B”H

A Little Gematria

In Gematria we find 60=Samech. The word samech means “to support,” as it states in the Shemoneh Esreh: “Someich noflim—You support those who fall.” This is why Shlomo said, “Lovingkindness and truth preserve the king; he upholds his throne by lovingkindness.” (Mishlei/Prov. 20:28)

The Mishnah [1.2] Says:

One may not [leave] for peah less than [one out of] sixty, even though they said Peah has no measure. Mishnay’ot Seder Zeraim Vol. II(a) – Pe’ah – Yad Avraham Artscroll Mishneh Series, page 19.

The Samech is the only letter of the Aleph-Bet that is missing from [the passuk] V’Yiqrah 23.22

Samech =60. Samech means to “Support!” “He supports all the fallen, and uplifts all those bowed down.” Tehillim 145.14

60 divided by a Mishnaic Group of 3 = 20 & 20 in Gematria = Chaf and Chaf is the first letter of Keter which is [the] crown [of the Torah].

Since 60 divided by 2 = 30 & in Gematria 30 = Lamed. Lamed is an impractical number of Gematria because it is not easily divided into a fair (evenly divided) dispensational [Mishnaic] number; and 30 divided by 2 = 15 and 15 in Gematria = Yah. One can not divide the Holy One!

15 cannot be evenly divided by a Mishnaic group¹ of two, (Baith Hillel as in, “the poor and the stranger”) and is an impractical number [which must be reduced to a fairly distributable number] as (Baith Shammai says, “One for the Widow, One for the Orphan and One for the Stranger”):

The problem is 15 divided by 2 = 7.5 and 7.5 divided by 2 = 3.75 another impractical number. One does not divide a fifth of a person (out of 7.5 people) as that is impossible!

However, 60 divided by a Mishnaic group [Baith Shammai] of three (widow, orphan and stranger) is easily divided: 60 divided by 3 = 20 and 20 = Keter which is [the] crown [of the Torah]; 20 divided by 2 =10. 10 divided by 2=5. Furthermore, 20 divided by 5 equals four and there are four amoth (of personal space) that belong to each person.

As we said, 60 divided by 2 =30 and 30 divided by 2 =15. And 15 is easily divided by three which is five [and five equals the Wisdom of Yoseph: 60 divided by 5 = 12. B’rashith (Genesis) 41.34 – “Let Pharaoh do this, and let him appoint overseers over the land, and take up the fifth² part of the land of Egypt in the seven years of plenty.”]

One fifth part of 60 = 12 and twelve = the twelve tribes. Hence, 1/60th of Land of Eretz Yisrael (that is, Pe’ah ) which is harvested by the Twelve Tribes is fairly divided by 1/5 as 60 divided by 12 equals five! In a fair distribution, One Fifth out of a Sixtieth [of Pe’ah, Leket and Shich’chah] belongs to each and every poor person, (the widow, orphan,) [and to] the stranger³ who resides amongst you.

“And a stranger shalt thou not oppress; for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Shmoth 23.9

1Baith Hillel says a group two (the poor and stranger) is significant whereas Baith Shammai says a group of three (the widow, orphan and stranger) are significant, Hillel citing V’Yiqrah 19.9, 10; while Shammai cites Devarim 24.19. If one divides 30 (Lamed) by 5, one gets 6 and six in Gematria is VAV (the conjunctive “and“). If one divides 30 by 6, one gets 5 and five in Gematria is Hey (the definitive article, “the”) and it says, “for you know the heart (literally, eeth nefesh ha‘geyr “אֶת–נֶפֶשׁ הַגֵּר “) of the stranger” Shmoth 23.9. There are no superfluous letters in the Torah! Divrey HaYamim (1 Chronicles ) 29.15 “For we are strangers before Thee, and sojourners, as all our fathers were: our days on the earth are as a shadow, and there is no abiding. “

2 “or the thing which he hath gotten by oppression […] he shall even restore it in full, and shall add the fifth part more thereto ….” VeYiqrah 5.20-26. See also: V’Yiqrah 22.14 “And if a man eat of the holy thing through error, then he shall put the fifth part thereof unto it, and shall give unto the priest the holy thing. “

3“And the land shall not be sold in perpetuity; for the land is Mine; for ye are strangers and settlers with Me.” Shmoth 25.23 “He doth execute justice for the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment. ” ” Devarim 10.18 “Love ye therefore the stranger; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Devarim 10.19

Here, the Torah singles out the GER, the stranger for love, a singular action because he is in a better social position (as a witness) to plead the cause of the widow and orphan where a question of doubful leket, shichchah and peah are concerned.

On a side note, it is related in Mishnah Pe’ah 1.3 Rabbi Yehudah says: “If he left over a single stalk he can attach to it….” This statement of R. Yehudah has a foot-note which states, “Thus, the words, Somech lo are to be rendered: he can attach it (see Rambam Comm.). Rav, however, seems to have taken them to mean: he relies upon it. See pages 25-26 Mishnay’ot Seder Zeraim Vol. II(a) – Pe’ah – Yad Avraham Artscroll Mishneh Series – R. Yehudah holds that some peah must be left at the very end of a field in order for peah left elsewhere to have validity. [….] It seems that the note says peah at the end of a field “supplements” peah left [Azav – “abandoned or left” – viz, designated] elsewhere according to R. Yehudah’s holding.

Enough!

