“Kimcha d’Pischa” – Charity Before Passover

Topic: Charity Before Passover

Debbie in Canada wrote:

Dear Rabbi,

A woman in synagogue told me that I need to give “kimcha d’pischa” (or something like that). Rabbi, would you tell me what she was talking about? Thanks a million!


Dear Debbie,

Kimcha D’pischa means “flour for Pesach.” In other words “Kosher for Passover Flour.” This refers to the age-old custom of giving charity before Pesach to the city’s poor so they will be able to afford all their Passover needs.

This custom is ancient, first mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud. The idea behind it is that it was hard to find “Kosher for Passover” flour to buy during the holiday. So poor people who live on a day to day basis would not have food to eat on Pesach, because there would be no flour to buy to bake matzot with. Hence began the custom to distribute flour before Pesach.

Today, most people don’t bake their own matzot, so kimcha d’pischa has been adjusted to meet the needs of the poor people of today. All over the world Jewish communities give money to the needy before the holiday so they can prepare. In many communities food supplies are distributed for free or at great discount. In my community, charity organizations give money to the supermarket to credit the accounts of needy families, in addition to food distribution and cash donations.

It is said that before Pesach there are two types of people: Those who give kimcha d’pischa and those who get. In other words, anyone who can is obligated to help the needy meet their holiday expenses.

You should make a donation to the kimcha d’pischa organization, in your community if possible. If there are no needy in your city, or no existing organization, you can choose to help out the poor of Jerusalem by sending a donation via Ohr Somayach, POB 18103, Jerusalem 91180 Israel.

There is a wonderful story about how charity money is distributed before Pesach. A woman once approached the Rabbi of the city of Brisk, Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, with a strange question. She wanted to know if one could use milk instead of wine for the four cups of the Seder. She explained that she could not afford wine. He answered her by giving her a large amount of money. Asked the Rabbi’s wife, “I understand you gave her money because she can’t afford the wine, but why so much?”

Answered the Rabbi, “If she wants to drink milk at the Seder, it is obvious she has no meat for Pesach (as there is a prohibition to eat meat and milk at the same meal). So I gave her enough to by wine and meat for the entire Holiday.”

The Divine Monarch

Devarim (Deuteronomy) 17.15 “thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the L-RD thy G-D shall choose; ….”

B’rashith 17.5-6 “Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for the father of a multitude of nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.

B’rashith 17.15-16 “And G-D said unto Abraham: ‘As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall her name be. And I will bless her, and moreover I will give thee a son of her; yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be of her.’

Shmoth 19.6 “and ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.’ ”

We see from these sources in the Torah that the Will of HaShem is a monarchy; a holy nation! Not a nation like all other nations as the people clamored for, before Navi Shemuel. 1 Samuel 8.18-20:

18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king whom ye shall have chosen you; and the L-RD will not answer you in that day.’ 19 But the people refused to hearken unto the voice of Samuel; and they said: ‘Nay; but there shall be a king over us; 20 that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.’

****

Devarim (Deuteronomy) 17.15 “thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the L-RD thy G-D shall choose; ….”

1 Chronicles 28.4 “Howbeit the L-RD, the G-D of Israel, chose me out of all the house of my father to be king over Israel for ever; for He hath chosen Judah to be prince, and in the house of Judah, the house of my father, and among the sons of my father He took pleasure in me to make me king over all Israel; ….”

2 Chronicles 6.6 “But I have chosen Jerusalem so that My Name will be there, and I have chosen David to be over My people Israel.’ ”

Tehillim 78.70 “He chose David also His servant, And took him from the sheepfolds;….”

1 Samuel 16.1 “And the L-RD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided Me a king among his sons.”

The mitzvah is to appoint a king for HaShemwhom the L-RD thy G-D shall choose; ….” HaShem chose David as King over all Israel, even as King David confirmed in 1 Chronicles 28.4.

As the Tanak pointedly states, the people chose Saul as King rather than allowing the prophet and high priest as agents for HaShem to choose a king (presumably through the Urim and Thumim)!

