Home (Netzarim Logo)

Seventh-month 10: Special Shab•ât


Contrary to the overly enthusiastic, but not religiously authoritative, EJ ("Day of Atonement," 5.1376), any Orthodox rabbi will confirm for you that isn't "the most important day in the liturgical year." The Sages and every Orthodox rabbi will tell you the same thing (though you may have to ask some for clarification): the most important day in the liturgical year is Shab•ât. I would argue that is the third "most important day in the liturgical year." While the Sages and Orthodox rabbis argue that Yom ha-Ki•pur•im is the second most important day (after Shab•ât), Yom ha-Ki•pur•im is completely empty unless it is preceded by tᵊshuv•âh – making Yom Tᵊru•âhTᵊshuv•âh Day – more critical and important than Yom ha-Ki•pur•im. Failure to emphasize the greater importance of tᵊshuv•âh, by focusing on Rosh ha-Shân•âh instead, is the greatest failing of Modern Judaism and Orthodox rabbis.

Demonic Fears

In early times, was regarded as demonic. Therefore, its removal wasn't enough. Its demonic-force had to be exorcised. This was accomplished in one of three ways, apparently patterned on the basic formula for (or vice-versa) and officiated by a Tza•diq, after immersion in a miq•wëh, and in the company of a min•yân:

  1. curse or adjuration (supplemented by reading Tᵊhil•im 91 three times),

  2. destruction by fire: subjecting the nostrils of the suspected possessed person to smoke of fire burning herbs or sulfur (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 2, 5, 8, 45-48; Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism {viewed 2010.07.15, Divrei Yoseiph, pp. 319-24, as translated in Spirit Possession in Judaism} and My Jewish Learning {2010.07.15} websites)

  3. (supplemented, variously, by, immersion in a miq•wëh and trumpeting on the ).

The last was usually employed. Rather than the evil entity being driven away by curse or fire, it was regarded as an involuntary (in later times regarded as a lost ) to be pitied and ordered by to return to its place of origin (believed to be Gei-Hi•nom; cf. Exorcism in Judaism, New World Encyclopedia), or to some place where either its malefic powers could work in the interests of the sender (e.g., enemy territory), or where it could do no harm at all (e.g., mountains, mid•bâr). Thus the scapegoat was sent to the mid•bâr which was considered uninhabited except by the satyr-demon Az•â•zeil (Day of Atonement (Jewish Virtual Library), EJ, 1386).


Mᵊlâkh•âh is prohibited on just as it is on other special Shabât•ot.

Tor•âh requires -wa-Yi•qᵊr•â 16.29-31; 23.27-32; bᵊ-Mi•dᵊbar 29.7). This pi•eil form of is popularly rendered "afflicted." However, this is probably more accurately a variation of the verb's main theme: "to cause to answer for" [something].

The connotation of "affliction" (and torture) derives, by extension, from the theme of causing (the pi•eil and pu•al constructs) someone to answer for something. Thus, the connotation of afflicting or torturing one's on would seem to be an exaggeration of the Biblical instruction to make one's answer for his or her on .

The ultimate purpose is the affirmation of the earnestness of one's reply or response—tᵊshuv•âh for Jews—to the call to non-selective Tor•âh-observance which, all of the Kha•khâm•im concurred, is prerequisite to receiving . Tor•âh confirms this explicitly in wa-Yi•qᵊr•â 16.30: "For on this day shall be made for you [which doesn't imply a particular person qualifying to receive it] to make you , from all of your you shall be before --.

can, at most, remove , providing only a current state of which lasts only until the individual commits another , causing reversion to a state of again. Consequently, "staying clean" has a very real parallel to one who has taken drugs. makes them clean. But the problem is one of "staying clean," which means doing one's utmost to keep Tor•âh non-selectively; i.e., not going back to the old ways of . ("Staying clean" doesn't mean being "perfect," as Christians are wont to assert. Rather, Tor•âh requires that one does his or her utmost to (learn, as needed) and implement Tor•âh, non-selectively, in daily practice.)

To encourage reason (and discourage fanatics), the halakhic principle of requires that medical considerations that jeopardize health must override not only afflicting oneself on , but even the laws of Shab•ât! Also, "only a few years before they reach the age at which [Jews] are obliged to fulfill the [mitz•wot] (13 years for a boy and 12 years for a girl) should one begin to accustom them gradually to keep these [mitz•wot] (EJ, 1378).

It was on that, in the year, the was trumpeted to indicate the liberating of slaves and the restoration of the fields to their indigenous owners (wa-Yi•qᵊr•â 25.9-10).