The root letter or character Samech is related to the word mispeak – (Or, if you will, S’lichah – forgiveness, as in Tehillim 130.4 “For with Thee there is forgiveness, that Thou mayest be feared.”)

the verbs הִסְפִּיק‎ (hispík, “to be enough, to suffice”), סיפק / סִפֵּק‎ (sipék, “to supply, to satisfy”), and הִסְתַּפֵּק‎ (histapék, “to have enough, to be satisfied”) are all formed from the root ס־פ־ק‎ (s-p-k), which forms words (among others) with meanings related to “enough”.

HERE, the Torah is telling us that there are times when we must curb our desire for wealth, when we must say “ENOUGH” – I have enough;

Our harvest should at some point cease, and due to our generosity our field should support someone in need, rather than just than ourselves or feed our desire for wealth. For one sixtieth of our harvest or wealth represents the minimal amount of support we are obligated to leave or abandon for the poor and the stranger.

So, what is the difference between the word poor (ani) – ayin nun yud 70+50+10=130, and stranger (ger) gimmel resh 3+200= 203 – 130=73 “wisdom” חָכְמָה as it says, Tehillim 111.10 The fear of the L-RD is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all they that do thereafter; {N}
His praise endureth for ever. {P}

The wisdom to know when to say mispeak – ENOUGH!⁸ The performance of a mitzvah brings one advocate as it is said, Pirke Avot 4.11. “Rabbi Eliezer the son of Ya’acov would say: He who fulfills one mitzvah, acquires for himself one angel-advocate; he who commits one transgression, acquires against himself one angel-accuser. Repentance and good deeds are as a shield against retribution.” Which brings us to the next subject, the reward for fulfilling the Mitzvah of Peah –

In Parsha Emor we read, “[…] I am the L-RD, Your G-D.” VeYikrah 23.22 What does this come to teach?

In Parsha Shmoth 6.2 we find the following RASHI commentary:

and He said to him, I am the L-RD: [Meaning: I am] faithful to recompense all those who walk before Me. I did not send you [to Pharaoh] except to fulfill My words, which I spoke to the early fathers. In this sense, we find that it אִנִי ה is interpreted in many places [in Scripture] as “I am the L-RD,” [meaning that I am] faithful to exact retribution. [It has this meaning] when it is stated in conjunction with [an act warranting] punishment, e.g., “or you will profane the name of your G-D; I am the L-RD” (Lev. 19:12). When it is stated in conjunction with the fulfillment of commandments, e.g., “And you shall keep My commandments and perform them; I am the L-RD” (Lev. 22:31), [it means: I am] faithful to give reward.

And what is the reward for fullfilling the Mitzvah of leaving Peah, Leket and Shich’chah?

The Mishnah says, Somech Lo “he can attach [to] it” (viz, to the reward): “wisdom” חָכְמָה and a good name as long as he knows when to say Enough.

Obviously, there is a reward⁹ for the one who gives, that is, leaves generously for the poor; as it is written, Mishley (Proverbs 22.1) “A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour rather than silver and gold.” “A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children; and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the righteous.” Mishley 13.22 AND, the Mishnah Says, oolphi rov ha’anavah (“… and according to the abundance of generosity [lit. humility]). (Mishley 22.4 “The reward of humility is the fear of the L-RD, even riches, and honour, and life.”) It [the BLESSING of HASHEM] “all depends on [His – the owner’s¹⁰, lit. HASHEM’S] generosity.” Mishnayoth 1.2, Yad Avraham, pages 21, 22.

B”H

PM Nentanyahu, MK Dayan, MK Zohar:

Shalom.

I read the article: “Senior Likud Member Calls for Sovereignty Over Jordan Valley While Trump In Office” Senior Likud member calls for sovereignty over Jordan Valley while Trump in office

Israel, as an Indigenous body politic possesses Inalienable and Unalienable Sovereign Title over all of Eretz Yisrael by virtue of a continuous Jewish presence in the Land since King David established Yerushalayim as the Capital of the Kingdom of Yisrael – No amount of military force, attempts at (Arab/Islamic or Crusader) colonial dispossession, ethnic cleansing or terrorist guerrilla warfare can divest the Jewish Community of sovereign title to all of Eretz Yisrael since international law does not recognize acquisition of title by conquest!

Please read: Inalienable and Unalienable Sovereign Title to Eretz Yisrael
Moreover, because the Arabs of Palestinian extraction voted for Abdullah I of trans-Jordan to be their sovereign at the Jericho Conference of December 1948, and were “Collectively Naturalized” by Abdullah I, they cannot now claim a right to cede from the Hashemite Crown and claim a right to self-determinism over Sovereign Jewish territory.

See: Emerson, Self-Determination, 65 Am. J. INT’L L. 459, 465 (1971).

The Jewish right of self-determinism, self-government and “territorial integrity” throughout Eretz Yisrael (“Palestine”) is guaranteed by the Anglo-American Treaty of 1924; and was recognized by the San Remo Resolution of 1920 and consented to by the Arabs via the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919. (The Arabs [a foreign power having their origins in the Kingdom of the Hajaz] were guaranteed the right of self-determinism, self-government and “territorial integrity” [to wit INDEPENDENCE] in the Mandates for Mesopotamia (Iraq), Syria and Lebanon; while only Jews were guaranteed “POLITICAL RIGHTS” within the Mandate for Palestine!!!)

It would be a violation of Article 5 of the Mandate for Palestine and the Anglo-American Treaty of 1924 to give the PA/PLO sovereignty within Eretz Yisrael (Judea and Shomron/Samaria) as the Arabs are a “foreign power” by virtue of their origins in the Kingdom of the Hajaz and that Article stipulates that “the Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.”

