears with a splinter and worshipped them." The
Sages contradicted the simplification and ruled: "At the door you give,
but you do not give in the mezuzah" (Machlita Derbi Ishmael,
Mishpatim, Parashat 2). In other words, the Torah says: at the door or
 in the mezuzah; The residents are defiant and determine: only at the
door and not at the mezuzah.
141. Deuteronomy 25:3 accurately describes the number of blows to
which a person who is found guilty is committed: "Forty shall not
perish, lest he be beaten with a great blow, and your brother shall be
cursed before your eyes." Although the Torah emphasizes that the
commandments of Moses should not be detracted from
(Deuteronomy 4:2, 13:1), the Sages stated on their own accord: "How
much does Malkin him? Forty lacks one" (Mishna, Tractate Maccabees
III). That is, the Torah commands: 40 plagues; The residents state: 39.
142. In Leviticus 11:3, it is stated clearly and sharply: "Every
horseshoe and cleft horseshoe you shall eat" (the principle is repeated
in Deuteronomy 14:4-6). From this it follows that the donkey and the
dog are not kosher to eat, as the Sages also admit (Bavli, Baba Batra
16:11; But even though the donkey and the dog are unclean, the
Talmud states that "whoever holds a yarkon [jaundice], feeds him
donkey meat; Whoever has bitten a foolish dog, feeds him from his
heavy yard" (Yuma 84:11).
143. The Talmud states: "A man shall not walk behind a woman on
the way, and even his wife shall have a chance on the bridge, and shall
be removed to Saddin. And whoever passes behind a woman in the
river has no part in the world" (Bavli, Blessings 61:11). In "The Fathers
of Derby Nathan" (chapter two) it is said: "No man will go after the
woman in the market." According to the Sages, it is therefore
forbidden for a man to follow his wife, let alone the wife of his friend.
However, these assertions are peculiar for two reasons: (1) the Law of
Moses does not imply any such commandment, teaching, or halachah;
The Bible provides examples of people who followed their wives and
did not suffer condemnation and criticism for this: Judges 13:11: "He
arose and went after his wife..."; Judges 19:1-3: "... And the man of
Levi lived at the stern of Mount Ephraim, and he would take a wife
who was a mistress from Bethlehem of Judah. And feed his mistress
on him and go from him to her father's house... And he raised up a
woman and followed her to speak of her heart to bring him back (to
bring her back)..."; 2 Samuel 3:14-16: "And David sent angels to Ish-
Beshet, son of Saul, to say, Give my wife Michal... And a woman will go
back and forth and cry after her until you choose..."; 2 Kings 4:29-30:
"And he said to Gihazi, 'Hagar from your waist, and take my support in
 your hand and go... And say if the boy is alive the Lord, and your soul is
alive, if I leave you and get up and follow her."
144. The Sages established a biblical principle according to which:
"The wicked are predecessors of oil: the harp of his name, the exile of
his name, the seven son of Bakri his name; But the righteous are the
oil of Kodman: and his name is Elkana, and his name is Yishai, and his
name is Boaz..." (Esther Rabba 6). In other words, if the character's
name precedes the word "his name" – it is evil; If the word "his name"
precedes the character – it is a righteous man. However, the Bible
shows that this is not always the case: the phrase "and his name"
appears before "Hira" (Genesis 38:1), "Jesus" (38:2), "Michihu" (Judges
17:1), "Saul" (1 Samuel 9:2), "Shemai ben Gera" (2 Samuel 16:5) – and
we have no biblical indication that they were righteous. Regarding
Shemai Ben-Gera, it is even explicitly stated that he cursed and stoned
David with stones (2 Samuel 16:5-6) and the Sages themselves
described him as wicked (Midrash Psalm 18). As mentioned above, the
Sages stated that if the phrase "his name" appears after the name of
the character, it is evil. But the Bible testifies that this, too, is not
necessarily true: "Josiah his name" (1 Kings 13:2), "Job his name" (Job
1:1) – there is no evidence that they were wicked; On the contrary, the
Bible describes Josiah (2 Kings 23:24-25) and Job (Ezekiel 14:14-20, Job
1:1-8).
145. According to rabbinic law, every person must have at least two
children – male and female (Bavli, Yevmot 61:72). In other words, the
Sages decreed that those who do not have at least a son and daughter
do not fulfill their duty and do not fulfill the commandments of Pro
and Rabbi. However, this assertion is inconsistent with biblical opinion,
where there are examples of women who gave birth to only sons:
Noah had three sons (Genesis 5:32); Terah had only three sons
(11:25); Isaac had two sons, Jacob and Esau (25:25-26); Joseph had
two sons, Menashe and Ephraim (Chapter 41:51-52); Moses had two
sons, Gershom and Eliezer (Exodus 2:22, 18:4); Aaron HaCohen had
only sons (chapter 6:23); Ali the priest had only two sons, as did
Samuel the prophet (1 Samuel 2:34, 8:2); Boaz and Ruth had one child,
a worker (Ruth 4:13-21). Needless to say, nowhere in the Old
Testament is the commandment to bring at least a son and a
daughter; Moreover, there is no biblical confirmation that one of the
above characters was smoked and reprimanded for not having
 daughters. All this is to say that rabbinic law in this case is a clear
example of adding a mitzvah that is not part of the Torah.
146. According to Exodus 7:17-11:1-5, it is clear that God brought 10
plagues upon Egypt (compare also with Psalms 78:44-51, 15:28-36).
Rabbi Eliezer was not impressed by the obvious and counted no less
than 40 plagues! R. Akiva went further when he ruled in an individual
opinion that it should be said: "In Egypt there are 50 plagues" (Michlita
Derbi Shimon bar Yochai, chapter 14). The above pair of rabbis were
caught spoiling it not only on the part of the Bible, but on two other
fronts: 1- In the Mishna (Tractate Avot, chapter 5) it is said: "Ten
plagues the Holy One brought, blessed be He, upon the Egyptians in
Egypt"; In the Passover Haggadah it is also written: "These are the ten
plagues that The Holy One, Blessed be He, brought upon the Egyptians
in Egypt...".
147. The sages of the Talmud (Bavli, Sanhedrin 18:11) stated that
while "a High Priest discussed and condemned him... The king did not
discuss or discuss it." That is to say: unlike a priest, the king is not
allowed to judge for himself and is not judged. However, the Bible
shows the exact opposite: in 1 Samuel 8:5, the elders of Israel demand
from the prophet Samuel: "Shima-leno king to judge us as all the
nations"; 2 Samuel 8:15 says: "And David reigned over all Israel, and
David did justice and righteousness to all his people." That is, David
was a king and a judge at the same time; When Absalom sought to
reign under his father, he realized that one of the king's duties was to
judge (2 Samuel 2:2-6). When Solomon began to reign, he asked the
Lord: "And you have given your servant a heart to hear to judge your
people"; And immediately afterwards it is said: "It is better in the eyes
of my Lord, for Solomon asked this thing" (1 Kings 3:9-10). Later on, an
example of the king's trial of the two prostitute women is presented,
and the summary of the chapter reads: "And all Israel shall hear the
judgment which the king has judged, and they shall see from the king
that they have seen the wisdom of God in his midst to make
judgment" (verse 28). In conclusion, the Sages state that the king is
not allowed to judge; The Bible testifies that the kings understood that
part of their role was to judge, and so they actually did.
148. In Exodus 32:7 it is written: "And the Lord spoke unto Moses to
you, for you swam with you, which you brought up from the land of
Egypt." From the context it is clear that the word "your people" refers
to the people of Israel and evidence, in verse 1 it is written "And the
 people feared"; Later in the chapter it is said that when the tribe of
Levi were called upon to come to account with those guilty of the
calf's deed, they killed "one another and one another and one
another" (verse 27). Rashi was not impressed by this, and in his
commentary on verse 7, stated: "The slaughter of the people is not
said, but your people; It is a great evening that you have received from
yourself and converted and you have not fled from me and you have
said well that they will infect those who live in the Shekhina, they have
swam and corrupted." That is, contrary to the simplification that
emerges from the entire chapter, Rashi stated that those guilty of the
sin of the calf were not the people of Israel but the converts who were
part of the great evening that came out of Egypt.
149. R. Shimon bar Yochai stated: "You are called a man and there
are no <star workers> {gentiles} called a man" (Bavli, Bava Metzia
14:72). That is, unlike Israel, gentiles do not attain the status of a
person and do not deserve to be called that. This laconic statement
sounds very strange mainly because in the Old Testament God himself
called non-Jews "Adam": Adam and Eve were called "Adam" (Genesis
5:2); God generally referred to the Gentiles as "Adam," both before
and after the Flood (Genesis 6:6-9); The Bible refers to Egypt as a
"man" (Exodus 8:13-14). In short, the Sages stated that gentiles are
not considered "man" and therefore are not called that; In contrast,
the Bible (and God Himself) refers to the Gentiles as a "man" in many
places.
150. Without any reference from the Bible, the Sages decided that
Nebuchadnezzar had plotted to make Zedekiah the king of the male
layer; And based on a verse that has nothing to do with it (Mahbakkuk
2:16), the rabbis stated that when Nebuchadnezzar asked to kick
Zedekiah, his foreskin was extended by three hundred cubits (Bavli,
Shabbat 149:72).
151. In Judges 13:24, it is said: "And the woman shall give birth to a
son, and his name shall be Samson, and the boy shall grow up, and the
Lord shall bless him." R. Judah was unable to overcome his creator
and, relying on this verse, stated rudely: "Blessed in his truth as men
and his seed as a flowing stream" (Bavli, Sotah 10:11). In other words,
according to the Talmud, God blessed Samson by giving him the penis
of an adult while we were still a young boy. In Judges 16:21, it is
written: "Let there be a miller in the prisoners' house." On the basis of
this verse, the Sages stated that Samson "milled" the women of Israel:
 "Each and every one brought his wife to the house of the forbidden so
that she would be conceived."
152. In Leviticus 23:15, it is written: "And you have been told from
the day after the Sabbath from the day you brought Umar the
momentum of seven innocent Sabbaths will be." That is, the counting
of the Omer must take place on the Sunday of the week within the
feast of matzah. The Judaism of Halacha changed the date and ruled
that the counting should begin "from the next day of Yom Tov" (Rashi),
that is, on the 16th of Nissan. This interpretation is fraught with at
least two difficulties: 1- The biblical simplification of the
commandment from the day after the "Sabbath" and everywhere in
the Torah where it is said "The Sabbath" in The Lord of Knowledge, it
does not refer only to the seventh day of the week; 2- The rabbis also
admit that, unlike the other dates in the Torah, shavuot (the ceremony
of lifting the Omer) does not have a fixed date and depends entirely
on the end of the counting of the Omer. But because Halacha has
decreed that the counting must be started every year from the 16th of
Nissan, shavuot will fall regularly on the sixth day of Sivan! In
conclusion, due to the Sages' misinterpretation of the phrase "from
the next day of Shabbat," those who follow their method are forced to
indicate the lifting of the Omer on the wrong date; Moreover,
according to the Torah, shavuot does not have an explicit date and is
set only at the end of the counting of the Omer; Nevertheless, the
rabbis contradicted what was written by ruling a fixed date for the
holiday, and as a result, completely obscured the need for the
counting of the Omer.
153. The Bible refers to Balaam by several adjectives, such as "the
magician" (Joshua 13:22), but in no way describes him as a "prophet"!
Despite this, the Sages allowed themselves to grant Balaam a new
privilege, stating: "And we shall no longer arise in Israel as Moses; In
Israel he did not arise, but in the aqueducts of the world he arose...
And what prophet did they have as Moses? It's Balaam, a son in the
skin." (Bamidbar Rabbah, Parashat Balak 14). Later in the midrash, the
Sages even make a comparison between Moses and Balaam, at the
end of which Balaam has the upper hand. In this, the rabbis made a
mistake twice: (1) they gave Balaam the title of "prophet" even though
the Bible refrained from doing so; In the comparison made by the
Sages between Moses and Balaam, the latter appears to be a greater
and more spiritual prophet.
154. Although the Torah commands and emphasizes that the
commandments of Moses should not be added to (Deuteronomy 4:2,
13:1), the Sages decided to intervene in the most intimate moments of
a person's life; With an incomprehensible frown, the rabbis ruled on
new laws, which have no clue in the Bible, such as: When entering the
throne room, "There is no east and west but north and south... There
is no nephra'in standing but inhabited... There is no mackenhin on the
right but on the left." And as if that were not enough, Rabbi Kahane
entered his rabbi's bedroom, for matters between him and her – in
order to learn how to fulfill the mitzvah of using the bed according to
Halacha. In both cases, it is explicitly stated that this is an integral part
of the Torah (Bavli, Blessings 62:11).
155. In Judges 4:4 it is said: "And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of
Lapidot, judged Israel at that time." From the above description it is
understood that Deborah was the wife of a man named Lapidot.
Despite the simple and clear description of a number of judges, the
rabbis ruled – without any biblical references – that Deborah was
actually married to Barak ben Avinoam (Yalkut Shimoni, Judges 4,
Mark 42).
156. In Genesis 24:2 it is written: "And Abraham said to his old man,
'His house, the parable of all that is to him, put your hand under my
thigh.'" In light of chapters 15:2 and chapter 24:34, it is clear beyond
any doubt that this is Damascus Eliezer. The author of the Zohar
thought otherwise and stated: "It is written: And Abraham said to his
servant, this is Metatron" (Parashat Chayei Sarah 55:15-17). That is to
say: according to the Torah, the servant of Abraham is Damascus
Eliezer; According to the Zohar, the servant is the angel of the
