Outcast Jew battles rabbis (In South Africa)
The Star newspaper
http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=129&fArticleId=2183560
August 11, 2004 By Estelle Ellis

"A Jewish businessman has gone to the High Court to block a decision by the Johannesburg Beth Din (Jewish religious court) to excommunicate him.

The Jewish court's legal team argued yesterday that a ruling in favour of the man would be like "taking a pencil and drawing a line through centuries of religious practices". As it would be the first case of its kind worldwide, the outcome is being closely watched by global Jewish communities. The drama started with an arbitration decision by the Beth Din in a divorce. It seems that the man, who has not been named to protect his children, was ordered to pay a certain amount of maintenance by the Beth Din, but refused to do so.

'If you want to belong to the club, you must observe the rules '.

The Johannesburg High Court later declared this arbitration award to be unlawful as the High Court, by law, is the only body that can decide about maintenance and custody. His wife then laid a complaint about his non-compliance with the Beth Din's order. As a result, the man was considered to be a dissident and the Beth Din, after some legal wrangling, elected to excommunicate him. His legal team has now told the Johannesburg High Court that this must be unconstitutional as it infringes on their client's right to religion and right to practise religion. "It will destroy his dignity as a human being," Advocate Frank Snyckers said. But advocate Gerald Farber SC, appearing for the Beth Din, argued that the general principle in South African law was that the courts stay out of religious fights. "The Beth Din derives its authority from religion and is accepted by those who practise that religion," he explained. "Don't come now and say that my freedom to religion overrides everything. If you want to belong to the club, you must observe the rules," He said the excommunication issued by the Beth Din would bar the man from:

Being an official member of a synagogue;
Being part of a prayer quorum;
Leading the community in prayer;
Being a witness in matters before the Beth Din; and
Being buried in a Jewish cemetery.

"The last is the most serious in my view," Farber said. "But I don't want to get into a philosophical debate about damnation and if the right to dignity survives death."

He said the Beth Din's decision on the man "does not subvert his chosen religion. He can still be an orthodox Jew. He can still worship and observe the Torah". Farber said the law was "not a way to subvert disciplinary structures of religion or give immunity against complying with religious demands. "To hold otherwise would have the result that as far as the administration of religion and its survival are concerned, one may as well take a pencil and draw a line through centuries of religious practices."

He said the constitutional right to religion was not an absolute right, but a "community right" that gave the community the right to discipline those who did not comply with religious decrees." Otherwise one would open the door to anarchy," he said. He added that the right to religion "does not mean that I can say I have the right to freedom of religion and then I insist on eating ham in the shul (synagogue)." The right to freedom of religion included the right of the "entire orthodox Jewish population of Johannesburg to uphold Judaism", he said.

Judge Frans Malan argued with Farber: "The applicant says that it would bring about his end as a human being." "That is perverse nonsense," Farber replied. He argued that if the Beth Din had decided to punish the man by ordering his execution, the court would most certainly have had grounds to interfere. But what had happened here, Farber argued, was not "murder, it was a failure to pay maintenance".

Advocate Frank Snyckers, for the man, argued that the actions of the Beth Din had in no way corresponded with fair procedure in S[outh] A[frican] law. "No case has facts as bizarre as this," Snyckers said. The Beth Din "can with apparently unfettered discretion declare (excommunication)". Snyckers said his client had asked what principle would guide which punishment, but was not told. "The vagueness carried through the court papers lends an air of arbitrariness ... It sits uncomfortably with the rule of law, which enjoins laws to be clear and shuns vagueness as an incident of tyranny." "If they have to decide whether it is fair to excommunicate for defiance, it is only fair that they consider what the reason for the defiance was and if this was fair," Snyckers said.

The application continues."

- posted by Izak @ 2:20 AM (0) comments

 
What is "Israel-Palestine"? A debate.
(Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License if you use the following. Thank you.)

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Israel-Palestine

Simshalom says: There is no "Palestine" officially yet

Simshalom says: Gilgamesh, you have just made this up on the spur of the moment it seems, or as a result of some mis-informed thinking verily. Look, NPOV on Wikipedia is all good and well and a "means to an end" but it it is NOT "an end in itself" when it becomes a tool for making up MYTHOLOGICAL and illusionary notions and "constructs" that do not exist in the real world. As of July 2004 there is no such country called "Palestine", whereas there has been an Israel officially since 1947 when Israel accepted the 1947 UN Partition Plan and all the Arabs, including those in what was then known as the British Mandate of Palestine in Palestine, rejected it (because they wanted to kill and/or "throw into the sea" all of the "Yahoods") hence depriving themselves of a chance to have a state of their own. The Jews on the other hand were happy to get their share, and it was a pretty small one, and then went ahead with the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, May 14, 1948. So please do not confuse the facts with wishful thinking. IZAK 10:42, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