It is related that none of Israel's Khaj•im compared with the 15th of Fifthmonth and , on which days the daughters of Yᵊrushâ•layim would go forth, dressed in white, and dance in the vineyards — "And what did they say? — 'Young man! Lift your eyes and look what you choose for yourself'" (Masëkët Ta·anit 4.8; EJ 1377).

The penalty of kâ•reit applies only to eating, drinking and doing mᵊlâkh•âh (Masëkët Yomâ 74a; Masëkët Mᵊgilâh 1.5). Children (subject to the gradual accustoming mentioned) are exempted from all modes of affliction, except the wearing of leather.

is the only day in which the A•mid•âh is recited five times.

The custom of trumpeting the on was adopted "during the geonic era"—era of the Iraqi (Babylonian) Academy heads, 7th-11th centuries C.E. (EJ 1381).

According to the sages there are five ways in which the duty of afflicting one's applies (Masëkët Yomâ 8.1; Yad, Shᵊvit•at A•sor 1.4; 3.9), by 24 hr., eve-to evening, prohibitions against:

  1. (from eating and drinking),

  2. Washing oneself for pleasure,

  3. Anointing the body (colognes, perfumes, deodorants, etc.),

  4. Wearing of leather (belts, shoes, etc.) and

  5. Sex.

Except for the prohibition against wearing leather, children are exempt until a few years before the age of responsibility (boys = 13, girls = 12). During these years (at least by 9), beginning with a few hours of tzom, increased each subsequent year, they gradually begin to become accustomed to the requirements of the day. After the blessing of lighting the ër•ëv candles, the woman of the house adds the shë-hë•khë•yânu (that preserves-us-alive [to reach this occasion]) bᵊrâkh•âh.

In some years, Yom ha-Ki•pur•im falls on Shab•ât. This occasions no changes in the Ha•lâkh•âh or customs of Yom ha-Ki•pur•im. The essential Shab•ât liturgy is included in the for Yom ha-Ki•pur•im.

Two Goats

The special offering of two goats was brought on and, apart from these, a ceremony peculiar to the day—the —was solemnized in the Beit ha-Miq•dâsh (wa-Yi•qᵊr•â 16.1-34). Only in the liturgy, once a year on this day, was the Tetragrammaton uttered, and then only by the Ko•hein Gâ•dol, in the Qodësh Qâdâsh•im and in this liturgy.

Of the two goats, one was slain and the other led away into the mid•bâr alive, paralleling the Mâ•shiakh Bën-Yo•seiph and Mâ•shiakh Bën-Dâ•wid, respectively. The dâm of the first, according to the Kha•khâm•im, made the Beit ha-Miq•dâsh and Kohan•im , while the living goat provided for the of Yi•sᵊ•râ•eil (and, always included and counted in Yi•sᵊ•râ•eil, geir•im), who did their utmost to keep Tor•âh non-selectively.

EJ submits that the two goats represent "two categories of offering — the slain, whose dâm purges the [Mish•kân], and the live, which provides for the of Yi•sᵊ•râ•eil—are two inseparable parts of a unified ceremonial" ("Day of Atonement," EJ, 5.1385). This conclusion is contradicted by the requirement that, on , the Ko•hein Gâ•dol sacrifice a bull—not for providing for a place but ''as his personal []-offering" ("Avodah," EJ, 3.976-7).

As EJ has noted (5.1382), "Atonement is made with a male goat as a reminder of the male goat which [Yo•seiph's] brothers slaughtered and in whose dâm they dipped his shirt." We may add that the other goat being sent away is reminiscent of Yo•seiph being sent off to Mitz•rayim where he prepared a place of respite for Yi•sᵊ•râ•eil for their exile in Mitz•rayim, paralleling the Mâ•shiakh Bën-Yo•seiph preparing a place of respite for Yi•sᵊ•râ•eil's in this world, and where Yo•seiph's family eventually joined him.

Similarly, the goat that was slain parallels the role of the Mâ•shiakh Bën-Yo•seiph, according to Yᵊsha•yahu ha-Nâ•vi 53 as understood by the Kha•khâm•im of the Tal•mud, the Qum•rân Tzᵊdoq•im and the Nᵊtzâr•im, a Tza•diq to die, vicariously providing for the of his Am, Yi•sᵊ•râ•eil.

is afforded neither to an without tᵊshuv•âh, nor to those who practice Displacement Theology or other religions of the goy•im (i.e., all non-Jews other than geir•im).