As it stands, it was a violation of Articles 5, 15, and 25 of the Mandate for Palestine to establish the Hashemites as a Kingdom within “Palestine” – this is because (a) the Hashemites are a “foreign power” (b) their constitution excludes Jews from acquisition of Jordanian citizenship and (c) the 25th Article by it’s terms only permits the administration of those [Jewish] territories on a temporary basis!

IMHO, the State of Israel should reach a trusteeship agreement with Jordan to hold the Jewish Tribal territories of Gad, Reuven and Manasseh (“the East Bank”) in trust just as the State of Israel holds Judea, Benjamin and Shomron/Samaria (“the West Bank”) in trust for the Jewish body politic (to wit: for The Kingdom of Eretz Yisrael).

In closing, the rights recognized and guaranteed to the Jewish Community by the San Remo Resolution (the Mandate for Palestine) do no expire merely because the Mandatory withdrew from it’s obligations and responsibilities under the Mandate. Those rights are secured by Article 80 of the UN Charter and the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Be well, blessed and a success,
Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham

A fascinating museum in the Holy City of Jerusalem is testament to thousands of years of Jewish continuity on this land.

Dec 2, 2020

Related:

• archaeology
• Chanukah
• Hasmonean dynasty
• Israeli museum
• Second Temple
• temple mount

Chanukah S’ma’ach (“Happy Hanukah”)

By: Atara Beck, Senior Writer, United with Israel

Shortly after the 1967 Six Day War, Theo and Miriam Siebenberg purchased a new home on a hill in the newly liberated Old City. Eventually, the site also became home to the Siebenberg House, a remarkable museum of Jewish history.

When they moved in, Miriam explained in an interview with United with Israel, her husband “had the feeling that since we were so close to the Temple Mount, Jews must have lived here 2,000 years ago. So he wanted to dig.”

He spoke to the authorities, who granted permission to excavate. Immediately, “we pulled the hill out from under the house,” Miriam quipped.

“We found two ritual baths, a wall from the Second Temple period and a burial crypt dating back 3,000 years ago to the time of Kings David and Solomon,” she said.

Over the course of 18 years, many remarkable discoveries were made, including coins, pottery, glass, jars and mosaics. One example – relevant to the Festival of Lights, which is celebrated this week – is large stones from a building dating back to time of the Hasmonean dynasty, which included the heroic Macabbee fighters of Chanukah fame.

The Hasmonean period began with the story of Chanukah, when the People of Israel, led by Judah the Maccabee, revolted against King Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who forbade circumcision and the observance of the Sabbath, according to his agenda to eradicate all traces of the Jewish faith.

“In 164 BCE, they won,” Miriam recounted. “Judah entered the Temple and removed the idol, and in commemoration of this victory we celebrate Chanukah.”

The Hasmonean Dynasty, founded by the Maccabees, the Jewish army that defeated the Hellenistic empire, ruled until 63 BCE.

It is evident that the Siebenbergs never lost their sense of excitement about living, literally, on top of Jewish history. Miriam described a number of findings, such as a 2,600-year-old arrowhead used in the war against the Babylonians and a bronze bell which, it seems, had been part of a musical instrument some 2,000 years ago.

A support pillar on the property has black streaks containing “ashes from the time of the destruction of the Old City about 2,000 years ago,” Miriam enthused.

When the streak lines were uncovered, the Siebenbergs sent the ashes to a radiocarbon laboratory in South Africa, which confirmed that they were “remnants from between the years 40 and 90,” she explained. “The exact date of the destruction of the Upper City [now called the Old City] – the eighth day of the Hebrew month of Elul in the year 70 – we get from [famous first-century historian Flavius] Josephus.”

On the top level of the excavation, they found a machine gun from Israel’s War of Independence in 1948, demonstrating contemporary historic events.

“It was the only armament that the Jews had here,” Miriam said, adding that a man by the name of Yitzhak Mizrahi used to run with a heavy machine gun, from place to place, in order to give the impression that they had more ammunition.

The Siebenbergs have always been eager to welcome visitors to the museum, radiating pride not only in their home and their incredible achievement, but also in their heritage. Indeed, as stated by former President Chaim Herzog in 1985 at the Siebenberg House, “”Here, in our time, you have created a direct link between our wonderful past and present and our exciting future.”

Keep Israeli Soldiers Warm this Winter – Send Gifts for Chanukah!

This Chanukah, we are honored to thank the young soldiers of the IDF who risk their lives to defend the people of Israel.

Join us in sending winter care packages and personal notes of support to Israeli soldiers who are out in the cold all day.

Warm up a soldier’s heart with essential winter wear including fleece jackets. Keep an entire unit warm by ordering 10 packages…

THE SOLDIERS REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR LOVE AND CONCERN!

Click Here to Send Your Chanukah Gift and Personal Note to Israeli Soldiers

The right to self-determination does not include ‘the right to secede’ from an established state. Those who do adhere to the principle, however, recognize that it applies only to people who have originally made a choice to be included in a state. Once they have made that initial selection, the nation is defined and not even the right to self-determination justifies secession from the political entity.

In light of this principal (political allegiance), since the Arabs of Palestinian (Eretz Yisrael) extraction voted by delegates for Abdullah I to be their sovereign at the Jericho Conference (December 1948), the Arabs (e.g. Hamas and the PLO) cannot now claim a right to secede from the Hashemite Crown.

Emerson, Self-Determination, 65 Am. J. INT’L L. 459, 465 (1971).

Over and above sustaining life, the air of the Holy Land uplifts the individual soul while its earth spurs our national development.