covenant Metatron, who is nothing more than an incarnation and
rabbinical upgrade of the Persian god Mithra.
157. The circumcision first appears in the Bible in Genesis 17, where
God says to Abraham: "This is my covenant that you will keep between
me and you and your seed after you, who are all male to you. And you
have forsaken the flesh of your foreskin, and it has become a covenant
between you and me. And a half-day-old man will circumcise you
every trace of your door... "And Abraham shall take his son Ishmael
and all the natives of his house... and circumcised the flesh of their
foreskin" (verses 10-12, 23). However, without any biblical references,
the Sages stated that Seth, the son of Adam, was born adulterated –
just like his father (Yalkut Shimoni, Genesis 5, Mark 42). That is to say:
 according to the Torah, Ishmael, Abraham and his household were
circumcised first; According to the rabbis, Adam and Seth had been
circumcised earlier.
158. In Genesis 5:23-24 it is written: "And all the days of Enoch shall
be five and sixty years and three hundred years. And he will walk and
inaugurate the Elohim, and we will not take God with him." Although
the word "walked" appears in the Torah with only a positive
connotation, the Sages stated that Chanoch "Hanaf was – sometimes a
righteous man, times wicked... Therefore, "it is not written within the
timussen [book] of the righteous, but within the timussen of the
wicked" (Bereishit Rabbah, Parashat 25). That is, the Torah illuminates
Hanoch in a purely positive light; The rabbis claim that Hanoch was
both righteous and wicked and was written in the Book of the Wicked.
159. In Genesis 49:33, it is written: "And Jacob could command his
sons, and he gathered his feet to the staff, and he touched and
gathered his peoples." In chapter 50:5-7, Joseph says to the Pharaoh:
"My father is sworn to say, 'Here I am dead in my grave, which I have
cut down in the land of Canaan, where I will be buried, and now I will
go up and bury my father and return.' And the Pharaoh said, 'Go up
and bury your father when you are satiated.' And Yael Yosef buried his
father..." From these passages it is clear beyond any doubt that Jacob
is dead. Rabbi Yochanan was not convinced of this and stated in a
single opinion: "Our father Jacob did not die" (Bavli, Talmud 5:72). It is
interesting that when R. Nachman heard this, he was puzzled and
asked: And that for nothing they eulogized, chunked and buried
Jacob? R. Yochanan's laconic answer to this was: The Bible I demand!
160. The book of Numbers 16 tells of the attempted revolt led by Ice
and the punishment that followed. Chapter 26:10 again mentions the
punishment of Ice and his commission. Although the Torah is very
clear in describing those who accomplish the crime, the Sages stated –
without any references from the Bible – that the sons of Gad and the
sons of Shimon also took part in the revolt of ice (in the Desert Rabba,
Parashat Ice).
161. Genesis 1-2 describes a unique feature attributed to God alone
in the other books of the Bible; The ability to create the world and
everything in it. The act of creation, associated with God, runs through
many of the biblical books, for example, Exodus 31:17; Isaiah 44:24;
Jonah 1:9; In Zechariah 12:1; Psalms 104:2, 5; Proverbs 3:19; and
Nehemiah 9:6. There is ample additional evidence of this in the Bible,
 but these examples are sufficient to establish that creation in the Bible
is attributed only to God and not to any other figure, as it is written:
"He was commanded and created" (Psalm 148:5). Nevertheless, the
Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 65:72) describes how a sage named
Raba created a real person, but he did not have the power of speech, a
prophet; Likewise, Rabbi Hanina and R. Oshaya engaged in the "Book
of Creation" and created a triangular cart every Friday night, and ate it
with an appetite. That is to say: according to the Bible, God alone has
the ability to create; According to the Sages, the rabbis are also
capable of creating something out of nothing!
162. In Genesis 34:1-2 it is written: "Dina, the daughter of Leah, who
gave birth to Jacob, will go out to see the daughters of the land. And
he feared you, the son of a donkey, the president of the land, and he
took her and lay down with her and answered." From the brief
description above, the Sages concluded that "Dina was six years old
when she gave birth to Osnat of Nablus" (Tractate Scribes 11:9; In
other words, without any biblical references, the rabbis stated that: A.
Dina was raped when she was six years old; In Osnat, Yosef's wife, she
was the daughter of Nablus and Dina. Here, the Sages roughly
contradict the Torah, for according to Genesis 41:45, Osnat's father
was "Poti Pharaoh Cohen an" (and not Nablus, as is claimed in the
Midrashim).
163. In Genesis 14:18 it is written: "And the kings of justice, a
complete king, brought out bread and wine, and he was a priest of a
supreme God." The phrase 'complete king' means "the ancient name
of Jerusalem." In the Midrash Yalkut Shimoni, the Sages decided to
become wise and stated: "A complete king – born of adultery"
(Genesis 14, Mark 74). In other words, while the Torah identifies
Shalem with the name of a biblical city (see Genesis 33:18), the
midrash decides to deviate completely from the simple and rule that
the kings of justice were born adulterated.
164. In Numbers 25 it is written: "And behold, a man of the children
of Israel came and brought the political one closer to his brother,
before the eyes of Moses and the eyes of the whole community of the
children of Israel, and the weeping opened the tent of Moed. And
Pinhas ben Elazar ben Aaron the priest feared and rose from the
community and took a ramach in his hand. And he followed the man
of Israel to the stomach and stabbed them both... "And there is the
man of Israel who strikes the political one Zimri Ben-Salwa, the
 president of the household of the father of my hearing" (verses 6-8,
14). From this description, the rabbis concluded that "four hundred
and twenty-four on the grounds of the same wickedness that day,
Pinhas was waiting for him from the outside to exhaust his power"
(Yalkut Shimoni, Numbers 25:12). So, according to the Torah, as soon
as Pinhas saw that Zimri had brought the political woman closer to his
brother, he took the sword in his hand and stabbed them; According
to the incomprehensible rudeness of the Sages, Zimri managed to kick
the woman 424 times before he was stabbed.
165. In Genesis 1:26-27, it is written clearly and clearly: "And God
said, 'We shall become a man in our image as our image... "And God
created man in His image, in the image of God, he created with him
male and female." The traditional commentators ignored the
simplification and decided that man was created in the image of the
angels (Rashi, Rashbam, RavA, etc.). In other words, the Torah
explicitly states that man was created in the image and likeness of
God; The rabbis decreed, out of nothing, that man was created in the
image of the angels. Evidence of the error of these commentators
comes from the words of D.L., who said: "We will do – this does not
mean that we will reign in others, such as angels, because he said in
our image, and man is not in the image of the angels."
166. In Genesis 2, it is written: "And the Lord God will grow from the
earth every nice-looking tree that is good to eat and the tree of life in
the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... "And the
Lord God commanded man to say from every tree of the garden, 'Eat,
eat.' And from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you will not
eat of it..." (Verses 9, 16-17). Chapter 3 reiterates that it was a tree
and not another type of plant (verses 1-7, 11-12). R. Meir (Bereishit
Rabba 15) was not impressed by biblical knowledge and stated that it
was not a tree but rather wheat (even though wheat is not a tree, but
a grain); R. Judah (Bereishit Rabba 15) also sought to be wise, claiming
that it was actually grape juice (even though the vine is not a type of
tree either). In short, the Torah says wood; The Sages defy that this is
not a tree, but wheat or a vine. Therefore, the rabbis erred twice: (1)
they tried to determine the gender of the tree of knowledge, even
though there is no hint in the Bible as to the type of tree; Some of
them claimed that it was not a tree, even though the Bible emphasizes
it.
167. Genesis 4:1-2 says: "And man knew his wife Eve, and he gave
birth to Cain... "And you will give birth to his brother Abel...". In
chapter 4:25 it is written: "And a man shall know his wife and give
birth to a son, and shall call his name Seth..."; And in chapter 5:4 it is
written: "And there shall be days of man after he gave birth to a year,
and he gave birth to sons and daughters." This is how all the births of
Eve are described. The Sages were not satisfied with this and stated,
without any biblical evidence, that by the eighth hour of the creation
of man, Eve had already had twins – Cain and his sister (Bavli,
Sanhedrin 38:72); He went on to do a midrash in Bereshit Rabbah
(Parashat 22) when he claimed that at that very time, Eve also gave
birth to a trio of twins – Abel and his two sisters: "They went to bed
for years, and descended seven: Cain and his twin, and Abel and his
two twins."
168. In Leviticus 21:13-14, the High Priest commands that "He who is
a virgin woman shall take. A widow and a divorcee and a martyr who
forsakes these will not take, but a virgin mother of his people will take
a wife." Quite simply, the high priest cannot marry but a virgin from
the tribe of Levi. Based on verse 13, Maimonides stated that it is
forbidden for the High Priest to marry an adult girl over the age of 12
or younger than the age of 12: "Matzot was made on a high priest,
who would marry a virgin girl; And when he becomes ill, he will be
forbidden, which is said: 'And he, a woman in her virginity, shall take'
(Leviticus 21:13) – 'a woman', not a small one; 'In virginity', immature"
(Mishneh Torah, Halachot Esorei Bia 17). Why did the Sages forbid the
priest to marry an adult virgin? Answer: "And he who is a woman in
virginity will take, except for an adult – who has lost her virginity" (i.e.,
over the age of 12, virginity begins to degrade and the woman's value
decreases respectively, Bavli, Yevmot 59:11). In conclusion, the Torah
commands the High Priest to marry a virgin woman; The Sages added
a mitzvah that is not from the Torah and stated that he must marry a
girl exactly 12 years old, no more no less.
169. InGenesis37:24, it is said that the pit into which Joseph was
thrown was empty. The Talmud did not accept the biblical opinion and
stated that the cistern was not empty but that scorpions and snakes
were running (Bavli, Shabbat 22:11). It should be noted that even after
reviewing the entire chapter 37, there is no indication that there were
spawns in the pit.
170. InProverbs23:31 it is written: "Do not see wine because he who
gives in the glass of his eye walks in the plains." In fact, verses 29-32
are a grave warning sign of the temptation and danger inherent in
wine. For some reason, the Talmud decided to completely reverse the
interpretation and stated: "Dictate (Proverbs 23:23) 'Do not see wine
because it shall be maned', TR: Everything is obligatory in these four
glasses; One men and one women and one babies" (Bavli, Pesachim
18:72). Interestingly, not only did the Sages completely deviate from
the meaning of the Bible, they even decreed from the verse a
commandment that is not from the Torah, according to which it is
obligatory (even for children) to drink 4 glasses of wine on the eve of
Passover.
171. In Numbers 30:3 it is written: "A man who has made a vow to
the Lord or the seven-seven to forbid his soul will not begin to speak
as much as he will do." The wanderer is therefore obliged to act
according to his vow, as Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu admitted: "The
simplest thing is that he is obligated to fulfill his vow." The Torah
qualifies this by 3 cases in which vows can be permitted, and it is
important to note that all three relate only to women (verses 4-16). In
the Old Testament, there are examples that emphasize the severity of
the vow and emphasize the obligation to fulfill it (such as
Deuteronomy 23:22-23; Judges 11:29-39; 1 Samuel 1:11; and
Ecclesiastes 5:3-4). However, despite the Torah prohibition against
breaking vows, apart from the three exceptional cases, the Sages
amended a draconian "vow-breaking text", which is suitable for every
person and includes a monetary redemption thanks to which the
rabbis permit the vow, saying: "Everything will be given to you,
everything is sick to you, everything is to you, there is no vow here,
nor an oath..."; The Talmud even states: "Whoever wishes not to keep
his vows all year round will stand on Rosh Hashanah and say: Every
vow that I am going to make will be void..."; The "Shortening of the
Shulchan Aruch" also ignores the biblical prohibition and specifies
halachot for the dissolution of vows, on the nose and nose of the
Torah.
172. The Torah opposes and categorically forbids the practice of
witchcraft; Exodus 22:17 says, "A witch shall not live," and in
Deuteronomy 18 it is written: "He who shall not find in you passing on
his son and daughter in a fire a cloudy magic and a serpent and a
sorcerer." Despite the Torah's negative attitude towards witchcraft,
 Talmudic scholars reveal that the phenomenon of witchcraft has
flourished among the Sages. who permitted all the snakes and spells
and the sorcerers" (Responsa of Rashba, Part 1, Mark 13). It is not
surprising, therefore, that the Talmud is replete with examples of
rabbis who used sorcerers and gave them permission (see, for
example, Bavli, Kiddushin 39:72; Gitin 45:11; Sanhedrin 65:72;
Sanhedrin 67:12; Sanhedrin 68:11). The Talmud also admits that the
rabbis who served in the Sanhedrin were "sorcerers" (Sanhedrin
17:11; In conclusion, the Torah condemns sorcerers and forbids the
practice of witchcraft in any way; Rabbinic literature is full of examples
of rabbis who dealt with magic and witchcraft unhindered and without
reservation.
173. Genesis 1:6-10 says, "And God said, Let there be heaven in the
water, and there shall be a differentiator between water and water.
And God made the heavens and distinguished between the waters
beneath the heavens and the waters above the heavens, and so it was.
And God called to heaven and there was evening and there was
Monday morning. And God said, The waters beneath the heavens will
rise to one place, and you will see the land, and so be it. And Leviticus
called God to the land, the land, and to the watershed called the seas."