From 1 Samuel 16.1 (“… for I have provided Me a king among his sons.”) we see that the Tanak makes clear [that] the king chosen by G-D serves HaShem; as Tehillim 78.70 points out: “He chose David also His servant,…” and as 1 Samuel 13.14 points out, David was found by HaShem to be a “man after the heart of G-D:

1 Samuel 13.14 “But now thy kingdom shall not continue; the L-RD hath sought him a man after His own heart, and the L-RD hath appointed him to be prince over His people, because thou hast not kept that which the L-RD commanded thee.’ “

R. Yossi and R. Yehuda, the Rambam (R. Moshe ben Maimon, 12th century, Egypt) and Sefer HaChinukh (author unknown, 13th century, Spain) and all those commentators who are of the opinion that there is a mitzvah to appoint a king, imply in their opinion both the fact that the Torah involves itself in the regulation of human affairs and that it chose to endorse monarchy as the proper form of government.

So if (since) HaShem chose David as King then there is no need to select, choose or appoint a king from outside King David and Shlomo’s lineage. In fact, it was improper for the Hasmoneans to rule over the people for they were of the priestly caste!

****

To quote from one article on the discussion of “Appointing a King” –

“In Sanhedrin (20b) which states that the phrase “Ki yad al keis Kah” (“Hand upon the throne of the Lord,” Shemot 17:16) refers to the king: “Ve-ein kisei ela melekh she-ne’emar Vayeshev Shelomo al kisei Hashem le-melekh” – “‘Throne’ refers to the king, as it is written, ‘Shelomo sat on the throne of the Lord as king’ (I Divrei Ha-yamim 29:23).” (See also Ramban ad loc., who adopts this position.) The upshot of this statement, further emphasized by the gemara’s subsequent statement that “Be-tchila malakh Shlomo al ha-elyonim she’ne’emar vayeshev Shlomo al kisei Hashem le-melekh” (“At first Shelomo ruled over the the upper spheres”), is that the king is not solely a human figure serving the needs of his countrymen, but rather he is also a sacral figure, representing Divine interests in the human world. Just as the Kohen Gadol (High Priest) is the Divine representative in the religious sphere, serving as a “shelucha de-rachmana” (emissary of God) no less than a “shelucha didan” (emissary of man), so too is the melekh an ambassador of God in the political sphere. The Heavenly Throne (kisei Hashem) serves as a symbol of Divine involvement in the human world and, therefore, the description of the king as sitting upon this throne serves to establish his rule as a manifestation and executor of Divine Will in our world. In this context, mention should already be made of the fact that the king, as the kohen, is anointed with shemen ha-mishcha (the anointing oil).

If we accept this line of reasoning, the Torah’s interest in a royal head of state is not due to his practical utility to human society, but rather is due to the fact that a royal figure is a better representative of God on Earth. By adopting such a position, we are able to understand the need for a king, despite the drawbacks which Abarbanel pointed out. To offset those, the Torah added a whole list of regulations and mitzvot designed to distance the monarch from “gavhut ha-lev” (arrogance), involvement with earthly affairs and the temptations of power (i.e. women, money and horses) and to instill in him and his subjects the sense of a Divine mission (the need to constantly have a Torah scroll at his side).”

SOURCE: YESHIVAT HAR ETZION

ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)

**************************************************************

JEWISH POLITICAL THEORY – HILKHOT MELAKHIM

SHIUR #1: The Commandment to Appoint a King

by Rav Mosheh Lichtenstein

Copyright (c) 1997 Yeshivat Har Etzion. All rights reserved.

****

While the above article does not touch upon the subject of the unifying mission of the King, it is important to note that I Divrei Ha-yamim (1 Chronicles) 29:23 concludes with the phrase “… and all Israel obeyed him.”

“David came and increased their number to 24.”

24 mishmarot (lit. “guards”; Ta’an. 4:2), which served in a regular weekly rotation. The mishmarot were further broken up into a varying number of battei avot (“houses” or “families”). Each division and subdivision was presided over by a head, called rosh mishmar and rosh bet av respectively (Tosef., Hor. 2: 10); there is also mention made of a bet av (Tam. 1:1; Mid. 1:8; cf. Yoma 1:5). The levites were similarly divided into 24 mishmarot, which replaced each other every week (I Chron. 25:8ff, et al.; Jos., Ant., 7:363ff.; Ta’an. 4:2). These were in turn subdivided into seven battei avot, and presided over by “heads.” Finally, there was an analogous division of the Israelites themselves into 24 mishmarot, each of which had to take its turn in coming to Jerusalem for a week. They served to represent the whole body of the people while the daily (communal) offerings were sacrificed, for “how can a man’s offering be offered while he does not stand by it?” (Ta’an. 4:2, et al.).

