Podcasts about Babylonia

A braita explains that the words “מעם הארץ” — “from one of the land” — mentioned in the section about the individual’s sin offering serve to exclude the king and the kohen gadol. The braita then questions this drasha, noting that the king and kohen gadol are already explicitly excluded by the verses. It concludes that the exemption in the braita for the kohen gadol applies in a case where he committed a forbidden act unwittingly, but without relying on an erroneous ruling. The exemption for the king applies when he sinned before being appointed. However, this interpretation aligns only with Rabbi Shimon’s view, as the rabbis maintain that in such a case, the king must bring an individual sin offering. To reconcile this with the rabbis’ position, Rav Zevid in the name of Rava suggests a scenario in which the king ate half the requisite amount of forbidden fat (cheilev) before becoming king, and then ate the other half afterward. In this case, he would not be obligated to bring an individual sin offering. Rava asked Rav Nachman: if someone ate half the requisite amount before becoming king, then became king, and later ceased being king before eating the second half, would the two halves combine to obligate him to bring an individual sin offering? They attempt to resolve the question by comparing it to a parallel case involving a Jew who ceased practicing religion, a meshumad, but the comparison is ultimately rejected. Rabbi Zeira asked Rav Sheshet, according to Rabbi Shimon’s position: if someone ate a piece of fat whose status — permitted or forbidden — was unclear, and only discovered the issue after becoming king, would he bring a provisional guilt offering? The reasoning is that the type of sacrifice does not change with the person’s change in status from a regular individual to a king. The question remains unresolved. A braita presents two different drashot to derive that a meshumad does not bring an individual sin offering. The practical difference between the two derivations is explored. There is a debate regarding which transgressions qualify someone as a meshumad. A braita explains that when the Torah refers to a nasi, it means a king — as no one is above him except God. Rabbi Yehuda haNasi, known as Rebbi, asked Rabbi Chiya whether he would be required to bring the unique offering designated for a nasi. Rabbi Chiya responded that Rebbi had a counterpart in Babylonia, the Exilarch, and therefore did not meet the criteria of someone who has no one above him but God. A difficulty is raised, as both kings of the kingdoms of Judea and Israel would bring the offering, yet it is explained that Rebbi was subservient to the Exilarch. Rav Safra offers a different version of the discussion between Rebbi and Rabbi Chiya. The kohen gadol who brings a unique sacrifice is specifically one who was anointed with the shemen hamishcha, the special oil prepared by Moshe. The Mishna outlines the legal differences between a kohen gadol who was anointed and one who assumed the role by wearing the special garments. It also distinguishes between a kohen gadol currently serving and one who is no longer in the position. A braita records a debate between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosi regarding whether the shemen hamishcha was prepared in a miraculous manner. Rabbi Yehuda, who believes it was prepared miraculously, supports his view by citing several miracles associated with the oil, arguing that its miraculous preparation should not be surprising. If a king inherits the throne from his father, he is not anointed, but the kohen gadol is. Only kings from the Davidic dynasty were anointed. Challenges to this theory are raised: Shlomo was anointed despite his father being king, and Yehu, an Israelite king, was also anointed. These are resolved by explaining that Yehu was anointed with balsam oil, not the shemen hamishcha, and that Shlomo’s anointment was due to uncertainty over succession. Yehoachaz, whose father was also king, was anointed because he became king instead of his older brother Yehoyakim, who was two years his senior. Was he really two years his senior? The Gemara delves into the different verses to understand the age order among the brothers. 