Eretz Yisrael Yomi , Dec 09 , 2020 10:14 AM Share

Eretz Yisrael Yomi Courtesy

Eretz Yisrael Yomi was established with the goal of a daily recharging of the innate love for Eretz Yisrael and the idealism of living in Eretz Yisrael based on sources from the Torah and Chazal. The Divrei Torah are written by Torah scholars at Religious Zionist yeshivas.

Dvar Torah written by Yehuda Gold, presented by: Yedidya Solomon

In memory of Miriam Schmulowitz z”l

Yaacov dwelt in the land of his father’s sojournings, in the land of Canaan.

The posuk (verse) explains why Yaacov (Jacob) did not clear the way for his brother Esav despite the fact that the time for the fulfillment of the promise of the Land to him was only after exile “in a land not theirs.” The reason is that … the land of Canaan has the mitzva of settling the Land and is the most suited for purity and sanctity of all the lands. [Ha’amek Davar (The Netziv on the chumash)]

The Netziv notes two advantages of the Land which brought Yaakov to settle within her and hold onto her despite the fact that the time for Am Yisrael (the Nation of Israel) to inherit the Land had yet to arrive: 1) the mitzva to settle the Land; 2) the unique suitability of the Land to purity and sanctity.

We shall reflect on each of these points and attempt to understand the character of each.

Holding Onto the Land – Building up the Am Yisrael (Nation of Israel)

The mitzva of settling the Land, as all mitzvot, was not obligatory before the Torah was given at Sinai. Chazal (Our Sages) [Gemara (Talmud) Yoma 28b] teach that the Avot (Forefathers) observed all of Torah, including rabbinic mitzvot, because of their high spiritual level and their desire to cling to God at the highest level, in preparation for fathering the holy seed through whom Am Yisrael will be built.

It is clear therefore, that Yaakov was not legally obligated to settle the Land, but yearned to do us as a reflection of his lofty level and desire to fulfill God’s word and His will even when he did not have a complete obligation to do so.

However, it seems that the Avots’ (Forefathers’) desire to fulfill the mitzva of settling the Land originated in a higher place than their desire to fulfill other mitzvot. The first words God spoke to Avraham were “Go forth from your land and from your birthplace and from your father’s house, to the Land that I will show you” . Before communicating anything else to Avraham, God told him to leave his homeland and come to Eretz Yisrael.

When the possibility arose for Yitzchak (Isaac) to go down to Egypt because of a famine, God instructed him “Do not go down to Egypt; dwell in the Land that I will tell you. Dwell in this Land, and I will be with you, and I will bless you…” . Yitzchak was commanded never to leave the Land, and indeed he never stepped foot outside her borders.

Yaakov, the only one of the Avot (Forefathers) who left the Land in order to live abroad, did so in the first instance due to the threat to his life by his brother Esav. Even under those conditions, Yaakov left the Land only following his parents’ explicit instructions to do so. The second time Yaakov left the Land was to be reunited with his beloved son Yosef (Joseph), and he did so following God’s explicit command, as He informed Yaakov: “Do not be afraid of going down to Egypt … I will go down with you to Egypt, and I will also bring you up”.

In each of these Divine appearances to the Avot (Forefather), the topic of inheriting the Land and its being given as a present to their future generations is central.

It therefore seems that the Avot’s (Forefather’s) efforts to fulfill the mitzva of settling the Land stemmed not only from its being one of the mitzvot, all of which they wished to fulfill completely, but also and especially because of the centrality and indispensible nature of this mitzva to their function as the founders of Am Yisrael.

Returning to God’s first words to Avraham, we note that after instructing Avraham to travel to “the Land that I will show you,” He informed Avraham “And I will make you into a great nation.” As Maharal of Prague notes [Tiferet Yisrael, chapter 37] the roots and essence of things are conveyed by their initial presentation. Thus, the fact that the first Divine communication to Avraham commences with the command to ascend to the Land and the promise of his becoming a great nation, indicates that these are major aspects of Avraham’s mission. The same is true for Yitzchak and Yaakov, the successors to Avraham.

The mission of the Avot (Forefathers) was to establish an entire nation in which the Shechina will be manifest. Even prior to Avraham, as well as after him, there were individuals within various nations who achieved high levels of service of God, (such as Chanoch ) and even experienced prophecy (Bilaam), however, they remained individuals and are not indicative of their societies in general.

The unique mission of the Avot (Forefathers) was to establish a nation, which as a collective society is designated to be “A kingdom of princes and a holy nation” , a nation whose every member’s soul is rooted in the loftiest levels of sanctity, and of whom all nations will perceive and admit that “The name of the Lord is called upon” them.

Therefore, prior to informing Avraham of his destiny to establish the nation of God, He commanded him to abandon his homeland and journey to the Promised Land, the one place in the world where the Divine plan to create Am Yisrael can be realized. The basic condition for Avraham’s descendants to develop into a nation is ascending to the Land, and striking roots in the Land designated for them. Only the Land of Israel possesses the conditions and qualities which allow Israel’s national development. Without the Land’s qualities, Israel cannot be a nation, but simply a group of individuals.

This is the reason that Yaakov continued the path of Avraham and Yitzchak and invested special efforts in developing and settling the Land. Upon returning to the Land, even before he found permanent dwelling for himself, Yaakov purchased a parcel of land near Shechem. Before taking care of his personal needs, Yaakov acted to establish his holdings within the soil of the Land of Israel. In so doing, Yaakov built and strengthened the connection between the nation-in-the-making and the Holy Land, and paved the way for Am Yisrael to fully establish itself and to hold onto the Land upon its return from exile. Yaakov thereby facilitated the realization of the Divine will to establish and perfect the nation in whom the Shechina will rest within this world.