The goat which was sent to Az•â•zeil in the mid•bâr also parallels the role of the Mâ•shiakh in being sent into what physicists might describe as a non-dimensional state (which Jews call ha-O•lâm ha-•Ba and Christians call "heaven"). There, like Yo•seiph, he prepares a non-dimensional state ("place" contradicts non-dimensional) for us to join him in the domain where, again like Yo•seiph, he exercises great authority under the Mëlëkh.

Rainbow Rule


Traditions, some of which are specific to the Teimân•im:

The custom of taking a miq•wëh on the afternoon preceding , introduced during the Gᵊon•im period (Babylonian Academy heads, 7th-11th centuries C.E.), which Rav Yo•seiphpakh also describes as the custom among the Tei•mân•im.

Customs in Tei•mânRav Yo•seiphpakh

Yᵊhud•im Tei•mân•im "are accustomed to immerse in a kâ•sheir mi•qᵊwëh on the night [preceding] ërëv Yom ha-Ki•pur•im or on ërëv Yom ha-Ki•pur•im itself, in the early hours of the morning. But they are not accustomed [to do] so in the rest of the ërëv Shab•ât•ot or Khaj•im"

), , (: -, 5721, ‮ (33-35

"Finishing eating and drinking, they rest a bit, dressing in silk clothes or lovely white clothes and flocking to the beit ha-kᵊnësët. Some of them are shod with cloth shoes but most of them go barefoot like the " ." There is no person, large or small, who shods himself in leather shoes. It should be noted that the hour of " " has no special meaning [above the gravity of the other hours of Yom ha-Ki•pur•im] for Yᵊhud•im Tei•mân and it is said like "counting pennies," by playing it simple, while the peak elevation and ascension is when saying " , poetry attributed to Rabbeinu Hai Gaon" … (loc. cit.).

On Yom ha-Ki•pur•im, "Before Mi•nᵊkh•âh, they leave their homes for a limited time to change [from the] white clothes of Yom ha-Ki•pur•im to dress in regular Shab•ât clothes. Then, upon their return, they bring in their hands sprigs of fragrance (basil). Until the end of the day everyone holds in his hand a sprig of basil for his nëphësh to enjoy its good blossom and in order to complete a hundred bᵊrâkh•ot. So everyone brings a in his pocket to end the fast with it… They pray Mi•nᵊkh•âh and, after that, they open tᵊphil•at by reciting poetry: "May no awful plot [i.e., pogrom] be fabricated for us; absolution in the hour of ", in a tone similar to the tone of songs of Si•mᵊkh•at-Tor•âh. After that, pray , say a few poems, in the tone of until it's dark, then pray Ma•a•riv according to custom, blast " on the sho•phâr and say seven times: "-- ," etc. according to custom. After that, they make Ha•vᵊdâl•âh in the beit ha-kᵊnësët and immediately after Ha•vᵊdâl•âh everyone brings out his from his pocket, recites the bᵊrâkh•âh and eats; thereby ceasing his fast. [Members of] the congregation each bless the other with the bᵊrâkh•âh: "! " and the response is: "! "

Finally, "They depart to their homes… They begin one meal involving the matters of the Four Species, and in the preparations for making the Suk•âh and its ornaments, to realize: "they shall go from valor to valor."" (ibid.)


The authentic Teimân•i greeting from antiquity, beginning at the conclusion of Yom Tᵊru•âh until the end of Yom ha-Ki•pur•im is (slightly different from the Sᵊphâ•râd•i greeting) the most pensive greeting in the Jewish world:

(i.e., into the yu•khas•in in the heavens).

Rainbow Rule


Seventh-month 9

This opening tᵊphil•âh of ërëv is a medieval addition. "The first reference to as a collective declaration is found in the responsa of the Babylonian Gᵊon•im (beginning in the eighth century [C.E.]). It is stated that was familiar to them from 'other lands'; but the Gᵊon•im (especially of Sura) sharply condemned it for many generations" (EJ, 10.1166-7). was not accepted until about 1000 C.E. In direct contradiction to Tor•âh shë-bikh•tâv, Dᵊvâr•im 23.22-24, et al.), "worshipers proclaim that all personal vows, oaths, etc., that they made unwittingly, rashly, or unknowingly (and that, consequently, cannot be fulfilled) during the year should be considered null and void" (ibid.). The Teimân•im, by contrast, pray that they not make such vows in the coming year.

Seventh-month 10

" '-" " '-" " "" "; " '-‫'

(Last two pᵊsuq•im are exclusive to Teimân•im)

Rainbow Rule

Rainbow Rule

(near the end of the Mu•sâph service)

In the Beit ha-kᵊnësët ha-Teimân•i the service is included near the end of Mu•sâph. Unlike an Ash•kᵊnazi Beit ha-kᵊnësët, there is no break between Mu•sâph and the liturgies.