This is how the creation of the sea is therefore described; God created
this alone without any intervention from anyone external to Him.
However, contrary to everything the Bible teaches, the Sages stated
that when God sought to create the sea, he had to first confront the
god of the sea, 'Rahav' his name (Bavli, Bava Batra 74:72).
174. Jeremiah 32:40 says: "And I have made a covenant for them that
I will not return from behind them to benefit them, and I will fear
them in their hearts to the infallible." The verse clearly indicates that
the fear of heaven is given by God. However, "Rabbi Hanina said:
Everything is in the hands of heaven except the fear of heaven" (Bavli,
Blessings 33:72). That is, contrary to what is written in the Bible, the
Sages taught that the fear of heaven is not in the hands of God but in
the hands of man.
175. Deuteronomy 13:13-16 describes the law of a remote city: "For
you shall hear in one denomination... The people of Bil'el will come
out of your midst and drive away the inhabitants of their city, saying,
"We will go and worship other Gods... And you have preached and
researched and asked well and here is the truth of the matter... Strike
you, the inhabitants of that city by the sword...". In chapter 21:18-19,
 the law of 'rogue son and teacher' is explained: "For a man shall have a
rogue son and a teacher, he shall not hear the voice of his father and
the voice of his mother... And his father and mother caught him and
took him out to the elders of his city and to the gate from his place."
Although these commandments are clearly written in the Torah, black
and white, the Sages stated that they were not and are not to be
(Bavli, Sanhedrin 71a). Twice, R. Jonathan gathered up the courage
and accused the rabbis of their mistake: 1) When he testified that with
his own eyes he saw a remote city: "Rabbi Jonathan said: I saw it and
sat on a mound"; B. When he also testified on the subject of a 'rogue
son and a teacher': "I saw him, that I was in the place where he was
discussed... And I even sat on his grave after he was sentenced and
killed."
176. In Leviticus 14:34-37, the laws regarding a house found to be
infected with leprosy are detailed: "For you shall come to the land of
Canaan... And he came to the house and told the priest to say as a
scourge seemed to me at home. And the priest commanded and
vacated the house before the priest came to see the scourge... Then
the priest came to see the house. and see the scourge...". Although
this is explicitly written in the Torah, the Talmud states: "The house of
the touched was not and is not to be" (Bavli, Sanhedrin 71a). Evidence
that the Sages were wrong and the Torah is right is obtained from R.
Eliezer and R. Shimon, who testified and said: "After all, there was in
reality the house of the touched."
177. In Genesis 11:27, 29 it is written: "Terah gave birth to Abram to
Nahor and Haran, and Haran gave birth to Lot... And Abram shall take
and snore for them women, there the wife of Abram Sherry, and there
the wife of Nahor Malka, the daughter of Haran, the father of Malka,
and the father of Yaske." In chapter 20:12, Abraham says of Sarah:
"My father's daughter is but not my mother's daughter, and I will be
my wife." From the above passages, the following picture emerges: A-
Terah was the father of Abraham and Sarah; In Haran, the brother of
Abraham and the son of Terah, he was the father of Malka and
Jessaka; C- Sarah was Abraham's wife. The Talmud reversed the
creators and, in complete contradiction to the Torah, stated: "Sarah
dictates (Genesis 11): My father is Malka and my father is Yeska. And
R. Yitzchak said: "Yeska is Sarah" (Bavli, Megillah 14:11). In this case,
the rabbis contradicted the Bible three times: (1) when they
determined that Terah was not Sarah's father; in when they claimed
 that Sarah was Jessaka, the daughter of Haran; C- When doing so, they
actually determined that Sarah was not Abraham's sister on the part of
his father Terah.
178. The book of Daniel 4 describes how Daniel's three friends –
Shadrach (Hananya), Mishich (Mishael) and Abed Nego (Azaria) – were
thrown into the furnace of fire because they refused to bow down to
the king's image. From the text it is clear that the three were thrown
into the furnace by force (verses 15-24) and did not jump there on
their own initiative, God forbid. Nevertheless, the Sages stated with
incomprehensible brazenness that the three had tried to commit
suicide just like King Saul (Bereishit Rabba, Noah, Parashat 34; Bavli,
Pesachim 53:72)!
179. The Sages stated that it is forbidden for a person to stand and
pray in a high place, but only in a low place: "A man should not stand
in a high place and pray... "No man shall stand, neither on a chair nor
on a stool, nor in a high place and pray, but in a low place" (Bavli,
Blessings 10:72). This statement contradicts the Bible, where there are
several examples of people who prayed in high places and gods who
heard, for example: 1-Moses went up to Mount Sinai and prayed for
the people of Israel (Exodus 32:11-15, 30-35); In Samuel, he prayed to
God in Mitzpe and Ramah (1 Samuel 7:5-9; 8:4-6); 3- The man of God
went up to the altar at Beit El and prayed for King Jeroboam (1 Kings
13:1-6); 4) Daniel entered his house, which was upstairs (perhaps in an
attic) and prayed to God (Daniel 6:11).
180. According to the Bible, a man's Jewishness is determined by the
origin of his father (Numbers 1:2, 16-18, 17:18); In other words,
whether the child's mother is Jewish or not, he will be considered a
Jew as long as his father is a descendant of the Israelites. Indeed, the
Bible is full of examples of men who married alienated women and
whose offspring were considered Jewish in every respect, such as: the
sons of Jacob of Bilhah and Mazalfa (Genesis 30:5-13); the sons of
Judah from the Canaanite woman (chapter 38:2-5); the sons of Joseph
of Asnat (chapter 46:20); the sons of Moses of Zipporah (Exodus 18:2-
4); Son of Boaz Merut (Ruth 4:13). However, contrary to biblical
opinion, the Sages distorted the intention of verse 3 of Deuteronomy
chapter 7, stating that the offspring of a man carrying an alienated
woman would not be considered Jews (Bavli, Kiddushin 68:72). That is,
according to the Bible, the origin is determined according to the
 father; According to rabbinic law, the origin is determined according to
the mother.
181. Exodus 23:17 says, "Three times a year, all your memory shall be
seen before the Lord." In Deuteronomy 31:10-12, it is said: "And
Moses commanded them to say from the end of seven years in the
absence of a year of omission on the feast of Sukkot. When all Israel
comes to see the face of the Lord your God in the place he chooses,
you will read this Torah against all Israel with their ears. The crowd,
the people, the men and the women, and the preachers and the
gerek...". From these sections it is clear that the commandment to go
up to the Temple on the date stated above includes the babies (teff).
Nevertheless, the Sages of the Mishna stated that "everything is
obligatory in sight, except for a foolish and small deaf" (Tractate
Chagga 1). That is, the Torah includes the babies in the mitzvah ("all
your memory", "all Israel", "and the preacher"); Whereas the Mishna
excludes the babies from the mitzvah.
182. Job is described in the Bible as a righteous man (Ezekiel 14:14,
20); As a man who is unparalleled in all the land, "he was innocent and
honest and feared God and unrighteous" (Job 1:1, 8, 2:3); as a man
who has not sinned with his lips (1:22, 2:10); For if he spoke correctly
to God (42:7). Raba and R. Eliezer were not impressed by this, claiming
that Job had sinned in his heart and even asked to "turn a bowl upside
down," that is, to apostatize God (Bavli, Baba Batra 16:11). In other
words, while the Bible justified Job; Some of the rabbis incriminated
him.
183. The Sages claimed that our mother Sarah was the daughter of
Shem (Midrash Yalkut Shimoni for Job, Chapter 8, Mark 5744). But this
statement is incorrect, for two main reasons: (1) There is no reference
to this in the Bible; According to Genesis 11:10-26, about ten
generations separate the period of Noah's life from that of the
patriarch Abraham (the Sages also admitted this in Tractate Avot 4).
According to the Bible, a period of one generation lasts between 20
and 40 years (see Numbers 32:13; or Psalm 95:10). So, in a simple
account we can conclude that between Shem and Abraham a
maximum of 400 years have passed (10 generations multiplied by 40
years), or at least 200 years (10 generations multiplied by 20 years). It
follows that if Sarah was indeed Shem's daughter, as the rabbis claim,
then when Abraham met her, she should have been at least 200 years
old. But this is not possible because the Torah states that before Isaac
 was born, Sarah was 90 years old (Genesis 17:17); And on the day of
her death, she was "one hundred years and twenty years and seven
years old" (23:1).
184. In 2 Kings, chapter 2, it is written: "And the Lord raised Elijah in
the storm of heaven, and Elijah and Elisha went from the wheel... And
there were those who went back and forth, and there was a vehicle of
fire and horses of fire, and they separated the two, and Elijah
ascended in the storm of heaven" (verses 1, 11). Despite these clear
statements, the Sages stated that "the Shekinah never descended
downwards, nor did Moses and Elijah ascend to Merom" (Bavli,
Sukkah 5:11). That is to say: in the Bible it is explicitly stated that the
prophet Elijah ascended to heaven; The Talmud states that there were
never any things.
185. In Job 26:7 it is written: "A northerly leaning on the earth hung a
land without anything." The parallelism between the two parts of the
verse compares the phrase "wonder" to the phrase "without what."
From this it is clear that the correct meaning of "without anything"
must be 'nothing', or 'nothing'. Simply put, Job describes the fact that
G-d supposedly hung the Earth in the airspace, with nothing to hold
onto. The sages of the Talmud were mistaken and understood the
phrase as one word: "braking", like a restraint; Therefore, they
interpreted the verse as follows: "Hangs a land on a brake... The world
does not exist except for those who brake themselves in times of
strife" (Bavli, Holin 89:11). That is to say: in the Bible it is said "without
what" – a combination of two separate words that mean: nothing; The
Sages did not begin by replacing the phrase with one word with a
completely different meaning ("braking") and thus completely
deviated from the intention of the Bible.
186. In the book of Jonah 2, it is written: "The Lord raised a great fish
to swallow a dove, and there was a dove in the intestine of the fish for
three days and three nights. And Jonah prayed to the Lord his God
from the intestines of the fish... And the Lord said to the fish, "Let the
dove come to the land" (verses 1-2, 11). From these passages it is clear
that the words "fish", "to the fish" and "the fish", refer to the same
large fish that swallowed the dove. The Sages understood this quite
differently and decided (based on verse 2) that Jonah was swallowed
by two different fish, one male and the other female (Ozar Midrashim,
Midrash Yonah, p. 219). That is, the Bible emphasizes that it was one
fish that swallowed a dove; The midrash claims that two distinct fish
 swallowed Jonah, one after the other: "He said to her to the fish: Go
and swallow the prophet in the intestine of the fish. The fish was
ejected and swallowed by the fish."
187. In the book of 1 Samuel, chapter 3, it is written: "The candle of
God has not yet been extinguished, and Samuel has been lying in the
hall of the Lord, which is the name of the ark of God" (verse 3). The
Sages could not stand the thought that Samuel was lying in the hall of
Elohim, and therefore allowed themselves to misrepresent the
meaning of the Bible as follows: "The candle of God has not yet been
extinguished in the hall of the Lord and Samuel is lying in his place"
(Bavli, Kiddushin 78:72). Regarding this, Rabbi Amnon Bezeq admitted
that the Sages neutered the verse and created difficulties in the
simplest way.
188. In the Midrash Shemot Rabbah (Parashat 41), the Sages
categorically stated that everywhere in the Bible "when you find a
yeshiva, you find a fault there." That is, in every story in which the root
Y.S.B. appears, there will necessarily be a sin at the end. The midrash
found several examples of this, including: the Tower of Babel ("And
they shall find a valley in the land of Shinar and dwell there", Genesis
11:2); the sale of Joseph ("And they sat down to eat bread", chapter
37:25); The people prostituted with the daughters of Moab ("And
Israel sat in the fools," Numbers 25:1). In the above cases, a yeshiva is
indeed described that leads to a malfunction, but the Sages' assertion
contradicts many passages in the Bible in which a yeshiva without sin
or fault is described, such as: "And Abram came and sat in Eleni of
Mamra in Hebron, and there was an altar to the Lord" (Genesis 13:18);
"And the Lord looked up to him in Eleni of Mara, and he sat in the
opening of the tent as the heat of the day" (18:1); "And Joseph sat in
Egypt, he and his father's house, and Yehi Yosef one hundred and ten
years" (v. 22); "And Ali the priest sat on the throne on the mezuzah of
the hall of the Lord" (1 Samuel 1:9); "And David sat with Achish in Gat"
(27:3). All this is to say, the Sages established a biblical law according
to which sitting leads to fault and sin; But as we have seen, this
assertion contradicts the Bible, for it is full of examples of sitting
without fail in its aftermath.
189. In the book of Joshua 10:12-13 it is written: "Then Joshua will
speak to the Lord on the day of the Lord the Amari before the children
of Israel and say to the eyes of Israel the sun in Givat Dom and the
moon in the valley of Eilon. And in their hand the sun and the moon
 stood until the gentile of his enemies arose..." The explicit reason for
stopping the celestial bodies lies in the desire to postpone darkness
and take advantage of daylight to win the battle; This is how the
traditional commentators understood it as the "Citadel of David", who
wrote: "The sun in Givat Dom – because at that time the sun stood in
the presence of Givon, and feared that it would set in its season and
they would not be able to chase the enemy in the middle of the night."
Nevertheless, in the midrash "Perki Derbi Eliezer" (chapter 52), the
Sages stated a completely different reason: "Joshua came and made
Israel's war, and came on the eve of Shabbat, and saw in Israel's
misfortune that they would not desecrate the Sabbath..." That is,