That part of the mishmar of priests, Levites, or Israelites actually engaged in the performance of its duty was called a ma’amad or ammud (“station”) and was headed by a rosh ma’amad (Tam. 5:6). When the time for the service of a mishmar came round, all the priests and Levites belonging to it would go to Jerusalem. Not all the Israelites of that mishmar, however, proceeded to Jerusalem. A portion of them certainly did (Ta’an. 4:2; cf. Tosef., Ta’an. 4:3) but those who could not do so assembled in their own towns and read the story of creation, etc. Only those in Jerusalem who actually “stood by” while the sacrifice was being offered could, strictly speaking, be called a ma’amad, or ammud (see Sof. 17:5; but see Lieberman , Tosefta ki-Feshutah 5, 1962, 1104, who shows that according to a different opinion the ma’amadot were of Israelites alone).

23 “And Solomon sat on the throne of the L-RD as king instead of David his father, and he prospered, and all Israel obeyed him.” 24 And all the leaders and the mighty men and also all King David’s sons placed their hand under King Solomon.

Hoshea 3.5 “afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek [desire] the L-RD their G-D, and David their king; and shall come trembling unto the L-RD and to His goodness in the end of days.”

Yekezkel 37.22 “and I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king to them all; and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all;”

Thus, in a Divinely chosen monarchy, the king sit as an emissary of the Merciful One on the throne of the L-RD uniting the people, to worship as one by an oath; even as Avraham’s servant swore by the “Covenant of Circumcision” B’rashith (Genesis) 24:3!

Aboriginal (Indigenous) Title & a Trusteeship Agreement

The Supreme Court of Canada 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.Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 SCR 1010 (Case Number 23799).

This jurisprudence is an important decision because it is only Jews who are indigenous to “Palestine” (Eretz Yisrael) that have maintained an “indigenous demographic and cultural connection” to the Land of Eretz Yisrael, have survived foreign (Arab) conquest/colonialism and were guaranteed POLITICAL rights to self-government within Mandate for Palestine “Treaty Territories” pursuant to the San Remo Resolution!

(The Arabs acquired independence, as contemplated by the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement via the Kingdom of the Hejaz, were guaranteed political rights at the San Remo Conference via the Mandates for Syria, Lebanon, and Mesopotamia (Iraq) and are indigenous to Arabia!)

The Canadian Treaty Land Entitlements Agreements process, and the Jurisprudence decided in behalf of Indigenous First Peoples provides a useful model that could be negotiated as part of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli settlement under a ‘post-OsloTrusteeship Agreement as contemplated by Chapter XII (Articles 75 through 85) of the UN Charter, to “set aside” Land Reserves for “close Jewish and Arab settlement” in historical “Eretz Yisrael” (Palestine) both East and West of the Jordan River.

The Commandment to Appoint a King

Devarim (Deuteronomy) 17.15 “thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the L-RD thy G-D shall choose; ….”

B’rashith 17.5-6 “Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for the father of a multitude of nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.

B’rashith 17.15-16 “And G-D said unto Abraham: ‘As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall her name be. And I will bless her, and moreover I will give thee a son of her; yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be of her.’

Shmoth 19.6 “and ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.’ ”

We see from these sources in the Torah that the Will of HaShem is a monarchy; a holy nation! Not a nation like all other nations as the people clamored for, before Navi Shemuel. 1 Samuel 8.18-20:

18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king whom ye shall have chosen you; and the L-RD will not answer you in that day.’ 19 But the people refused to hearken unto the voice of Samuel; and they said: ‘Nay; but there shall be a king over us; 20 that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.’

****

Devarim (Deuteronomy) 17.15 “thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the L-RD thy G-D shall choose; ….”

1 Chronicles 28.4 “Howbeit the L-RD, the G-D of Israel, chose me out of all the house of my father to be king over Israel for ever; for He hath chosen Judah to be prince, and in the house of Judah, the house of my father, and among the sons of my father He took pleasure in me to make me king over all Israel; ….”

2 Chronicles 6.6 “But I have chosen Jerusalem so that My Name will be there, and I have chosen David to be over My people Israel.’ ”

Tehillim 78.70 “He chose David also His servant, And took him from the sheepfolds;….”

