Home (Netzarim Logo)

Update: 2017.12.11

Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh = Tōr•âh

The import of Ha•lâkh•âh cannot be grasped apart from the Judaic definition of Tōr•âh, which has remained unchanged for millennia—and which differs dramatically from the non-Judaic (i.e. Hellenist Christian) perception. Since the codification of Tōr•âh at Har Sin•ai, Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh (Oral Law)—has always been paired with Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv in the Judaic definition of Tōr•âh. (Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh is documented as preceding Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv from the earliest times. Before Mōsh•ëh first codified Tōr•âh at Har Sin•ai, there was only Oral Law, which had evolved independently in each of the twelve tribes, creating conflicting tribal versions, causing resulting schisms between the tribes.

Two Biblical Components

Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh comprises two Biblical components, extensively ordained and required by Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv (in over 450 passages, see Atonement In the Biblical 'New Covenant' Live-Link (ABNC)):

  1. mi•shᵊpât and
  2. khōq.

Since the time of Mōsh•ëh, mi•shᵊpât and khōq have always comprised Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh, defining the legitimate guidelines for interpreting and implementing Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv. Each of these two components of Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh can only issue from the sole legitimate authority: a Beit Din having an unbroken succession of sᵊmikh•ōt from Mōsh•ëh.

Consequent To Countless Severances Of Sᵊmikh•âh Since Mōsh•ëh
Evaluating Judaic (Not Displacement Mythology) Interpretations Today

However, this chain was first broken (of subsequent countless breaks and missing links since) only 80 years after his death, c BCE 1620, with the death of his protégé, Yᵊho•shua Bin-Nun, leaving no successor, c BCE 1540. The subsequent reform to "pōsᵊq•im", therefore, is limited to:

  1. the degree of knowledge of Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv (as contrasted with today's rabbinic focus on the milennia-later reform essentially displacing Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv with supplementary discussions, namely, Ta•lᵊmud—in contravention of Dᵊvâr•im 13.1) that they can demonstrate coupled with

  2. their mastery (or lack thereof) of mathematically-precise logic in deriving authentic interpretations faithful to the original intent.

Their resulting "pᵊsâq•im", therefore, carry only what authority this combination of factors affords them.

Two Subsets Of Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh
With Concomitant Grades Of Ha•lâkh•âh Authority
  1. mi•shᵊpât or khōq derived by mathematically-precise logic directly from Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv.

  2. mi•shᵊpât or khōq both [a] necessitated for implementation and [b] derived by formal logic indirectly from Tōr•âh shë-bikh•tâv; i.e., from post-Sin•ai Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh and, therefore, of lesser—rabbinic rather than Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv—authority relative to .

Discrete Logical Analysis of:

Sources (in order of consulting):
Understand each of the following according to the original language of the earliest extant mss., strictly within the confines of discrete logic (including science), which is according to the Order of ‑‑, echoed and reflected in Laws He Authored governing His universe.
  1. Tōr•âh shë-bi-khᵊtâv (Ta•na"kh I•vᵊr•it)
  2. Post-Sin•ai Tōr•âh shë-bᵊ-al-pëh
    • Parts of 4Q MMT not specific to ko•han•im.

    • 1st century CE – Pre-dating Ta•lᵊmud by nearly four centuries, The Nᵊtzârim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matitᵊyâhu (NHM, in English) (pre-135 CE) recorded the halakhic interpretations of the most famous tal•mid of Ribi Hi•leil, and the most famous and only world-changing Ribi in all of history, who himself predated virtually all of the Sages of the Ta•lᵊmud – see, inter alia, NHM note 7.1.1

    • My friend's wedding khupah and Rav Qapakh
      Click to enlargeFriend's wedding Khup•âh, officiated by Rav Qapakh (1998)
      2nd-5th century CE – Clarifications, if needed, from both Ta•lᵊmuds – Yᵊru•shal•mi takes precedence

    • 2nd-5th century CE – Mi•shᵊn•eih Tōr•âh of Ram•ba"m , with Tei•mân•i commentary by , ".

    • Check Tei•mân•i differences from Ram•ba"mTei•mân•im Dar-Da•im Ha•lâkh•âh takes precedence.

    • Obtain the opinion of one or more moderate (not Ultra-Orthodox or Kha•reid•i) Orthodox rabbi(s), preferably locally when viable (since some questions, like dress, may vary slightly according to local custom / tradition), else online, to confirm your finding – or alert you that you missed something(s).

    • Most likely, questions still unanswered describe areas requiring tolerance of diversity. Only questions that still appear to defy logic and science after researching the above, or are not answered in the sources above, or concerning scientific and technical advances, or national, political and other changes in the world since Ram•ba"m: consult the Nᵊtzâr•im Beit Dinaccompanied by your written compendium of all of the above relative to the question, with proper citations – since Ha•lâkh•âh must be determined compatible with the above and it shouldn't be necessary to waste time figuring out what citations you may have used when they should be included with the inquiry to demonstrate the inquirer has done his or her utmost to learn the pertinent Ha•lâkh•âh and not become totally dependent on any human(s) – see Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhu 31.30-33.

To get even the most elementary handle on historical Ribi Yᵊho•shua's relationship to Ha•lâkh•âh requires completing our Khav•rut•a.

Rainbow Rule © 1996-present by Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David,

Int'l flags


Go Top Home (Netzarim Logo) Go Back

Nᵊtzâr•im… Authentic