without any confirmation from the Bible, the midrash stated two
things that lacked biblical foundation: a- the battle took place on
Friday; In Yehoshua Ben-Nun he was afraid of desecrating the Sabbath
and therefore performed the miracle. By the way, the Babylonian
Talmud (Talmud 25:11) exemplifies the confusion that prevailed
among the Sages regarding the time that passed until the sun set (one
rabbi claimed 12 hours, the other 24 hours, another rabbi 36 hours
and another 48 hours). But that's not all; The Midrash "Seder Olam
Haba" shows that the rabbis were also divided on the date on which
the miracle occurred: some claim C in Tammuz and some say A in
Nissan.
190. The Sages stated that "until Noah is born, they do crafts with
their hands, and we dictate and shape our hands. Noah was born, he
installed plows and exiles and cardamoms and all the craftsmanship"
(Midrash Tanhoma, Genesis 11). That is, according to the rabbis, the
craftsmanship was introduced only by Noah, since before that, people
worked only with their own hands. However, this assertion contradicts
the Torah, since before the birth of Noah, it is said: "And Tzela also
gave birth to Tuval Cain to polish all the deafness of serpent and iron"
(Genesis 4:22). The translation of Onkelos and the translation of
Jonathan ben Uziel into the Torah interpret the phrase "deaf" as a
work ("work" in Aramaic), i.e., as a craft of copper and iron. In other
words, the Torah indicates that the work of making iron tools was first
performed by the descendants of Cain, before Noah was born;
According to the Midrash Tanhoma, the craftsmanship tools emerged
only after the birth of Noah, even though there is not a single hint of
this in the Torah.
191. Deuteronomy 24:17 says: "Thou shalt not judge an orphan, nor
sabotage a widow's garment." The meaning of the phrase "sabotage"
in this context is pledge, that is, the Torah forbids taking from the
widows a garment as a pledge or as a pledge. The Mishna gave this
commandment greater validity and explained: "A widow, whether she
is poor or rich, does not mortgage her." Nevertheless, R. Shimon
sought to be wise and stated: "She is richer than a neighbor, a poor
woman does not mortgage her" (Bavli, Bava Metzia 15:11), that is, if
the widow is rich, it is permissible to mortgage her clothes (in this way,
R. Shimon contradicted not only the Torah, but also the Mishna).
Although the mitzvah is clear in its reference to any widow, it is
unfortunate to discover that the rabbis throughout the ages have been
wise in their minds and have not decided whether to act as written in
the Torah or according to the approach of R. Shimon in the Talmud.
192. The sages of the Talmud decided on their own accord to exempt
women from the commandments that the time caused, such as:
"Sukkah and Lulav Shofar and Tzitzit". As mentioned above, the Sages
exempted women from the commandments of sitting in the sukkah, as
written in the Mishna: "Women and slaves and little ones, exempt
from the sukkah." This strange exemption has no references in the
Bible and even roughly contradicts it; In Leviticus 23, it is explicitly
stated that the mitzvah is given to all the children of Israel: "In the sect
you shall dwell for seven days all the citizens of Israel shall dwell in the
sect" (verses 34, 42). Even the description of the commandments of
sukkot in Deuteronomy 16:14 does not exempt the women, which is
stated: "You and your son and your daughter and your servant and
your mother and the Levite and the stranger and the orphan and the
widow in your gate." Another example of the fact that the Bible
included women in the commandments of the sukkah comes from the
book of Nehemiah 8, where it is written that "the whole crowd from
man to woman... the men and the women," they sat in sukkot (verses
2-3, 17). Why, then, did the rabbis exempt the women from the
commandments that time caused? Rabbi David Abudrham explained:
"According to the fact that the wife is enslaved to her husband to
defecate. And if she was bound by the commandments that the time
caused, it is possible that at the time of doing the mitzvah, the
husband would command her to do his commandments, and if she did
the Creator's commandments and laid down His commandments –
woe to her from her husband; And if you do His commandments and
 assume the Creator's commandments, woe be to her from her creator.
Therefore, the Creator exempted her from His commandments in
order to have peace with her husband." As a matter of fact, the
Creator did not dismiss her; The Sages dismissed her! And for what
purpose? In order for the wife to be enslaved to her husband's
commandments and needs only.
193. In Zechariah 14:4 it is written: "And the Lord came out and
fought against those gentiles today, who fought on the day of battle.
And his feet stood that day on the mountain of olives, which is on the
surface of Jerusalem from Kedem..." Despite the fact that the
Scriptures explicitly state that G-d's feet will stand on the mountain,
the Sages decided to be wise and state that, in fact, G-d will hover
"more than ten tefahim" over the mountain and will not actually touch
it (Bavli, Sukkah 57a).
194. In Genesis 25:23, the Lord promised Rebecca: "Two games in
your belly and two lamas from your intestines will separate, and a
mother will adopt and a rabbi will worship a young man." Immediately
afterwards, it becomes clear that the two Gentiles are none other than
Esau and Jacob, who is said: "And her days shall be filled to give birth,
and behold, she shall be innocent in her belly. And the first one came
out... And they will call his name done. And then his brother came
out... Leviticus called his name Jacob" (verses 24-26). The Sages
decided to misrepresent the simplification and stated: "Do not
sacrifice gentiles but gamim... These are Antoninus and Rebbe" (Bavli,
Blessings 57:72). Here the Talmud erred twice: a- when it distorted the
simplification of the Torah and replaced the phrase "game" (gentiles,
with a dreamer above the letter C), with the expression "game"
(without the dreamer); 2) When he decided that the intention of the
verse was not to Esau and Jacob but to Antoninus and Rebbe.
195. The passage in Genesis 11:7-9 describes what the Lord did to
those people who planned to build the Tower of Babel: "Let us
descend and spend time there in their own language, which will not
hear each other's language. And the Lord will spread you from there
across the whole earth, and they will cease to build the city... And
from there, the Lord spread it all over the earth." Despite the brief and
concise description above, the Sages stated – without any biblical
justification – that God punished about a third of these people by
turning them into monkeys (Midrash Tanhoma, Parashat Noah, Mark
 18). So, the Torah says: Confuse their language and spread them over
the whole earth; The midrash states: Turn them into monkeys.
196. In Exodus 32:1, it is written: "And the people feared that moses
should come down from the mountain, and the people would gather
on Aaron, and they would say to him, 'Arise, make us gods, who will go
before us, for this is Moses, the man whom we brought up from the
land of Egypt, we did not know what he had.'" From the context of the
verse, it is clear that the meaning of the phrase "at six" is delayed and
so is explicit in the dictionary of biblical Hebrew. Despite this, the
Sages took upon themselves the authority to distort the scriptures and
its meaning altogether: "Do not happen to shame, but come six; When
Moses ascended to Merom, he told them to Israel: "At the end of forty
days at the beginning of six, I am coming..." (Bavli, Shabbat 89:11).
197. Genesis 1:14-15 says, "And God said, Let there be a martyr in
heaven to distinguish between day and night... "And there was a lair in
the heavens to shine on the earth, and so it was." This description
clearly indicates that God created the luminaries on Wednesday. Rashi
was not impressed by this and identified the light on Sunday with the
luminaries on Wednesday: "From Sunday they were created, and on
Wednesday they were commanded to hang in heaven." In other
words, the Torah states: The luminaries were created on Wednesday;
Rashi defies: On Sunday! By the way, evidence that the light created
by God on Sunday is not related to the lights of Wednesday comes not
from the Torah alone, but from some of the midrashic sages who
claimed that the light from Sunday is actually the light of the Messiah.
198. In Exodus 12, it is written: "The Pharaoh rose up overnight...
And he called Moses and Aaron to night and said, 'Come out of my
people, you are also the children of Israel, and go and worship the
Lord as you speak... And the people shall bear their dough before they
are soured by the rest of their womb on their shoulders... And they
baked the dough that they brought out of Egypt a cake of matzos
because they didn't get leaven because they were expelled from Egypt
and they couldn't procrastinate, and they didn't do anything to them...
The night of yeast is for the Lord to take them out of the land of Egypt
is this night for the Lord to lift all the children of Israel to their door"
(verses 30-42). Deuteronomy 16:1 says: "Keep the new spring and
make Passover to the Lord your God, for in the new spring the Lord
your God took you out of Egypt overnight." From these two passages it
is clear that the Israelites left Egypt at night. The sages of the Talmud
 were not impressed by this and stated: "And when they left, they did
not go out except on a day... And that at night they went out? And
they did not go out except in a day" (Bavli Blessings 9:11). So, while
the Bible says: night; The Sages say: day.
199. In the book of Leviticus, it is stated overwhelmingly: "We have
learned to all the sacrifices that they are not fit except during the day
[in the morning]" (chapter 18). That is to say: according to the Sages,
there are no qualified sacrifices from the Torah, except during the
daytime. But this assertion contradicts the Torah, for in Numbers 28:2-
4 it is written: "Command the children of Israel, and you said, 'I am the
sacrifice of my bread to the scent of my scent, and you shall keep
sacrificing for me in his time.' And you said to them, 'This is the
woman who will sacrifice to the Lord one-year-old sheep, and you will
never live up to the day.' You'll do one lamb in the morning and the
other in the evenings." Besides, according to the Torah, the Passover
sacrifice was also slaughtered in the evening and not in the day
(Leviticus 23:5; Numbers 9:3; Deuteronomy 16:6).
200. In Ezekiel 9:6 it is written: "... And from the temples you will get
sick and you will begin with the old people who are in front of the
house." The Sages did not hesitate to distort the scriptures and change
its meaning completely: "Do not sacrifice 'temples', but from my
holiness. These are people who have fulfilled the entire Torah from A
to the Times" (Bavli, Shabbat 55:11). The magnitude of the mistake
made by the Talmud becomes clear when one realizes that the original
intention of the phrase "and from the temples of Tahlo" was to say
that "you will begin to beat from the people who stand before my
temples" (as interpreted by "David's Citadel"). That is, in complete
reversal of the Sages' opinion, the figures described in verse 6 were
severely beaten precisely because they did not fulfill the law of God, as
it is written: "The house of Israel and Judah is very great, and the earth
will be filled with blood... And I, too, will not spare my eyes and will
not compassionate through them..." (Verses 9-10).
201. In 1 Kings 3:27-28, towards the end of Solomon's trial,
Solomon's ruling and the reaction of the people are described: "And
the king answered and said, Give her the living and dead newborn, and
the dead shall not die, she is his mother. And all Israel shall hear the
judgment which the king has judged, and they shall fear the king...".
The Sages invented their own version of the story: "Because he said,
'Give her the living and dead newborn, you will not die,' a voice ignited
 and said to him: 'She is his mother.'" (Midrash Psalms on Psalm 72). In
doing so, the Sages contradicted the Bible twice: 1-verse 27 clearly
states that the words "she is his mother" came out of Solomon's
mouth, but the midrash decided that it was the statement of the
daughter Kol (even though the daughter Kol is not mentioned at all);
The midrash hints that it was not the wisdom of Solomon that saved
the child, but the daughter of the voice that came out of heaven
(although the context of the story in the entire chapter seeks to
demonstrate the wisdom of Solomon).
202. In 1 Kings it is written: "And King Solomon loved many negro
women... Of the gentiles whom the Lord said to the children of Israel,
you shall not come in them, and they shall not come in you, indeed
they shall incline your hearts after their God, in whom Solomon
adhered to love... Vito married his heart... His wives turned their
hearts after other gods, and his heart was not at peace with the Lord
his God... And Solomon followed the lord of Tzadanim, and after their
king, the end of the nations. And Solomon did evil in the eyes of the
Lord... Then Solomon will build a platform to conquer the end of Moab
on the mountain across Jerusalem, and to the king the end of the
people of Ammon. And he also made all his wives cut off from the
sacrifices and altars to their gods" (verses 1-8). The above scripture
emphasizes that Solomon followed other gods and built platforms for
foreign labor. Nevertheless, in the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 56:72)
it is said: "And in solomon's old age, his wives tended his heart to
follow other gods, and did not go. And the dictate (1 Kings 11:11):
Then Solomon shall build a platform for the thorn of Moab, who
sought to build and did not build." Here the Sages contradicted the
Bible twice: first, the Talmud says: "He did not go," but in the Old
Testament it is written: "And Solomon went" (verse 5); Second, the
Talmud says, "He did not build," but in the Old Testament it is written:
"Then Solomon will build" (verse 7).
203. The Book of Esther, chapter 9, describes 3 purim customs: "Days
of feast and joy and sending portions to one another and gifts to the
patriarchs" (verse 22). R. Yehoshua ben Levy was not satisfied with this
and set forth an additional mitzvah on his own: "A man must read the
scroll at night and change it by day..." (Bavli, Megillah 20:11). In doing
so, Rabbi Yehoshua contradicted not only the Bible, but also the words
of the Mishna, where it was said that the scroll should be read
 precisely from "the hot hawk... All day long it is kosher to read the