1 Samuel 16.1 “And the L-RD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided Me a king among his sons.”

The mitzvah is to appoint a king for HaShemwhom the L-RD thy G-D shall choose; ….” HaShem chose David as King over all Israel, even as King David confirmed in 1 Chronicles 28.4.

As the Tanak pointedly states, the people chose Saul as King rather than allowing the prophet and high priest as agents for HaShem to choose a king (presumably through the Urim and Thumim)!

From 1 Samuel 16.1 (“… for I have provided Me a king among his sons.”) we see that the Tanak makes clear [that] the king chosen by G-D serves HaShem; as Tehillim 78.70 points out: “He chose David also His servant,…” and as 1 Samuel 13.14 points out, David was found by HaShem to be a “man after the heart of G-D:

1 Samuel 13.14 “But now thy kingdom shall not continue; the L-RD hath sought him a man after His own heart, and the L-RD hath appointed him to be prince over His people, because thou hast not kept that which the L-RD commanded thee.’ “

R. Yossi and R. Yehuda, the Rambam (R. Moshe ben Maimon, 12th century, Egypt) and Sefer HaChinukh (author unknown, 13th century, Spain) and all those commentators who are of the opinion that there is a mitzvah to appoint a king, imply in their opinion both the fact that the Torah involves itself in the regulation of human affairs and that it chose to endorse monarchy as the proper form of government.

So if (since) HaShem chose David as King then there is no need to select, choose or appoint a king from outside King David and Shlomo’s lineage. In fact, it was improper for the Hasmoneans to rule over the people for they were of the priestly caste!

****

To quote from one article on the discussion of “Appointing a King” –

“In Sanhedrin (20b) which states that the phrase “Ki yad al keis Kah” (“Hand upon the throne of the Lord,” Shemot 17:16) refers to the king: “Ve-ein kisei ela melekh she-ne’emar Vayeshev Shelomo al kisei Hashem le-melekh” – “‘Throne’ refers to the king, as it is written, ‘Shelomo sat on the throne of the Lord as king’ (I Divrei Ha-yamim 29:23).” (See also Ramban ad loc., who adopts this position.) The upshot of this statement, further emphasized by the gemara’s subsequent statement that “Be-tchila malakh Shlomo al ha-elyonim she’ne’emar vayeshev Shlomo al kisei Hashem le-melekh” (“At first Shelomo ruled over the the upper spheres”), is that the king is not solely a human figure serving the needs of his countrymen, but rather he is also a sacral figure, representing Divine interests in the human world. Just as the Kohen Gadol (High Priest) is the Divine representative in the religious sphere, serving as a “shelucha de-rachmana” (emissary of God) no less than a “shelucha didan” (emissary of man), so too is the melekh an ambassador of God in the political sphere. The Heavenly Throne (kisei Hashem) serves as a symbol of Divine involvement in the human world and, therefore, the description of the king as sitting upon this throne serves to establish his rule as a manifestation and executor of Divine Will in our world. In this context, mention should already be made of the fact that the king, as the kohen, is anointed with shemen ha-mishcha (the anointing oil).

If we accept this line of reasoning, the Torah’s interest in a royal head of state is not due to his practical utility to human society, but rather is due to the fact that a royal figure is a better representative of God on Earth. By adopting such a position, we are able to understand the need for a king, despite the drawbacks which Abarbanel pointed out. To offset those, the Torah added a whole list of regulations and mitzvot designed to distance the monarch from “gavhut ha-lev” (arrogance), involvement with earthly affairs and the temptations of power (i.e. women, money and horses) and to instill in him and his subjects the sense of a Divine mission (the need to constantly have a Torah scroll at his side).”

SOURCE: YESHIVAT HAR ETZION

ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)

**************************************************************

JEWISH POLITICAL THEORY – HILKHOT MELAKHIM

SHIUR #1: The Commandment to Appoint a King

by Rav Mosheh Lichtenstein

Copyright (c) 1997 Yeshivat Har Etzion. All rights reserved.

****

While the above article does not touch upon the subject of the unifying mission of the King, it is important to note that I Divrei Ha-yamim (1 Chronicles) 29:23 concludes with the phrase “… and all Israel obeyed him.”

“David came and increased their number to 24.”