Gilgamesh says: It's not wishful thinking. It has less to do with history and everything to do with modern usage. It is a real term used by real people in real functions. Israel-Palestine as a word exists and is used, completely regardless of what past or modern politics are. It is a dispassionate term that makes no endorsements, condemnations nor concessions, and treats the political positions as equal, regardless of what those positions are or how respectable they might be. It really has no connection with the passions of either side, but is all about neutrality. - Gilgamesh 10:57, 23 July 2004 (UTC) Note that Google has 382000 page results for "Israel-Palestine". See: (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&btnG=Google+Search&safe=active&q=Israel%2DPalestine) You can't censor a phenomenon of terminology like that. The term itself does not endorse Palestine, nor even Israel. It just leaves the issue open without taking a stance. That's why it's so often used by peace groups and neutral speech. - Gilgamesh 11:09, 23 July 2004 (UTC)

Simshalom says: You know, to live in an academic bubble is one thing, but when that bubble is blind to the threats to the lives of the Israeli Jewish people, it's quite another matter, which is something you fail to grasp when you say things like: "Israel-Palestine as a word exists and is used, completely regardless of what past or modern politics are. It is a dispassionate term that makes no endorsements, condemnations nor concessions, and treats the political positions as equal, regardless of what those positions are or how respectable they might be." Are you not aware of the Arab Palestininian's own Palestinian National Covenant which calls for Israel's DEMISE: "...Articles 15, 19, 20, 22, and 23 of the Covenant explicitly deny Israel's right to exist. Articles 1-6, 8, 11-14, 16-18, 21, 24-26, 28 and 29 implicitly deny the State of Israel's right to exist. These articles claim that Palestinian Arabs have the sole right to all of the land. Articles 7, 9 and 10 call all Arabs to support an armed struggle against the State of Israel. Articles 27 and 30 indirectly call for violence. A total of 30 of the 33 articles in the Covenant effectively deny Israel's right to exist..." These are very serious matters, and Google may have whatever terms repeated on its search engines zillions of times, it still does NOT "neutralize" the open threats by the PLO against Israel.IZAK 06:10, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Gilgamesh says: You would think a certain person would realize this by now... I appreciate the politics involved. And there hasn't been a single Palestinian leader who I've been comfortable with either. Intifadas do not enact any positive change. That's my POV. But a sense of threat is irrelevant when writing Wikipedia articles — they convey scientifically factual information and the existence of social trends, and are written in a neutral, dispassionate, even robotic manner. In order to keep NPOV well-balanced, I must not nor ever let my editorial content be slanted by any sentiment nor political side. In the real world, I have emotions. But on Wikipedia, I a repository of information; I am, as much as I can be, a cold calculating computer, seeing only raw information and intentionally blinded to the politics of any side, even to sides close to my interests. And you should be too. The passions of the heart can get any Wikipedia user in trouble if they're not careful. One can easily challenge a notion of truth, and that's largely what impassioned debates are all about, and private message boards and blogs can be useful for that; but Wikipedia is a place of academic fact. Everyone has their individual core beliefs, to which they are entitled to, and are not necessarily right or wrong because they are belief rather than fact. But in a place of secular science and academics, as what Wikipedia is, one must practice an emulated skepticism in that nothing is a case unless it is proven. As far as we users are concerned, nothing exists — there is no God, there is no truth, there is no good, there is no evil, there is no Israel, there is no Palestine, there is no sun, there is no moon, there is no earth, there is no life, there is no death, unless such things are founded and corroborated in the coldest most precise calculations of the secular scientific method. Social phenomena (such as thought pattern, vocabulary and terminology including "Israel-Palestine") can be described, and published books can be said to exist, and their contents described, but we cannot assert any opinion to be fact unless it is proven so beyond any doubt. This is the foundation of science, and Wikipedia is a place of collecting and documenting this science. All that said, the science as used here need not negate ones own personal beliefs, because I think even science is incomplete in answering an individual's personal spiritual questions. And social phenomena such as these can also be described if they are attested, without endorsement nor condemnation. But Wikipedia is not the place to solve spiritual confusion, because it is not a place to proselytize, because proselytizing would elevate one opinion or another, and that is not a neutral point of view, because an unneutral point of view is unscientific, and thus unfit for Wikipedia. I hope you can appreciate all this, because these are the conditions under which I work on Wikipedia as well as under which I debate subjects in Wikipedia talk pages. If you cannot appreciate these conditions, then I have nothing more to say to you until you do. Leave your passions at the door, and have a pleasant day. - Gilgamesh 10:27, 26 July 2004 (UTC)