A braita explains that the words “מעם הארץ” — “from one of the land” — mentioned in the section about the individual’s sin offering serve to exclude the king and the kohen gadol. The braita then questions this drasha, noting that the king and kohen gadol are already explicitly excluded by the verses. It concludes that the exemption in the braita for the kohen gadol applies in a case where he committed a forbidden act unwittingly, but without relying on an erroneous ruling. The exemption for the king applies when he sinned before being appointed. However, this interpretation aligns only with Rabbi Shimon’s view, as the rabbis maintain that in such a case, the king must bring an individual sin offering. To reconcile this with the rabbis’ position, Rav Zevid in the name of Rava suggests a scenario in which the king ate half the requisite amount of forbidden fat (cheilev) before becoming king, and then ate the other half afterward. In this case, he would not be obligated to bring an individual sin offering. Rava asked Rav Nachman: if someone ate half the requisite amount before becoming king, then became king, and later ceased being king before eating the second half, would the two halves combine to obligate him to bring an individual sin offering? They attempt to resolve the question by comparing it to a parallel case involving a Jew who ceased practicing religion, a meshumad, but the comparison is ultimately rejected. Rabbi Zeira asked Rav Sheshet, according to Rabbi Shimon’s position: if someone ate a piece of fat whose status — permitted or forbidden — was unclear, and only discovered the issue after becoming king, would he bring a provisional guilt offering? The reasoning is that the type of sacrifice does not change with the person’s change in status from a regular individual to a king. The question remains unresolved. A braita presents two different drashot to derive that a meshumad does not bring an individual sin offering. The practical difference between the two derivations is explored. There is a debate regarding which transgressions qualify someone as a meshumad. A braita explains that when the Torah refers to a nasi, it means a king — as no one is above him except God. Rabbi Yehuda haNasi, known as Rebbi, asked Rabbi Chiya whether he would be required to bring the unique offering designated for a nasi. Rabbi Chiya responded that Rebbi had a counterpart in Babylonia, the Exilarch, and therefore did not meet the criteria of someone who has no one above him but God. A difficulty is raised, as both kings of the kingdoms of Judea and Israel would bring the offering, yet it is explained that Rebbi was subservient to the Exilarch. Rav Safra offers a different version of the discussion between Rebbi and Rabbi Chiya. The kohen gadol who brings a unique sacrifice is specifically one who was anointed with the shemen hamishcha, the special oil prepared by Moshe. The Mishna outlines the legal differences between a kohen gadol who was anointed and one who assumed the role by wearing the special garments. It also distinguishes between a kohen gadol currently serving and one who is no longer in the position. A braita records a debate between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosi regarding whether the shemen hamishcha was prepared in a miraculous manner. Rabbi Yehuda, who believes it was prepared miraculously, supports his view by citing several miracles associated with the oil, arguing that its miraculous preparation should not be surprising. If a king inherits the throne from his father, he is not anointed, but the kohen gadol is. Only kings from the Davidic dynasty were anointed. Challenges to this theory are raised: Shlomo was anointed despite his father being king, and Yehu, an Israelite king, was also anointed. These are resolved by explaining that Yehu was anointed with balsam oil, not the shemen hamishcha, and that Shlomo’s anointment was due to uncertainty over succession. Yehoachaz, whose father was also king, was anointed because he became king instead of his older brother Yehoyakim, who was two years his senior. Was he really two years his senior? The Gemara delves into the different verses to understand the age order among the brothers. 

The stories about the challenges of the returnees from Egypt are about the real challenges of the returnees from Babylonia. Our Numbers chapters for today are 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 20. Join our tribe on Patreon! Check out these cool pages on the podcast's website:Home PageWho wrote the Bible: Timeline and authorsAncient maps: easy to follow maps to see which empire ruled what and whenClick here to see Exodus divided into "sources" according to the Documentary Hypothesis The podcast is written, edited and produced by Gil Kidron

When people returned to the land of Israel from Babylonia after that exile, they brought an offering on behalf of the people from the era of Tzedkiyahu. But all of that generation and long died! Normally, a designated sin-offering that isn't offered before the person offering it dies is left alone to get a blemish. But for a public offering, that doesn't work. But an inference can be made from the he-goat of Rosh Chodesh, in terms of it being a communal offering. But maybe the cases aren't comparable, say, if nobody died before the offering was made? Maybe eglah arufah is a good comparison? Some of the returning members of the community were actually still alive at this time - survivors from the time of the First Temple, which was certainly a sad time for them, but they were able to offer the sin-offering. Were they the minority or the majority? Also, the case where one of the public dies - when all the people must bring the offering. Now what? And so a search for parallet categories begins.

Hailing from the Bay Area, Zaza has a passion for DJing and a love for creating immersive sets. As she weaves through the sub-genres of house and techno like the serpent in sound- press play ⚡️Like the Show? Click the [Repost] ↻ button so more people can hear it!