24 mishmarot (lit. “guards”; Ta’an. 4:2), which served in a regular weekly rotation. The mishmarot were further broken up into a varying number of battei avot (“houses” or “families”). Each division and subdivision was presided over by a head, called rosh mishmar and rosh bet av respectively (Tosef., Hor. 2: 10); there is also mention made of a bet av (Tam. 1:1; Mid. 1:8; cf. Yoma 1:5). The levites were similarly divided into 24 mishmarot, which replaced each other every week (I Chron. 25:8ff, et al.; Jos., Ant., 7:363ff.; Ta’an. 4:2). These were in turn subdivided into seven battei avot, and presided over by “heads.” Finally, there was an analogous division of the Israelites themselves into 24 mishmarot, each of which had to take its turn in coming to Jerusalem for a week. They served to represent the whole body of the people while the daily (communal) offerings were sacrificed, for “how can a man’s offering be offered while he does not stand by it?” (Ta’an. 4:2, et al.).

That part of the mishmar of priests, Levites, or Israelites actually engaged in the performance of its duty was called a ma’amad or ammud (“station”) and was headed by a rosh ma’amad (Tam. 5:6). When the time for the service of a mishmar came round, all the priests and Levites belonging to it would go to Jerusalem. Not all the Israelites of that mishmar, however, proceeded to Jerusalem. A portion of them certainly did (Ta’an. 4:2; cf. Tosef., Ta’an. 4:3) but those who could not do so assembled in their own towns and read the story of creation, etc. Only those in Jerusalem who actually “stood by” while the sacrifice was being offered could, strictly speaking, be called a ma’amad, or ammud (see Sof. 17:5; but see Lieberman , Tosefta ki-Feshutah 5, 1962, 1104, who shows that according to a different opinion the ma’amadot were of Israelites alone).

23 “And Solomon sat on the throne of the L-RD as king instead of David his father, and he prospered, and all Israel obeyed him.” 24 And all the leaders and the mighty men and also all King David’s sons placed their hand under King Solomon.

Hoshea 3.5 “afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek [desire] the L-RD their G-D, and David their king; and shall come trembling unto the L-RD and to His goodness in the end of days.”

Yekezkel 37.22 “and I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king to them all; and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all;”

Thus, in a Divinely chosen monarchy, the king sit as an emissary of the Merciful One on the throne of the L-RD uniting the people, to worship as one by an oath; even as Avraham’s servant swore by the “Covenant of Circumcision” B’rashith (Genesis) 24:3!

Material Breach of Treaty Obligations

John Hummasti 

<johnhummasti@yahoo.com>

To: sar@mfa.gov.il

Mon, Oct 26 at 2:21 AM

B”H

It is a violation of the Israeli Jordanian Peace Treaty to allow Jordan to harbor or provide a safe haven to Hamas terrorist Ahlam Tamimi and permit her to incite terrorism on social media and to permit hostile Hamas propaganda in the media from originating in Jordanian territory.
Jordan has a Treaty obligation to remove from it’s legislation “hostile propaganda” as evidenced by it’s Declarations – In RE: International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Financing:

Declarations:
       “1. The Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan does not consider acts of national armed struggle and fighting foreign occupation in the exercise of people’s right to self-determation as terrorist acts within the context of paragraph 1(b) of article 2 of the Convention.
       2. Jordan is not a party to the following treaties:
       A. Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, adopted in Vienna on 3 March 1980.
       B. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, done at Rome on 10 March 1988.
       C. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Contiental Shelf, done at Rome on 10 March 1988.
       D. International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, adopted in New York on 15 December 1997.
       Accordingly Jordan is not bound to include, in the application of the International Covention for the Supresssion of the Financing of Terrorism, the offences within the scope and as defined in such Treaties.”


The Arabs “of Palestine” exercised the right of “self-determinism” at the Jericho Conference of December 1948 when they elected King Abdullah I as their sovereign; so it is a non-sequitur to make an averment that Hamas and the PLO are engaged in a right to self-determinism.
As advocated by Hamas terrorists (including Tamimi) genocide is a war crime not an act of self-determinism! 

The Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty provides:

2. Security The two parties will refrain from any acts of belligerency or hostility, will ensure that no threats of violence against the other party originate from within their territory, and undertake to take necessary and effective measures to prevent acts of terrorism. They will also refrain from joining a coalition whose objectives include military aggression against the other party. Israel and Jordan will abstain from hostile propaganda and will repeal all discriminatory references and expressions of hostility in their respective legislation.
As the Minister will recall, Jordan recently engaged in a Military Exercise (“Swords of Karama”) simulating a war with Israel which is a Material Breach of the Peace Treaty for which King Abdullah II should be held accountable.
In closing, please lodge a Diplomatic Complaint with the Jordanian Authorities…!

Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham

(John Mauritz Hummasti)

503-327-4268

Syria next to make peace with Israel? Negotiations may be underway, report says

September 30, 2020 Syria next to make peace with Israel? Negotiations may be underway, report saysSyrian President Bashar Assad (AP/SANA)

“The road to Washington always passes through Tel Aviv,” said Ibrahim Hamidi, senior diplomatic editor at Asharq Al-Awsat.

By Josh Plank, World Israel News

A widespread belief has emerged recently in diplomatic corridors about the presence of secret negotiations between Israel and Syria, the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported Sunday.

Ibrahim Hamidi, Asharq Al-Awsat‘s senior diplomatic editor, said that Syria sent the first explicit “peaceful signal” after the signing of the Israeli agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

Contrary to its ally, Iran, Syria did not issue an official condemnation of the Abraham Accords.

“It remained silent,” Hamidi said. “Silence here is a political stance.”

Hamidi noted that modern history has shown that whenever Syria was on the brink of major transformations or isolation, the only “way out” was to resume negotiations with Israel.

“The road to Washington always passes through Tel Aviv,” Hamidi said, citing two historic examples.

In 2008, Israel and Syria engaged in secret negotiations, through which Syria intended to break its state of isolation after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005.

Syria also entered into direct negotiations with Israel in 2000, after the collapse of the Soviet Union led to transformations in the region and the world.

Neither effort led to a lasting peace agreement, but did serve to lessen Syrian isolation on the world stage.

Hamidi said that both U.S. and Russian sponsorship would be needed for renewed Israeli-Syrian negotiations.

Any negotiations would likely focus on the future of the Iranian presence in Syria as well as the status of the Golan Heights.

The U.S. formally recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights in 2019.

“This should have been done numerous presidents ago,” said President Donald Trump at the time.

Israel liberated the Golan Heights from Syria in the 1967 Six-Day War and officially applied sovereignty to the area in 1981.

Syria has never recognized the State of Israel or Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and has threatened to attack Israel unless it withdraws from the area.

Syria has been involved in an ongoing multi-sided civil war since 2011.

Spies Smuggle Jewish Bibles Out of Syria

This week a court ruled that the Damascus Bibles must stay in the Israel’s National Library.

By Ezra Stone, United with Israel

In a daring mission 27 years ago, Israeli spies, a Canadian activist, and a rabbi spirited nine rare Jewish texts called the “Damascus Crowns” out of the Syrian capital and into the Land of Israel.

The death-defying mission spared the manuscripts destruction or desecration at the hands of the Assad regime and any of the Islamic terror groups, from Hezbollah to ISIS, that have operated in Syria during the past quarter century.

This week an Israeli rule that the medieval books must stay under the control of Israel’s National Library.

The Damascus Crowns consist of the Tanach, or the Jewish Bible, which encompasses Judaism’s 24 canonical books. This edition was written on parchment in the 13th century CE and was the property of Damascus’ Jewish community, which fled Syria during the decades following the establishment of the State of Israel due to brutal pogroms, discriminatory anti-Semitic laws, wide-scale property theft, and other forms of persecution.

As of 2019, there were no known Jews living in Syria, despite the fact that it had been home to a thriving community for centuries.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Chief Rabbi of the Syrian community Avraham Hamra oversaw the clandestine removal of a trove of Jewish holy objects to Israel, including nine bible manuscripts, 40 Torah scrolls, and 32 ornamental boxes that housed the Torahs. The holy items are housed in the National Library and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem Library.

On Monday the Jerusalem District Court ruled that the Damascus Crowns, are “treasures of the Jewish people” that have”historic, religious and national importance” and must be protected, The Associated Press reported.

“The trust and its conditions are aimed at ensuring first and foremost the preservation of the Damascus Crowns and their care for the public, the Jewish people and future generations,” the court added.

The mission that delivered these treasures included the Mossad spy agency, which worked with Canadian Judy Feld Carr and Rabbi Hamra.