Simshalom says:When talking about Israel and Jews or Arabs and Palestine and their histories, we cannot use methods of science only, as they are not much help alone. History relies on primary documents and eye-witness testimonies, of which there are plenty in the Arab-Israeli conflict. The complex contradictory human factor is unavoidably always present, you cannot wish it away like a wish over a fountain. I appreciate very much your intense passionate sincerity about the ideology or metaphysical significance of what NPOV is or is not, but as I read and re-read what you have just written I must caution you that there is a very clear distinction between pure science and science fiction when you say things like: "As far as we users are concerned, nothing exists — there is no God, there is no truth, there is no good, there is no evil, there is no Israel, there is no Palestine, there is no sun, there is no moon, there is no earth, there is no life, there is no death, unless such things are founded and corroborated in the coldest most precise calculations of the secular scientific method." I am not sure if you appreciate what the functions and limitations of the "scientific method" are and of controversies concerning it. For example, the liberal arts, social sciences, humanities and religion cannot and should NOT be measured by the same methods one measures in pure mathematics, chemistry, physics and biology. The latter, because it touches on issues of life is also complex. Geography is physical, but the human beings on the Earth are more complex than that. In some ways they can be "measured" and in other ways they cannot be measured or subjected to "scientific method". They tried that in the former USSR but all that was, was a guise to dupe people into accepting "scientific" Marxism-Leninism. Hitler's scientists produced proofs that Germans were a Master race based on perversions of the scientific method, so spare me the hocus-pocus about the holy grail of the "scientific method". By all means use it, but with healthy amounts of "scepticism", because what you are describing is that to be on Wikipedia one must "swear allegiance", almost like an oath or "party membership" in bizarre sounding premises, the way you describe them, as an "infallible" litmus test, when the very "test" has been proven to fail many times over when it over-reaches itself. In human affairs there are complex non-measurable human realities and factors such as morality and values for example, about which science and its methods can tell us nothing. Also remember, there is a great difference between the use of mere science, and "scientism" which is "belief in science" as in a "religion" which is just plain old "idol worship" dressed in the garb of Pseudoscience according to many people out there. IZAK 04:02, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Gilgamesh says: I think you misunderstood what I said. I am a deeply religious person, and have a great deal many opinions and passions. And in the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and I think everyone has a right to live anywhere in that land, though I find myself leaning more towards the Jewish side because of closer personal affiliation, though I have compassion for those among the Palestinian civilians who are peaceful and non-political. It's been hard to have any sympathy for Yassir Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas, etc., or anyone else who especially denies Israelite history in the Holy Land or particularly at the Temple Mount. Anyway, I think this practice is not about actually personally believing absolute skepticism, but merely practicing it in the scientific field, simply because it is one of the rigid rules of the scientific method that lends it empirical legitimacy. Personally, I think it quite scientific to balance the human issues involved and try to be more sensitive about the concerns, at least in the aspect of presentation, but without sacrificing the crucial information involved, and without changing the impact of the message (i.e. no POV sugar-coating). I'm largely scientific perhaps because I am autistic, and that makes me sterilely methodical by nature, but that doesn't mean I'm insensitive to the concerns of others, at least not intentionally. By all means, we should strike a social balance in this article. - Gilgamesh 05:05, 28 July 2004 (UTC)

- posted by Izak @ 5:32 AM (1) comments

 
The Davidic line or Davidic Kingdom
Written by SIMSHALOM at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davidic_line

(Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License if you plan to use the following. Thank you.)

Davidic line

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Davidic line, or Davidic Kingdom, known in Hebrew as Malchut Beit David ("Monarchy [of the] House of David") refers to the tracing of royal lineage by kings and major leaders in Jewish history to King David in Judaism.

Upon being chosen and becoming king, the custom in the times of the Tanakh was to be annointed with olive oil by having it poured on the head. In David's case, this was done by the prophet Samuel. The annointing is called meshicha (meaning "pouring") in Hebrew and that is why a king (melekh or melech in Hebrew) is referred to as a Mashiach or Messiah or a Melech HaMashiach meaning "The Annointed King". The procedure of annointment, in David's case symbolized the descent of God's holiness (kedusha) upon the king and as a sign of a bond never to be broken.