‭ ‬ 16 – ‭ ‬ was the only service in the year when the Ko•hein Gâ•dol would entered the Qodësh Qâdâsh•im. Only in the service, once a year, the Ko•hein Gâ•dol pronounced the holy Tetragrammaton. In Ash•kᵊnazim synagogues (but not in the Teimân•i tradition), everyone in the congregation prostrates themselves at the point where the Ko•hein Gâ•dol pronounced the Tetragrammaton (cf. "Avodah," EJ, 3.976-8).

Rainbow Rule

Seventh-month 10
" '-‫' -, ' "-‫'

Rainbow Rule

5753 (1993.09 Tor•âh)

‭ ‬ 16.29 — And you m.pl. have a khuq•at o•lam: on the Tenth of Seventhmonth: " your pl. and don't do any mᵊlâkh•âh, both in your midst."

Rainbow Rule


(Âmar Ribi Yᵊhoshua)


Matityâhu bᵊ-Ivrit; Hebrew Matityâhu
The Nᵊtzârim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityâhu (NHM)

(Redacted, Christianized & corrupted to 4th-century "Matthew")

5770 (2010.09)

Nᵊviy•im Translation Mid•râsh Ribi Yᵊho•shua (NHM) NHM
Ha•phᵊtâr•âh: Yon•âh 3.5

The men of Ninᵊweih believed in Ël•oh•im; and they called a tzom and dressed in sacks, from their great to their small

Ha•phᵊtâr•âh: Yon•âh 3.6

The dâ•vâr reached the mëlëkh of Ninᵊweih, and he stood up from his seat, and (un)crossed his robe from himself; and he covered himself in a sack, and sat on ashes (see also The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) note 11.21.3)

Ha•phᵊtâr•âh: Yon•âh 3.7-8

Then [the town crier] proclaimed and said in Ninᵊweih, of the mëlëkh, and his greats saying; the â•dâm and beast, the cattle and the tzon, - anything, they shall neither graze nor drink water.

Ha•phᵊtâr•âh: Yon•âh 3.9

He who knows , and may hâ-Ël•oh•im ; and , from His burning fury and we will not be lost.

Ha•phᵊtâr•âh: Yon•âh 3.10

And Ël•oh•im saw their Ma•as•im, that from their ways of ; and Ël•oh•im concerning the , that He had spoken to do to them, and did not do it.

Ha•phᵊtâr•âh: Yon•âh 4.1

to Yon•âh—a great ; and he was incensed

Yᵊsha•yâhu 14.[5-6,9,] 11,13,15

The … ‭ ‬ 9 , from below, is excited to call your coming… 11 Brought down to were your pride… 13 You had said in your heart, "I will ascend to the heavens; higher than the stars of Eil I shall raise my throne… 15 But you have been lowered into , to the bottom of the pit.

Yᵊsha•yâhu 23 (chapter)

Prophecy of Tzor

Yᵊsha•yâhu 34.8

Because it is of --; a year of payments for the conflict of Tzi•yon. (See also The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) note 11.22.1.)

Dâniy•eil 9.3-19
Yᵊkhëz•qeil 31.14-17

(Using trees to symbolize "lofty" leaders of Syria) … So that none of any of the well-watered trees would become haughty about their stature, and they would not give their crown among the thick branches… because they are all given to death to the Ërëtz beneath, among, bᵊn•ei-â•dâm who descend into the pit… (See also The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) note 11.23.2.)

Then he11.20.1 began to reproach11.20.2 the âr•im2.23.0 for whom11.20.3 most of his forces11.20.4 had become, because they didn't make tᵊshuv•âh.3.2.1 21 "Oy for you of Ko•râz•in in the Gâ•lil. Oy for you of Beit-Tza•yâd•âh11.21.0 on the northeast shore of Yâm Ki•nërët. Because if the forces11.20.3 that have been exercised in you had been exercised in Tzor11.21.1 and Tzi•don,15.22.1 Lᵊvân•on they would have made tᵊshuv•âh3.2.1 by this time in sackcloth and ashes.11.21.3 22 I tell you only11.22.0 that it will be easier for Tzor11.21.1 and Tzi•don15.22.1 in the day of adjudication-of-Halâkh•âh11.22.1 than for you.