Megillah" (Tractate Megillah, chapter 2).
204. The Babylonian Talmud (Yuma 28:72) states that "our father
Abraham fulfilled the entire Torah." However, this statement
contradicts the Bible because Abraham married his sister, the
daughter of his father (Genesis 20:12), even though the Torah forbids
this outright, as it is written: "No one of all the rest of his flesh shall
come near to exile naked... The waking of your sister, your father's
daughter or your mother's daughter... You shall not reveal their
wakefulness" (Leviticus 18:6, 9).
205. In Genesis 6, it is written: "And the sons of God shall see the
daughters of men, for Tevet is here, and they shall take wives from all
that they have chosen... The fallen were in the land in those days, and
even after that, the sons of Elohim came to the daughters of man and
gave birth to them..." (Verses 2, 4). From the passage above, it is clear
that the phrase "of all that they have chosen", refers to the daughters
of man who liked the sons of God. The Midrash Bereshit Rabbah
(Parashat 26) was not satisfied with this, stating in a crude and
puzzling manner that "of all that they chose, it is a male and a beast."
That is to say: the Torah says that the sons of Elohim chose for them
wives from the daughters of man; The Sages added on their own
accord, and without any hint of this from the text, that the sons of
Elohim chose to sleep with males and beasts as well.
206. In Leviticus (chapter 26) and Deuteronomy (chapters 27-28), the
Torah generally warns that obedience to the commandments will
bring blessings and prosperity, while disobedience will result in
punishments and curses. The Sages established a categorical law
according to which "for every single thing that the Holy One
commands, blessed be He, to Moses, warnings and punishments"
(Midrash Tanhoma, Parashat Bamidbar). That is, according to the
midrash, every mitzvah and mitzvah in the Torah includes warning and
punishment. However, a review of the 13 commandments in the
Torah proves that the rule established by the Sages does not hold
water; Many of the commandments of the Torah do not include a
warning and many others include a warning but do not mention
punishment. Here are some examples: to build the Tabernacle (Exodus
25); to make holy garments for the priests (Exodus 28); The priest's
commandment to bear a virgin (Leviticus 21); To sacrifice ascends to
G-d at the beginning of the months (Numbers 28); to salt every
 sacrifice (Leviticus 2); to set aside challah for the priest (Numbers 15);
not to cook a goat in his mother's milk (Exodus 23:34; Deuteronomy
14); Do not eat ox meat that is stoned (Exodus 21); Do not block a bull
in a disho (Deuteronomy 25).
207. In Numbers 27 it is said: "... Take Yehoshua Ben-Nun... And you
stood with him before Elazar the priest and before the whole
community and commanded him before their eyes and gave thanks to
him for the sake of all the people of Israel to hear... And before
Lazarus the priest will stand... He and all the children of Israel are with
him and the whole community" (verses 18-21). The phrase "and the
whole community" refers to the entire community of Israel, as is easily
apparent, from both verse 20 and verse 2 of the same chapter.
However, in order to justify the existence of the Sanhedrin in biblical
times, the Sages stated: "And the whole community, this is the
Sanhedrin" (Bavli, Yuma 73:72). The interpretation of the Talmud is
even more puzzling considering that throughout the Old Testament,
the phrase "the whole community" refers to the entire House of Israel
and not to a separate group such as the Sanhedrin. It is interesting
that the Sages made a similar mistake in the commentary on Exodus
19:3, where it is said: "And Moses ascended to the Elohim and called
the Lord to him from the mountain, saying, 'So say unto the house of
Jacob and tell the children of Israel.'" From this context, it is clear that
"Beit Yaakov" is analogous to the expression "the children of Israel"
and this refers to hino-hech. Despite this, in the Midrash Shemot
Rabbah it is stated: "So say to the house of Jacob, this is the
Sanhedrin" (Seder Yitro, Parashat 28). Here, too, this is a miserable
mistake, because the "House of Jacob" in the Bible refers frequently to
the people of Israel.
208. In 2 Samuel 12:9, the prophet Nathan proves David's sin and
says, "Why did you forsake the word of the Lord to do evil with his
eye, Uriah the hittie, you hit with a sword, and his wife to take you for
a wife, and with him you killed with the sword of the people of
Ammon." In the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 56:11) it is written: "Why
did you despise the word of God to do evil? Rabbi says: This evil is
strange from all the evils in the Torah; that all the evils in the Torah
are written in ho 'and yash' and here is the spelling 'to do', which he
sought to do and did not do." In saying this, R. Yehuda HaNasi was
wrong twice: first, he argued that, with the exception of this case, in
all the evils in the Torah it is written 'and do evil' and not 'do evil'. But
 this is not true! The phrase "to do evil" appears about a dozen other
times in the Bible, such as Deuteronomy 9:18; Judges 3:12; 1 Kings
16:19; 2 Kings 17:17; D.B. 33:6, etc.; Secondly, he argued that this case
was unusual because here David sought to do evil and did not. But the
Old Testament clearly states: "And the things that David did in the
sight of the Lord were evil" (2 Samuel 11:27; see also 2 Samuel 12:13).
In Psalm 51:6, David confesses his sin to God and confesses, "To you
alone, I have sinned, and I have done evil in your eyes."
209. Based on Leviticus 19:32, the Sages established a new biblical
rule: "For return shall arise... And there is no old man but a wise man"
(Bavli, Kiddushin 32:72). That is, according to the Talmud, the title
'beard' in the Bible is given only to a wise person. But the assertion of
the Sages contradicts the Bible, where there are several examples that
describe old people who are not wise, for example: Isaiah 9:13-15; Job
32:6-9; Ecclesiastes 4:13. In short, the Talmud says: An old man equals
a wise man; The Bible says: Not necessarily!
210. Maimonides, relying on the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 71a),
stated that "it is eating a rogue son and a teacher, who is not killed but
for eating ugly that he ate." That is, according to Maimonides, a
disobedient son and teacher is punished only for eating excessive
meat and wine (Mishneh Torah, Halachot of Miriam 7). But notice how
the unruly son is described in the Torah: "For a man shall have a son
who is a rogue and a teacher, he does not hear the voice of his father
and the voice of his mother, and they will refuse him and he will not
obey them. And his father and mother caught him... And they said to
the elders of his city, 'Our son is a rogue, and bitter is not to hear in
our voices, 'Filthy and grandfather'" (Deuteronomy 21:18-20).
According to the Torah, therefore, a disobedient son and a teacher are
characterized first and foremost by not hearing the voice of his
parents and not disobeying them; In addition to this, it is also
devoured and subdued (by the way, contrary to the words of the
Sages, there is no mention of meat and wine here). The prophet Isaiah
(chapter 30:1) describes unruly sons as those who do not dare at G-d
and cover themselves with an acetala that is not to His spirit. Psalm 78
describes the unruly generation and the teacher as one who "did not
prepare his heart and did not faithfully prepare his spirit... They did
not keep the covenant of God and in His law we must go. And they
shall forget his deeds and wonders which he has raised" (verses 8-11).
 In both cases (Isaiah 30 and Psalm 78) there is no trace of excessive
consumption of meat and wine.
211. In Deuteronomy 20:5-7, it was stated by the police officers of
the people that a man who built a new house, planted a vineyard and
did not desecrate, became engaged to a woman and had not yet taken
her – this man was entitled to receive an exemption from going to
war. The policemen added a fourth reason: "Who is the most fearful
and tender-hearted man who will go and sit in his house and will not
melt the heart of his brother as his heart" (verse 8). The meaning of
the phrase "soft-hearted" in the Bible is nothing more than fear or lack
of courage. Nevertheless, in the Midrash "Sefer Deuteronomy"
(Parashat Shoftim, Piskei Katzav), R. Yossi Haglili stated: "The fearful
and tender-hearted, who has a defect." That is, the Torah says: fearful
and tender-hearted; Rabbi Yossi says: A malformed husband.
212. In order to justify the necessity of the residents, it is stated in
the Midrash Shmuel (on Tractate Avot 1): "Moses received the Torah
from Sinai – because G-d did not give him the entire Torah in its
entirety, because he was not prepared to receive all of it... In other
words, what he received was Torah, but some of it he received and
not all of it." That is, according to the midrash, Moses received only a
small part of the Torah. This assertion is extremely puzzling
considering that the Bible often emphasizes that Moses accepted and
wrote the Torah in its entirety and even passed it on in its entirety to
Joshua ben Nun. Deuteronomy 31:24 clearly states: "Let the bride of
Moses write the words of this Torah on a book until it is finished."
Rabbi Hoffman dared to speak out against the opinion of the Sages
when he interpreted the phrase "ad tamam" precisely: "Here we are
talking about the end of the entire Torah." By the way, the Talmud
says that "three thousand halachot were forgotten in the days of
Moses' mourning"; This claim, too, has no biblical basis.
213. In Leviticus 11:1-2, it is written: "And the Lord spoke to Moses
and to Aaron to say, 'Elham.' Speak to the children of Israel to say...".
From these two verses it is crystal clear that God spoke, both to Moses
and to Aaron and not to one of them alone. Three phrases reinforce
this fact even more strongly: 1- "Al-Moses and al-Aharon"; 2- "Elham";
3- "Speak." However, although the Torah emphasizes that G-d spoke
to Moses and to Aaron, Rashi argued: "To Moses he said that he would
tell Aaron." That is to say, God spoke to Moses alone and asked him to
tell Aaron afterwards. In short, the verse says: To Moses and Aaron;
 Rashi says: No! For Moses only. It is interesting that in this
interpretation a curious inconsistency is revealed; On the previous
occasions in the Torah in which it is said that God turned "to Moses
and to Aaron" (Exodus 6:13, 12:1), Rashi stated that God had spoken
to both of them together.
214. In the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 13:72) it is said: "Remember
that man for good and Hananya son of Hezekiah his name, that if it
were not for him the book of Ezekiel was stolen, which were his words
contradictory to the words of Torah." That is to say: the Sages had the
courage to try and prevent Ezekiel from being included in the canon of
the Scriptures, because for them he contradicts the Torah. The
position of the Sages is most puzzling in light of the fact that the book
of Ezekiel opens as follows: "And in the thirties of the fourth of the five
months I am in exile on a river that has already opened the heavens
and I will see the sights of God... There was the Word of the Lord to
Ezekiel ben Bozi, the priest in the land, as demons on the river of the
Lord, and there shall be the name of the Lord on it" (Chapter 1:1-3).
Ezekiel therefore testifies that his words reflect the Word of God, and
therefore we are left with two choices: a- the Sages were right; The
book of Ezekiel contradicts the Torah, so his testimony in verse 3 is
incorrect; In the Sages, they were wrong; The Word of God was to
Ezekiel and God does not contradict Himself. I don't know about you, I
stick to the second option!
215. In the Babylonian Talmud (Eruvin 65:11) it is written: "A rabbi
said: As long as his mind is not settled on him, do not pray, for it is
said: Betzer el Yura." Note that in order to justify his claim – that
anyone who is angry is better off not praying – relies on the verse
"Batzer el Yura". However, the use of this quote is extremely strange
because it does not appear at all in the Bible, and Rashi was also
astonished at this and embarrassingly admitted that he had checked
the entire Bible and did not find a hint of the quote; Therefore, Rashi
believed that the phrase may have been taken from the Book of Ben-
Sira (but an examination of 'In Ben Sira' reveals that the phrase "Basr
al-Yura" does not appear there either). The Talmud further relates to
Rabbi Hanina: "On the day he was angry, he would not pray, which
was said: Betzer el Yura." In conclusion, the Sages relied on a verse
that, out of nothing, justified halachah on the subject of prayer in
times of anger.
216. In Genesis 38:1-2 it is written: "And Judas descended from his
brother Wit to the man of Adlami, and his name was Hira. And Judah
feared the daughter of a Canaanite man, and his name was Shua, and
he took her and came to her." Verse 2 explicitly says that Judas took a
wife to a partner of Canaanite origin. The phrase "Canaanite" appears
earlier, in Genesis 24, when Abraham swears to his slave that he will
not take a Canaanite wife to his son Isaac. In fact, the term
"Canaanite" appears in the Book of Genesis about a dozen times, and
in all of them it refers only to a specific people living in the land of
Canaan. The Sages did not tolerate the fact that Judah took a
Canaanite woman, despite the warnings of Abraham and Isaac not to
marry Canaanite women; Therefore, the rabbis decided almost
unanimously to distort the meaning of the scriptures and to state:
"May Canaanite?... Bat Gavra Tagra." In other words, because Judah's
actions did not seem legitimate to them, the Sages decided to
determine that "daughter of a Canaanite man" means the daughter of
a merchant. By the way, in doing so, the Sages contradicted not only
the Torah, but also themselves, for in another midrash it is said that all
the wives of the sons of Jacob – including Judah – "were Canaanites"
(Yalkut Shimoni, Parashat Vayeshev Siman 143).
217. Rabbi Yochanan established a biblical rule, according to which
he stated: "Every place that is said 'and sat', is nothing more than a
tongue of sorrow, hatred' (Numbers 26:11): And Israel sat in the fools,
and the people began to prostitute themselves to the daughters of
Moab" (Bavli, Sanhedrin 16:11). According to R. Yochanan, whenever
in the Old Testament the phrase "and sat" appears, an indication of
sorrow must be found. However, an examination of the Bible proves
that this assertion is incorrect and contradicts verses in which this
