English Translation of

Chashukei Chemed, Tractate Chullin, Page 32a

Question: Is it desirable to reveal the reason behind Torah commandments (ta’ama dekra)?

An AI Depiction of Shlomo (Solomon) and his Multiple Wives

Answer: It is stated in Sanhedrin (21b): Rabbi Yitzchak said: Why were the reasons for the Torah’s commandments not revealed? Because in two instances where their reasons were revealed, a great man of the world stumbled. It is written: “He shall not multiply wives for himself [lest his heart turn away]” (Deuteronomy 17:17). Shlomo (Solomon) said, “I will multiply wives, yet I will not turn away,” but it is written: “And it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart” (I Kings 11:4). It is also written: “He shall not multiply horses for himself [lest he return the people to Egypt]” (Deuteronomy 17:16). Shlomo said, “I will multiply horses, yet I will not return them,” but it is written: “And a chariot came up and went out of Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver…” (I Kings 10:29). See there. This implies that it is inappropriate to reveal the reason for a scripture, as doing so can lead to a stumbling block.

On the other hand, the Gemara expounds in Pesachim (118b -119a) that in the future those that dwell before Hashem will merit to obtain the things that the Ancient of Days concealed. And what are they? The reasons of the Torah. Thus implying finding reasons for the commandments is something to be valued (note this paragraph for the sake of simplicity was given as a summary and not as a literal translation).

Thus, there appears to be a great virtue in revealing the reasons of the Torah.

See the Maharsha there, who wrote to reconcile this: Specifically, regarding a matter whose reason the Torah itself revealed, it leads to a stumbling block. However, regarding a matter whose reason is hidden in the Torah—even if the Sages offer a reason for it—it will not lead to a stumbling block. See there for his reconciliation.

In the book Margaliot HaYam on Sanhedrin (there), he explained the Maharsha’s intent: When the Torah itself explicitly writes the reason, a person might think that if the reason does not apply to them, the law is void. Conversely, when the reason is not written in the Torah, but the Sages provided a reason, people will not stumble from it—for would we perform an act based merely on our own logical comparisons?! Are not Hashem’s thoughts profoundly deep? See there, where he brings numerous examples from throughout the Talmud and the Rishonim showing that the Sages expounded the reasons behind scriptural commands.

See further what the Sefer HaChinuch wrote (Mitzvah 159), quoted as follows:

“Among the roots of this commandment (the impurity of creeping creatures), no person of intellect should doubt that there has never been a human being who attained the entirety of all wisdom to its end without missing a detail. For even regarding Moshe our Teacher, peace be upon him, the Sages of blessed memory said that fifty gates of understanding were created, and all were given to Moshe except one… Therefore, when we comprehend through our wisdom any benefit accrued to us from the commandments, we should rejoice in it. But when our wisdom fails to comprehend their benefit to us, we must nevertheless consider that due to the ultimate wisdom of Hashem above all creatures, He knew the benefit we derive from that commandment, and therefore commanded us concerning it.

And the Sages of blessed memory have already informed us why the reason for all commandments was not made known: so that it would not become a stumbling block for us. They brought proof that when the reason for three of them was revealed, a great man of the world stumbled in them.

Let no opponent come against me… regarding what I have now said—that Hashem concealed from us the reasons for the commandments, yet I have raised my hand to speak about them to my young students. For my teachers preceded me in discussing many aspects of them in Midrashim and elsewhere according to their literal sense (peshat). The depth of their wisdom, the strength of their insight, and their immense holiness remain hidden within them, unmoved even by all the winds of the world. Whoever delves deeply into their plain meaning and strives to innovate regarding their revealed layer—longing to peer through the lattice, delight in the splendor of their appearance, and gather from them to gird themselves—it is improper to lay guilt upon him. Rather, one should bless him and mention him favorably wherever he is…” See there.

Thus, the Chinuch explicitly stated that his purpose in writing the reasons for the commandments was not for deriving practical halachic rulings, but rather to demonstrate the wisdom of the Torah.

See also the lengthier discussion by Rabbi Hillel of Verona in Tagmulei HaNefesh (a student of Rabbeinu Yonah), where he wrote:

“…But to offer a fitting and proper reason for the commandments—meaning that the Blessed Holy One commanded a specific precept for a specific reason—and to state it in order to glorify the commandments so they do not seem like empty matters: this task is heavenly work, honoring the Creator and honoring Israel.” See there.

Now, it is stated in Chullin (32a): If a knife fell and he picked it up, or his clothes fell and he picked them up, or he sharpened the knife and was exhausted, and his companion came and slaughtered—if he paused (shehiyah) for the duration of a slaughtering, it is invalid.

The Prisha (Yoreh De’ah 23:3) writes two reasons why pausing (shehiyah) invalidates slaughtering:

1. It is derived from the Torah’s word “v’shachat” (and he shall slaughter), implying one continuous slaughter rather than two separate slaughters.
2. When the slaughterer pauses in the middle of the act, the animal recoils out of fright (bi’atuta) from the slaughtering. Consequently, the blood becomes absorbed into its organs and cannot be removed through salting.

On the other hand, the Simlah Chadashah (there, §1) wrote in the name of the Razah that all five invalidating factors of slaughtering—including pausing (shehiyah)—are royal decrees (gezeirat melech) and oral traditions given to Moshe at Sinai (Halachah le-Moshe mi-Sinai), and one must not ask for reasons behind these laws.

The Tevuot Shor (there, §1) added that relying on the aforementioned reasons could lead to severe halachic errors. For example, people might come to permit the meat by salting or roasting it—just as in the case where an animal’s neck bone is broken, where eating its meat raw is forbidden because its blood recedes and becomes re-absorbed in the organs, yet it remains permitted via salting or roasting. Furthermore, people might err and argue that if the entire reason for the prohibition is due to blood, one should permit the inner intestines, which do not hold blood. Therefore, we have no permission to question or rationalize the reason for the invalidation of shehiyah.

The Pri Megadim (Siftei Da’at there, §2) wrote that another error could arise from this reason: If the prohibition of shehiyah were due to blood rather than the status of a non-kosher carcass (neveilah), then if an olive’s bulk (kezayit) of neveilah and an olive’s bulk of meat slaughtered with shehiyah were mixed with sixty times as much valid meat (59 kezayitim of kosher meat), the entire mixture would become permitted. This is because we hold the rule that distinct prohibitions nullify one another; thus, the kezayit of neveilah would be nullified in sixty kezayitim that are not neveilah, and the kezayit of shehiyah would be nullified in sixty kezayitim free of blood.

He wrote another practical difference (nafkamina) based on this reason: If the prohibition of shehiyah is only due to blood, once the meat is cooked, it would only be prohibited by Rabbinic law (since cooked blood is only forbidden rabbinically). People might then treat a case of uncertainty leniently, following the rule that uncertainties in Rabbinic law are resolved leniently (safek d’rabbanan l’kula).

He also questioned the first reason mentioned above—that “v’shachat” implies one slaughter rather than two—pointing out that all laws of slaughtering are Halachah le-Moshe mi-Sinai and are not explicitly detailed in the text, except for pressing (derasah).

See further in Pri Megadim (in his introduction to the Laws of Shechitah), where he wrote:

“The reason for this commandment (of slaughtering) was brought by the Eliyah Rabbah in the name of Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 451): that most of the blood exits from the neck so that the blood drains out, and additionally to prevent animal cruelty (tza’ar ba’alei chayim). From this he proves that preventing cruelty to animals is a biblical obligation… Similarly, using a notched knife is forbidden due to animal cruelty, see there.

However, all authorities have already written that one should not assign a reason to any commandment—including the five laws of slaughtering. Even though reasons for them are found in a few books, one should pay no heed to them, and I will explain each one in its place with Hashem’s help.” End of quote.

Thus, the Pri Megadim wrote that it is improper to write the reasons for the commandments of slaughtering, their specific details, or any commandment at all. On the contrary, writing reasons for commandments can lead to stumbling blocks.

However, as stated earlier, there is no inherent prohibition against providing a reason for commandments; rather, doing so honors Heaven.

I heard a similar concept from my teacher, the Rosh Yeshiva of Slobodka, the Gaon and Tzaddik Rabbi Eisik Sher zt”l, that there are two distinct meanings of “reason” (ta’am):

1. A reason that serves as the cause/mechanism behind the law.
2. A reason in the sense of “Taste (ta’amu) and see that Hashem is good” (Psalms 34:9)—meaning it is not the underlying cause of the law, but serves to sweeten and draw the learner’s heart, showing how pleasant the Torah and commandments are.

Our teacher, the Chinuch, intended to write reasons to demonstrate the good taste and sweetness of the Torah’s commandments, as he wrote in his introduction: “Out of my intense desire to dip the tip of the staff into the honeycomb of commandments, I pressed forward into a boundless forest.” In light of this, my teacher zt”l added that the reasons provided by the Chinuch are not causes or origins of the laws from which one can derive practical legal conclusions (nafkamina), but are solely intended to add flavor and showcase the sweetness of the Torah.

It is possible that the later authorities (Acharonim) mentioned above raised their objections because they witnessed practical stumbling blocks occurring as a result. This is similar to what I heard in the name of Maran Rabbi Y.T.H. Donner zt”l: About 150 years ago, a professor discovered that pork contains a dangerous parasite. Some Jews remarked that the reason for the prohibition was now understood, celebrating it as a great sanctification of Hashem’s name (Kiddush Hashem) showing that the Torah knew pork was dangerous to eat.

Fifty years later, a Jewish doctor discovered a medicine that neutralized the parasite. He then added that since the sole reason pork was forbidden was because of the parasite, now that the parasite was neutralized, eating pork should be permitted (may such words be forgiven)!

This demonstrates that great caution is required when explaining the reasons for commandments. It must be made crystal clear that these explanations are not the underlying cause of the commandment, so that people do not stumble into nullifying the law when the reason appears to be absent.

Furthermore, it should be noted that there may indeed be a practical legal outcome (nafkamina le-dina) derived from the Chinuch‘s explanation that the reason for slaughtering is to prevent animal cruelty (tza’ar ba’alei chayim). As we wrote in Chashukei Chemed on Tractate Zevachim (64b): If a non-Jew wishes to learn the laws of slaughtering, there is room to teach him on the grounds of preventing animal cruelty.