Since the monarchy was vouchsafed to David by God in the Book of Samuel:

"...Now he [David] was ruddy, and with beautiful eyes, and goodly to look upon. And the Lord said: 'Arise, anoint him; for this is he.' Then Samuel [the prophet] took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren; and the spirit of the Lord came mightily upon David from that day forward..." (I Samuel, 16:12-13) (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et08a16.htm ) and

"And Nathan said to the king:...Thus says the Lord of hosts: I took you from the sheepcote, from following the sheep, that you should be prince over my people, over Israel. And I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make you a great name, like the name of the great ones that are in the earth... and I will cause you to rest from all your enemies. Moreover the Lord tells you that the Lord will make you a house....Then David the king went in, and sat before the Lord...'now therefore let it please you to bless the house of your servant, that it may continue forever before you; for you, O Lord God, have spoken it; and through your blessing let the house of your servant be blessed forever.'" (II Samuel, 7:1-29) (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et08b07.htm), and

"Then came all the tribes of Israel to David to Hebron, and spoke, saying: 'Behold, we are your bone and your flesh. In times past, when Saul was king over us, it was you that did lead out and bring in Israel; and the Lord said to you: You shalt feed my people Israel, and you shall be prince over Israel.' So all the elders of Israel came to the king to Hebron; and king David made a covenant with them in Hebron before the Lord; and they anointed David king over Israel..." (II Samuel, 5:1-3) (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et08b05.htm).

As well as in the Book of Chronicles: "...So all the elders of Israel came to the king to Hebron; and David made a covenant with them in Hebron before the Lord; and they anointed David king over Israel, according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Samuel..." (I Chronicles, 11:3) (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et25a11.htm).

"...And these are the numbers of the heads of them that were armed for war, who came to David to Hebron, to turn the kingdom of Saul to him, according to the word of the Lord...All these, being men of war, that could order the battle array, came with a whole heart to Hebron, to make David king over all Israel; and all the rest also of Israel were of one heart to make David king." (I Chronicles, 12:24;39) (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et25a12.htm)

Thus all subsequent monarchs in both the ancient first united Kingdom of Israel and the later Kingdom of Judah needed to show their direct descent from King David to validate their claim to the throne/s in order to rule over the Israelite and Jewish people/s in perpetuity.
In cases where this rule was broken, the verdict of history has not been kind according to classical understandings within traditional Judaism. Two important examples are:

After the death of King Solomon son of David, the ten northen tribes of the Kingdom of Israel revolted against the Davidic line, refusing to accept Rehoboam son of Solomon and instead chose as king Jeroboam who was not a member of King David's family. The fate of this northern kingdom was sealed when they were eventually conquered by Assyria who exiled them completely until they became The Ten Lost Tribes.

The Hasmoneans, also known as the Maccabees, who were priests, (kohanim) from the Tribe of Levi, establshed a monarchy of their own in Judea following their revolt and war against the Greek Seleucid dynasty. The Hasmoneans were not connected to the Davidic line that is attached to the Tribe of Judah. The Levites had always been excluded from the Israelite monarchy. When the Maccabees assumed the throne in order to re-dedicate the defiled Second Temple, a cardinal rule was nevertheless broken, and it has been considered to be contributing to their own downfall, and part of the eventual downfall of Judea and when internal strife brought in Rome and resulted in the violent non-Jewish Herod the Great becoming king, and eventually ended with the destruction of the Second Temple by the Roman Empire according to scholars within Orthodox Judaism.

With the cessation of the Jewish monarchy following the destructions of both the Temple of Solomon and the Second Temple, the line of the monarchy was always carefully preserved and guarded even though no kings such as David and his immediate descendants were alive. It was from that supposed Davidic line though that many great rabbis and "princes" of the people were claimed descent. Thus men such as the editor of the Mishnah, Rabbi Judah haNasi and his heirs were considered to be from the Davidic line, hence also the title "Nasi" meaning prince. Many of the heads of the Jewish communities in Babylon, the Reish Galuta were also described as being of the Davidic line.

Subsequently, great rabbis such as Rashi, the Maharal of Prague, and the Baal Shem Tov were all considered to be from the Davidic line by Orthodox Judaism.
The future Jewish Messiah is expected to be from the Davidic line.

Many prayers in the Jewish prayer book, the Siddur make fervent mention for the restoration of King David's monarchy, and the long-awaited Messiah who is referred to as Mashiach ben David, "Messiah son of [King] David".

- posted by Izak @ 4:55 AM (0) comments

 
Korban:Definition and Explanation of Jewish "Sacrifices"
Korban: Written by SIMSHALOM at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korban

(Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License if you plan on using the following. Thank you.)