This week's learning is sponsored by Danielle & Jason Friedman in honor of Anabelle Friedman on her siyum of Mashechet Rosh Hashana on the occasion of her Bat Mitzvah, and in honor and appreciation of Rabbanit Michelle for inspiring and enabling multiple generations of women, in our family and around the world, to engage in Talmud study. Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in memory of Myer Senders a”h, beloved father of our friend and co-learner Tina Lamm. "May the Torah learned today by all of us be a zechut for his neshama ותהא נשמתו צרורה בצרור החיים." What is the law regarding a mouse that falls into vinegar? Is the mouse nullified, and if so, at what ratio? The Mishna presents three distinct scenarios involving a Jew and a non-Jew, where wine is left in a location accessible to the non-Jew, raising concerns about potential libation (נסך) and thus rendering the wine prohibited. In each case, the Mishna outlines whether there is reason to suspect that the non-Jew offered the wine as a libation. The determining factor is whether the Jew stated they would be gone for a while or whether the Jew is considered to be supervising. The Gemara defines supervision as a situation in which the Jew could return at any moment, even if they are not physically present. The amount of time that must elapse to prohibit the wine (in a case where the Jew leaves for a while) is debated between the Rabbis and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. The Rabbis hold that the wine becomes prohibited if enough time passes to pierce the stopper, reseal it, and allow it to dry. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel maintains that the required time is that needed to break the stopper entirely, fashion a new one, and let it dry. A fourth case involves a non-Jew dining in a Jew’s home, with wine left either on the table or on a side table. If the Jew leaves the room, there is concern that the non-Jew may touch the wine on the table, but not the wine on the side table—unless the Jew instructed the non-Jew to dilute the wine. If the bottle is sealed and enough time has passed for the stopper to be broken, replaced, and dried, the wine is prohibited. Why are all three cases necessary? What is unique about each, and why did the Mishna include them all? Rabbi Yochanan limits the scope of the debate between the Rabbis and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel to stoppers made of lime plaster, excluding those made of clay. If a non-Jew were to pierce a clay stopper and reseal it, the tampering would be visibly noticeable. A difficulty is raised against Rabbi Yochanan’s explanation from a braita, but it is ultimately resolved. Rava rules in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as the final case in the Mishna reflects his opinion exclusively, without presenting the view of the Rabbis. The sugya concludes with a practical question: If the halakha follows Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel—requiring a longer time to prohibit the wine—and also follows Rabbi Eliezer (Avodah Zarah 31a), who permits leaving a barrel with a single seal in the possession of a non-Jew without concern for tampering, why is the current practice to avoid leaving wine in a non-Jew’s possession? The Gemara answers that the concern lies with the bunghole, which was used to smell the wine. The worry is that the non-Jew might widen the hole to drink from it and offer the wine as a libation. Bungholes were apparently not present in barrels during the time of the Mishna but were commonly used at a later time in Babylonia when the question was asked.