A Bull and a Donkey Suffering from Hunger: If They Work Together, They Will Receive Food

Question: It is stated in the Chinuch (Mitzvah 550): Not to plow with a bull and a donkey together. The same applies to any two species of animals where one is kosher (tehorah) and the other is non-kosher (tmeiah). The prohibition is not limited to plowing alone, but applies to any work, such as threshing or pulling a wagon. Concerning this it is said: “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together” (Deuteronomy 22:10).

Among the reasons for this commandment is the issue of animal cruelty (tza’ar ba’alei chayim), which is biblically prohibited. It is well known that species of animals and birds experience great distress when dwelling with species other than their own, and all the more so when working with them. As we see with our own eyes among wild creatures, every bird dwells with its own kind, and all animals likewise cleave to their own kind.

Every wise-hearted person should take moral instruction from this: never to appoint two people together for any task if they are distant in nature and different in conduct—such as a righteous person and a wicked person, or a lowly person and an honored person. For if the Torah was sensitive to the distress caused to mindless animals, how much more so regarding human beings, who possess an intelligent soul to know their Creator! End of his words.

The question arises: What is the law if a bull and a donkey have no food and are suffering from hunger, but if they plow together, the owner of the field [a non-Jew] will feed them? Is it permissible in such a case to plow with them together? Since one of the reasons for the commandment is to prevent their distress, and here their suffering from hunger is greater, perhaps it is preferable that they work together and receive food rather than suffer from hunger without plowing?

Answer: It appears that this is forbidden. The life-saving imperative (pikuach nefesh) of an animal is not like the life-saving imperative of a human being, regarding whom it is said: “and he shall live by them” (Leviticus 18:5)—and not die by them.

As for what the Chinuch wrote—that the reason for the scripture is due to animal cruelty—we have already elaborated above that the Chinuch himself wrote that one must not derive lenient halachic rulings from these reasons. This is especially true for this commandment, where the Chinuch emphasized that this is merely one of the reasons for the commandment, and the reason is expounded to add moral insight—as he wrote, never to appoint two people together who are distant in nature and different in conduct.

Rabbi Zilberstein’s words in Chashukei Chemed, quoted above I have brought for a specific purpose.

As I see more religious figures bringing dubious leniencies to justify voting for religious parties that seek to put Non-Jewish, seemingly “pro-Zionist” non-Jews into Israel’s legislature and to serve as cabinet ministers, my hope is to find a new line of reasoning to change their minds. My hope is that an appeal to some of the reasons given by the rabbis for not appointing a non-Jew or even a righteous convert to Judaism to positions of dominion over Jews born to a Jewish mother, might convince the waverers on this issue.

I realize though that quoting “reasons for commandments” is a double-edged sword, where the unscrupulous might try to use a reason for the commandment as a means of uprooting the commandment by saying nowadays the reason does not apply. My hope is that after reading Rabbi Zilberstein’s essay you will understand that this is not my purpose in bringing the Sefer HaChinuch’s reason for Commandment #498

Sefer HaChinuch Commandment #498

Mitzvah 498

To not establish a foreign king over us: That we were prevented from establishing a man that is not from the seed of Israel — and even if he is a righteous convert — [as] king upon us. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 17:15), “You may not place upon yourself a foreign man that is not your brother.” And they, may their memory be blessed, said in Sifrei Devarim 157, “‘You may not place upon yourself a foreign man’ — this is a negative commandment.” And likewise, it is not fitting to appoint upon us for anything — not a Torah appointment and not a state appointment — a man that is from the “congregation of converts,” until his mother be from Israel, from that which is written, “You shall surely place, etc.”; and they, may their memory be blessed, made a precise inference (Kiddushin 76b), “Any placing that you do shall only be from among your brothers.”

The roots of the commandment are well-known: Since it is for the appointed head to humble all in everything that he says, it is necessary that he nonetheless be from the seed of Israel — as they are merciful, the children of merciful ones — so that he will have mercy on the people not to make their yoke heavy in any matter from all of the things. And he should love truth, justice and righteousness — as it is known to all that anyone who is from the family of Avraham has all of these good [qualities]; and similar to what the wise men of science said, that the nature of the father is planted in his children.

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Kiddushin 76b) that we only set up a head of authority from the seed of Israel — and even if he is appointed over a watercourse to distribute from it to the fields {end of translated quote}.

Another Possible Reason Based on the Rabbi Akiva Precedent

In tractate Brachot 27b when the sages decided to depose Rabban Gamliel from being the head of the Sanhedrin (due to his mistreatment of Rabbi Yehoshua) they were looking for a replacement. The Talmud explains, they did not choose Rabbi Akiva because he lacked the merit of his forefathers. The Chevruta commentary explains that he lacked the merit of the forefathers that would protect him from punishment because he was from the seed of converts [based on Tractate Sanhedrin 96a].

According to the Talmud Kiddushin 76b Both Gentiles and Converts Were Excluded from the Army of the House of David Because They Lacked Merit of Their Forefathers

Here is the translation of the passage according to Sefaria.org

The mishna teaches that Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: Even the descendants of one who was written in the army list of the Jewish king does not have their lineage investigated. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The reference is to one who was written in the list of the military troops of the House of David, who were all of pure lineage. Rav Yosef said: What is the verse from which it is derived? The phrase is: “Reckoned by lineage for service in war” (I Chronicles 7:40). The Gemara asks: And what is the reason for this requirement that they be of unflawed lineage? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It is in order that their merit and the merit of their ancestors will help them in battle.

What About Ittay the Gittite?

The politician Ofer Winter used the precedent of King David’s General Ittay the Gittite to dispute the Halacha on the issue of having a gentile run for Israel’s Knesset. I hope Hashem willing and without vowing, to put out a rebuttal in a separate article.

Conclusion

I have offered the Minchat Chinuch’s reason for the mitzva and a second possible reason. It you don’t like either reason go out and find yourself another reason. The Halacha stands on its own with or without human justifications for the will of Hashem.

Article by Shlomo Moshe Scheinman

Further suggested reading: Are the Commandments of Judaism, Demands , I Would Expect from an Omnipotent Creator?

Monday, 8 MarCheshvan 5787 [October 19, 2026]

Take a Look at France

The riots in France offer yet another opportunity for those who have so far shut their eyes to reality to learn what happens as a result of containment, “understanding,” spoiled discrimination—termed “corrective” [affirmative action] in the language of political correctness—and the other side effects of global progressivism toward barbaric Islam. This is a wake-up call—perhaps a final one—for the Jews of France in particular, Europe in general (and also the US): it is time to pack your bags and come to the land G-d chose, which today is thriving, flourishing, and growing stronger by every material measure. And although a struggle is being waged over the spiritual reality here, the general trend here too is continually improving, and the situation is infinitely better than anything the world has to offer.

But beyond that—the riots also teach us what awaits us here in the Land of Israel if we continue, Heaven forbid, to contain, accept, and “understand” the beasts of prey who slaughtered us mercilessly just three years ago, and who are constantly plotting to repeat the atrocities on a much larger scale. If in France—where they arrived through the grace of foolish Frenchmen who believed they were fulfilling hospitality, expecting them to be grateful and adopt the values of the Republic—one can only imagine in particularly dark colors what they will do in a place where they feel they are the masters of the house, and we are perceived in their eyes as invaders of a land that is not ours. Quite chilling…

And lo and behold, a female journalist from Haaretz comes along and fantasizes about how they will recreate the riots here in Israel and set fire to the offices of the Chief Rabbinate. This is no mere slip of the tongue; rather, it is a sick worldview that long ago took root among the radical left, and is increasingly spreading into the realms of what is called the “mainstream” of Israeli secularism. For those with too short a memory, let us recall the anarchistic riots that accompanied the protest against the judicial reform—riots backed and supported by top figures in the opposition, with Yair Golan (a candidate for a senior position in an Eisenkot government, Heaven forbid) orchestrating the wild mob that threatened the life of a woman whose only “crime” was her marriage to a man they dislike, and who happened to arrive in North Tel Aviv for her private affairs.

In France, as in Israel, these are not “spontaneous” protests. It is an organized, orderly method of operation with ideological roots. These are people whose goal is the dismantling of societal institutions from the ground up to establish the new social order they wish to force upon the public. In this framework, they will refrain from no violent act, yet they accuse the “Hilltop Youth” heroes of “terrorism” when they defend themselves against Israel-hating anti-Semites who cloak themselves in diplomatic and journalistic attire.

We need to put things out in the open. The Left, both in Israel and around the world, has long been fed up with the democratic process it supposedly claims to protect. The Left is certain it knows what is best for the ignorant masses, and when those masses do not buy its goods, it allows itself to riot to its heart’s content and destroy the social order from its foundation. This is the most accurate definition of “anarchism.” And just like in France, so too in Israel—in order to force its corrupt values on the entire population, the Left is willing to cooperate with the nation’s darkest enemies, who rejoice and celebrate at the free gift they receive from those foolish people who believe anyone will spare them on the day the barbaric rioters succeed in realizing their desires. Nothing was learned from the horrors of October 7th, when the beasts of prey set out to destroy, kill, and annihilate everything in their path—and those who happened to be in their path were primarily those leftists from the kibbutzim and the Nova festival.

And there is a deeper and no less important lesson: the French Republic, which was established through a bloody revolution against oppression and exploitation in pursuit of freedom and enlightenment, is gradually sinking due to the moral decay produced by Western materialism, the ultimate end of which is destructive progressivism. This phenomenon—where the Left joins forces with Islam to complete the destruction of society that it began with its social views and the destruction of the family unit—is a global phenomenon threatening all of Europe, the United States, and Israel as well. On the surface, the answer to this is an uncompromising war against the physical threat posed by the Left’s mercenaries, namely the representatives of Islam; as the US President has already said, the liberal immigration policy practiced in Europe is a recipe for disaster.

In Israel, this applies even more strongly, as the enemy is already here and it is our duty to remove them without flinching or hesitation—bringing about voluntary emigration or otherwise. But above all, the war is within ourselves, against the destructive trends of progressivism that seek to dismantle the family unit, social institutions, and above all, faith in G-d and the values of justice, integrity, law, and kindness rooted in the Divine goodness expressed in our world through the giving of the Holy Torah and absolute obedience to its laws.

That despicable journalist from Haaretz dreaming of burning down the Rabbinate offices looks across the sea and sees the riots in France as a worthy model for destroying society here in Israel. If we desire life, it is our duty to eradicate not only the local counterparts of those rioters, but also those elements within Israeli society who try to inject into our midst the sick values of the global Left that backs those rioters. These dangerous people could come to power here if we do not pull ourselves together to defend our lives. We must understand that our entire existence hangs in the balance!