Korban (plural: Korbanot) in Judaism, is commonly called a religious sacrifice or an "offering" in English, but is known as a Korban in Hebrew because its Hebrew root KaRoV means to "[come] Close (or Draw Near) [to God]", which the English words "sacrifice" or "offering" do not fully convey. A Korban was usually an animal such as a sheep or a bull that was ritually slaughtered and then burned on an altar, or a vegetable that the Hebrew Bible commanded the ancient Children of Israel to be offered up on the various altars in the ancient Temple in Jerusalem during the history of ancient Israel and Judah.

Table of contents:
1 Background
2 In Mishnah and Talmud
3 Roles of the kohen (priests)
4 Book of Leviticus
5 Maimonides vs. Nachmanides
6 Twentieth century
7 Orthodox Judaism
7.1 Korbanot in the prayer book
8 Belonging to the 613 commandments
9 Abuses of the korbanot
10 Martyrs as korbanot

1 Background
The korbanot were practiced from earliest times, and particularly for over one thousand years in the Tabernacle and during the eras of the the Temple of Solomon and the Second Temple in Jerusalem when the Children of Israel, as the Jews were then known, lived in the Land of Israel until the destruction of Judea, Jerusalem, and the Temple by the Roman Empire approximately two thousand years ago in the year 70 CE.
Since that time the ancient rabbis instituted a system of study, public Torah readings, and prayers that have required Jewish people to keep up the knowledge and connection with the Torah's korbanot with the hope and belief that one day when the Jewish Messiah would come, a Third Temple would be re-built and the korbanot would once again be reinstituted in all their details. This belief is still maintained by all of Orthodox Judaism. Other streams, such as Conservative Judaism and Reform Judaism do not subcribe to the notions of the korbanot nor do they desire to have them reinstituted once again in the future.

2 In Mishnah and Talmud
The Mishnah and Talmud devote a very large section, known as a seder, to the study and analysis of this subject known as Kodshim, whereby all the detailed varieties of korbanot are enumerated and analyzed in great logical depth, such as kodshim kalim ("simple sacrifices") and kodash kodashim ("holy of holies").

3 Roles of the kohen (priests)
It is the role of the Kohen (plural Kohanim) , the "priests", designated from the Tribe of Levi who performed the rituals needed for the success of the korbanot first in the ancient Tabernacle and then in the Temple of Solomon and the Second Temple.

4 Book of Leviticus
The Book of Leviticus (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=3&CHAPTER=1) contains all the vast details and outlines of each korban and the roles of both a regular kohen as well as that of the Kohen Gadol, the "High Priest", who played a crucial role in this regard on the holiest day in Judaism when multiple korbanot were offered on Yom Kippur. Leviticus is known to Jewish scholars as Torat kohanim the "Law [book of the] Priests".
The korbanot are mentioned in all five books of the Torah outlining their origins and history and then in the Tanakh when their was the Temple in Jerusalem only, that every day and each Jewish holiday had its own unique korbanot first in the Tabernacle, and then in the Temples.

5 Maimonides vs. Nachmanides
Maimonides has given some rationale for the ancient Jewish institution of sacrfices, see Sacrifices in Judaism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrifice#Sacrifice_in_Judaism), but Nachmanides has famously disagreed with him citing the fact that the Torah records the practices of animal and other sacrifices from the times of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and earlier. Indeed, the purpose of recounting the Near sacrifice of Isaac, known in Judaism as "The Binding of Isaac" (Akeidat Yitzhak or the Akeidah) was to illustrate the sublime significance and need of animal sacrfices as supplanting the abomination of human sacrifices.

6 Twentieth century
During the early twentieth century, Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan known as the Chafetz Chayim and himself a kohen, advised some followers to set up special yeshivas for married students known as Kollel that would specialize in the study of the korbanot and study with greater intensity the kodshim sections of the Talmud in order to prepare for the arrival of the Jewish Messiah who would oversee the rebuilding of the original Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem that would be known as the Third Temple. His advice was taken seriously and today there are a number of well-esatblished Ultra Orthodox Judaism isntititutions in Israel that focus solely on the subject of the korbanot, kodshim, and the needs of the future Jewish Temple.

7 Orthodox Judaism
Today Orthodox Judaism includes brief mention of each korban on either a daily basis in the Siddur daily prayer book, or in the Machzor holiday prayerbook as part of the prayers for the relevant days concerned. On each Jewish holiday the sections in the Torah mentioning that festival's korbanot is read out loud in synagogue.