The Quality of the Land – Spiritual Vitality

We shall now consider Netziv’s second point: the Land has a unique quality which facilitates achieving purity and spiritual advancement, more than any other land. Centuries before Netziv, Rabbi Yehuda haLevi (1075-1141) raised this point in his poem “Zion Will You Not Inquire After the Welfare of your Captives,” which is included within the elegies of Tisha b’Av. In this poem, full of descriptions of the beauty of the Land and its qualities and of a strong and burning desire to see the rebuilding of the Land and its redemption, Rabbi Yehuda haLevi uses the expression “The air of your land is a soul’s very life.”

More than its simple physical function of sustaining life, the air of the Land strengthens and uplifts the soul and provides the vitality which is necessary for the soul’s existence and development.

Unlike the body, the soul is dependent upon spiritual nourishment. The greater the spiritual powers and power of purity within the environment, the greater is the soul’s chance of being strengthened. Conversely, in a materialistic environment devoid of sanctity, the soul will be weakened and lose some of its vitality.

In his choice few words, Rabbi Yehuda haLevi describes the great attribute of the Land which was mentioned by Netziv. The Land of Israel has a high concentration of powers of sanctity and of purity, and therefore souls which reside in her are nurtured by the spiritual “food” in the form of enlightenment of sanctity and of purity, which the soul requires to live and develop.

Zohar [Parashat vaYakhel, 287] explains the source of the Land’s extra level of sanctity:

In every level of heaven there is (an angel) appointed to supervise the world and its lands, except for the Land of Israel, which is supervised exclusively by the Holy One, blessed be He Himself.

Zohar teaches a significant fundamental point concerning God’s management of the world: for each land, He has appointed a ministering angel who serves as the conduit through which the abundance designated for that land descends to earth. However, the Land of Israel is different than all other lands in that God Himself takes the place of His angels, and personally supervises her.

Based upon this, it is clear that it is God’s personal supervision of the Land, His presence within her and His personal involvement in her which is the source of the Land’s unique level of sanctity. Certainly the intensity of sanctity within the Land is immeasurably greater than that of all other lands. The place where God Himself is present and in which He uniquely manifests His supervision and influence, necessarily will have a greater power of sanctity and it will have qualities which are conducive to strengthening purity and sanctity.

Practical Implications

We, who are privileged to dwell in the Land as Jews who serve God are obligated to recognize the Land’s qualities and her great power to elevate and sanctify all aspects of our lives. The study of Torah and fulfillment of mitzvot, which can ostensibly be done abroad on a similar level, are greatly elevated when done within the Land, and their influence on the individual and the collective are enhanced several fold.

To the extent that we recognize the Land’s qualities and strive to live our practical and spiritual lives in awareness of these qualities, is the extent to which we will be able to experience the great and sublime influences of sanctity and blessings of the Land.

Tags: Eretz Yisrael Yomi Land Of Israel Parshat Shavua

“The Supreme Court of Canada in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, has decided that, where a First Nation maintains demographic and cultural connections with the land, aboriginal title (including self-government rights) can survive both sovereignty changes and the influx of a new majority population, resulting from foreign conquest.”

In light of the holding in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 SCR 1010 (Case Number 23799), Jews have maintained sovereign title, as an indigenous population, to all of Eretz Yisrael, east and west of the Jordan River, since King David…!

The so called “West Bank” (i.e. “Judea, Samaria/Shomron”) has always been a Jewish demographic and cultural population center and title to the territory has never passed from Jewish sovereignty to another sovereign since colonial dispossession by conquest cannot divest aboriginal title including the right to self-determinism. (That is, international law does not admit acquisition of title by conquest.)

Since only Jews are indigenous to these Tribal Treaty Territories; it must be admitted that Arabs (indigenous to Arabia, e.g. the Kingdom of the Hejaz) are foreign conquerers (colonialists) and, pursuant to treaty law have no political rights within sovereign Jewish territory (the Mandate for Palestine) by virtue of the Treaty of Versailles as the Arabs were guaranteed political rights and acquired political independence within the Mandates for Mesopotamia [Iraq], Syria and Lebanon; and, as Jews have maintained a continuous presence in Eretz Yisrael in spite of foreign conquests and attempts at colonial dispossession; the inalienable and unalienable Jewish historical right to sovereign title, including the right to self-government was recognized by the League of Nations at the San Remo Conference of 1920.

The inalienable and unalienable right to self-determinism by the Jewish People within Treaty Territory (Eretz Yisrael-Palestine) is guaranteed by the Anglo-American Treaty of 1924, was consented to by the Arabs pursuant to the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919 and is enshrined in International Law by virtue of Article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

B”H

Shalom Rabbi

I have a question about Mishnah Berachoth: why does the Mishnah begin with a discussion of the Shema when Mishnah Berachoth is in Seder Zeraim? shouldn’t it begin with a discussion of agriculture/seeds?

The Talmud itself (Shabbat 31a), cites an explanation given by Resh Lakish, who homiletically states that the first six terms in a verse in Isaiah (Isa 33:6) refer to the six orders of the Mishna – and the first word, “emunah” (faith), corresponds to Zeraim. This is seen as an explanation for why the regulations regarding prayers and blessings – and especially those concerning the recital of the Shema prayer – the Jewish declaration of faith in the One God – came to be grouped with agricultural laws, which are seen both as an expression of faith through reliance on God and, according to the commentator Rashi, (1040 – 1105 CE), as an expression of faithfulness in social relationships, by the provisions of dues to the poor, the priests and the Levites as described in the other tractates of this Order.