Then some of the So•phᵊr•im5.20.1 and of the [probably 'Herodian'22.16.1] Rabbinic-Pᵊrush•im sect advocating that Halâkh•âh7.1.1 must be exclusively oral3.7.1 replied to him12.38.1 saying, "Ribi,23.7.1 we wish to see a sign from you." 12.38.2 39 Replying, he said to them, "It is an evil5.39.1 generation of an adulteress12.39.1 that seeks after a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Yon•âh12.39.2 ha-Nâ•vi:11.9.1 40 Like Yon•âh (2:1) was in the bowels of the 'Fish' 12.40.1 3 days and 3 nights,12.40.2 so Ribi Yᵊho•shua will be in hâ-•ârëtz2.20.0 3 days and 3 nights. 41 Men of Ninᵊweih12.40.2 shall take the stand for the adjudication-of-Halâkh•âh7.1.1 with this generation and they will incriminate it—because they made tᵊshuv•âh3.2.1 at the call12.41.1 of Yon•âh,12.41.2 and I am greater than Yon•âh.12.41.3

42 The queen of the Ethiopians12.42.1 shall rise to take the stand for the adjudication-of-Halâkh•âh7.1.1 with this generation, and will incriminate it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the logic13.54.2 of Shᵊlom•oh ha-•Mëlëkh12.42.2 and look, something greater than Shᵊlom•oh is here.12.42.3

Ha•phᵊtâr•âh Mi•nᵊkh•âh Yon•âh 1.4ff

The shipwreck and story of Yon•âh in Ninᵊweih

Yo•eil 4.19

Mitz•rayim shall be , and Εd•om for a mid•bâr ; from bullying Bᵊn•ei-Yᵊhud•âh wherein they spilled dâm in their ârëtz.

Zᵊkhar•yâh 1.3-6

Thus says -- Tzᵊvâ•ot, to Me, declares -- Tzᵊvâ•ot; to you," said -- Tzᵊvâ•ot

Oy23.13.1 for you, So•phᵊr•im5.20.0 and those of the [probably 'Herodian'22.16.1] Rabbinic-Pᵊrush•im sect of Judaism23.25.1 who advocate that Halâkh•âh7.1.1 must be exclusively oral3.7.1 – hypocrites…23.13.2 because you build23.29.1 the tombs27.61.1 of the Nᵊviy•im11.9.1 and put the sepulchers27.60.0 of the Tzadiq•im1.19.1 in order and say, 'If we had been in the days of our fathers we wouldn't have shared in the dâm of the Nᵊviy•im.' 23.30.1

In the following you witness23.31.0 against yourselves that you are the sons23.31.1 of those who murdered the nᵊviy•im:23.30.1 You measure up fully5.17.3 to your fathers. Serpents, offspring of vipers… how shall you escape the adjudication-of-Halâkh•âh7.1.1 of Gei-Hi•nom10.28.2 if you don't return in tᵊshuv•âh? 23.33.1

Look, I send forth nᵊviy•im23.34.1 to you, and intellectuals,11.19.4 and So•phᵊr•im.5.20.0 You23.34.2 will kill some of them, even hang10.38.1 some of them and flog some of them in your Bât•ei- ha-kᵊnësët9.35.0 and pursue them from ir2.23.0 to ir, so that all of the dâm of the Tzadiq•im1.19.1 spilled out on hâ-•ârëtz23.35.1 should come upon you, from the dâm of Hëvël23.35.2 the Tza•diq1.19.1 to the dâm of Zᵊkhar•yâh23.35.3 whom you murdered between the Beit ha-Miq•dâsh and the Miz•beiakh.23.35.5 •mein!

I tell you, all these things shall come upon this generation. Yᵊrushâ•layimYᵊrushâ•layim, who kills the Nᵊviy•im23.30.1 and stones those who have been sent forth to her. How often I wished to gather24.31.2 your children like a hen gathers her chicks under her wings—but you would not.23.37.1

Look, your Bayit23.38.1 is left23.38.2 23.38.3 to you, for I tell you—you shall in no case see me anymore until you say (Tᵊhil•im 118:26):


Ha•phᵊtâr•âh Mi•nᵊkh•âh Yon•âh 2.1

-- a big "Fish"; to swallow-up Yon•âh; and Yon•âh was in the innards of the "Fish," 3 days and 3 nights

Having come near, those of the [probably 'Herodian'22.16.1] Rabbinic-Pᵊrush•im sect of Judaism23.25.1 who advocate that Halâkh•âh7.1.1 must be exclusively oral,3.7.1 and of the aristocratic, Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple," 3.7.2 testing him, grilled16.1.1 him to teach them some sign16.0.1 from the heavens. Replying, he said to them,16.2.1 An evil5.39.1 and adulterous5.23.2 seed seeks6.32.2 a sign.16.0.1 No sign16.0.1 shall be given to them except the sign16.0.1 of Yon•âh ha-Nâ•vi." 16.4.1 Then, leaving them, he went away.