“Feld Carr said that in 1993 she coordinated with Hamra to give one of the manuscripts to a Canadian diplomat, who slipped it out of Syria in a black plastic shopping bag,” AP reported.

While Syria has not attempted to get the Crowns back, Rabbi Hamra sought custody of them. He claims Israeli officials promised he could keep the books and place them in a Syrian Jewry cultural center outside of a Tel Aviv.

The court ruled that the Crowns must stay in Jerusalem. Trustees of the items will include Rabbi Hamra, other members of the Syrian Jewish community in Israel, National Library representatives, the chief Sephardic rabbi of Israel, and Hebrew University’s president.

Jewish Kings and Monarchs: From King David to the Messiah Live webinar

  Shalom from Israel! United with Israel is happy to invite you to an interactive webinar broadcast LIVE from Israel on Thursday, August 20, 2020. Renown speaker and scholar Rabbi Ari Enkin presents highly educational, thought provoking, inspiring classes covering topics from the Land of Israel to Bible study to contemporary Jewish and Israeli issues and more. This week, Rabbi Enkin’s topic will be:
Jewish Kings and Monarchs: From King David to the Messiah Live webinar will be broadcast on Thursday August 20 at:
10:00am EDT (Eastern USA)
3:00pm London time
5:00pm Jerusalem time
12:00am (Friday) Melbourne, Australia Space is limited so please be sure to sign into the class early. If you registered for a previous week’s class you may use the same link to attend. Otherwise, please register for the webinar below. Click Here to Register for the Zoom Webinar Rabbi Enkin will begin the class with a review of this week’s Torah portion, “Shoftim” (Deuteronomy 16:18-21:9). After a brief overview of the Torah portion and the many commandments that it contains, Rabbi Enkin will discuss the history of the monarchy in the Land of Israel and review the life of King David and Solomon. We will explore some of the lesser-known facts and details of the final king: King Messiah. Register NOW for Rabbi Ari Enkin’s LIVE Webinar Although not required, please consider making a donation support United with Israel’s ongoing program by clicking here. It would be greatly appreciated! We look forward to seeing you there! With Blessings from Israel, The United with Israel Team CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

An Open Letter: MK Smotrich

MK Smotrich:

Shalom.
You should present a Bill before the Knesset to amend the Law of Return to
“Collectively Naturalize” all Jews of the Diaspora. Please see my case for doing so in my below forwarded email to Rav Netanyahu.
Also, as to why I oppose a Palestinian state and the return of the Arabs of Palestinian extraction to Eretz Yisrael, see below wherein I posit that they were collectively naturalized and acquired national autonomy in December 1948-49!
The so called Palestinians cannot acquire “national autonomy” in Judea and Samaria because within the meaning of International Law they all-ready have Jordanian citizenship; they are classified as belligerent nationals of Jordan due to their POLITICAL STATUS vis-a-vis the Hashemites, (“Black September” and their militant opposition to Zionism and M’dinat Yisrael). See: Bishop, International Law, Cases and Materials, Second Edition, Little, Brown & Co. 1962 @pp. 338-39.
Unlawful enemy combatant, or Mercenaries status might apply to some of their populous, but whatever the case, they acquired “NATIONAL AUTONOMY” at the Jericho Conference December 1948 within the meaning of international law!
It can be easily argued that the Kingdom of Jordan was established in violation of Treaty Law ( See: <https://johnmhummasti333455225.com/2018/09/05/the-hashemite-kingdom-of-jordan/> and that Treaty Law requires the Hashemites to cede to M’dinat Yisrael the Eastern Territories of Gad, Reuven and Manasseh as per the Faisal-Weissman Agreement/Map!

In closing, When the time comes for a Plenum Vote on Palestinian Statehood in the Knesset, Vote No for Palestinian Statehood and declare Oslo null and void or dead!!! Additionally, See Article 20 Charter, Tzionist Liberation Organization.
Kol tov,
Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham
(John Mauritz Hummasti)

A synagogue on the Temple Mount? Activists say let the Jews move in

Jews believe the site – venerated as holy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam alike – is where the Beit Hamikdash used to sit.