– The author is Rabbi Yehuda Epstein, Chairman of the Kedushat Zion Association

Further suggested reading: Rabbi Yissachar S. Teichtal (H”YD) A Victim of the Holocaust, Explains Why Hashem Let It Happen

Here is an AI Summary:

The video titled “CBS Classic Deception Revealed – Meet a REAL Hilltop Settler” (published by media commentator and international spokesperson Yishai Fleisher) focuses on a critique of how 60 Minutes covers Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).

The primary arguments and critiques presented in the video include:

• Distortion and “Hit-Piece” Editing: The video argues that *60 Minutes* segments on Israeli settlers are heavily edited to create a misleading narrative. Rather than offering an objective overview, the criticism highlights how selective footage and narrative framing function as a “hit piece” to demonize Israeli residents.
• Misrepresentation of Local Residents: The segment features an unedited, face-to-face interview with an Israeli sheep farmer/hilltop resident (Binyamin Mordechai Minster) who was featured in a *60 Minutes* report. The critique asserts that mainstream media outlets like CBS mischaracterize ordinary farmers and families, stripping away their context, daily realities, and security challenges to fit a predetermined political agenda.
• Biased Framing of Complex Geopolitics: The commentary contends that the network glosses over the historical, legal, and security contexts of the region, favoring a simplistic narrative that frames Israeli communities entirely as an obstacle to peace while ignoring local hostile pressures and security threats.

In short, the video accuses *60 Minutes* of journalistic malpractice, media distortion, and using manipulative editing techniques to misrepresent Israeli settlers to an American audience.

Comment: In the post: The Kfar Darome Miracle Was Not Enough To Save the Jewish Communities in Gaza From the “Deep State” and A Biblical Curse  we showed examples of how the so-called Palestinians tried again and again to attack Jews.
Did it help sway public opinion? Not that much.
Many people on “our side” fail to understand the root of the problem and therefore look for solutions that are not effective:

The Root Issue (A Quote from the Kfar Darome Miracle article)

The Biblical Curse As Explained By Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh

He thus without realizing it, fulfilled the Biblical Curse in Bamidbar/Numbers 33 as explained by Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh:

33:55

ואם לא תורישו את יושבי הארץ, “And if you will fail to drive out the inhabitants of the land, etc.” According to Megillah 10 which says that wherever the word והיה occurs it alludes to something joyful, the meaning of the word here would be that although the reason the Israelites would decide {with joy} to allow some of these inhabitants to remain for the performance of menial duties, etc., i.e. in order to enjoy their services, G-d would see to it, that instead, these remaining inhabitants would prove to be thorns in their eyes and pricks in their sides and that these foreigners would harass the new owners.

וצררו אתכם על הארץ, “and they shall harass you in the land, etc.” The Torah means that not only will they harass you in the part of the land that you did not drive them out of, but they will harass you even in the parts of the country which you have conquered and driven them out of and which you have settled. They will challenge you to leave what they consider to be their country. The meaning of the word על in this context is similar to Numbers 20,24: על אשר מריתם את פי, “because you have rebelled against My word.” We have a similar meaning of the word על in Deut. 32,51.

33:56

כאשר דמיתי לעשות להם, “as I meant to do unto them, etc.” My commandment was meant for your benefit. Seeing you have not fulfilled it, My commandment remains unfulfilled; I therefore have no choice but to fulfill it in respect of these people you have left in the land.

Note: Elsewhere in his commentary, Ohr Hachaim indicates that the curse is not limited to the situation where Canaanites are left in parts of Biblical Israel.

As long as Jews do not bring up the root issue to justify their actions, the other sophisticated PR tactics will not work in the long run.

Do they have to explain this to 60 Minutes? Probably not. To them it is probably best to ignore their requests for an interview. But for supporters and neutral people, the root issue should be raised.

Comment #2: The biblical prophet, Isaiah (Yishayahu) teaches [chapter 54 verse 2] “Expand the place of your tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of your habitations: do not hold back, lengthen your cords and strengthen your stakes”. The students of the Gaon of Vilna,(as explained in Rabbi Rivlin’s book, Kol Hator, chapter 5 ), believed there are 17 facets of expansion needed to fully fulfill this verse. All the activities that are contained within the commandment of expansion , it is obligatory to do them and strengthen them without stopping and without delay as the words of the prophecy there [in Isaiah] state, “Expand the place of your tent”, etc. “do not hold back” , meaning, don’t stop, and “strengthen your stakes”. In the same chapter [of Isaiah] of which we were commanded to “Expand the place of your tent”, we have a trustworthy promise “No weapon that is formed against you shall prosper and every tongue that rises with you to judgment, you shall make into the guilty party, this is the heritage of the servants of Hashem [G-d] and their righteousness is from me, says Hashem”.

Comment #3: There is room to make an argument that for neutral people if you know they can “handle” argument A for your cause but not argument B to tell them just Argument A. We find that when Rivka wanted to convince Yitzchak to allow Yaakov to leave the country, she did not state to him the main reason that Eisav was planning to murder Yaakov. She stressed the reason that Yitzchak could handle, namely, the woman in their region were not fit to be married to Yaakov. Only Lavan’s daughters who lived outside the country were fit for Yaakov to marry.

Gaza Strip and Gush Katif

The steady, diesel rumble of a D9 armored bulldozer became a familiar sanctuary for Dayan Avraham Zarbiv, a rabbinical judge from the Tel Aviv Rabbinical Court who found himself navigating the treacherous streets of Gaza. Amidst the deafening roar of tracks and collapsing masonry, the boundaries between ancient faith, modern warfare, and extraordinary human spirit blurred into a single narrative of survival and solidarity.

Unexpected Signs in Jabalia

Stepping out of his D9 into a quiet apartment complex in Jabalia one Saturday, Dayan Zarbiv sought out the battalion commander of the Givati Reconnaissance Battalion. As he entered, he froze—a soldier inside was wrapping leather straps around his arm, quietly winding tefillin.

“Wait,” Zarbiv thought, momentary confusion washing over him. “Maybe today isn’t Shabbat? I prayed Mussaf, I made Kiddush…”

He turned to the soldier. “It’s Shabbat!”

The soldier looked up, completely unbothered, unaware of the prohibition against binding tefillin on the Sabbath day. “Up until a month ago, I hadn’t put on tefillin since my Bar Mitzvah,” the young man explained softly. “When the war started, I decided I needed to do it. I searched everywhere until someone gave me a pair, on one condition: that I put them on every single day.”

Later, operating near El Khyam, Zarbiv’s radio crackled: “Dubi Zarbiv, drive to the axis. A young combat engineer is trapped under a collapsed house—go rescue him.”

When Zarbiv arrived and dismounted, the squad recognized him instantly from viral combat clips: “Ah, you’re Rabbi Zarbiv from TikTok!”

Scanning the group, Zarbiv noticed something striking: under every heavy bulletproof vest hung ritual tzitzit fringes. Surprised by what appeared to be a religious unit, he asked the nearest soldier, “Which yeshiva are you from?”

“Which yeshiva?” the soldier laughed. “I went to Makif Bet Ramla—a secular high school. There isn’t a single religious guy in our whole company.”

“Then what are these tzitzit?” Zarbiv asked, gesturing to the fringes.

“What do you mean?” the soldier replied naturally. “It’s war! Even the Druze guys are wearing tzitzit.”

Months later, while sharing these experiences in Yokneam, a couple approached Zarbiv. The husband, wearing a kippah, mentioned that he too had recently begun putting on tefillin.

“Where are you from?” Zarbiv asked.

“Kibbutz Dalia,” the man replied—a stronghold of secular Hashomer Hatzair. “At the start of the war, my wife felt we couldn’t just keep living the same way. She went to the store, bought a hot plate, and we started learning what Shabbat meant from scratch. Then I joined in, started putting on tefillin, and eventually called an organization to donate six pairs of tefillin to other combat soldiers.”

His wife interjected with a smile: “He puts on tefillin, eats strictly kosher, attends a daily Torah class—and he still insists he’s completely non-religious!”

The Genesis of a New Strategy

Questions frequently followed Zarbiv back home. During a radio interview, the host pressed him: “You’re a Dayan—a rabbinical judge handling sacred law. How does a judge become a heavy bulldozer operator?”

For Zarbiv, the answer lay in the brutal reality on the ground. Early in the conflict, a devastating ambush in the Shaboura neighborhood of Rafah claimed the lives of five soldiers when a squad entered a booby-trapped building. The tragedy prompted a fundamental shift in tactics: rather than sending infantry into death traps, heavy machinery would clear paths through hostile structures.

Without traditional military licenses for the machinery, Zarbiv and his comrades built a specialized engineering team within the Givati Reconnaissance Battalion. They transformed raw recruits into skilled operators, developing unprecedented methods to neutralize combat risks.

Where the brigade had previously suffered steady losses every month from enemy ambushes and RPGs, the tactical shift drastically reduced casualties among the infantry, proving that adapting tactics could safeguard lives on the front line.

+————————————————————————-+

|                        TACTICAL SHIFT IN RAFAH                          |

+————————————————————————-+

| OLD METHOD: Infantry clearing booby-trapped structures door-to-door.    |

| RESULT:   High casualty risks from hidden explosive charges and shafts. |

+————————————————————————-+

│

▼

+————————————————————————-+

| NEW METHOD: Frontline D9 armored bulldozers clearing structures ahead.  |

| RESULT:   Neutralized ambush risks; significant casualty reduction.     |

+————————————————————————-+

As Zarbiv pushed dirt across the Philadelphi Corridor and into the heart of Rafah, the work took an unexpected physical toll and required constant innovation.

“How do you bring down a five-story building with a D9?” others asked.

The answer arrived unexpectedly over Sukkot while Zarbiv was pushing his granddaughter on a playground swing. He realized that demolition required rhythmic timing—hitting the structure precisely at the apex of its sway to multiply force, letting momentum do the heavy work.

Over the radio, his fellow operators joked about the rabbinical judge operating heavy armor, noting that in Hebrew, Dayan (דיין) and D9 (די9) shared the exact same letters.

Near Misses and Miraculous Escapes

Wartime operations brought constant peril. On the eve of Hoshana Rabbah in Jabalia, Zarbiv woke up inside his armor, stepped out to perform the morning rituals, and immediately moved to clear a critical junction.