7.1 Korbanot in the prayer book
The prayers mention the korbanot at various junctures. In the very early morning Shacharit prayers for example, they include the following in order of mention, actually called the korbanot
Kiyor Describing the basin containing pure water to wash up before touching the korbanot (offerings), based on Exodus 30: 17-21 (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=2&CHAPTER=30).

Trumat Hadeshen Removing the ashes of the korban olah (elevation offering), based on Leviticus 6:1-6 (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=3&CHAPTER=6 ).

Korban Tamid Perpetual daily offering, based on Numbers 28:1-8 (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=4&CHAPTER=28 ).

Ketoret Incense. Based on Exodus 30:34-36;7-8 (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=2&CHAPTER=30). With commentary from Babylonian Talmud Kritut 6a; Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 4:5; 33a.

Korban Musaf The additional offerings for Shabbat, Numbers 28:9-10 (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=4&CHAPTER=28 ).

Korban Rosh Chodesh Offering for the new month, Numbers 28: 11-15 (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=4&CHAPTER=28).

Chapter 5 of Mishnah Zevachim is then cited:

A. Eizehu mekoman shel z'vachim Places for the zevachim korbanot to be offered.

B. Parim hanisrafim Bulls that are completely burned.

C. Chatot hatzibur v'hayachid Sin offerings of the community and the individual.

D. Ha'olah kodesh kodashim The elevation offering is among the most holy offerings.

E. Zivchei shalmei tzibur v'ashamot Communal peace offerings and guilt offerings.

F. Hatodah v'eil nazir kodashim kalim The thanksgiving offering and the ram of a Nazirite are offerings of a lesser (lighter) holiness.

G. Sh'lamim kodashim kalim The peace offerings are of lesser (lighter) holiness.

H. Hab'chor vehama'aser vehapesach kodashim kalim The firstborn and tithe of animals and the Passover offering are offerings of lesser (lighter) holiness.

Rabbi Yishmael omer (Ending.) Rabbi Yishmael says: Through thirteen rules is the Torah elucidated. (Introduction to the Sifra).