I enjoyed the reference to (Shabbat 31a) faith in this article; which I connect with the terumah given to the Kohanim. It is an expression of faith to give to the Kohen. So the Mishnah states: “From the time the Kohanim enter to eat their terumah.”

The farmer plants seeds in faith that HaShem will bless his endevour, leaves Peah and gives Terumah.

The SCOTUS must determine if America’s flawed electoral system is “too big to fail” or too corrupt to succeed; crunch time is NOW.

Dr. R. Sklaroff & L Lechter , Dec 06 , 2020 3:07 PM Share

Trump vs. Biden צילום: רויטרס

Starting immediately after the election, we predicted and President Trump confirmed—in a Study Guide and in a subsequent Handicap—that Trump’s campaign would direct litigation toward the SCOTUS [Supreme Court of the United States], rather than depending upon politically unnerved Republican state legislators to appoint Trump electors.

This proved prescient for, after a professionally implemented and enthusiastically received fraud hearing in Gettysburg on Wednesday, November 25th, leaders of the Republican-controlled legislature announced on Monday, November 30th, they are adjourning without further election action.

These three essays, published in Israel, elaborate upon Trump’s two-pronged Federalism-based strategy: the necessity for state legislatures to control procedure and the need to ensure administrative adherence to what state legislatures enact.

In Bush v. Gore, Justices immediately started pondering how they might decide the election outcome; yet, as multiple Trump cases approach the SCOTUS, Court watchers remain reticent to explore how an appropriate remedy might be sculpted without provoking Democrats to erupt for, as Trump reminded Fox Business Channel’s Maria Bartiromo, the current wide-spread violence in the United States is emanating from Antifa, BLM and the radical left (not from the right).

An opinion accompanying a 5-4 vote that would serve to “elect” Trump (perhaps 6-3 if Roberts felt his Court’s image might be tarnished by a narrow margin) could couch politicization in language comparable to the split decision of two decades ago; recall the Florida case was to be remanded to rectify equal protection claims BUT that there was felt to be insufficient time for this to be implemented before the safe-harbor date (here, December 8th).

Trump knows that SCOTUS Justices read newspapers too and, thus, have learned how Biden’s Great Reset would radically change America as his adherents unleash a lawless national cancel culture; thus, Rudy Giuliani’s claims of widespread fraud will resonate among relatively reliable conservatives to prompt a reaction comparable to when they (most recently) honored religious rights over gubernatorial edicts (consistent with the RLUIPA).

To emerge victorious, Trump must deny Biden the Electoral College votes cast by three of the six swing-states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin), as per the 12th Amendment (“The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed”).

Although this language appears ambiguous, it seems (settled that) “the candidate who gets to 270 electoral votes wins, rather than whoever is leading in electoral votes”; if neither candidate traverses this threshold, no president would be elected via the electoral college system.

In 1876, Tilden did not win despite his having accrued a majority of Electoral votes cast because 20 had been disputed; thus, because he hadn’t won a majority of the total votes encompassed by the Electoral College, the resulting two-candidate dispute led to the Congressional election of Hayes.

Apparently, although flipping the slates from Biden to Trump is preferable to pro-Trump voters, the GOP need only erode Biden’s current “306” presumptive (electoral vote) total by convincing three state legislatures to conclude that voting irregularities and a contested election preclude their ability to send electors and, thus, will not be casting electoral votes (aided by the SCOTUS); in that instance, the “one vote per state” House vote would yield Trump’s re-election.

In fact, remedies fashioned from the three complementary Pennsylvania cases now converging on the SCOTUS can be sculpted that most Americans will accept, albeit some grudgingly: [1]—one remains before the Court (the original “4-4“ case that Justice Barrett would presumably now accept); [2]—one arriving via the Federal Appeals Court (Trump’s aggregate of voting irregularities); and [3]—one arriving via the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (addressing the constitutionality of mail-in voting).

Assume the SCOTUS were to ignore protestations of the Secretary of the Commonwealth and other Democrats, (on civil procedural rather than substantive objections) when they claim [a]—it’s impossible to recall already-appointed Electors, inasmuch as certification can be suspended; and [b]—it’s impossible to honor any constitutional challenge due to inordinate time delay (“laches”), inasmuch as a premature filing would have been properly viewed as speculative when damages couldn’t yet be asserted to justify standing to sue.

[1]—Regardless of whether Gorsuch’s original text or Kavanaugh’s original meaning were invoked, the Court’s conservatives would rectify the “error of law” committed when the power of the state legislature was abrogated by its executive branch (per Article II, § 1.2 OF THE CONSTITUTION)) and, thus, be predisposed to frown upon unilateral extension of the deadline for receipt of all ballots.

[2]—Regardless of whether fraud occurred, the Court’s conservatives would not discount unrefuted evidence that officials inter alia denied Republicans “meaningful” oversight over tabulations.

[3]—Regardless of when the challenge to the constitutionality of Act 77’s expansion of absentee voting to include mail-in voting was filed, the Court’s conservatives would be predisposed to neutralize “abuse of discretion” that had been rationalized by inflating fear of Covid-19.

Invoking the algebraic mathematical induction proof, documented are both a faulty enabling statute (“postulate works for n = 1”) and fraudulent implementation thereof (“if postulate works for n, then then it works for n + 1”). Is anyone going to understand this – it seems out of context.

A remedy would recall how a Pennsylvania precedent yielded an electoral reversal without a new election, after [1]—nursing home ballots were bundled; [2]—the GOP’s candidate was denied equal protection and due process constitutional rights; and [3]—Republicans asserted the resulting discrepancy exceeded the electoral gap.