Within minutes of beginning work, a sudden flash illuminated the cabin—an RPG struck the heavy armored glass directly in front of him.

“Ori, are you okay?” Zarbiv called out through the smoke to his partner.

“Yeah… I think so,” came the shaken reply.

Zarbiv keyed his radio: “Dubi Zarbiv took an RPG hit; Dubi Zarbiv remains operational.”

“Pull back, Zarbiv! There’s another shooter!” the battalion commander warned over the comms.

Reversing into an alley to maneuver, a second RPG struck the vehicle. Despite the shock and the cloud of dust, the heavy armor held. Holding pieces of the shattered projectile later that morning, Zarbiv recorded a brief prayer of gratitude before driving back out to complete the path.

During another operation in Jabalia, Zarbiv worked to collapse a heavily fortified five-story building. As the final support pillars buckled, tons of concrete cascaded directly onto the cab of the D9, burying the vehicle in darkness and tilting it precariously under the debris.

Trapped in total pitch-black isolation—a feeling he described as “the solitude of the grave”—Zarbiv waited out the dust, gripped the joysticks, engaged reverse, and forced the machine through the rubble until the tracks cleared the pile.

Emerging covered in concrete dust, he paused long enough to eat a quick third Sabbath meal—mixing tuna oil and engine grease onto a roll—before returning to clear the remaining objectives.

A Legacy of Survival

Toward the final stages of operations in Beit Hanoun, senior commanders visited the front lines. Meeting Zarbiv beside his machine, military leadership highlighted the immense physical strain and tactical impact of the heavy armor units.

Through relentless operations, the engineering teams altered the landscape of engagement, clearing subterranean networks, eliminating hidden firing posts, and ensuring that infantry units could operate without walking into prepared ambushes.

For Dayan Zarbiv, every structural sweep, every hour spent in the cramped cockpit, and every improvised lesson learned on the battlefield served a singular purpose: bringing every soldier home safely while standing guard over his people.

Rabbi Avraham Zarbiv’s dispute with high-level military leadership and commanders revolves around the strategy used to clear buildings in Gaza and how to minimize IDF casualties.

The dispute centers on the following key points:

1. Tactics vs. Higher Command Strategy

• Tactical Approach: Zarbiv advocates for using heavy engineering equipment (D9 armored bulldozers and excavators) to flatten structures from the outside rather than sending infantry inside door-to-door, where terrorists set lethal ambushes and booby traps.
• Higher Command Opposition: Higher-ranking commanders—including the IDF Chief of Staff and the Major General (Commander of the Southern Command)—opposed this widespread destruction.
  • The Chief of Staff explicitly argued to stop destroying buildings unless they posed a direct, specific danger, calling the practice superficial and pushing to halt it.
  • Major General Finkelman reprimanded Zarbiv directly, telling him to stop saying he was “destroying houses” and to state instead that he was “destroying terror infrastructure.”
  • The Chief of Staff even confronted Zarbiv physically (grabbing him by the collar), angrily warning him to stop publicizing the systematic destruction of buildings.

2. Disobeying Orders and Operating Without Licenses

• Zarbiv and his comrades established what he calls an informal “militia-like” engineering setup within the Givati Brigade, training soldiers and operating D9 bulldozers without official permits, licenses, or formal military approval for those specific demolition roles.
• Despite repeated warnings and explicit bans from military brass—as well as warnings from the Director General of the Rabbinical Courts that he was risking his position—Zarbiv continued releasing combat videos and giving interviews to promote his demolition-first doctrine.

3. Argument Over Soldier Safety and Statistical Proof

• Zarbiv’s Core Argument: Zarbiv argued that traditional tactics were “bleeding us dry.” Sending troops into booby-trapped buildings or allowing armor to navigate narrow streets between standing buildings allowed terrorists to pop out of shafts to attach explosives or fire RPGs, leading to heavy casualties.
• Casualty Comparisons: Zarbiv pointed out the stark difference in casualty rates to justify his approach:
  • Prior to this strategy, the Givati Brigade lost an average of 7 combat soldiers per month to enemy fire.
  • • Neighboring brigades using standard tactics suffered high losses in short periods (e.g., 20 dead in two weeks, 16 in two months, 14 in two months).
    • In contrast, during the 18 months that Zarbiv’s unit employed the systematic D9 clearing strategy, enemy-fire deaths in the Givati Brigade dropped to an average of 0.43 per month

    (with only 1 combat death and 3 operational accidents over three months in Jabalia).

Ultimately, Zarbiv’s dispute was driven by his belief that saving soldiers’ lives and achieving victory required overriding standard operational protocol in favor of systematic armor-led clearing.

All this is based on the Hoshana Rabba 5787 Hebrew video talk given by Rabbi Zarbiv

Editor’s note: This positive portrayal of Rabbi Zarbiv’s role in the army, should not be considered in any type of way or manner a retraction of what was written in the posts:

• What do Rosh Chodesh Elul, the draft decree, the Tel Aviv Municipality, a surrender deal with Hamas, and a particularly interesting survey have in common? – Rabbi Yehuda Epstein, Chairman of the Kedushat Zion Association

• Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak threatens and calls on the protesting public to stop serving in the IDF if …..

• Biblical And Historical Precedents For Resisting Army Service

Did Zvulun’s Tribal Portion Reach the  Mediterranean Sea

Quote from A Solution to Fundamental Problems Regarding Tekhelet

Although there is an opinion that holds that the Tribal portion of Zvulun did not reach the Mediterranean Sea, we hold like the Vilna Gaon’s viewpoint to the book of Yehoshua {Joshua} 19:14 “that we have to say that the border of Zvulun cuts through the middle of Asher’s boundary, and goes to Tzidon Rabba {Greater Sidon} and there it expands a bit in its width like the shape of a thigh“.

According to the Book of Yechezkel the tribe of Zvulun in the future will get a different area as a tribal inheritance than what was received in the past.

The tribe of Zvulun as well as a few other tribes will receive in the future a portion in the Sinai Desert. Seemingly the tribe of Zvulun will once again be able to complain that to other tribes You gave fields and vineyards but now, they will not even receive compensation of having the Chilazon near their shores, since dye producing mollusks do not appear to be found in the southern Sinai region.

According to the book Ohr Yechezkel, if you accept a 47 cm. sized cubit, the future division of the land of Israel looks like the map below. In my article The Future Borders of the Tribes of Israel as Evidence for the Size of a Cubit I provided alternative views and maps. See there for details.
According to Sifri, Devarim, Parshat Haazinu, Piska 315 the Land of Israel in the Future Will be Divided into 13 Strips of 150,000 Cubits, Which is Equivalent to 75 Talmudic Mil

In the article The Future Borders of the Tribes of Israel as Evidence for the Size of a Cubit I point out that by assigning different values to a cubit you could either include more parts of the Sinai or less than what appears in the map above. But all the major Biblical maps based on the last two chapters of Yechezkel (Ezekiel) agree that some of the tribes of Israel will receive their future portion in the land of Israel in the Sinai region which is currently a desert.

Is it fair to assign the Sinai region which is currently mostly a desert to the southern tribes including Zvulun while the northern tribes seem to be getting a more fertile region?

My general answer is that Zvulun and the other southern tribes will be compensated by other benefits, but not necessarily the Chilazon of Tekhelet.

On a more specific level, I would like to suggest that the compensation might be in accordance to a Youtube video that I asked Gemini AI to summarize.

Video Title: Israel Built a Hidden Fish System Beneath the Desert — And It Actually Worked

This summary explores how Israel transformed a barren desert into a thriving agricultural hub by turning environmental “problems” into a high-tech, sustainable goldmine.

## The Discovery: An Ocean Beneath the Dust

In 1973, geologists drilling in the Negev Desert (which covers 60% of Israel) struck the Nubian Aquifer. They found a massive reservoir of “fossil water” trapped since the last Ice Age. However, the water was initially considered worthless for two reasons:

• Boiling Temperature: It emerged at 99°F to 104°F due to geothermal heat.
• High Salinity: It was brackish (salty), containing 3,000 ppm of salt—enough to kill standard crops like tomatoes or wheat within days.

## The Innovation: Tropical Fish in the Desert

Instead of abandoning the wells, scientists asked: “What thrives in hot, salty water?” The answer was tropical fish like Barramundi, Tilapia, and Sea Bass.

• Free Heating: In Europe, farmers spend a fortune heating tanks for tropical fish. In the Negev, the Earth provides the perfect temperature for free, even when desert nights drop to 41°F.
• Healthy Environment: The salt content mimics the natural brackish habitats of these fish, keeping them healthier than in freshwater ponds.
• Massive Scale: Today, farms like Kibbutz Mashabé Sadé produce over 3,000 tons of fish annually, exporting them to major European supermarkets.

## The “Double-Usage” System: Turning Waste into Food

The biggest challenge in fish farming is ammonia (fish waste), which is toxic to the fish. Israel solved this by creating a symbiotic closed-loop system:

1. Step 1: High-pressure water is pumped from 2,300 ft deep into fish ponds.
2. Step 2: As fish grow, they saturate the water with nitrogen-rich waste (natural fertilizer).
3. Step 3: This “dirty” water is piped directly to groves of Olive trees and Date palms.
4. Step 4: These specific trees are salt-tolerant. They filter the ammonia out of the water to use as food, while the slight salt stress actually makes the fruit sweeter and more flavorful.

## Why It’s a Game Changer

1. Economics

Fresh water in Israel is expensive ($0.70 per 35 cubic feet). Brackish water is nearly free ($0.05–$0.10). By sharing the water, the fish farm gets a free “disposal system” for waste, and the crop farm gets free water and free organic fertilizer.

2. Environmental Impact

The system is carbon negative. It avoids the massive CO2 emissions caused by:

• Manufacturing synthetic fertilizers.
• Pumping and transporting fresh water.
• Heating fish tanks with fossil fuels.
• Additionally, the trees sequester (trap) thousands of pounds of carbon annually.

## The Bottom Line

The Negev project proves that constraints are opportunities. By pairing “useless” hot water with tropical fish and “toxic” waste with salt-tolerant trees, Israel created a food production system that is cheaper, cleaner, and more productive than traditional farming. This model is now being piloted in other arid regions like Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

“Impossible is just another word for nobody’s tried the right combination.”