8 Belonging to the 613 commandments
About one hundred of the permanent 613 mitzvot based on the Torah (Pentateuch) itself, concern the korbanot, (excluding those mitzvot that concern the actual Temple and the kohanim themselves of which there are about another fifty):
Not to burn anything on the Golden Altar besides incense (Exodus 30:9)
To offer only unblemished animals (Leviticus 22:21)
Not to dedicate a blemished animal for the altar (Leviticus 22:20)
Not to slaughter it (Leviticus 22:22)
Not to sprinkle its blood (Leviticus 22:24)
Not to burn its fat (Leviticus 22:22)
Not to offer a temporarily blemished animal (Deuteronomy 17:1)
Not to sacrifice blemished animals even if offered by non-Jews (Leviticus 22:25)
Not to inflict wounds upon dedicated animals (Leviticus 22:21)
To redeem dedicated animals which have become disqualified (Deuteronomy 12:15)
To offer only animals which are at least eight days old (Leviticus 22:27)
Not to offer animals bought with the wages of a harlot or the animal exchanged for a dog (Deuteronomy 23:19)
Not to burn honey or yeast on the altar (Leviticus 2:11)
To salt all sacrifices (Leviticus 2:13)
Not to omit the salt from sacrifices (Leviticus 2:13)
Carry out the procedure of the burnt offering as prescribed in the Torah (Leviticus 1:3)
Not to eat its meat (Deuteronomy 12:17)
Carry out the procedure of the sin offering (Leviticus 6:18)
Not to eat the meat of the inner sin offering (Leviticus 6:23)
Not to decapitate a fowl brought as a sin offering (Leviticus 5:8)
Carry out the procedure of the guilt offering (Leviticus 7:1)
The kohanim must eat the sacrificial meat in the Temple (Exodus 29:33)
The kohanim must not eat the meat outside the Temple courtyard (Deuteronomy 12:17)
A non-kohen must not eat sacrificial meat (Exodus 29:33)
To follow the procedure of the peace offering (Leviticus 7:11)
Not to eat the meat of minor sacrifices before sprinkling the blood (Deuteronomy 12:17)
To bring meal offerings as prescribed in the Torah (Leviticus 2:1)
Not to put oil on the meal offerings of wrongdoers (Leviticus 5:11)
Not to put frankincense on the meal offerings of wrongdoers (Leviticus 3:11)
Not to eat the meal offering of the High Priest (Leviticus 6:16)
Not to bake a meal offering as leavened bread (Leviticus 6:10)
The kohanim must eat the remains of the meal offerings (Leviticus 6:9)
To bring all avowed and freewill offerings to the Temple on the first subsequent festival (Deuteronomy 12:5-6)
To offer all sacrifices in the Temple (Deuteronomy 12:11)
To bring all sacrifices from outside Israel to the Temple (Deuteronomy 12:26)
Not to slaughter sacrifices outside the courtyard (of the Temple)(Leviticus 17:4)
Not to offer any sacrifices outside the courtyard (of the Temple)(Deuteronomy 12:13)
To offer two lambs every day (Numbers 28:3)
To light a fire on the altar every day (Leviticus 6:6)
Not to extinguish this fire (Leviticus 6:6)
To remove the ashes from the altar every day (Leviticus 6:3)
To burn incense every day (Exodus 30:7)
The Kohen Gadol must bring a meal offering every day (Leviticus 6:13)
To bring two additional lambs as burnt offerings on Shabbat (Numbers 28:9)
To bring additional offerings on the New Month (Rosh Chodesh) (Numbers 28:11)
To bring additional offerings on Passover (Numbers 28:19)
To offer the wave offering from the meal of the new wheat (Leviticus 23:10)
To bring additional offerings on Shavuot (Numbers 28:26)
To bring two leaves to accompany the above sacrifice (Leviticus 23:17)
To bring additional offerings on Rosh Hashana (Numbers 29:2)
To bring additional offerings on Yom Kippur (Numbers 29:8)
To bring additional offerings on Sukkot (Numbers 29:13)
To bring additional offerings on Shmini Atzeret (Numbers 29:35)
Not to eat sacrifices which have become unfit or blemished (Deuteronomy 14:3)
Not to eat from sacrifices offered with improper intentions (Leviticus 7:18)
Not to leave sacrifices past the time allowed for eating them (Leviticus 22:30)
Not to eat from that which was left over (Leviticus 19:8)
Not to eat from sacrifices which became impure (Leviticus 7:19)
An impure person must not eat from sacrifices (Leviticus 7:20)
To burn the leftover sacrifices (Leviticus 7:17)
To burn all impure sacrifices (Leviticus 7:19)
To follow the [sacrificial] procedure of Yom Kippur in the sequence prescribed in Parshat Acharei Mot (After the death of Aaron's sons...) (Leviticus 16:3)
One who profaned property must repay what he profaned plus a fifth and bring a sacrifice (Leviticus 5:16)
Not to work consecrated animals (Deuteronomy 15:19)
Not to shear the fleece of consecrated animals (Deuteronomy 15:19)
To slaughter the paschal sacrifice at the specified time (Exodus 12:6)
Not to slaughter it while in possession of leaven (Exodus 23:18)
Not to leave the fat overnight (Exodus 23:18)
To slaughter the second Paschal lamb (Numbers 9:11)
To eat the Paschal lamb with matzah and marror on the night of the 15th of Nissan (Exodus 12:8)
To eat the second Paschal Lamb on the night of the 15th of Iyar (Numbers 9:11)
Not to eat the Paschal meat raw or boiled (Exodus 12:9)
Not to take the Paschal meat from the confines of the group (Exodus 12:46)
An apostate must not eat from it (Exodus 12:43)
A permanent or temporary hired worker must not eat from it (Exodus 12:45)
An uncircumcised male must not eat from it (Exodus 12:48)
Not to break any bones from the paschal offering (Exodus 12:46)
Not to break any bones from the second paschal offering (Numbers 9:12)
Not to leave any meat from the Paschal offering over until morning (Exodus 12:10)
Not to leave the second Paschal meat over until morning (Numbers 9:12)
Not to leave the meat of the holiday offering of the 14th until the 16th (Deuteronomy 16:4)
To celebrate on Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot at the Temple (bring a peace offering) (Exodus 23:14)
To rejoice on these three Festivals (bring a peace offering) (Deuteronomy 16:14)
Not to appear at the Temple without offerings (Deuteronomy 16:16)
Not to refrain from rejoicing with, and giving gifts to, the Levites (Deuteronomy 12:19)
The kohanim must not eat unblemished firstborn animals outside Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 12:17)
Every person must bring a sin offering for his transgression (Leviticus 4:27)
Bring an asham talui when uncertain of guilt (Leviticus 5:17-18)
Bring an asham vadai when guilt is ascertained (Leviticus 5:25)
Bring an oleh v'yored offering (if the person is wealthy, an animal; if poor, a bird or meal offering) (Leviticus 5:7-11)
The Sanhedrin must bring an offering when it rules in error (Leviticus 4:13)
A woman who had a running issue (unnatural menstrual flow) must bring an offering after she goes to the Mikveh (Leviticus 15:28-29)
A woman who gave birth must bring an offering after she goes to the Mikveh (Leviticus 12:6)
A man who had a running issue (unnatural semen flow) must bring an offering after he goes to the Mikveh (Leviticus 15:13-14)
A metzora (with a type of leprosy) must bring an offering after going to the Mikveh (Leviticus 14:10)
Not to substitute another beast for one set apart for sacrifice (Leviticus 27:10)
The new animal, in addition to the substituted one, retains consecration (Leviticus 27:10)
Not to change consecrated animals from one type of offering to another (Leviticus 27:26)
Carry out the procedure of the Red Heifer (Parah Aduma) (Numbers 19:2)
Carry out the laws of the sprinkling water (Numbers 19:21)
Break the neck of a calf by the river valley following an unsolved murder (Deuteronomy 21:4)