phrase does not describe unfortunate circumstances, such as: Genesis
13:18: God blessed Abraham and promised his great seed the land,
and then it is said: "And he came and sat in eleni from Mara, which is
in Hebron, and built an altar to the Lord"; Gen 29:14: "And he said to
him, 'White, but myself and my flesh are with you, and he shall dwell
with him for a new day'; Gen 37:1: "And Jacob sat in the land of his
father's dwelling in the land of Canaan"; Gen. 50:22: "And Joseph sat
in Egypt, he and his father's house, and Joseph lived for one hundred
and ten years"; Numbers 21:25: "And Israel shall take all these cities,
and Israel shall dwell in all the cities of the Amari in the account and in
all its midst"; Num. 32:40: "And Moses gave Gilead to the
 acquaintance of Ben-Menashe and dwelled in it." So, according to the
Talmud: "And sat" always means the language of sorrow; According to
the Bible: Not necessarily.
218. In Genesis 18:2-8, Abraham is told: "And he looked up and
feared, and there were three men standing on him, and he feared and
ran towards them... And he said, 'Lord, if I like you, don't pass over
your servant.' Take some water and wash your feet and lean under the
tree... And he took butter and milk and the son of cattle that he had
made and gave before them, and he stood on them under the tree
and they ate." Later in the chapter it is written: "And the Lord said,
'The cry of Saddam and Amra is great, and you have sinned because it
is very heavy. Erda-na and I'll see her next shout to me make a bride
and if I don't know. And the people turned away and went to Sadma,
and Abraham was still standing before the Lord." According to the
simplification, Abraham stood before G-d while his guests ate, and
remained standing before G-d when two of them turned to Sodom.
The Sages were not impressed by this and determined exactly the
opposite: in the first place Abraham sat down and G-d stood before
him, and only after the correction of scribes was it said that Abraham
stood. In fact, it turns out that the rabbis ruled that Hashem stood
before Abraham in order to justify the regulation of "standing old,"
according to which it is obligatory to stand against a wise student even
if he is not old at all. Aliba Derby David Frenkel, the Almighty said: "It
was I who had a 'beard stand' first; That Abraham was sitting and the
Shekhina was standing." Note the incomprehensible forehead
boldness of the Sages: not only did they cast a narcissistic
interpretation of the concept of "beard standing," they also distorted
the Bible to justify it. So, according to the Torah: Abraham stood
before God; According to the Sages: The Lord stood before Abraham.
219. In the Midrash Shemot Rabbah (Parashat 1), the Sages
established a biblical law according to which: "There is no laughing but
the work of the stars." In another midrash it is stated: "There is no
laughing but incest" (Bereishit Rabbah, Seder Vayera, Parashat 53).
Later in the midrash, the verb "laughs" is described even as bloodshed.
Hoy says, according to the Sages, whenever in the Bible the phrase
"laughing" appears, it does not refer only to alien labor, incest and
bloodshed. However, the claim of the Sages is in stark contradiction to
the Torah, for example in Genesis 19:14: "And Lot went out and spoke
to his sons-in-law the lessons of his sons-in-law, and said, 'Get out of
 this place, for the Lord corrupts the city, and be like a laugher in the
eyes of his sons-in-law.'" Lot sought to warn his sons-in-law and urged
them to leave Sodom, but despite his efforts, he appeared to them to
be laughing. It is clear that the phrase "laughing" in this context cannot
be interpreted as incest, alien labor or bloodshed, since what reason
does Lot's sons-in-law have to think that he encourages them in this
direction?.. Another example appears in Genesis 26:8, where it is
written: "And it was that the days were long for him, and Abimelech,
king of the Philistines, reflected through the window and feared, and
behold, Isaac laughed at his wife Rebecca." From the context of the
verse in the entire chapter, it is clear that the verb "laughs" here does
not describe alien labor, incest or bloodshed. In conclusion, according
to the Sages: "laughing", mea ns alien labor, incest or bloodshed,
according to the Torah: "laughing", means ridiculing, laughing
(mocking) or maintaining the use of the bed.
220. The Sages stated: "That every splendor in the Land of Israel is
like someone who has a God, and every splendor outside the land is
like someone who does not have a God... And whoever is not in the
land has no god, but to tell you all the glory abroad as if he were
working a stellar work" (Bavli, Ketubah 100:12). According to the
Sages, therefore, a Jew living abroad does not have a God and seems
to be engaged in foreign labor. This statement is extremely puzzling
and contradicts the Bible on the right and on the left. Here are three
examples of this: Moses dared abroad and it was clear that he had a
God and he was not engaged in foreign labor (Deuteronomy 33:10);
Mordechai lived abroad, there is no doubt that he had a God and he
vehemently refused foreign labor (Esther 3:2-5), Daniel Dar abroad
and because of his faith in God avoided foreign labor (Daniel 6:10-29).
I wonder, then, how the hundreds of thousands of Haredim living in
the Diaspora relate to a passage from the Talmud?..
221. In Leviticus 12:2-7 it is said: "A woman shall sow and give birth
to a male and unclean for seven days... And for thirty days and three
days you will sit in the blood of purity... And in the fullness of the days
of purification for a son or daughter, a one-year-old lamb shall bring a
leaf and a son of Yonah or Ther for the sin of al-Fath Ah-Moed al-
Hacohen. And they sacrificed before the Lord and atonement for her
and purified her from the case of her blood." Because yes, from what
is written at the end of verse 7, it is clear that the reason why the
mother is required to bring a sacrifice lies in the need to purify her
 blood. In the halachic book "Abbreviation of Shluchan Arukh", they
insisted on this and therefore stated: "Every woman who has been
uprooted from her source a drop of blood... After all, she is unclean,
until she counts seven clean ones and immerses herself properly." The
need for the purification process therefore stems from the blood of
the niddah. Although this is simple and clear, the Talmud decided to
give a different reason: "His disciples asked Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai:
For what did the Torah say, a woman who gives birth brings a
sacrifice? He said to them, "When she kneels down to a child, she
jumps and swears that she will not need her husband, therefore the
Torah said, "Bring a sacrifice" (Bavli, Nida 31:72). Hoy says, in complete
contradiction to Torah and Halacha, R. Shimon bar Yochai ruled that a
woman must bring a sacrifice because at birth she vows that she will
no longer need her husband, so that she will never give birth again.
222. Three verses in the Book of Esther emphasize that due to the
death of her father and mother, Mordechai adopted Esther as his own
daughter and became a nationalist, as it is written: "Let there be an
artist of Hadassah, she is Esther... And on the death of her father and
mother, Mordechai took a daughter for him" (2:7; see also verses 15,
20). The Sages did not shy away from contradicting what was written,
stating that Mordechai married Esther and had conjugal relations with
her (Bavli, Megillah 13:11-2). In honor of their position, the Sages were
not ashamed to misrepresent the word of the Scroll and stated: "Do
not sacrifice to a daughter but to the house" (ibid.). The statement of
the Sages seems even more strange in light of the fact that according
to the Megillah, Mordechai did not prevent Esther from being taken to
Ahshvarush's palace and even encouraged her to do so (Esther 2:10-
11, 4:13-14).
223. In Genesis 24:64-67 it is written: "And Rebecca shall bear her
eyes and see Isaac and fall over the camel... And Isaac came, and his
mother sang, and he took Rebecca, and he became a wife and loved
him..." Based on the romantic description above, the Sages
determined the following scenario: "And you will fall over the camel –
as she saw in the spirit of the holy place that was to come out of it, the
wicked did, she was shocked and became struck by a tree, and virgin
blood came out of it. Immediately the Almighty said to Gabriel: Go
down and keep the blood that will not stink and there will be no
mutilation in it. Isaac came upon her and did not find her virginity and
was suspicious of Eliezer. He said to her, "Where are your virgins?" He
 said to him, "When I fell from the camel, I became beaten by a tree."
He said to her, "You are lying, you are speaking, but Eliezer hurt you,
and she swore to him that he had not touched her." They went and
found the tree painted with blood, and Isaac immediately knew that it
was pure" (Shimoni Schoolbag, Genesis 24, Mark 119). In other words,
when she fell from the camel, she lost her virginity and Isaac
suspected her of sleeping with Eliezer. After Rebecca swore that there
had never been anything, the blood was found and Isaac forgave her.
The Sages added all this to the story without a hint of indication from
the biblical text.
224. In Judges 4:18-19, it is written: "And Yael went out towards Sisra
and said to him, 'Sura adani sura, to me al-Tira, and he shall remove
the tent to her, and cover him with a blanket.' And he said to her, 'I
have watered a little water, for I am thirsty, and you shall open the
naud of the milk, and you shall water it and cover it.'" Without any
reference from the text, the sages of the Talmud (Bavli, Nida 55:72)
"saw the milk that Yael gave to Sisra as the milk of a woman." That is,
according to the Sages, Yael watered Sisra with breast milk, her own.
By the way, in the song of Deborah (Judges 5:25) the story is changed,
and there is no reference to the fruit of the Sages' imagination.
225. The Book of Esther reiterates that at the time Esther was taken
to the king's house, she was still a virgin like all the other girls invited
to the palace (chapter 2, verses 2-4, 7-13). The Sages completely
ignored this and broke out in the following argument: "And Amen
hadassah is Esther, a rabbi said: She was forty years old; And Samuel
said: Eighty years old; Rabanan Emery: "Seventy-five years old"
(Bereishit Rabba 39). That is, the Bible describes Esther as a virgin girl;
The Sages argue among themselves whether she was 40, 75 or 80
years old. In addition, like the other girls brought to the king, the text
in the scroll identifies Esther as a virgin girl (who knew no one). The
Sages also contradicted this, saying that Esther was married to
Mordechai and slept with him (Bavli, Megillah 13:11-2).
226. Maimonides ruled that "Israel, who is a sabbath-breaker in
public, or who works in foreign labor, is a non-Jew for all his words"
(Mishna Torah, Halachot Eruvin 2). This assertion is plastered on the
surface of the Old Testament and contradicts many verses that
proclaim that even though Israel desecrates its covenant and turns to
foreign labor, God will not cease to regard it as its chosen people
(Leviticus 26:44-45; Deuteronomy 32; Ezekiel 20:32-38, 36:22-28;
 Psalm 106:45-48). Contrary to Maimonides' position, the Bible testifies
that God did not treat Israel as complete Gentiles, even though they
desecrated the Sabbath and turned to foreign labor.
227. The Talmud says: "Three wines are: consumed wine – forbidden
with pleasure and defiling a severe impurity in a falcon; Just
winemaking – it is forbidden to enjoy and defile impurities from a bag
in the fourth; The depositor was appointed by a star worker, a non-
Jew, – forbidden to drink and permitted with pleasure" (Bavli, Foreign
Labor 30:72). According to the Sages, consumed wine means wine that
has been dedicated to foreign labor and because of this, it is forbidden
from Daurita (from the Torah) to drink and enjoy. Dr. Mashiach
explains: "Over the years, this law has been expanded, and even the
contact of a non-Jew who is not a foreign worker will forbid the wine
from being touched." However, the rabbinic interpretation of the
concept of "wine is consumed" is distorted and completely contradicts
its meaning in the Torah. In Numbers 15:5,7 it is said: "And wine for
the fourth of the hin shall be made on the leaf or altar to the one
lamb... And wine for the prince of the three hin will close-up a scent-
scent to the Lord... And wine will be sacrificed to the prince of half the
hin a woman who smells of the Lord" (verses 5, 7, 10). In stark contrast
to the opinion of the Sages, the meaning here is nothing more than
the spilled wine; Prince, means – shedding, as Rashi rightly pointed
out. Moreover, Midbar 15 has nothing to do with gentiles or star
worshippers in the context of the wine of the prince. Genesis 35:14
says, "... And he poured oil on it and poured oil on it." This is another
indication that the expression "yasach" is analogous to the expression
"casting."
228. InExodus18:9 it is written: "And together they shall give up all
the good that the Lord has done to Israel, which they have saved from
the hand of Egypt." The phrase "togetherness" expresses nothing but
joy, joy and gratitude – as is clear from the context and as the
traditional commentators have understood it.[125]However, without any
reference or hint from the Torah, theSagesdecided that Jethro had
converted to Judaism, and therefore did not refrain from changing the
text: "And together Jethro; Do not sacrifice and together but a Jew,
who becomes a Jew" (Midrash Tanhoma, Parashat Yitro).
229. In Numbers18:16, it is explicitly written that the ceremony of
redemption of the son should not be performed, but rather "from a
new son you will redeem." That is, it is necessary to wait at least 30
 days from the birth of the son before redemption. The Sageswere not
moved by this and were divided as to whether the son could be
redeemed before the age of 30 days: "Rabbi[126]He said, "His son is
redeemed; And Samuel said, "We are not redeemed" (Bavli,
Genesis12:72). Thus, "in the days of Raba, it seems that the opinion
was accepted that the puda was ahead of time, his son was
redeemed."[127]In conclusion, the Torah states: redemption of theson –
not before 30 days; The Talmudis defiant: not necessarily.
230.
231.
232.
233. [1]"This shepherd will be honored. And why was her name called Shifra? that improves hold... "Pua is Miriam. And why was her name called Pua?
that was pulsating..." (Bavli Sotah 11:72). Note that, without any reference in the text, the Sages stated that the Hebrew midwives Shifra and Puah,