Jpost – Israel News
By Maayan Jaffe-Hoffman
March 6, 2019 04:09

A general view of Jerusalem's old city shows the Dome of the Rock in the compound known to Muslims a

A general view of Jerusalem’s old city shows the Dome of the Rock in the compound known to Muslims as Noble Sanctuary and to Jews as Temple Mount, October 25, 2015. (photo credit: AMIR COHEN/REUTERS)

A group of Israeli activists are calling on the government to establish a synagogue on the Temple Mount and open it for Jewish prayer.

According to Asaf Fried, a spokesman for an association of organizations dedicated to Jewish rights on the Temple Mount, more than 50 leaders from across the religious spectrum gathered on Sunday to discuss the situation on the Temple Mount. Participants included Rabbi Yehudah Glick (Likud), Baruch Marzel (Otzma Yehudit) and members of the rabbinate.

Jews believe the site – venerated as holy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam alike – is where the First and Second Temples used to sit.

Riots have continuously erupted on the Temple Mount since last month, when thousands of Palestinians stormed the Golden Gate, which had been closed by a court order since 2003. Jerusalem Police arrested two senior Wakf officials – east Jerusalem Wakf chairman Sheikh Abdel Azim Salhab and deputy director of the Wakf Sheikh Najeh Bkeirat – banning them from entering the Aqsa Mosque compound for 40 days.

In response, the Muslims took over and converted a 1,500-year-old structure located near the Golden Gate (known as Shaar Harachamim in Hebrew) into a mosque. Currently, the Muslims have four other mosques on the mount, said Fried. Jews, on the other hand, “if you try to pray, you will be arrested.”

The activists argue that by opening the Golden Gate and establishing a new mosque, the Muslims have broken the status quo agreement. Israel has made attempts to shutter the gate, but the Muslims have refused, threatening increased violence.

“If the status quo is broken anyway, then Israel needs to break it, too,” said Fried, arguing that Jews should be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount. “We need a place to pray and we want that structure near the Golden Gate.”

Establishing a synagogue is not unprecedented, explained Yaacov Hayman, head of the Yishai Organization for the Establishment of Synagogues on the Temple Mount. He said in Temple times there was always a synagogue near the Temple.

“The Talmud tractate that talks about Yom Kippur clearly states there was a synagogue,” he said.

His organization has mapped the Temple Mount and created renderings for where up to four synagogues could be located on the holy site.

Marzel told The Jerusalem Post that the Temple Mount is “the holiest place for the Jewish people. Our enemies are taking it over, they are breaking the law, destroying archaeology sites and disgracing Judaism and God. We have to fight.”

Fried said the group is not asking to take over authority on the mount. Currently, the Jerusalem Wakf Islamic religious trust controls and manages the Islamic edifices on and around the Temple Mount. The east Jerusalem Wakf is controlled by Jordan.

However, they would like to see the Temple Mount divided like the way that the Cave of the Patriarchs was divided into a synagogue and a mosque in 1967.

This latest call for a synagogue on the Temple Mount is not the first.

In 2017, MK Bezalel Smotrich (Bayit Yehudi) called for the construction of a synagogue on the Temple Mount in the aftermath of the brutal Halamish (also known as Neveh Tzuf) attack, in which a Hamas terrorist infiltrated the West Bank settlement and murdered three people at their Shabbat table.

“I would set up a synagogue on the Temple Mount today, this morning,” Smotrich said then. “If someone thinks that through terrorism, violence, and the massacre of a family that he will push our sovereignty back, then – if I am the prime minister – this morning, I would close the Temple Mount to Arab prayer and establish a synagogue for Jews. And if the terrorism continues, I would close the mount to Arabs and there will be only Jews there.”

A similar demand was made in 2014, when a large group of religious-Zionist rabbis – including Rabbi Dov Lior, Rabbi Eliyahu Zinni and Rabbi Haim Cohen – penned a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu advocating the construction of a synagogue on the Temple Mount. No action was taken.

Furthermore, there have been bills raised in the Knesset calling for equal prayer rights for Jews on the Temple Mount, but they have generally been shut down, as Muslims threaten violence if the status quo is altered.

Fried said he believes that this time the goal can be accomplished because Israel is in an election period and politicians who can effect change will want to appear responsive.

On March 14, the group is arranging a massive Jewish trip to the Temple Mount. He said he expects hundreds of Jews to attend and to pray in their hearts.

Then, in late March, they will run a protest rally from City Hall to outside the Golden Gate.

“We are all angry about what is going on the Temple Mount,” said Fried. “If we will it, we think this time it will be.”