A comparison table between traditional fish farming and this Negev desert system to highlight the cost and energy savings

Here is a breakdown of how the Negev desert system compares to traditional aquaculture and farming methods. This table highlights why the “Double-Usage” approach is such a massive leap forward in efficiency and sustainability.

Comparison: Traditional vs. Negev Desert System

Key Takeaway

In the traditional model, waste is a liability that costs money to remove. In the Negev model, waste is an asset that powers a second industry. This synergy allows desert-grown fish and fruit to be priced more competitively than those produced in “easier” climates.

The section above covers the Nubian Aquifer in the Negev. To be thorough I asked Gemini AI: Does the Nubian Aquifer run beneath the Sinai Desert?

Answer:

Yes, the Nubian Sandstone formation extends under the Sinai Peninsula, though whether it is considered part of the main Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System (NSAS) depends on how hydrogeologists strictly define the boundaries.

Key Details & Characteristics

1. Regional Hydrogeology

• The Main NSAS Boundary: The formal “Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System” covers over 2 million km² across Egypt, Libya, Sudan, and Chad. Geologically, its continuous main basin lies predominantly west of the Nile in Egypt’s Western Desert.

• The Sinai Extension: The same Lower Cretaceous and Paleozoic sandstone formations (the Nubian Sandstone series) extend east across the Gulf of Suez and lie beneath central and northern Sinai. In regional hydrogeology, the deep, deep-seated water-bearing sandstone layers beneath Sinai are commonly referred to as the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer of Sinai or the Deep Nubian Aquifer.

2. Water Type & Depth

• Fossil Water: Like the main Saharan NSAS, the deep water trapped within the Nubian sandstone under Sinai is largely fossil groundwater. It was recharged tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years ago during prehistoric wet (pluvial) climate periods.

• Depth & Quality: In Sinai, the Nubian aquifer sits at significant depths—often 1,000 to over 3,000 meters underground. The water is typically confined under high pressure (artesian in some places). While fresh-to-brackish in parts, salinity generally increases toward the northern and coastal reaches of the peninsula.

3. Separation from Main Saharan Basin

Hydrogeologists often analyze Sinai’s Nubian aquifer separately from the Western Desert NSAS because:

• Structural Barriers: The Suez Rift Valley / Gulf of Suez and associated faulting geographically and hydrologically separate the Sinai block from the main Western Desert basin.

• Local Recharge: While the deep sandstone contains non-renewable fossil water, shallow upper layers in central/northern Sinai receive minor modern recharge from flash floods along major drainage networks (such as Wadi El-Arish), mixing localized fresh water with older deeper brackish reserves.

What can be answered if it ends up that the Nubian aquifer, doesn’t reach Zvulun territory or can’t be used there for some other reason?

Answer: I will fall back on my general answer, Hashem will then find some other way to compensate.

New Addition: If you understand that Yechezkel Chapter 47 is talking about abundant fish and agriculture being produced by a miracle, we have another answer to a potential complaint by the tribe of Zvulun

Here is the Koren Jerusalem Bible translation of the relevant verses:

Article by Shlomo Moshe Scheinman

1. Retention and Promotion of Disgraced Leadership

Chayun expresses deep outrage over a senior officer—whom he refers to as “General A” (תא”ל א’)—and other senior leaders from the Gaza Division and Southern Command.

• Promotions Instead of Dismissals: Rather than facing severe consequences for their severe oversight on October 7, senior figures involved in major errors were either promoted in rank or retained in key operational roles.
• Concealment of Mistakes: He describes a scenario where an officer responsible for medical/evacuation dispatch made critical delays that resulted in troops and civilians bleeding to death. Rather than being held accountable, that same officer was subsequently promoted.

2. Sabotage of Tactical Life-Saving Operations

Chayun shares a personal account from the war, claiming he used millions of dollars worth of resources—backed by international donors—to develop a tactical life-saving capability for troops on the ground.

• Deliberate Obstruction: According to Chayun, “General A” actively attempted to disrupt and sabotage this project simply because Chayun’s name was attached to it.
• Intervention by Field Commanders: The situation got so severe that Brig. Gen. Oren Solomon (serving as acting division commander at the time) had to intervene, telling “General A” to stop disrupting Chayun’s work and allow people who want to save lives to actually do so.

3. Deception of Bereaved Families

Chayun accuses the military establishment of actively misleading the families of fallen soldiers and victims.

• Illusion of Heroism over Truth: He asserts that while the fallen fought heroically, the military narrative conceals the systemic negligence and blunders that caused their deaths.
• Withholding 90% of the Truth: He claims bereaved families have not been told even 10% of the real truth regarding the command breakdowns, intelligence suppression, and operational errors that occurred before and during October 7.

4. Demands for Severe Consequences

Chayun argues that standard military dismissals or resignations are completely insufficient:

• Exile and Revocation of Citizenship: He argues that top officials responsible for the October 7 failure—as well as those who protected or promoted them afterward—do not deserve to live in Israel. He calls for them to be stripped of their status and expelled/exiled from the country.
• Systemic Corruption: He describes a self-serving network of high-ranking officers who protect one another’s career trajectories, prioritize internal politics over operational readiness, and operate without genuine accountability.

5. Tactical Misconceptions Regarding Enemy Leadership

Chayun criticizes the strategic mindsets of Israel’s defense leadership:

• Replacing Eliminated Targets: He points out that high-profile targeted assassinations of Hamas leaders do little to dismantle the enemy’s organizational structure.
• Enemy Succession Doctrine: He highlights how enemies like Iran or Hamas prepare two to four designated successors for every commander well in advance. Decapitation strikes without broader organizational destruction fail to disrupt enemy capabilities.

Chayun concludes that Israel cannot afford to leave these same decision-makers in place while expecting different outcomes, calling for a complete overhaul and total exposure of the truth surrounding October 7.

Background on Raphael Chayun

Raphael Chayun (often spelled Rafael Hayun) is an Israeli civilian intelligence operative based in Netivot, near the Gaza border. Over the past decade, he became a prominent and controversial figure within Israel’s defense and intelligence ecosystem.

Here is background information on who he is, his role before and during October 7, and why his criticisms carry weight:

1. Early Background & Private War Room

• Transition to Intelligence: Raised in an Orthodox family, Chayun developed self-taught technical skills in computing and radio interception. Around 2011 (at age 27), he began monitoring open-source intelligence (OSINT) and intercepting tactical radio communications from terror groups in Gaza, including Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
• Private Network: Operating from a dedicated intelligence hub (“war room”) in his home, he eventually led a network of roughly 30 analysts. He maintained a direct, informal network of forums with field officers, special forces commanders, and border security teams who relied on his real-time warnings.
• Official Authorization: For years, Israel’s Ministry of Communications granted him formal licensing and legal authorization to possess and operate non-standard interception and monitoring equipment.

2. The Pre-October 7 Warning Clashes

In the years leading up to 2023, Chayun repeatedly warned field commanders about Hamas preparations and military exercises taking place along the Gaza perimeter fence.

• Shut Down by IDF Leadership: In late 2022, senior IDF intelligence officials—specifically Col. “G,” the head of the Information Security Department—took steps to cut Chayun off from military channels.
• The “Concepcion” Argument: Leaked recordings of conversations between the officer and Chayun revealed that military officials dismissed Chayun’s warnings, arguing that the IDF’s internal intelligence apparatus (AMAN and Shin Bet) did not need “civilian assistance” or unvetted private collection.
• Revocation of Equipment: Months before October 7, his license was revoked, and his listening gear was confiscated under the reasoning that his independent operation posed a information-security risk.

3. Heroism and Actions on October 7, 2023

Despite the previous restrictions, when the attack began on the morning of October 7, Chayun became a crucial communications link for soldiers and civilians trapped in the border region:

• Directing Rescuers: Desperate civilians, local defense squads, and active commanders contacted Chayun directly via cell phone and encrypted apps.
• Guiding Special Forces: Using his knowledge of local geography and real-time reports, he guided IDF units (including elite units like Maglan and Duvdevan) directly to active firefights, hostage situations, and ambush sites across Kibbutz Holit, Kfar Aza, Nahal Oz, and the Nova music festival.
• Restoration of License: Due to media pressure and his instrumental role during the assault, Israeli authorities restored his official gear licenses shortly after the attacks began.

4. Post-October 7 Recognition and Role

• Official Commendations: Following the initial months of the war, Chayun received formal certificates of appreciation and commendations from numerous IDF elite units (Maglan, Duvdevan), the Air Force, Border Police, and counter-terrorism branches for saving lives on October 7.
• Testimony: He has testified before the Citizens’ Inquiry Committee into the October 7 attack, detailing how intelligence warnings were repeatedly suppressed or ignored by senior military leaders prior to the massacre.

I asked Gemini AI: has any top military official in Israel’s army gone to jail for the terrible performance of the IDF on Oct 7?

Answer:

No high-ranking military official in the IDF has been sent to prison or faced criminal prosecution for the intelligence and operational failures of October 7.

The Jerusalem Post

Under Israeli law, military failure, systemic oversight, or strategic misjudgment do not automatically constitute criminal offenses unless there is evidence of treason, corruption, or intentional criminal negligence. Instead, accountability across the Israeli Defense Forces and intelligence agencies has been handled through resignations, dismissals, and administrative penalties.

Anadolu Ajansı

The consequences top military leadership have faced break down into a few main categories:

1. High-Level Resignations

Virtually the entire top tier of Israel’s defense leadership on October 7 accepted command responsibility and resigned from their positions:

The Jerusalem Post

• Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi (IDF Chief of Staff): Resigned citing command responsibility for failing to protect the country.

PBS

• Maj. Gen. Aharon Haliva (Head of Military Intelligence): Resigned after taking responsibility for the intelligence failure.

The Jerusalem Post

• Maj. Gen. Yaron Finkelman (Head of Southern Command): Resigned over the failure to defend the Gaza border region.

PBS

• Brig. Gen. Yossi Sariel (Commander of Unit 8200, Israel’s elite cyber intelligence unit): Resigned following internal probes into ignored intelligence warnings.

The Jerusalem Post

• Brig. Gen. Avi Rosenfeld (Commander of the Gaza Division): Resigned after stating he failed in his mission to protect the border communities.

The Jerusalem Post

2. Expulsions and Disciplinary Actions

Following internal military investigations, IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir issued formal disciplinary actions against several senior officers:

Anadolu Ajansı

• Stripped of Reserve Status: Generals who had resigned (including Haliva, Finkelman, and former Operations Directorate chief Oded Basyuk) were formally expelled from IDF reserve duty, preventing them from serving in the military again.