9 Abuses of the korbanot
There are many prophets of the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible, such as in the Book of Isaiah and Book of Jeremiah who spoke out against the false assumptions and hypocrisy that many held in the times of the ancient Temples, thinking that the korbanot were some sort of "bribes" to appease their God and keep him "quiet" regardless of their behavior. There are prophesies in the name of God wherein he rejects the entire system of the korbanot. Christian thinkers claim that Jesus was the "final sacrifice" for everyone's sins, citing the rebukes of the prophets against the Children of Israel. However, Judaism rejects this claim, believing instead that God's criticism's were just and fair and meant to correct the negative behavior of the Jewish people, and not meant as an absolute rejection of all korbanot for all time. On the contrary, it is particularly Orthodox Judaism's belief that there is an obligation to be knowledgeable about the korbanot, because with the ingathering of the Jewish people to Israel, korbanot may once again be practiced.

10 Martyrs as korbanot
Strange as it may seem, classical Judaism refers to a martyr as both a kadosh and as a korban. A kadosh means a "holy" or "sanctified" person who has given up his life for God, which is known as kiddush Hashem or "sanctification of God's name". The word for korbanot is kodshim, meaning "holy things" and the name for martyrs is kedoshim meaning "holy ones". So it is no wonder that Jews murdered during the Holocaust are referred to as both "korbanot" and "the kedoshim".

The relationship between martyrs and sacrifices has its sources in the Torah as well. One strong proto-type for the subject is the near sacrifice of Isaac, where God calls Isaac an olah ("burnt offering"): "...God tested Abraham...'Take your son, the only one you love, Isaac...Bring him as an olah (an all-burned offering)...'...Abraham built the altar there, and arranged the wood. He then bound his son Isaac, and placed him on the altar on top of the wood. Abraham reached out and took the slaughter knife to slit his son's throat. God's angel called to him from heaven...Abraham then looked up and saw a ram caught by its horns in a thicket. He went and got the ram, sacrificing it as an all-burned offering in his son's place..." (Genesis 22:1-19) (http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=1&CHAPTER=22 ). Thus, this ram is interchangeable with Isaac, as any animal korban is symbolic of its human owner. In times when there is no Temple, the individual martyr is his or her own korban according to most classical views in Jewish thought on this subject.

This lesson seems to have been greatly embedded into the Jewish national consciousness because it became their "mental framework" and means of rationalizing the persecutions against them over the centuries. There is a rabbinical teaching (Rashi Torat Kohanim, Leviticus) that when Jews are suffering, God looks to the "ashes" of Isaac on the altar, as if he had been burned like a korban olah, a complete "burned offering", (since Isaac accepted his fate, it's considered to be the equivalent of him having actually "gone through with it" on a metaphysical level), and it then serves the same purposes of gaining atonement as the sacrifices would have done in the ancient Temples.

There is also a well known verse in the Book of Psalms that says "...But for your [God's] sake are we killed all the day; we are considered like sheep for the slaughter. " (Psalms 44:23) (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt2644.htm). The image of Jews going like "sheep to the slaughter" has been used as the metaphor for both Jewish powerlessness as well as absolute fealty by them to their God. Modern secular Jews, in particular those devoted to modern Zionism have consciously rejected that image of the "Jews as victims" going like a "sheep to the slaughter, and have instead striven to promote the idea of a "new" type of aggressive liberated persona. In past times, according to the "sheep to the slaughter" symbolism, the death of people martyred for their faith was deemed to be the equivalent of sacrifices in the ancient Temples and hence the nomenclature utilized is the same as well.

- posted by Izak @ 4:41 AM (0) comments