Yon•âh 4.6

Qiqayon, Castor (oil) tree (ricinus) ' apportioned a , and it rose up over [where] Yon•âh [was], to be a shade over his head, to rescue him from his bad [situation]. Yon•âh rejoiced about the [exploding-star shaped leaves of the] with great rejoicing.

Having heard the mëlëkh,14.9.1 they went. Then look… the celestial-phenomenon2.2.1 which they had seen in the east2.1.4 brought them on ahead2.9.1 until they came to Beit Lëkhëm. 10 When they had arrived in Beit Lëkhëm, the celestial-phenomenon stood in conjunction2.9.2 in front of the place where the little boy was. Seeing the celestial-phenomenon,2.2.1 they rejoiced5.12.1 with exuberant rejoicing.

Yon•âh 4.9

Then Ël•oh•im said to Yon•âh, Is your being incensed over the better" [than your being incensed over not punishing the Ninevans, earlier in the chapter]? And he said, "It's better I [would remain] incensed [over the rather than over not punishing the Ninevans] to the death."

Note that the parallel with NHM 26.38 derives from both LXX and even the Artscroll English, which both translate "grieved" (for , in the latter case).

The parallel to The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) 26.38 is due to the LXX translation of the verb to λελυπησαι and λελυπημαι, both from the root λυπεω

Then he said to them (Tᵊhil•im 42.6, 12; 43.5): " 'How downcast you are my nëphësh…'2.20.1 Lean on me in this." 26.38.1

"Downcast" is translated for the Hebrew , from the root (cf. Tᵊhil•im), in preference over the Greek περιλυπος, from the root λυπεω (paralleling LXX). The parallel is artificial and Hellenist.

Yᵊsha•yâhu 57.15

For thus said the High and Borne-aloft, until [forever] and Qâ•dosh is His Name: High and Qâ•dosh, with the crushed and lowly of ruakh, to enliven the ruakh of those who are lowly, and to enliven the heart of those who are crushed.

"Happy5.3.1 are they to be who are poor and broken-hearted,5.3.2 for the Realm4.17.1 of the heavens3.2.2 is theirs.

Ha•phᵊtâr•âh: Yᵊsha•yâhu 58.3-4

Why [when] we fasted, didn't You see [it]? Why [though] with our nᵊphâsh•ot You didn't even know [it]? Look, on your tzom day you pursue your own desires, and .

Yᵊsha•yâhu 58.5-6

Can such be the Tzom I shall choose, a day when â•dâm ân•âh his nëphësh? Can it be bending his head down like a marsh-reed or spreading [a mattress of] sackcloth and ashes? Do you call such as this a tzom or a day of favor to --? ‭ ‬ 6 Surely, this is the tzom I will choose: To open the cuffs [that shackle one to] rësha, to loose the bundles of the yoke, to send those crushed [under its weight] to freedom, and to tear-away every yoke.

Yᵊsha•yâhu 58.7-9

Shouldn't you break your bread with the hungry? And bring the homeless humble to a house? That you may see the scantily-clad and clothe him, and not conceal yourself from your flesh.

Yᵊkhëz•qeil 18.5, 7

Then a man who will be a Tza•diq7 … gives his bread to the hungry and covers the scantily-clad with clothing…

Yᵊsha•yâhu 58.10-14

Issue forth your nëphësh to the hungry, and satisfy the humbled nëphësh; then your or will shine in the darkness, and your gloom like the noon. 11 Then -- will direct you always, sate your nëphësh during scorching droughts, and invigorate your bones; and you will be like a drenched garden and a source of water whose waters shall not fail. 12 Ruins of o•lam will be (re)built from you, foundations of ancient generations shall you raise-up; and you shall be called, 'stone-fencer of the breach' and 'chiseler of paths for settling.'

When you tzom,6.16.1 don't become like the mournful hypocrites23.13.2 who make their appearance mournful and alter their faces6.16.2 to be seen fasting6.16.1 by persons.8.20.2 •mein! I tell you, they obviate their payment.6.2.1 17 When you tzom6.16.1 sprinkle your head6.17.1 and wash6.17.2 your face 18 so that you may not appear to be afflicting yourselves6.18.0 for persons8.20.2 but rather for your Father who is in secret, and your Father who is in secret shall render your payment.6.18.1


Then the tal•mid•im5.1.1 of Yokhâ•nân 'ha-Mat•bil'3.0.1 Ben-Zᵊkhar•yâh Ben-Tzâ•doq ha-Ko•hein3.0.2 came near to him saying, "Why do we and the Rabbinic-Pᵊrush•im sect of Judaism23.25.1 who advocate that Oral Law7.1.1 must be exclusively oral3.7.1 tzom often9.14.1 and your tal•mid•im5.1.1 don't tzom?" 6.16.1 15 And Ribi Yᵊho•shua said to them, "Do the friends of the groom9.15.1 mourn while the groom is with them? The days will come when the groom will have been picked up from them, and then they will tzom.6.16.1


For I was hungry and you gave me to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me to drink. I was a visitor25.35.1 and you gathered1.18.5 me in. I was scantily-clad and you outfitted me. I was weak8.17.2 and you monitored25.36.1 me. I was in the dungeon25.36.2 and you came to me.