The Jerusalem Post

• Dismissals and Expulsions: Lower-tier officers in key positions—such as the intelligence officers for the Gaza Division and Southern Command—were either formally discharged or expelled from service for directly ignoring intelligence warnings or withholding reports.

The Jerusalem Post

Why No Prison Time?

Imprisonment in military or civilian court requires proof of criminal acts (such as disobeying direct orders in combat, criminal negligence resulting in death, or treason). The failures of October 7 have been categorized legally as profound doctrine, analytical, and operational breakdown—failures of judgment and readiness—rather than criminal activity.

post by: Shlomo Moshe Scheinman

For the sake of ease I will quote from the Jerusalem Bible translation (published by Koren) of the Second Book of Kings chapter 17

In the ninth year of Hoshea, the king of Ashshur took Shomeron, and carried Yisra᾽el away into Ashshur, and placed them in Ḥalaĥ and in Ḥavor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Maday.

For so it was, when the children of Yisra᾽el had sinned against the Lord their God, who had brought them up out of the land of Miżrayim, from under the hand of Par῾o king of Miżrayim, and had feared other gods,

and walked in the statutes of the nations, whom the Lord cast out from before the children of Yisra᾽el, and of the kings of Yisra᾽el, which they practised;

and the children of Yisra᾽el fabricated matters that were not right against the Lord their God, and they built them high places in all their cities, from the tower of the watchmen to the fortified city;

and they set them up pillars and asherim on every high hill, and under every green tree; and there they burnt incense in all the high places, as did the heathen whom the Lord carried away before them; and did wicked things to provoke the Lord to anger; for they served idols, concerning which the Lord had said to them, You shall not do this thing;

then the Lord testified against Yisra᾽el, and against Yehuda, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the Tora which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets.

Yet they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the Lord their God.

And they rejected his statutes, and his covenant that he made with their fathers, and his testimonies which he testified against them; and they followed worthless paths, and became themselves worthless, and went after the nations that were round about them, concerning whom the Lord had charged them, that they should not do like them.

And they left all the commandments of the Lord their God, and made them molten images, two calves, and made an ashera, and worshipped all the host of heaven, and served the Ba῾al.

And they caused their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire, and used divination and enchantments, and gave themselves up to do evil in the sight of the Lord, to provoke him to anger.

Therefore the Lord was very angry with Yisra᾽el, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Yehuda alone.

Also Yehuda did not keep the commandments of the Lord their God, but walked in the statutes of Yisra᾽el which they practised.

And the Lord rejected all the seed of Yisra᾽el, and afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until he had cast them out from his face.

For he rent Yisra᾽el from the house of David; and they made Yorov῾am the son of Nevat king: and Yorov῾am drove Yisra᾽el from following the Lord, and made them sin a great sin.

For the children of Yisra᾽el walked in all the sins of Yorov῾am which he did; they departed not from them;

until the Lord removed Yisra᾽el out of his sight, as he had said by all his servants the prophets. So was Yisra᾽el carried away out of their own land to Ashshur to this day.
Historian Dr. Henry Abramson identifies the main regions that the Ten Tribes were sent and genetic Y-chromosome tests seem to indicate that even today there are some people in those regions that share a similar Y-chromosome DNA to Jewish populations.

I asked Gemini AI to make a map of where the Ten Tribes were exiled to according to the Talmud in the Iraq- Iran area based on the DafYomi Adavance forum:

Ten tribe regions gemini based on an understanding of the Talmud dafyomi advancement forum

The Talmudic Background on the Status of the Lost Tribes

The Talmud in tractate Yevamot 16b and 17a discusses the status of the Ten Tribes.
For the sake of ease, I will use the translation and commentary, I found at https://www.sefaria.org.il/Yevamot.16b.10?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

Everything quoted from there I colored dark blue:

Rav Yehuda said that Rav Asi said: With regard to a gentile who betrothed a Jewish woman nowadays, we are concerned that the betrothal might be valid, despite the fact that a betrothal of a gentile is meaningless, lest he be from the ten tribes of Israel who intermingled with the gentiles. The Gemara raises an objection: But there is an important principle in halakha that any item separated, i.e., not fixed in its place, is presumed to have been separated from the majority. In this case, it can be assumed that any individual singled out from the gentiles belongs to the majority of gentiles and has no Jewish roots at all.

The Gemara responds: Rav Yehuda means that there is a concern only with regard to those who came from the permanent dwelling places of the ten tribes…

In the end 2 reasons are provided to explain, why we would not give “Israelite status” to someone who lives in the permanent dwelling places of the ten tribes if he or she performed a marriage ceremony with a Jew. The following is the 2nd explanation provided by the Gemara/Talmud.

There are those who say that Rav Yehuda actually related the following: When I said this halakha before Shmuel, he said to me: They did not move from there, (the place where they deliberated on this matter), until they rendered all of them, including those who intermingled with the ten tribes in different locations, full-fledged gentiles. Consequently, there is no concern that their betrothals might be of any effect, as it is stated: “They have dealt treacherously against the Lord, for they have begotten strange children” (Hosea 5:7).

Ruling of Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) on the subject

Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) in his responsa #62 holds that Jewish Law is in accordance with the 2nd view mentioned in the name of Shmuel. Namely, based on the verse of (Hosea/Hoshea 5:7) the ten tribes have lost their Israelite status.
Rama ends off by quoting a dispute between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Eliezer (See Sanhedrin 110b). Rabbi Akiva holds that the ten tribes will not return in the future. Rabbi Eliezer contends that just as the day darkens and then becomes light again, so the ten tribes, even their state of darkness in the future will brighten for them and for all of Israel, Amen.

On the assumption that most of the original Ten Tribers did not leave their places of exile to other regions, which at least was true at the time that the Talmud was written it turns out that most of the biological descendants of the Ten Tribes live in Islamic lands in our times.

Those Rabbis who wish to clear Islam of the sin of Idolatry are providing a tremendous stumbling block to the biological descendants of the Ten Tribes from returning to Hashem and hold back the fulfillment of a prophecy. Namely, what is stated in the last verse of Yishayahu chapter 27: And it shall come to pass on that day, that a great shofar shall be blown, and they shall come who were lost in the land of Ashshur, and the outcasts in the land of Miżrayim, and shall worship the Lord in the holy mountain at Yerushalayim.

Why Classify Islam as Idolatry?

Ritva: Coercion to Join the Yishmaelite Religion is Coercion for Idolatry

Let it be known that the faith of Yishmaelites, even though they are Monotheists, it is considered to be complete Foreign Worship (Idolatry) to be killed and not convert, for one that admits to their faith, denies the Torah of Moshe, that it is not true as it exists in our hands and all that is similar to this is Foreign Worship (Idolatry).

See the insights of Ritva to tractate Pesachim 25b.

Radbaz Was Presented with a Similar Dilemma and Issued A Similar Ruling

And I exerted myself and found that the Ritva of Blessed Memory wrote in accordance to my words, and I quote:

Let it be known that the faith of Yishmaelites, even though they are Monotheists, it is considered to be complete Foreign Worship (Idolatry) to be killed and not convert, for one that admits to their faith, denies the Torah of Moshe, that it is not true as it exists in our hands and all that is similar to this is Foreign Worship (Idolatry).

Radbaz, then quotes that there are two types of coercion to violate the Sabbath on the penalty of death. One type of coercion does not demand sacrificing one’s life for Sabbath. However, there is a type of coercion that will be interpreted that the Jew is admitting that the Torah is not true and that the Holy One Blessed be He did not command the observance of Shabbat. That type of coercion does require self-sacrifice.

(from Questions and Answers of Radbaz Vol. 4 Response 92 (1163)

Tosafot: Those That Designate the Wrong Day of the Week as Their Sabbath Day Are Not Testifying about the Truth of the Holy One Blessed be He and Those that Deny the Uniqueness of Israel Are Not Testifying about the Truth of the Holy One Blessed be He

Who is like your nation Israel, one people on the Earth – We say in the midrash, three things testify this one for that, Israel and Shabbat and the Holy One Blessed be He; Israel and the Holy One Blessed be He, testify regarding Shabbat, that it is the day of rest; and Israel and Shabbat testify regarding the Holy One Blessed be He that he is one; the Holy One Blessed be He and Shabbat testify regarding Israel that they are unique among the nations; and upon this do we rely to say, “you are one” in the Mincha prayer of Shabbat, even though it does not speak (directly) on the matter of the day, Shabbat in contrast to the Arvit and Shacharit prayers.

Tosafot Chagiga 3b

What Other Big Halachic Authorities Rule In Accordance to Ritva and Radbaz to Resist Forced Conversion to the Yishmaelite Religion with the Highest Level of Sacrifice

The Chafetz Chaim author of the Mishna Brura and other important halachic works, who often has final say on Halacha (at least for Ashkenazim) wrote a book called Nidchei Yisrael. In chapter 19 of Nidchei Yisrael, he sides with the opinion of Ritva and Radbaz brought earlier in this article.

Rabbi Yekutiel Halbershtam in his work Divrei Yatziv, Section Yoreh Deah, chapter 40 also rules in accordance to Radbaz (and Ritva). Among the points Rabbi Halberstam says in the name of Radbaz: one who is being forced to leave the entire Jewish religion and to be like one of the nations of the Earth and to deny all the Torah of Moshe, all the more so, he should be killed and not transgress; this and furthermore, that the person (being coerced into Islam) has to admit that there was a man by them whose stature was greater than the stature of Moshe Rabbeinu, peace be unto him and this is a destruction of the entire Jewish religion.

Rabbi Dov Lior who served as the Chief Rabbi of Hebron and Kiryat Arba in a letter stating his opposition to the average Jew participating in Muslim Iftar parties cited Ritva’s opinion quoted earlier, as part of his justification for his halachic ruling.

Didn’t Rabbi Yosef Karo Rule that Muslims are not guilty of Idolatry?

The following is an excerpt from the post:
Muslim Idolatry Trees – Do They Interfere With Davening Mincha on the Temple Mount?

Whoever Doesn’t Want to Hide His Eyes From Reality Will Discover That Some Muslims Offer Incense to a Demon.