This week's learning is sponsored by Danielle & Jason Friedman in honor of Anabelle Friedman on her siyum of Mashechet Rosh Hashana on the occasion of her Bat Mitzvah, and in honor and appreciation of Rabbanit Michelle for inspiring and enabling multiple generations of women, in our family and around the world, to engage in Talmud study. Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in memory of Myer Senders a”h, beloved father of our friend and co-learner Tina Lamm. "May the Torah learned today by all of us be a zechut for his neshama ותהא נשמתו צרורה בצרור החיים." What is the law regarding a mouse that falls into vinegar? Is the mouse nullified, and if so, at what ratio? The Mishna presents three distinct scenarios involving a Jew and a non-Jew, where wine is left in a location accessible to the non-Jew, raising concerns about potential libation (נסך) and thus rendering the wine prohibited. In each case, the Mishna outlines whether there is reason to suspect that the non-Jew offered the wine as a libation. The determining factor is whether the Jew stated they would be gone for a while or whether the Jew is considered to be supervising. The Gemara defines supervision as a situation in which the Jew could return at any moment, even if they are not physically present. The amount of time that must elapse to prohibit the wine (in a case where the Jew leaves for a while) is debated between the Rabbis and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. The Rabbis hold that the wine becomes prohibited if enough time passes to pierce the stopper, reseal it, and allow it to dry. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel maintains that the required time is that needed to break the stopper entirely, fashion a new one, and let it dry. A fourth case involves a non-Jew dining in a Jew’s home, with wine left either on the table or on a side table. If the Jew leaves the room, there is concern that the non-Jew may touch the wine on the table, but not the wine on the side table—unless the Jew instructed the non-Jew to dilute the wine. If the bottle is sealed and enough time has passed for the stopper to be broken, replaced, and dried, the wine is prohibited. Why are all three cases necessary? What is unique about each, and why did the Mishna include them all? Rabbi Yochanan limits the scope of the debate between the Rabbis and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel to stoppers made of lime plaster, excluding those made of clay. If a non-Jew were to pierce a clay stopper and reseal it, the tampering would be visibly noticeable. A difficulty is raised against Rabbi Yochanan’s explanation from a braita, but it is ultimately resolved. Rava rules in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as the final case in the Mishna reflects his opinion exclusively, without presenting the view of the Rabbis. The sugya concludes with a practical question: If the halakha follows Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel—requiring a longer time to prohibit the wine—and also follows Rabbi Eliezer (Avodah Zarah 31a), who permits leaving a barrel with a single seal in the possession of a non-Jew without concern for tampering, why is the current practice to avoid leaving wine in a non-Jew’s possession? The Gemara answers that the concern lies with the bunghole, which was used to smell the wine. The worry is that the non-Jew might widen the hole to drink from it and offer the wine as a libation. Bungholes were apparently not present in barrels during the time of the Mishna but were commonly used at a later time in Babylonia when the question was asked.

In the first of three special episodes Georgina talks to two of the authors short-listed for the much coveted 2025 Wilbur Smith Adventure Writing Prize, Nussaibah Younis for Fundamentally and Costanza Casati for Babylonia. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Decision Space is the podcast about decisions in board games. Join our active and welcoming Discord community, Join the crew today! (Decision Space Patreon), or Leave us a review wherever you find this podcast! Episode 227 - All About Boards Jake and Brendan continue our series on game components with a deep dive on BOARDS!  What types of boards exist?  How do they enhance the experience of playing a game?  What are the best boards?  Are tiles also boards?   Timestamps 5:00- what are boards? 13:30- network boards 27:45- other types of boards 32:05- information on boards 46:15- game progress on boards 48:05- scaling boards 50:35- alternate / expansion boards 53:00- players creating the board 57:05- modular boards 59:35- signposting on boards 1:03:05- favorite boards   Games Mentioned Catan, Quantum, Broom Service, Pax Pamir, Agricola, Ticket to Ride, Root, Castles of Burgundy, Pandemic, Scrabble, Tigris and Euphrates, Blood Rage, Heat, Barrage, Lost Ruins of Arnak, Molly House, Sky Team, Troyes, Santiago, El Grande, Hansa Teutonica, Mexica, Five Tribes, Babylonia, Hey That's My Fish, Arcs, Tikal, Carcassone, Praga Caput Regni, Findorff, Great Western Trail    Preplanners A few deep dives are in the works, so get in some plays of Apiary, Castles of Mad King Ludwig, Dominion, and more Root!    Music and Sound Credits Thank you to Hembree for our intro and outro music from their song Reach Out. You can listen to the full song on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQuuRPfOyMw&list=TLGGFNH7VEDPgwgyNTA4MjAyMQ&t=3s You can find more information about Hembree at https://www.hembreemusic.com/.  Thank you to Flash Floods for use of their song Palm of Your Hand as a sting from their album Halfway to Anywhere: https://open.spotify.com/album/2fE6LrqzNDKPYWyS5evh3K?si=CCjdAGmeSnOOEui6aV3_nA Rules Overview Music:  Way Home by Tokyo Music Walker https://soundcloud.com/user-356546060​ Creative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported — CC BY 3.0 Free Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/tokyo-music-walker-way...​ Music promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/pJThZlOuDtI Intermission Music: music elevator ext part 1/3 by Jay_You -- https://freesound.org/s/467243/ -- License: Attribution 4.0 Bell with Crows by MKzing -- https://freesound.org/s/474266/ -- License: Creative Commons 0 hammer v2.wav by blukotek -- https://freesound.org/s/337815/ -- License: Creative Commons 0   Contact Follow and reach us on social media on Bluesky @decisionspace.bsky.social. If you prefer email, then hit us up at decisionspa@gmail.com. This information is all available along with episodes at our new website decisionspacepodcast.com. Byeee!