Then the tza•diq1.19.1 will reply to him saying, 'A•don•i,22.43.2 when did we see you hungry and nurture you? Or thirsty and give you to drink? When did we see you as a geir25.35.1 and gather1.18.5 you in? Or scantily-clad and outfit you? When did we see you weak8.17.2 or in the dungeon25.36.2 and come to you?' 25.39.1

Then, replying, the mëlëkh1.5.6 will say to them, '•mein! I tell you, Every time you did it for one of the needy of these, little ones like these,25.40.1 you did it for me.'25.40.2


Having left Nâtz•rat, having come, he dwelled in Kᵊphar Na•khum along the north shore of Yâm Ki•nërët within the borders of the lands of the tribes of Zᵊvul•un and Naph•tâl•i, in order that it would be fulfilled5.17.3 that which was spoken by Yᵊsha•yâhu4.14.1 ha-Nâ•vi (8.23–9.1) saying, "In the first period, Mâ•shiakh ha-mëlëkh4.15.1 will lighten the weight on the land of Zᵊvul•un4.15.2 and the land of Naph•tâl•i.4.15.3 Then, in the later period, by way3.3.3 of Yâm Ki•nërët,4.15.4 he will place more weight on the district4.15.5 of the goy•im6.32.1 – Trans-Jordan. The am who were walking in blackness will have seen a great or.4.16.0 The or will have shined upon the residents of the land of the picture-of-death."4.16.1

From that time, Ribi Yᵊho•shua began to call out12.41.1 and to say " ‎,3.2.1 for the Realm4.17.1 of the heavens3.2.2 has converged." 10.7.1


Go to Top
Return to Previous Page

Rainbow Rule

5768 (2007.09)

(The Nᵊtzârim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityâhu (NHM) 6.13).

When Ribi Yᵊho•shua taught that sᵊ•likh•âh for one's depends upon granting the same sᵊ•likh•âh to others, he was elucidating an unavoidable implication of Tor•âh and . Just as Tor•âh requires restitution as an integral element of tᵊshuv•âh, acceptance of that fair restitution (stipulated by a Beit Din) is no less tzëdëq and, therefore, no less a mitz•wâh. of this mitz•wâh, therefore, would preclude sᵊ•likh•âh for the one defiantly refusing to accept fair restitution (set by a Beit Din) and grant sᵊ•likh•âh.

Accordingly, •mar′  Ribi Yᵊho•shua, "If you sâ·lakh even the â•won of bën•ei-â•dâm, then your Father of the heavens will sâ·lakh even your â•won. If you won't sâ·lakh bën•ei-â•dâm, then He won't sâ·lakh you your kheit" (NHM 6.14-15).

& Sᵊ•likh•âh
versus (lᵊ-hav•dil)
Christian Linkage To Miraculous Healing

While the linkage between the disfavor of the ël•oh•im, vague and amorphous "sin" and "consequent" sickness traces back through Hellenism to Egyptian beliefs, there is no such linkage in Tor•âh (contrary to some rabbinic heresies whose basis is solely in superstition). There are imprecations upon Yi•sᵊ•râ•eil as a whole for straying from Tor•âh, but no direct correlation between an individual disappointing Ël•oh•im through and consequent physical sickness or injury to that individual. Thus (exposing the fakery of all religious "healers"), sᵊ•likh•âh that absolves the has no connection to healing from an unrelated sickness.

Noting the modern Christian linkage, one should, therefore, look for the change, expecting an account of the Judaic practice, and sᵊ•likh•âh, to be Hellenized in support of the modern Christian belief. Such evolution is indisputably documented in the Greek accounts of the forgiving and healing of the sick, demon-possessed man in Kᵊphar Na•khum, in the Gâ•lil, in 3789 (0029 C.E., The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) 9.2-6).

Note that pᵊsuq•im 6-7 are supported by the Hebrew 12th-century Ms. Or. Rome #53 (125b) and pᵊsuq•im 2 & 6 are supported by the 13th-century Hebrew Seipher Nitzâkh•on Yâ•shân as well as the Ëvën Bo•khan. The Hellenized (Christianized) version is supported by א, β, a-3 and the Pᵊshitᵊtâ (see The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM)).