The following is Pew research results of what the Muslims say about themselves.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2012/08/09/the-worlds-muslims-unity-and-diversity-4-other-beliefs-and-practices/

Overall, Muslims in Central Asia and across Southern and Eastern Europe (Russia and the Balkans) are least likely to say that jinn {demons} are real. In Central Asia, Turkey is the only country where a majority (63%) of Muslims believe in jinn {demons}. Elsewhere in Central Asia, about a fifth or fewer Muslims accept the existence of jinn. In Southern and Eastern Europe, fewer than four-in-ten in any country surveyed believe in these supernatural beings.

In general, Muslims who pray several times a day are more likely to believe in jinn {demons}. For example, in Russia, 62% of those who pray more than once a day say that jinn {demons} exist, compared with 24% of those who pray less often. A similar gap also appears in Lebanon (+25 percentage points), Malaysia (+24) and Afghanistan (+21).

The survey also asked if respondents had ever seen jinn {demons}. In 21 of the 23 countries where the question was asked, fewer than one-in-ten report having seen jinn {demons}, while the proportion is 12% in Bangladesh and 10% in Lebanon.

It is important to note that while belief in jinn {demons} is widespread, relatively few Muslims in the countries surveyed believe it is an acceptable part of Islamic tradition to make offerings to jinn {demons}. As discussed in Chapter 6, Bangladesh is the only country surveyed in which more than a fifth of Muslims (28%) say appeals to jinn are acceptable. In 18 of the countries, no more than one-in-ten say this is an acceptable practice.

According to reports on the internet offering incense of such things as frankincense and similar materials is part of the gift offerings they give to the demons.

And so I found on the internet a report of Muslims of offering incense to demons at the web site:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7waqNdtOF4&ab_channel=WildFilmsIndia

Incense to Demons

And so too another video complains of Muslim religious figures that are involved in mysticism that practice all types of magic with demons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PWawUcQYvQ&ab_channel=IslamicGuidance

I also found a written article on Muslims who offer a type of incense to demons and bring them other gifts and request from them, all types of requests.

https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/residence-of-jinns-where-muslims-and-hindus-come-together-to-pray-17283

Muslim Demon Worship Idolatry

One Who Offers Incense to a Demon – Insights of “the Ran” to Tractate Sanhedrin 61b

Introduction

A Jew should be willing to sacrifice his life rather than worship Idolatry. But what if he makes the wrong choice and does not sacrifice his life? The Talmud says the punishment for those that serve Idolatry out of love and fear is less severe than someone who does not have this excuse. Most commentaries understand that love and fear, means love of a person or fear of a person. Rambam however has a different understanding of love and fear which “the Ran” criticizes.

“And Rambam of blessed memory in chapter 3 (of the Mishna Torah) on the Laws which discuss Idolatry, defines, “out of love”, such as, he desires an image because its service is very attractive – or when one serves it out of his fear of it – i.e., he fears that it will harm him – as the [idol] worshipers imagine that it provides benefit and harm but did not accept it upon himself as a Deity, he is exempt”.

The Ran disagrees with the definition of serving “out of love and fear” offered by the Rambam and brings as proof the ruling of the Gemara, that someone who offers incense to a demon is considered to have served Idolatry.

Now the normal case of someone who offers incense to a demon is that he does not accept it as a Deity but nevertheless incense worship to demons is classified as Idolatry.

“The Ran” concludes that anyone who does an act of worship to any form {or image} in order to derive from it some benefit, behold he has in essence given it, Deity status and dominion in that matter and therefore the one that serves it is doing an act of Idolatry.

Rabbi Karo

The Ruling of the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, Chapter 179 Halacha 19

He who offers incense to a demon to bring it and to compel it to do his will, he is liable on account of serving Idolatry (see Tur and Beit Yosef commentary for background on this ruling).

For a defense of Rabbi Karo’s Shulchan Aruch ruling, see footnote IV in the Hebrew article

הסרת המסגדים בהר הבית על ידי ממשלת ישראל

Clarification: Normally, I would not rebuke scoffers. In this particular case, I thought doing so would benefit the Jewish people.

Other Muslims are guilty of:

• Tree Idolatry
• Deification of their (false) prophet
• Pantheism
• Moon Worship
• Intermediary Worship
• Belief in Multiple Deities (Alawite Muslims, who got a stamp of approval from the Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem)

In theory if you go according to the Rabbi Yosef Karo viewpoint and you encounter a Muslim, who is not guilty of Demon Worship, Tree Idolatry, Pantheism, Moon Worship, Intermediary Worship, and Multiple Deities and observes all the other Noahide commandments is he on solid ground with Hashem?

No! According to Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, Hashem will punish this person with premature death for believing in false prophet M.

Question: What Happens if the Muslim has some special merit based on other deeds, will this cancel his premature death decree?

Answer: I don’t know.

A Warning to those Rabbis that wish to overlook all this based on Talmud, Gittin 88a (translation by Sefaria)

A Repentance Message to the Tribe of Efrayim from the last Chapter of the book of Hoshea with Rashi’s commentary

Article by Shlomo Moshe Scheinman

Wednesday, 5 Tishrei 5787 [approx. September 16, 2026]

Shock in New York, Equanimity in Jerusalem…

Hitler with his friend the Mufti of Jerusalem

The Jewish world is shaken by difficult sights in the heart of New York—neo-Nazi activists have held an antisemitic demonstration in the city in recent days, wearing armbands bearing swastikas, chanting “Heil Hitler,” and shouting slogans against Jews. The event occurred just a few streets away from where the official memorial ceremony marking the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks was being held, and the protesters continued their activity without intervention from the authorities.

Behind the demonstration stands a neo-Nazi organization that defines itself as “White Socialist,” presenting as part of its goals the preservation of the white person’s status and the struggle against what it defines as Jewish influence. Alongside the Nazi symbols and calls praising Hitler, chants of “Free Palestine” and antisemitic slogans against what the protesters termed “Jewish power” and “Jewish manipulations” were also heard at the scene.

What do you say? Shocking, isn’t it? Brings gloomy thoughts? Illustrates how the ground is shaking beneath the feet of New York’s Jews, when the city with the largest Jewish population in the world is under attack from a Hamas-supporting mayor, and two ends of the political spectrum in the US join hands in a coalition that at first glance seems completely absurd? But in practice, one sees that there is much in common between neo-Nazis and radical Islam, and the main thing in common is the hatred of Israel. The love story between the German Führer and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during World War II—who was the only non-German allowed to enter Auschwitz and view the work of extermination—certainly serves as inspiration for the alliance of haters.

And it is already brought in the book Kol HaTor (Part 2, Chapter 2, Letter B)—”The special role of Mashiach ben Yosef is against Eisav (Esau), the Klipah (shell) of the Left, and the special role of Mashiach ben David is against Yishmael (Ishmael), the Klipah of the Right, and both together against Eisav and Yishmael, who are the impure Ox and Donkey. The joining of Eisav and Yishmael occurs through Armilus, the minister of the Erev Rav (Mixed Multitude), and it can destroy Israel and the entire world, Heaven forbid.”

Indeed, it is shocking to see the fulfillment of that coalition of Eisav and Yishmael in the streets of New York. However, before we express our disgust at the phenomenon, it is worth putting things into the proper perspective—not to minimize the danger posed to New York’s Jews, but to point a finger at the far more urgent danger.

In the US, neo-Nazi groups constitute a noisy and vocal minority that, while enjoying the First Amendment to the American Constitution regarding freedom of speech, still stands on the margins of society and receives fierce condemnation from all sides of the political spectrum. In the Land of Israel, on the other hand, stand their Muslim allies, who openly aspire to destroy Israel and enjoy broad international legitimacy—and even among their potential victims, the Jews in Israel, they receive understanding and forgiveness.

The terrible massacre in the Gaza envelope enjoyed massive support from a population that, even when their homes were destroyed and they were forced to evacuate en masse with tens of thousands of dead and wounded, did not prevent them from providing a backing that allowed the murderers to hold the Israeli hostages for two full years. The Arabs of Judea and Samaria also overwhelmingly supported the massacre; according to one survey, about 81% admitted to this openly, and among the rest, it is unclear how many opposed it for reasons of expediency and what negligible minority actually saw a problem with murdering Jews. Israeli Arabs—those holding blue ID cards and enjoying all rights—also vote in droves in Knesset elections for parties that openly call for the erasure of the Jewish state, aside from those who are unwilling to recognize Israel even for political purposes and support the Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement. Yoseph Haddad is a curiosity in the landscape of Israeli Arabs, drawing his support overwhelmingly from the Jewish public.

Are you still worried, dear readers, about those nonentities who salute with raised arms in the streets of New York and spread various strange conspiracy theories about Jewish power in Washington inspired by The Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Indeed, they should not be underestimated, especially if a severe economic crisis pushes many Americans to look for easy solutions and a charismatic leader might arise to direct the arrows of frustration toward the Jews. But I am much more worried about Achmad Tibi and Mansour Abbas, who with their smooth talking become legitimate interlocutors in Israeli political discourse, while in speeches in Arabic they reveal their true aspiration, which is no different from that of the Nazis in New York or anywhere else in the world.

The problem is that in the discourse of political correctness dictated by progressivism, antisemitism and hatred of Israel are forbidden only when they come from the political right. When they come from a place of the struggle of the oppressed against the oppressors, when they serve the “Palestinian” narrative of colonialist Zionism, of the Nakba, of Israel as an apartheid state—it is not only legitimate, but it wins prestigious awards at international festivals. When it is backed by political support from European countries like Britain, Norway, and others—it becomes the ultimate expression of enlightenment, progress, and all good things.

The time has come to strip the mask from the Yishmael-Nazi coalition and relate to the neo-Nazis in our midst exactly as we relate to those marching in the streets of New York. There is no difference between the swastika and the flags of the PLO and Hamas, and Israel’s readiness to negotiate with those murderers instead of wiping them off the face of the earth is nothing less than surrender to the progressive narrative that turns the aggressor into a victim and the victim into an aggressor, light into darkness and darkness into light, good into evil and evil into good, and generally intentionally blurs the entire world of values in order to remove all restraint and deny the Creator of the world.

May the words of Kol HaTor be a lamp to our feet, and may we merit to fulfill the destiny of Mashiach ben Yosef, to break the coalition of Israel’s haters, to eradicate the heirs of Hitler and Haj Amin al-Husseini, and then the scripture will be fulfilled in us—”And saviors shall ascend Mount Zion to judge the mount of Eisav, and to Hashem will be the kingdom!”