R. Dimi came from the land of Israel to Babylonia and taught how the land itself isn't rendered prohibited by virtue of people bowing down, but working/digging, etc. just might. The same for other items too. What about exchanging one thing for the thing that was worshipped? Still a problem, but the exchange of an exchange is a machloket. NOTE: A switch to discussion of libations and Aggadah in the mishnah (unusual, as we know). Does God really mind idolatry? He allows it, after all.... Also, a discussion between the philosophers in Rome (literally) and the sages on how God does not interfere in the running of the world, according to its natural order. But that means people do things against God's will and thrive nonetheless! (To wit, Rome).

We are to begin our day, each day of our lives, by expressing our gratitude to Hashem for all the blessings He has granted us. Immediately upon awakening, we recite "Modeh Ani," thanking Hashem for restoring our souls, and we are then required to recite a series of Berachot known as "Birkot Ha'shahar" – the morning blessings. These Berachot thank Hashem for our ability to open our eyes to see, the ability to get out of bed and walk, and other basic functions of the body. They also thank Hashem for spiritual blessings, such as His having chosen us and given us the Torah. As parents, we know how much it means when a child expresses gratitude. The more our children acknowledge what we do for them and thank us, the more we want to do for them. But when children act ungratefully, and do not thank their parents, the parents will be less inclined to give them what they want. We are Hashem's children, and we owe Him an enormous debt of gratitude for the countless blessings He gives us each day, starting with life itself. The more we thank Him for the blessings we have received, the more He will continue blessing us. We therefore thank Hashem each morning for some of the precious gifts that He has given us. Rav Natrunai Gaon (9 th century, Babylonia) traces the origins of the Birkot Ha'shahar to the obligation to recite one hundred Berachot each day. This obligation was taught as a "Halacha Le'Moshe Mi'Sinai" – a law that Moshe heard at Mount Sinai and has since been transmitted orally from one generation to the next. In ancient times, there were no fixed Berachot, and everyone was expected to recite Berachot on his own, until reaching a total of one hundred each day. However, without a fixed text of Berachot, and without specific Berachot required at certain times and on certain occasions, people became lax, and failed to recite the obligatory one hundred Berachot. In fact, the Midrash relates that when a devastating plague ravaged the Jewish Nation during the time of King David, killing one hundred people a day, King David determined that this was caused by the people's failure to fulfill this obligation of reciting one hundred Berachot every day. He therefore issued an edict to ensure that people recite the required number of Berachot, and the plague suddenly stopped. Still, this obligation was not always fulfilled. Therefore, the Ansheh Kenesset Ha'gedola (Men of the Great Assembly), a group of scholars and prophets that was formed at the beginning of the Second Commonwealth, established fixed Berachot that we are required to recite every day, thus ensuring that we recite one hundred blessings over the course of the day. Included in these Berachot are the eighteen Birkot Ha'shahar that we must recite each morning. Indeed, the Shulhan Aruch discusses the Birkot Ha'shahar in the same Siman (chapter) in which he mentions the obligation to recite one hundred Berachot each day – indicating that, as Rav Natrunai Gaon explained, the Birkot Ha'shahar are related to this obligation. They were instituted to help ensure that a person recites the required amount of Berachot every day. As mentioned earlier, underlying the requirement of Birkot Ha'shahar is our debt of gratitude to Hashem. Not surprisingly, we find a close connection between the obligation to recite one hundred Berachot each day and the concept of gratitude. First, the 100 th chapter of Tehillim is the chapter "Mizmor Le'toda" – the song which was sung to express gratitude to Hashem, thus establishing an association between the number 100 and gratitude. And, the first two letters of the word "Modim" ("We thank") are Mem and Vav, which together in Gematria equal 46 – the Siman in the Shulhan Aruch that speaks of the obligation of one hundred Berachot. We might wonder, why is it necessary to recite these Berachot each and every day? Why does it not suffice for us to