The earliest extant (all 4th century C.E. and later, post-135 C.E.) source mss. of the Hellenized (Greek) Christian NT "Saint Matthew" 9.2 read:

Και ιδου προσεφερον αυτω παραλυτικον επι κλινης βεβλημενον

However, according to the 12th century Ms. Or. Rome 53, the earliest extant Hebrew tradition reads:


The 15th-century Ëvën Bo•khan appends the word (The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) note 9.2.1.)

It is clear from the evolution of the Hebrew tradition, under pressure from the Church, that the later, Hellenized (Christian) version has redacted the account to read a "paralyzed" man instead of a merely "sick" man, who, in 9.6 (Ms. Or. Rome 53), we learn is sick by demonic-force; not paralyzed as the Hellenized version there, too, stipulates.

The ancients attributed the cause of everything for which natural explanations weren't known to demonic forces. Here, in the Hebrew tradition, we have the account of a man who has been "sick" and lying in bed for a year, attributed to a demonic force—linked expressly to sᵊ•likh•âh (since sᵊ•likh•âh cured him). As there is no Tor•âh linkage of sᵊ•likh•âh to demonic forces another, different, linkage must be found. One of the most prevalent symptoms attributed to demonic possession was a broken-spirit (or broken heart)— i.e., depression. Is there an obvious connection between depression and sᵊ•likh•âh? The answer seems obvious: this man was sick at heart, depressed to the point of retiring to a bed for the preceding year, over sᵊ•likh•âh. This certainly suggests that he felt guilty about something so terrible that it broke his heart, something for which he attempted with all of his being to make restitution and obtain sᵊ•likh•âh, but, apparently, the wronged party refused to accept the restitution or forgive the man despite his acute demonstration of depression and abject sorrow.

Let's examine the critics of Ribi Yᵊho•shua and exactly what they criticized him for. His critics are described as "Scribes." In the first century, "scribes" didn't refer only to those who wrote Tor•âh, tᵊphil•in and mᵊzuz•âh scrolls (as it does today). Of the three major sects of Judaism, only the Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple," had codified—"scribed" – their (previously Oral) Law into their Hellenist (Greek) Χειρογραφον τοις Δογμασιν (corrupted to the "Book of Decrees").

These Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple," the "scribes" of this passage, held that Χειρογραφον τοις Δογμασιν was their (codified Oral Law—comparable to Tal•mud of the Pᵊrush•im today) authority, negating Halâkh•âh and the Bât•ei Din of the Pᵊrush•im (which included Ribi Yᵊho•shua) as an infringement of their claimed exclusive jurisdiction. Thus, the dispute was between Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple,", who denied the Pᵊrush•im Bât•ei Din authority to set restitution—and, where the victim refused to accept such restitution and confer sᵊ•likh•âh, as decreed by the Beit Din, to declare sᵊ•likh•âh.

This is precisely what the Pᵊrush•i Ribi (and, presumably therefore, head of a Beit Din), Yᵊho•shua, did: declare the man's restitution to be fair and adequate (probably confirming the decree of an earlier, Pᵊrush•i (not Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple,") Beit Din) and declaring him forgiven.

The Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple," weren't criticizing Ribi Yᵊho•shua of blaspheming for pre-empting --, but for pre-empting the Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple"!!! He was merely discharging his duties as Tor•âh prescribed. Rather, the Roman-collaborating, Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•im of the "Temple" accused him of blaspheming for having the khutz•pâh declare sᵊ•likh•âh—which they claimed was solely their own authority, not Pᵊrush•im authority.

5753 (1993.09) Mi•nᵊkh•âh

wa-Yi•qᵊr•â 18.26, And you pl. shall be sho•meir of My khuq•im and My mi•shᵊpât•im.

In Hebrew, "not" followed by a list {a,b, …, n} is understood logically as "not a, not b, …, and not n"; i.e., "neither a, nor b, …, nor n."

Logically, (–a) * (–b) * …, * (–n) = –(a + b + …, + n)

This is the case in translating the two Hebrew objects of "not" in this pâ•suq as "neither… nor":


There is no implication in the Hebrew that negative "abomination" prohibitions are the only mitz•wot applicable to geir•im. Tor•âh is always consistent that there is only one Tor•âh—that is applied without discrimination except where explicitly stated otherwise.

Rainbow Rule © 1996-present by Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David,
Go Top Home (Netzarim Logo) Go Back

Nᵊtzâr•im… Authentic