in fact were Yocheved and Miriam!

234. [2] See also "Derby Eliezer Chapters", chapter 45.

235. [3] This is also repeated in Matthew 1:3-6; and Luke 3:31-33 (the name is called Ram – "Aram ben Hetzron").
236. [4] Also called the "Midrash Psalms".
237. [5] Maimonides also supported the view that Job was only a parable, in his book The Teacher of the Perplexed (in: Prof. Isaiah Nebenzel, "An
Innocent and Honest Man: Study and Study of the Book of Job", 2008: 1).

238. [6] The claim that Dina married Job is repeated both in the Midrash Bereishit Rabbah (Parashat 19) and in the Babylonian Talmud (Bava Batra
15:72).

239. [7] See also: Shortening of the Shulchan Aruch, Halachot Halachot Ha-Shem Hashem, Mark 145.

240. [8] It is interesting that Rashi contradicted the opinion of the sages of the Talmud and rightly stated: "And his mistress shall feed on

him – fornication from his house to the outside: every language of fornication is nothing more than an outgoing tongue... She leaves her husband

to love others."

241. [9] Dating back to the 15th century, in his commentary on the portion of Sarah's life.

242. [10] Annotated by Steinsaltz.

243. [11] Commentators such as Rashbam, RavA, and Shadal also objected to the Talmud's statement, stating, in accordance with the

Torah, that Zipporah circumcised her son's foreskin.

244. [12] See, among others, Bereshit Rabbah, Noah, Parashat 30; Midrash Tanhoma, Parashat Noah; Shimoni schoolbag, Parashat Noah.

245. [13] In his commentary on Genesis 6:14.

246. [14] I noted that there had to be at least 121 years old, because according to the biblical narrative they had been in the box for more

than a whole year.

247. [15] Throughout the entire Torah, God is the only one who changes names for people (see Genesis 17:5, 15).

248. [16] The phrase "why is it that you ask for my name" (Genesis 32:30) appears in the Bible only once more (Judges 13:18) and is clearly

stated that the desert is the angel of the Lord himself (verses 3-21). For further details, see: Prof. Uriel Simon, "Ask for Peace and Pursue Him: The

Questions of the Hour in the Light of the Bible – The Bible in the Light of the Questions of the Hour", 2002: 113-115.

249. [17] The Sages identify Samal with the Minister of Demons – Satan: see the Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 10:72; In the chapters of Derby

Eliezer, 13; And in Dr. David Barzis' book, "Between Fanaticism and Kindness: Anti-Fanatic Trends in Rabbinic Thought", 2015: 396.

250. [18] By the way, the midrash hereby contradicts not only the Torah, but also the Babylonian Talmud (Zevahim 15:12), where it is said

that it was convenient that he raised the offerings and not his son.

251. [19] See Bhai Ben Asher (13th century).

252. [20] For additional examples and extensive discussion, see:

253. http://eretzhemdah.org/newsletterArticle.asp?lang=he&pageid=48&cat=1&newsletter=989&article=3762

254. [21] In his commentary on the passage, Rashi confirms this and explains that G-d wanted to appease the white mind after the anguish

caused to it.
255. [22] And this is exactly what M. Z. Kadri wrote about in the Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew: "Joseph refused the offer of Potiphar's wife"

(2007: 574).

256. [23] See also: Genesis 1:26-27, 2:7, 21-22; Isaiah 40:12-14, 44:24; Psalm 148:5; Job 38:4; Nehemiah 9:6.

257. [24] See also: Bereishit Rabbah, Parashat 8; Rashi on Genesis 1:26; Commentary on "Rabbeinu Bhai", in Numbers Parashat Hakat

chapter 19; Commentary on the "Sacrifice of Isaac", Genesis 10:10; and the clear words of R. Avraham Zuckerman: "He [is] the only person who

was created in consultation with the entourage of Ma'ale" (in an article published on the website:http://www.yba.org.il).

258. [25] Midrash Tanhoma, Parashat Bereishit; Shimoni's schoolbag, Genesis Remez 2.

259. [26] Also in the "Chapters of Derby Eliezer" (Chapter 43) it is claimed that Pharaoh did not perished with his troops in the Red Sea.

260. [27] Inspired by the Babylonian Gemara, Tractate Baba Batra 11:11.

261. [28] And this is how they understood it: Kadri, in the Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew (Shatom = "having the ability to see a demon's

spectacle"); Cassuto, in his commentary on those verses (that tom = those whose eyes are open to see the spectacle of God, as interpreted in the

next verse"); Ibn Shushan dictionary, in its interpretation of the word 'shtom' ("visible, open"); Alkalai dictionary, where it is written: Shtom = "the

opposite of the obscure"); and even the translation of Onkelos, which translated it as "open the eye" (as noted by Rashi).

262. [29][29] Maimonides reiterates this in his commentary on the Mishna: "And they said (Sotah 13:2): Moses did not die, but ascended

and was used in Merom."

263. [30] Contrary to the commandment in the King's Law (Deuteronomy 17:16-17).

264. [31] Bavli, Tractates: Blessings, Megillah, Minchas, Eruvin, Shabbat. The Talmud is replete with examples of contradictions between

the laws of the sages and the commandments of the Torah for excuses such as: "the dignity of mankind," "reservation to the Torah," because "the

hour needs," and because of "ways of peace."

265. [32] In his article "The Dignity of Beings", www.etzion.org.il/vbm/archive/10-halak/15briot.rtf

266. Maimonides reaffirms this Talmudic rule in his book Mishneh Torah, Halachot Hybrids, Chap. 10, 25-26.

267. [33] Bavli, Yuma 28:72; Yerushalmi, Eruvin 32; Tana Debi Eliyahu, Chapter 6; Bereshit Rabbah, Histories, chapter 10; Vayikra Rabbah,

Parashat 2.

268. [34] Bavli, Sanhedrin 56:11.

269. [35] Bavli, Yevmot 65:72; Baba Metzia 23:72; The Fathers of Derby Nathan 12:3; Innovations of the RITBA, Tractate Cholin, chapter 7;

Responsa She'erit Yosef, Part 2.

270. [36] In Malachi 2, verses 14-16, it is said that God hates divorce (see also Proverbs 5:18-19).

271. [37] According to Tractate Ketubah 75a, it is permissible to deport the woman even for the size of her breasts.

272. [38] Shimoni's schoolbag, Genesis 2, Mark 24.

273. [39] About twenty percent of all the commandments of the Torah are devoted to the provisions relating to the Tabernacle, the

priesthood, and the sacrifice of those who ascend and sacrifice to G-d.

274. [40] On the contrary, there are several instances in the Bible in which prayer appears alongside the sacrifices (e.g., 1 Kings 8:12, Job

42).

275. [41] And in the Jerusalem Talmud it is written that at the altar and mincha there is no longer "there is no atonement, but atonement

in prayer" (Rosh Hashanah, Page 4, 1 chapter 1 of the Halachah in the Gemara).

276. [42] Bavli, Blessings 26:11; Taanit 27:72; Megillah 31:72; The Fathers of Derby Nathan, Chapter IV, Mark E.

277. [43] Steinzec interprets "naked" as "glued and embraced." However, from the context of the entire Talmudic passage, there is no

doubt that the Sages aimed at a sexual act.

278. [44] In his commentary on Ezekiel 18.

279. [45] In his commentary on Deuteronomy 24.

280. [46] Translation from Aramaic by Steinsaltz (Rashi interpreted "monument": image of the king).

281. [47]"And you shall not lie down from the layers of a woman, an abomination is" (Leviticus 18:22); "And a man who lays down the

male from the layers of a woman, an abomination they both did. The death of his death shall be put to death, their blood in them" (Ibid., 20:13).

282. [48] Mishneh Torah, Halachot Esorei Beya, I.

283. [49] And Maimonides elaborates on the subject: "Every woman is forbidden from these: if she was three years old and one day or

more, the next great one on her, must die or cut off or lashes; And she was exempt from anything, unless she was big. And if there was less than

that, then they are both exempt, that there is no coming of coming. And a great woman who came upon her small, if he was nine years old and

one day or more, she must have cut off, or die, or lashes; And he is exempt. And if he was nine years old or younger, they are both exempt"

(Mishna Torah, Halachot Esorei Bia 1).

284. [50] In his commentary on Genesis 25:20. Here is the full quote: "After all, Yitzhak 37 years old, and in this chapter Rebecca was born.

Wait for her until she was worthy of a lioness [and when she reached the age of] three years and married." It is important to note that Rashi does
 not express a single opinion regarding Rebecca's age; InDerby Eliezer 16, it is said that when Rebecca left her home to meet Yitzhak, Deborah – her

suckling mother, went out with her.

285. [51]"Showing him a face," i.e., sides—proving that he is pure (Steinsaltz annotation).
286. [52] Bavli, Sanhedrin 21:11.
287. [53] Mishneh Torah, Halachot Matrimony, Chap. 14, Halacha 4.

288. [54] Ibid., Halacha 6. For the sake of proper disclosure, it should be mentioned that since 1000 CE, Jews who lived in Ashkenazi

countries refrained from marrying more than one woman. This happened following a regulation prohibiting the carrying of a second wife. The

regulation is attributed by Jewish tradition to one of the most important rabbis in Europe – Rabbi Gershom. However, it should be noted that some

communities refused to accept the new regulation and continued the old polygyny customs under the auspices of Halacha.

289. [55] Prayer book: Morning Gate, Shabbat Gate. Regarding the lighting of candles on Shabbat, the Sages had the boldness of the

forehead to determine that it was a mitzvah from the written Torah (Midrash Tanhoma, Noah 1; and Tanhoma, Leper 9).

290. [56] Abbreviation of the Shulchan Aruch, Signs: 35:72 (The mitzvah of parashat challah is also found in the additions to the prayer

book, the blessings of the commandments). There is no indication that the mitzvah of the parashat challah is intended for wom en only (see

Numbers 15:17-21).

291. [57] Rabbi Avraham Zuckerman also understood this way and stated: "For his [a man] the world was created" (website:

http://www.yba.org.il).

292. [58] Even according to the chronology described in Psalms chapter 78 and chapter 15, it is clear that the creation of the world

preceded the Torah.

293. [59] Based on the midrash: "And when G-d created His world, we consulted the Torah and created the world."

294. [60] In Parashat Yitro, page 76a.

295. [61] In Hebrew translation: "Two Gods are here; One towards a male and one towards a female."

296. [62] In verse 3, Abraham addresses him with the title: "My Lord"; Throughout the entire Bible, when this word is dotted like this, it

means God alone! In verse 22, it is said that two of the men went down to Sodom (see also: chapter 19:1) and Abraham remained with the third,

as it is written: "He still stood before the Lord."

297. [63] In the Midrash Bereishit Rabbah (Parashat Vayera), the rabbis stated that the middle man among the third was Michael, to whom

Abraham addressed the title of "Adani."

298. [64] That is to say: in "Ger Tzedek". For example, in Michalta Derbi Ishmael (Mishpatim, Tractate Dachspa, Parashat 20); Michlita

Derbi Shimon bar Yochai (Chapter 20); Wilkut Shimoni (parashat: Mishpatim, and Athanan) and in the commentary of Maimonides (13th century);

the Malbim (19th century commentator); and Rasher Hirsch (19th century).

[65] And so confirm: Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew (M. Z. Kadri, 2007: 164); and biblical knowledge of Exodus 20 (interpreted by Amos Hacham, Mossad Rav

Kook, p. 25).