Synthesizing these observations, the SCOTUS could remand the case for prompt investigation as to whether to disallow counting ballots that did not comply with such legal requirements as [1]—timely arrival; [2]—tabulation under the aegis of bipartisan observers following documented adherence to chain-of-custody mandates; and [3]—preservation of the civil rights of candidate-Trump.

And if this cannot be accomplished in a timely fashion, the Court could award Pennsylvania’s Electoral votes to Trump; a decision that would not entail disenfranchising millions of Pennsylvania voters; rather, this solution would serve as a precursor that accommodates profound aberrations presented to the legislature intended to ensure tabulation only of all legal ballots.

Noting the brisk pace that the constitutional challenge [#3] traversed the Commonwealth Court and the Supreme Court—with briefing deadlines sometimes mandated to be met within hours of their issuance—and that the other two cases are equally ripe for adjudication, one can project a prompt SCOTUS decision.

And if the SCOTUS’s remedy comports with the above model, challenges in the other five states (asserting similar irregularities) would presumably be decided promptly in a comparable fashion—with evidence finally being confirmed in a judicial environment (under oath and subject to cross-examination), forcing state legislatures to decertify official results and to appoint Trump Electors.

In the process, rendered moot is applicability of the Independent State Legislature Doctrine because evidence and law drive constitutionality of all state legislative determinations, regardless of how they may have been adjudicated by its supreme court.

All of this is congruent with the Trump’s lawyers’ Opening Statement (see transcript) intended to undermine what has been arguably The Greatest Electoral Heist in American History; litigation that most of the media (particularly Fox) continue to find reasons to ignore continues to fall under the aegis of either honoring the will of the legislature or of exposing implementation that was at odds with statute.

Concomitantly, because Trump is dismayed that the CIA, FBI and Department of Justice continue to be inert in the face of the Deep State’ war against the Constitution, someone must expose the international tentacles of Dominion Voting Systems electoral corruption.

The multistate filings of Sidney Powell complement this stratagem; her “Biblical“ assertions of proof include exhibits exploring the Kraken “Sea Monster” (that is allegedly the Defense Department’s cyber warfare program).

In addition to multistate video proof of vote flipping from Trump to Biden—and ballot-box stuffing—PRECISELY 19,958 Trump votes were flipped to Biden in Pennsylvania within seconds; this is but one example of the corruption inherent in the tabulation systems employed.

The SCOTUS must determine if America’s flawed electoral system is “too big to fail” (or too corrupt to succeed); crunch time is NOW.

Maria Bartiromo Interviews Donald Trump on Fox News – November 29, 2020

Robert B. Sklaroff is a hematologist/oncologist. Lynne K. Lechter is a business/corporate attorney and litigator.

Tags: Dr. Robert B. Sklaroff & Lynne K. Lechter SCOTUS Voter Fraud

by Irit Tratt

Opinion

Members of the Columbia College Student Council debate a BDS referendum on March 10, 2018. Photo: Screenshot.

The last three decades have ushered in a hostile discourse surrounding Israel on university campuses.

Abraham Lincoln once said, “The Philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” If Lincoln’s statement holds true, stormy days may be in store for bilateral relations between the US and Israel.

get the best of the algemeiner straight to your inbox! sign up!

Israel has become a convenient target for the far-left in academia. Jews were now builders and creators of the most ethical and moral country in the Middle East, no longer shrouded in a post-Holocaust victimhood status. This newfound Jewish resilience, coupled with a rise of anti-Zionist sentiments at US universities partly fueled by overseas funding, may eventually result in shifting dynamics between the US and Israel.

I can recall taking a course at George Washington University 20 years ago titled “Imperialism in the Middle East.” As part of the course curriculum, we were required to visit Georgetown University one evening to hear Edward Said speak. As he embarked on his remarks disparaging the Jewish state, I remember looking around the auditorium and being in awe of the sheer number of people who came out to hear him.December 3, 2020 6:37 am0

The prevailing opinion among both scholars and the general public is that Saddam Hussein went to war with Iran in…

Without a doubt, Said helped pave the way for academics such as Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer to mainstream antisemitism with the publishing of their book The Israel Lobby. He also helped elevate the careers of many professors schooled in anti-Zionist ideology such as professor Rashid Khalidi, who serves as an endowed chair in Said’s memory at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. More recently, Palestinian terrorist hijacker Leila Khaled was invited to speak at San Francisco State University. Under the guise of being a free marketplace of ideas and thoughts, it would seem that even terrorists are now being welcomed onto university campuses.

In an article titled “How Middle Eastern Governments Encourage Anti-Semitism on Campus,” which appeared online at Mosaic magazine this year, it was revealed that from 1986-2018, Middle Eastern Muslim countries “donated a total of $6.5 billion to US universities.” Qatar, for example, is one of the largest funders of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood while also providing the bulk of Middle Eastern donations to American universities (over $1 billion over the last decade) through their Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development. And while Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has taken steps to liberalize Saudi Arabia, the House of Saud has pumped more than $350 million into 37 American schools over the last decade.

These spending sprees by Middle Eastern countries are often used to set up Middle East Studies departments and sponsor faculty who will propagate their own views on Israel and Western civilization as a whole. Mitchell Bard, a fellow at Campus Watch, recently cited a US Department of Education report on foreign gifts, noting, “There is very real reason for concern that foreign money buys influence or control over teaching and research.”