This article is a translation of the words of Rabbi Yehuda Epstein, Chairman of Agudat Kedushat Tzion (Zion)

The Crime of Britain

I asked Gemini AI: Please describe actions taken by the British government since the start of the October 7th War and onward that should be interpreted as hostile to Israeli control of territories conquered in the Six Day War?

Since the outbreak of the Gaza war triggered by the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks, successive British governments (both Conservative and Labour) have enacted a series of diplomatic, legal, and economic measures that directly challenge Israeli sovereignty and administrative control over territories captured during the 1967 Six-Day War (the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights).

While maintaining support for Israel’s core defense inside its 1949 Armistice lines (1967 borders), London has taken increasingly hostile measures against Israeli activities in these disputed territories:

1. Bans on Trade and Imports from Settlements

• Import Ban on Settlement Goods: The UK introduced legislation banning the import of all goods manufactured or grown in Israeli settlements in the West Bank. This effectively rejects Israeli commercial jurisdiction in those areas.

• Prohibition of Settlement Advertising: New regulations prohibit the advertising or promotion of land, residential real estate, or commercial properties located in West Bank settlements within the UK.

• Corporate Restrictions: The UK updated its Overseas Business Risk guidance to explicitly urge British companies against financial transactions, property purchases, tourism services, or investments that benefit Israeli presence beyond the 1967 lines.

2. Legal Reclassification of the Occupation

• Formal “Unlawful” Occupation Designation: Moving past traditional statements that settlements are merely “illegal under international law”, the British Foreign Office formally concluded that Israel’s ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories is entirely “unlawful” in its entirety. This stance relies heavily on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) 2024 Advisory Opinion.

• ICJ & ICC Legal Stances: The UK dropped its initial procedural challenges to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) application for arrest warrants against Israeli leadership over actions in Gaza, signaling a shift toward international judicial scrutiny over Israeli military presence in the territories.

3. Target Sanctions on Israeli Entities and Citizens

• Sanctions on Outposts and Developers: The UK implemented sanctions targeting organizations and construction entities that facilitate, build, or finance infrastructure in the West Bank (including major housing developments such as E1).

• Sanctions on Individuals & Activists: The Foreign Office placed financial and travel sanctions on dozens of Israeli citizens, extremist activist groups, and hill-top youth figures accused of destabilizing or forcibly displacing Palestinian communities in Judea and Samaria.

4. Partial Arms Export Suspensions

• Restrictions Tied to Operations: In September 2024, the UK suspended approximately 30 military export licenses to Israel. The decision was predicated on official legal assessments determining a clear risk that exported military hardware could be utilized in violations of International Humanitarian Law in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank.

5. Multi-National Declarations Against Territorial Control

• Rejection of E1 and Land Claims: The British Foreign Office, alongside European allies (such as France and Canada), issued formal declarations condemning Israeli state projects designed to bridge East Jerusalem to West Bank communities like Ma’ale Adumim.

• Asserting Palestinian Sovereignty: The UK consistently reaffirms that East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the West Bank constitute a single territorial unit that belongs under future Palestinian sovereignty, rejecting any unilateral Israeli territorial annexations, land declarations, or administrative takeovers.

When a Mega-Disaster Will Hit Britain, the Biblical prophet Yoel, tells us not to ascribe the tragedy to a thousand other reasons. Instead ascribe it to their support for the division and theft of Hashem’s holy land!

The Biblical book of Yoel (Joel) Chapter 4 as translated by https://www.sefaria.org.il/Joel.4.2?lang=bi states:
For lo! in those days And in that time, When I restore the fortunes Of Judah and Jerusalem,
I will gather all the nations And bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will contend with them Over My very own people, Israel, Which they scattered among the nations. For they divided My land among themselves.

Dividing Biblical Israel is a crime for which the nations will be punished.

See also Why G-d let Bin-Laden Succeed! A Jewish Perspective on the Destruction of the World Trade Center in New York for greater details of why America’s support for the Oslo Terror Accords brought and brings disaster to America.

Question: Maybe, only when the Gentiles reach the Valley of Yehoshafat (Jehoshafat) will they be punished for the crime of dividing Hashem’s Holy Land?

Answer: It is my understanding that when the Gentiles reach that valley, it will be clear that the punishment they will be getting is on account of the words of the prophet Yoel. But even before that event, Bible believers should be aware that scattering Israel among the nations and dividing up the land of Israel among the nations strongly angers Hashem.

Rashi, whose commentary, unlike other commentaries is obligatory for Jews who fear heaven (see Mishna Brura on 285:2) states the following:

‘You have seen what I have done to Egypt’ – For many transgressions were they liable to receive a punishment from me, before they harmed you, yet I punished them only on your account.

Similarly, if one looks at the Biblical book of Amos, chapter 1, (together with the traditional commentaries) one will see, that although the idolatrous neighbors of the nation of Israel, namely, Dammeseq, Azza, Tzor(Tyre), Edom, and Ammon, were guilty of many sins, nevertheless, the harm that they did to Israel is what sealed their fate.

Article by: Shlomo Moshe Scheinman

Rambam

He prohibited us from marrying Deniers. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, “And you shall not marry them” (Deuteronomy 7:3). And he explained what marriage is – “do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons.”

Negative Commandment #52 of Rambam’s (Sefer Hamitzvot)

Wikipedia states about Haddad:

Since May  2021,  he has been engaged to Emily Schrader ,  an  Israeli-American journalist and social media  activist  , and a columnist for the Jerusalem Post .

Elsewhere on the Internet it says that Emily Schrader is Jewish.

Update: A friend of mine suggested Schrader might not be Jewish according to strict halachic standards. I have not researched her parents background to say yes or no. As long as Schrader is not clearly identified as as not jewish, her relationship with Haddad still promotes intermarriage. 

Rabbi Karo

Maggid Meisharim of Rabbi Yosef Karo on appointing a foreign king over the nation of Israel in the commentary on Parshat Shoftim

And after this, it says: “When you come into the land… and say, ‘I will set a king over me [like all the nations that are around me]’” (Deuteronomy 17:14)—meaning, should it enter your mind to say “I will set a king over me like all the nations around me,” it shall not be so. For while you may indeed appoint a king over yourself, it must not be in the manner of the idolaters (accum). Idolaters appoint a king based on their own choice, whereas you [shall appoint] “him whom Hashem your L-rd chooses.” (Deuteronomy 17:15).

Furthermore, idolaters appoint a king even from another nation—as we find with the eight kings who reigned in the land of Edom, and Balak king of Moab—whereas you [must appoint one] specifically “from among your brothers,” and not from another people.

Furthermore, the kings of idolaters multiply wives, horses, silver, and gold, but your king shall not be so; rather, “he shall not multiply for himself…” (Deuteronomy 17:16). And do not say that if this is so, the King of Israel is inferior, for it is not so. Rather, the reason is “that his heart be not lifted up [above his brethren]… so that he may prolong his days over his kingdom.” (Deuteronomy 17:20).

The Talmud Kiddushin 76b as translated by Soncino broadens the prohibition mentioned above:

R. Adda b. Ahabah’s host was a proselyte, and he and R. Bibi were at variance, each claiming, I
must carry on the administration of the town. So they went before R. Joseph. Said he to them, We
learn it: One from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: 21 all appointments 22 which thou
makest must be only from the midst of thy brethren. Said R. Adda b. Ahabah to him: Even if his
mother is a Jewess? — If his mother is a Jewess, he replied, we apply to 23 him, ‘from the midst of
thy brethren’. Therefore let R. Bibi, who is a great man, give his attention to Heavenly matters, 24 and
do you, Sir, pay attention to affairs of the town. 25 Said Abaye: Therefore, when one provides a
scholar with residence in his boarding house, let him provide it for one like R. Adda b. Ahabah, who
is able 26 to argue 27 in his favour.
R. Zera took trouble over them [sc. proselytes]; Rabbah b. Abbuhah took trouble over them. In the
west [Palestine] not even an Inspector of Measures 28 was appointed of them. In Nehardea, not even
an irrigation superintendent was appointed of them.

Footnotes

(21) Deut. XVII, 55.
(22) Lit., ‘settings.’
(23) Lit., ‘read of.’
(24) Rashi: the charity collections and distribution, synagogue administration.
(25) E.g., taxation etc.
(26) Lit., ‘knows’.
(27) Lit., ‘turn (things) about.’
(28) Kori fr. kor, a measure.

Note: The leniencies that Rabbi Zera and Rabbah b. Abbuhah took for converts are not necessarily applicable for non-Jews. With Haddad there is an additional issue here, that he does not meet the halachic standards of a Ger Toshav. See Chazon Ish on Shviit #24. In addition, see Rambam, negative commandment 362 in Sefer Hamitzvot.

One should also note that even if you argue against the definition of Ger Toshav offered by the Chazon Ish and try to put Haddad into the Ger Toshav category, the Torah informs us in Deut. 28:43 that one of the curses for not following Hashem is that the Ger is above the Israelites. To quote Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan in the Living Torah (probably based on Onkelos): The alien among you will rise higher and higher over you, while you will descend lower and lower.

Regarding the issue of Edom and Moab appointing foreigners as kings, see Rashi’s commentary to Gen. 36:33 and Numbers 22:4. Even without Rashi, Genesis 36:34 is explicit that Chusham from the land of Temanites served as one of the Kings of Edom.

Excerpt from the post:

The Messiah Coming In a Generation That is Completely Liable [For Extinction] – The Vilna Gaon Explains on What Point Are They Liable

Undue Flattery to Agripas and Those Similar to Him

    It is stated in tractate Sotah at the end of chapter 7 that at the time when King Agripas was reading the verse, “You may not appoint a foreigner”, etc. [Deuteronomy 17:15] tears dripped from his eyes because he was not from the seed of Israel. They said to him, “you are our brother”. Now at the same time Israel became liable to extinction because they unduly flattered Agripas. For even though they didn’t have the ability to protest, nevertheless, they should have been silent and not  strengthen him in this way [by saying you are legitimate, you are our brother]. And this is the punishment of one who gives undue flattery in the matter of a transgression because he is afraid of the other person and is not concerned about the fear of the Holy One Blessed be He [until here is the translated quote of the Mishna Brura chapter 156].

The Vilna Gaon Predicted That The Generation In Which The Son Of David Arrives In Will Be Entirely Liable Based On A Sin Similar To The “Agripas Sin”

Article by Shlomo Moshe Scheinman