[66] For further elaboration, see Prof. Weiss's remarks at the link:

http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4513139,00.html

And at the link:http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4480611,00.html

[67] It is common among European Jews to be referred to in Yiddish as "Shabas Goy".

[68] See, for example, Mishneh Torah for Rambam, Halachot Shabbat, chapter 6: "It is forbidden to tell a non-Jew to do our work on the Sabbath."

[69] Words of R. Isaac ben Yosef, at the link:http://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/91349

Words of R. Naftali Herzl, Blink:

http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pagefeed/hebrewbooks_org_50509_342.pdf

And the words of the website "Kipot" (for which R. Elyakim Levanon is appointed), in the link:

http://www.kosharot.co.il/show_hadracha.asp?id=42013

[70] In fact, according to the Sages, a non-Jew who dares to keep the Sabbath must die (Bavli, Sanhedrin 58:72; Mishneh Torah for Rambam, Halachot Melechim

and Wars chapter 10).

[71] From Sefi Barklevsky's book "The Donkey of the Messiah"; There the status of the Gentile in the literature of Halacha and midrash is described in detail.

Here are some examples: According toThe Rabbi, the Maharal, andR. Judah Halevi, the Gentiles are equal to the beasts and do not deserve to be called a man;

Maimonidesalso writes that the Gentile is not truly a human being and his whole purpose is nothing more than to serve the Jew; Accordin g toR. Tzadik HaCohen

of Lublin, all gentiles are like a beast in the form of a man; According to theZohar, unlike Jews who have a living soul, the rest of the nations are not a living soul

(Chapter 7, pp. 104-113). Rabbi Kookeven stated that the difference between a Jew and a Gentile is greater and deeper than the difference between the human

soul and the soul of the beast, because between Jews and Gentiles "there is a qualitative self-difference" ("Orot", Orot Yisrael, chapter 5). To the question of

whether the Gentiles have a soul, R. Benjamin Shmuelianswered and said:

"A non-Jew has only a soul" (from the "Dialogue" website, link:http://www.hidabroot.org/he/question/19043).

[72] According to the Midrash Bereshit Rabbah (Parashat 36), Ham castrated his father to prevent him from having another son.

[73] Rashi: "'Thou shalt not be after many against thee' – if you have seen wicked men from tin judgment, you will not say that many are I inclined after them."

[74]"Rabbi Jeremiah said that we have already given the Torah from Mount Sinai, we do not observe Bat Kol, which you have already written at Mount Sinai in

the Torah (Exodus 23): After many to divert."

[75] M. Z. Kadri (Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew) interprets the phrase 'according to' as follows: 'according to...', 'as' or 'according to' (2007: 799, 848).

[76]"Rabbi Yossi said: Rabbi Judah would have demanded that the Lord of Sinai come to Takri yes, but the Lord to Sinai came."

[77] This is how both M. Z. Kadri (Biblical Hebrew Dictionary, 2007: 12) and Ibn Shushan understood it. This fact is reinforced in Genesis 18:22, when it is said

that after the meeting with Abraham at Alonei Mamra, "the people turned away and went to Sadma and Abraham still stood before the Lord."

[78] The Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos Daf 31-32, details in depth – the threat, sin and its punishment. It should be noted that there is no biblical indication that

the commandment to donate from the bread of the earth (Numbers 15:17-21) is attributed to women only, and therefore, it is no wonder that the Bible does

not mention the terrible punishment invented by the rabbis.

[79]"Page on page", Eruvin 47:72.

[80]"Hashuki Hemed", Foreign Work, Page 19, 71.

[81]"Yosef's Schoolbag", Katzusha Yura Da'a mark km-km; morning wake-up notes mark C; Prayer A. Notes Mark C, section 9.

[82] To R. Isaac Yosef.

[83] Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki (11th century) is considered the greatest commentator of the Bible and the Talmud.

[84] R. David Altshuler (17th century), one of the greatest commentators of the Bible.

[85] Rasher Hirsch (a 19th-century rabbi and commentator) rightly opposed the Talmudic distortion when he argued that "panic" is an embarrassment result ing

from a sense of helplessness" (in his annotation to Leviticus 26:16).

[86] Most biblical commentators affirm this, including M. Z. Kadri (Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, 2007: 17), according to which, "perhaps" in this case means: "a

word that indicates possibility."

[87] Even according to the Midrash Yalkut Shimoni (Exodus 33:16), Elohim puts on tefillin: "And I removed my shoulders and you saw my back – a melamed,

which G-d showed him a knot of tefillin."

[88] Deuteronomy 4:2, 13:1.

[89] Mishneh Torah for Rambam, Halachot Adut, 9.

[90] as well as most of the other commandments of the Torah.

[91] Also called "Piskita Zutra", from the 11th century CE.

[92] Mishneh Torah, Halachot Megillah and Chanukah, Chapter 4.

[93] See, for example, the 18th-century Midrash "The Wall of Anach" (Exodus, Parashat Beshalach); and the 19th-century midrash "Innocent Torah" (Notes to

the Song of Songs, chapter 1).

[94] According to M. Z. Kadri (Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, 2007: 276).

[95] According to the Babylonians, Egg 15:12; According to the "Grouped Method" of R. Ashkenazi (16th century): "The sharpness of the Lord is your stronghold,

it is the tower of his sons for the Talmud Torah"; And according to the midrash "The Wall of Ankh" (Nehemiah 9), there it is said: "The sharpness of the Lord,

which is the Torah that you have received."

[96] Nehemiah 8:1-12.

[97] The date of Yom Kippur, on the 10th of the seventh month, is repeated throughout the Torah (see Leviticus 16:29, 25:9; and Nu mbers 29:7).

[98] By the way, the Midrash of Psalms4 reveals that the same law applies to other times, such as Rosh Hashanah: "G-d, what the Sanhedrin of Mateh Guzerin,

does He uphold, and what is it? On Rosh Hashanah, when the Sanhedrin sits down and says: Rosh Hashanah is done on the second of Saturday, or on the third

on Saturday, immediately G-d sits up there a Sanhedrin of the server angels... And the same day that Israel decreed is the day of Rosh Hashanah even to the God

of Jacob, whom he upholds their decree, and agrees by them."

[99] In the Steinsaltz edition of this section of the Talmud, it is stated: "Since these words of R. Joshua were known, Rabban Gamliel sent him a decree: I decree

that you should come with me... "On the Day of Atonement, which applies to your account, which is according to our account, t he eleventh of Tishrei. When R.

Akiva found R. Yehoshua when he was straitting that the president had been forced to desecrate the Day of Atonement at his own expense, R. Akiva told R.

Yehoshua: "I have to learn that everything that Rabban Gamliel did in the kiddush of the month is made...".

[100] Mishneh Torah, Halachot Kiddush of the Month, Chap. 2.

[101]"Rabbi and Shmuel: One said a face and a sharp said a tail. In Shalma to M.D. a face, we were dictating: backward and pre-narrow, but to M.D. tail may

backwards and pre-narrow."

[102] Small Tractates, Tractate Simchas 8; Bavli, Taanit 16:11; Taanit 23:72; Sotah 34:72 (with Rashi's commentary on Numbers 14:22).

[103] Rabbinic literature provides quite a few examples of rabbis who encouraged prostration on the tombs of the righteous and even did so themselves: Bavli,

Bava Metzia 85:72; Sotah 14:11; Foreign Work 18:11-2; Celebration 23:72; Shimoni schoolbag, Parashat Beshalach. Today, this can be seen in the form of the

countless pagan praises for the "righteous," the "kabbalists," and the so-called "saints." And as if to add sin to a crime, the Sages stated that biblical figures –

such as Joshua and Caleb, for example – also prostrated themselves on the tombs of the righteous (Piskita Zutrata [a good lesson], Bamidbar, Parashat Shelach).

[104] See, for example, the "General Amendment", attributed to R. Nachman of Breslov, where the encouragement is found "to prostrate himself on the grave

of this holy righteous truth..."; And on the sites:http://din.org.il/wp-content/uploads/newsletter/he_61.pdf

http://www.breslev.org/pages.php?subaction=showfull&id=1182187161&ucat=36

http://www.biu.ac.il/jh/parasha/shlach/klei.html

[105] There is, therefore, a considerable amount of irony in the fact that today some also prostrate themselves on Maimonides' grave.

[106] Ibn Shoshan's dictionary on the phrase "Dron Olam"; M. Z. Kadri (Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, 2007: 782) also understood the word "world" as an

indefinite time.

[107] Rashisought to justify the Sages and also ignored the obvious contradiction between the Talmud and the Bible: "Out of his confusion, the scriptures

conjure up a layer. And why did he confuse and desecrate his work? When Rachel died, Jacob took his staff, which was frequently in Rachel's tent and not in the

rest of the tents, and gave it in the tent of Bilhah. Reuven came and demanded an insult from his mother; He said, "If my mother's sister was trouble for my

mother, would my mother's sister's slave be trouble for my mother?" That's why he confused."

[108] Reinforced bythe Jerusalem Talmud, Sutta Daf No,1 Chapter 7 Halacha 4 Gemara: "He neither studied nor taught, nor preserved, nor did, and there was

no sufficiency in his hand to hold and hold, after all, it is blessed... "G-d's future is to make a shadow for those with matzos in the shadow of those with Torah."

[109] Annotation by M. Z. Kadri (Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, 2007: 680).

[110] Interpretation of Ibn Shoshan dictionary.

[111] The "Agreement of Issachar and Zevulun" served as the basis for reasoning for giving money to sage students, as detailed in theabbreviation of the

Shulchan Aruch: "And those who do not know how to study at all, or who are not allowed to do so because of most of the harassment, will be enough for others
who study, and will be considered as if they were studying by themselves. As our gentlemen demanded their memory of the blessing in the verse: Zebulon
rejoiced at your departure and Issachar at Olich. Zebulon and Issachar made a partnership, Zebulon dealt with goods and had enough time for Issachar to earn a

living, to have time to practice the Torah" (Mark 27, section 2).

[112] See also: Ecclesiastes Rabba Parashat 6; Shimoni's schoolbag on Kings II; Midrash Shohar Tov, Shmuel Parashah 2.

[113] In another version, it is said: "Whoever prays is answered."

[114] Jesus Christ strengthened and confirmed the biblical opinion when he taught: "And in your prayers, do not chatter like gentiles who say in their hearts: in

most of our words we will hear" (Matthew 6:7).

[115] This refers only to "Nehemiah ben Hachaliah" (Nehemiah 1:1).

[116] In the 18th century, he was a kabbalist and author of halachic books.

[117] See reinforcements of this in the Babylonian Talmud, Blessings 64:11: "The deceased from his friend, do not tell him to go in peace, but to go in peace."

[118] SeeRashi'scommentary on the passage: "Sons of Yama – Fish have in the sea half human shape and half fish shape, and in the 17th century."

[119] R. Joseph Weitzen explains that it is "a creature born of the pairing of humans and dolphins... "In the Midrash Safra (Shmini Parashat 37) on what is stated

in Leviticus: "And from every soul of the beast that is in the waters that you have ended", and z"l: "An animal – this is the beast of the sea. The soul – to bring the

siron. There can be defilement in the tent as in the words of R. Hanina, the Talmud to say 'and you'." That is to say, it is forbidden to eat a siron, for the reason

that this animal is a fish, but at the same time when you die, you will be uncleaned in the tent as if it were a human being." From the

link:http://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/49593

[120] By the way, at the beginning of the same passage from the Talmud,R. Yochananstates emphatically that "those who write halachot as the burner of the

Torah and learn from them do not take wages." In other words, anyone who dares to put the residents in writing and ev en learn from it is equal to the burner of

the Torah and does not take a salary. I wonder what yeshiva students think about this?..

[121] Probably, most traditional commentators preferred to dance to the sounds of the Talmudic flute; Therefore, it is noteworthy the commentary of R. Pinchas

Horowitz (18th century, with the commentary "Beautiful Face", Parashat Vayikra chapter 4), who dared to speak out against the majority opinion and adhered

to the simple and clear intention of the verse.

[122] An examination of the Biblical Hebrew dictionary (M. Z. Kadri, 2007: 204, 773) indicates that these are indeed two different species of trees. Likewise, a

study of the Septuagint translation (Nehemiah 8:15) shows that the verse distinguishes between the myrtle and the thick tree.

[123] It is interesting that the owner of the commentary "Innocent Torah" (R. Baruch Halevi Epstein, 19th century) admitted their mistake and stated: "Myrtle

leaves and thick tree leaves, and from the well the fertilizers of species are" (Comments on Leviticus 23).

[124] The phrase "evil instinct" also does not appear in its entirety, but there are many clues to its existence in the Old Testament (e.g., Gen 6:5, 8:21;

Deuteronomy 31:21; Ecclesiastes 8:6-11; 21:29:18).

[125] See: Piskita Zutrata, Rashi, Rashbam, RavAbarbanel, Rabbeinu Bhai, Ibn Ezra (on Job, chapter 3), and others.

[126] The nickname of R. Abba Arikha, who was one of the most important Amoraim of Babylon (c. 3rd century).

[127] Prof. Nissan Rubin, "Early Life", 2005: 129.