occasionally praise and thank Hashem for all He gives us and does for us? An important answer to this question is offered by the Rashba (Rav Shlomo Ben Aderet, Barcelona, Spain, 1235-1310). He writes that every morning, we must see ourselves as born anew. As the verse says (Echa 3:23), "Hadashim La'bekarim, Rabba Emunatecha" – G-d performs great kindnesses for us each and every morning by restoring our consciousness, by giving us a new day, showing us His trust in our capacity to achieve and accomplish. Yesterday's blessings do not suffice today, because today we have been created anew, and so we must express gratitude to G-d anew. The Berachot that comprise Birkot Ha'shahar thank Hashem for many things – such as our vision, our ability to stand up straight and walk, our clothing, our having been chosen by Hashem – but does not appear to be exhaustive. Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868) raised the question of why the Sages did not institute a Beracha thanking Hashem for the ability to speak. It goes without saying that the faculty of speech is one of the human being's most important capabilities. In fact, the Torah says that when G-d created Adam, He infused within Him "Nishmat Haim" – "a living soul" (Bereshit 2:7), and Targum Onkelos translates this expression to mean "Ru'ah Memalela" – "a spirit that speaks." The power of speech can be said to be our defining characteristic, the quality that distinguishes the human being from other creatures in the animal kingdom. Why, then, do we not have a special blessing thanking Hashem for this most precious gift? An answer to this question appears in the work Petah Ha'debir by Rav Binyamin Pontremoli (Turkey, d. 1784). He notes the aforementioned verse, and Onkelos' translation, which teaches us that the faculty of speech is a function of the Neshama, the human soul. Now the Sages instituted as one of the Birkot Ha'shahar a special Beracha thanking Hashem for the soul which He has given us – the blessing of "Elokai Neshama." Hence, as the ability to speak stems from the Neshama, this Beracha which thanks Hashem for giving us our soul also thanks Hashem for the power of speech. (It would thus seem that if parents have a child who, G-d forbid, is not developing the ability to speak, or struggles with speech issues, they should have special intention when reciting the Beracha of "Elokai Neshama," and have in mind the child's soul through which they wish that he develop the faculty of speech.) Moreover, Rav David Abudarham (Spain, 14 th century), in explaining the Beracha of "Elokai Neshama," cites the verse in Tehillim (115:17), "Lo Ha'metim Yehalelu Y-ah" – "It is not the dead that will praise G-d." Once a person's soul is taken, he is no longer able to express Hashem's praises. Rav Abudarham notes the implication of this verse that the primary purpose of speech is to praise G-d. (This is indicated in the text of "Elokai Neshama," in which we say, "As long as the soul is within me, I give thanks before You…") Accordingly, it stands to reason that when we recite "Elokai Neshama" and give thanks to Hashem for giving us a soul, this includes an expression of gratitude for our ability to speak. A second answer to this question was offered by Rav Shmuel Alexander Unsdorfer (1920-2002), who explained that we express gratitude for the faculty of speech by reciting Birkat Ha'Torah – the blessing over Torah learning. The Misva of learning Torah includes the obligation to speak words of Torah and to transmit them to others, and so when we thank Hashem for this precious Misva, we automatically thank Him also for the gift of speech. A different question was asked regarding the omission of the faculty of hearing from the Birkot Ha'shahar. Clearly, our hearing is exceedingly important. In fact, if somebody injured another person and caused him to lose his hearing, he must pay compensation for the damages. Why, then, is this capability not included in our morning blessings? One answer given is that the ability to hear is included in the Beracha of "Ha'noten La'sechvi Bina Le'havhin Ben Yom U'ben Layla" – thanking Hashem for granting the rooster the knowledge to crow in the morning, thus waking people up. Of course, the rooster's crow is effective in waking people only because of the ability to hear, and so this Beracha implicitly expresses gratitude for the sense of hearing. Another answer is that the morning blessings thank Hashem only for those abilities which we lost, as it were, during the night when we slept, and were restored in the morning. Thus, for example, we thank Hashem for restoring our