The synergy between the establishment of the Qatar Foundation and the rise in popularity of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), a group that has helped support and tried to implement the antisemitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, is also hard to ignore. Once a loosely formed and disorganized group, SJP now has over 150 chapters worldwide and hosts an ” Israel Apartheid Week” on hundreds of campuses.

SJP can also lay claim to a political victory. This past September, Columbia University’s student body voted in favor of a BDS referendum. Incidentally, Columbia is where Edward Said started to shape the dialogue surrounding Israel and the BDS movement, and where Professor Khalidi currently teaches.

While the framing of the conversation surrounding Israel has changed dramatically on college campuses, has it altered US policy towards Israel? Fissures in the bilateral relationship have started to emerge. We now know that former president Barack Obama quietly pushed for passage of UN Resolution 2334 in 2016, which demanded an end to Israeli settlement building east of the 1949 armistice line. The United States then refused to exercise its veto power and abstained, knowing the resolution would pass.

This is in stark contrast to the moving speech that the late liberal icon Daniel Patrick Moynihan gave on November 10, 1975, fighting back against the UN’s “Zionism is Racism” declaration. He stated, his voice laced with emotion, that America “does not acknowledge, it will not abide by, it will never acquiesce in this infamous act.”

Additionally, the growing influence of anti-Israel forces within the left-wing of the Democratic Party will also potentially damage the bond between the US and Israel. Their votes in the House carry equal weight to their pro-Israel colleagues. Their popularity has also emboldened other candidates with questionable views on Israel to run for office, as evidenced by the candidacy of Raphael Warnock for a critical Senate seat in Georgia.

Was president Obama’s action at the UN one last parting shot at Israel, or was it the catalyst for a departure from precedent regarding US policy on Israel at the UN? Are the rise of anti-Israel left-wing forces within the Democratic Party part of a passing fad, one that will lose its luster in the coming years? Or is it part of a larger movement destined for increased influence and power within a major political party in America? For those of us who care deeply about the future of the US-Israel relationship, these events should force us to start thinking more critically about the current climate on our college campuses. After all, the students now walking the halls of our universities will be the future decision-makers walking the halls of Congress.

Irit Tratt obtained her Masters in International Affairs with a focus on the Middle East from George Washington University. Upon graduating, she worked as a Legislative Assistant handling foreign affairs for several members of Congress. She currently lives in Westchester County.

A version of this article was originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

Entire communities from Morocco to Iraq, from Egypt to Syria, Lebanon, Iran and more were effectively wiped out.

By GILAD ERDAN   NOVEMBER 30, 2020 09:59

Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan at the 75 UN General Assembly, September (photo credit: SPOKESMAN FOR MINISTER GILAD ERDAN)

You won’t hear their stories in European Union meetings or see their photographs exhibited in the hallways of the United Nations. Their names cannot be found anywhere among the thousands of UN resolutions discussed and passed over the last seven decades. There is no special day dedicated to their communities or to their memory. They are the 850,000 Jewish refugees expelled from Arab countries and from Iran following Israel’s creation.  For international bodies such as the UN, they are forgotten refugees. But for us Israelis, their struggle will go on. Read More Related Articles

There is no argument over the facts: In a display of anger, after failing to prevent the November 29, 1947, UN Partition Plan and the subsequent creation of the State of Israel, Arab countries waged war not only on the newly established Jewish state but also against the peaceful and thriving Jewish communities that lived among them.

Entire communities from Morocco to Iraq, from Egypt to Syria, Lebanon, Iran and more were effectively wiped out. Along with them thousands of years of Jewish heritage, history and culture was erased, too. The UN offered no help to those forced from their homes and has done little since to recognize the huge injustice they suffered. There was no international condemnation of the fact that these Jews were attacked and murdered, their property looted and their assets stolen, often by their neighbors and with the backing of the authorities.

In the decades since this treacherous expulsion, the UN has worked to only assist so-called Palestinian refugees. Billions of dollars have been handed over to UNRWA, which while caring for the welfare of families, simultaneously encourages terrorism and incitement through its school programs and, in the process, perpetuates a false narrative of the Palestinian’s “right of return.”

I see it as a moral obligation to right the wrong that was done to our brothers and sisters from Arab lands. As Israel’s ambassador to the UN, I am committed to ensuring that their stories will now become part of international consciousness.

Latest articles from Jpost

I will lead a diplomatic campaign to pass a resolution in the United Nations General Assembly to recognize their plight. I do not seek a quarrel with our neighbors, but to ensure that equality and justice is finally provided for the Jewish communities that have been scorned by the world for more than 70 years.

I have already formed warm relations with many ambassadors here and will build on these ties to garner wide international support for this proposal. We will rally foreign ministries worldwide and together, with the help of Jewish organizations, I believe we can put an end to UN ignorance on this issue.

Peace can only be reached through strength, mutual respect and recognition of the truth. If the international community is serious about promoting peace between us and our neighbors, then it must also recognize historical facts, including the trauma of Jews from Arab countries.

A new discourse will not change history, but it is time that their plight is recognized in the halls of the UN. The Abraham Accords are a source of light for thousands of Jews who still live in Arab countries today.

The normalization of ties between Israel and the UAE and Bahrain – and I hope soon with other Arab countries – will encourage Arab leaders to provide their Jewish communities with more support, allowing them to practice their culture proudly and without worry. We are all descendants of Abraham, and we must respect one another’s culture and heritage – and, no less important, our unique histories.

Gilad Erdan is Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations and Israel’s incoming ambassador to the United States. He served in the Israeli government in various ministerial positions for more than a decade, including in the security cabinet and in Israel’s Knesset.