vision after our eyes were closed throughout the night, and for allowing us to get out of bed, stand upright and walk, after we spent the night lying down. Our sense of hearing, however, is unaffected by sleep; we can still hear while sleeping, and so this capability is not included in Birkot Ha'shahar. (Interestingly, the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in his work Mi'kavse'el, cites a Rabbi who wanted to apply this theory to explain why we do not recite a Beracha over the ability to speak. This Rabbi noted that some people talk in their sleep, and so this capability is not technically "lost" at night, such that we should give thanks for it when we wake up in the morning. The Ben Ish Hai dismissed this answer, noting that some people sleepwalk, and yet we still recite each morning the Beracha of "Ha'mechin Mis'adeh Gaber," thanking Hashem for the ability to walk. One might, however, distinguish between talking in one's sleep and sleepwalking, as a person who sleepwalks is not actually sleeping as he walks, whereas those who talk in their sleep really are still asleep and have not woken up to talk.) The Sefer Hasidim (Rabbenu Yehuda Ha'hasid, Germany, 1150-1217) writes that he once met an exceptionally pious individual who recited additional blessings each morning, thanking Hashem for each and every part of the body, and the Sefer Hasidim expressed great admiration for this practice. He noted the verse in Tehillim (84:3), "Libi U'bsari Yeranenu El Kel Hai" – "My heart and my flesh shall sing praise to the living G-d" – implying that each and every part of the body which functions properly is a sufficient reason to give praise to Hashem. A different verse in Tehillim (35:10) states, "Kol Asmotai Tomarna, Hashem Mi Kamocha" – "All my bones shall declare: G-d, who is like you?" Indeed, it is worthwhile to express our gratitude to the Almighty for each and every limb and organ in the body. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his commentary to Sefer Hasidim, asserts that this righteous man could not have actually recited additional Berachot, for a Beracha that was not instituted by the Sages constitutes a Beracha Le'batala – a Beracha recited in vain, which is forbidden. Undoubtedly, this man expressed his gratitude to Hashem for all his working body parts without reciting formal Berachot. By contrast, Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025) suggested that this righteous man followed the opinion that one is permitted to create his own Beracha to give praise to Hashem. In any event, the truth is that we do not need additional Berachot – formal or informal – to express our gratitude to Hashem for everything in our body that works properly. The Tur (Rabbenu Yaakov Ben Asher, Spain, 1270-1340) notes that in the Beracha of "Asher Yasar," which one recites after using the restroom, we say that Hashem created "Halulim Halulim" (hollow spaces in the body). The Gematria of the word "Halulim," the Tur observes, is 124, and we recite this word twice, for a total of 248 – the number of limbs and organs in a person's body. This expression, then, alludes to all our body parts. Thus, when we recite "Asher Yasar," we give thanks to Hashem not only for the wondrous ability to eliminate the waste from our body, but also for each and every body part. The Rishonim (Medieval scholars) debate the question of whether a person recites a Beracha that is not applicable to him, because he unfortunately does not have the ability for which that Beracha gives thanks. For example, does a blind person recite the Beracha of "Poke'ah Ivrim," in which we thank Hashem for the gift of vision? The Rambam (Hilchot Tefila 7:7-8) writes explicitly that a person recites each of these Berachot only after performing the action referred to by that Beracha. For example, after standing upright, one recites the Beracha of "Zokef Kefufim" ("Who makes the bent upright"), and after getting dressed, one recites the Beracha of "Malbish Arumim" ("Who clothes the naked"). The Rambam writes that if, for whatever reason, a person did not experience that which a given Beracha speaks of, then he does not recite that Beracha. In the Rambam's opinion, the Birkot Ha'shahar resemble the Berachot recited over food, which one recites only when eating. By the same token, one recites each of the morning blessings only after receiving the benefit for which each blessing gives praise. The Shulhan Aruch follows this opinion. By contrast, the Kolbo (anonymous work from the period of the Rishonim), citing several of the Geonim, writes that every person recites all the Birkot Ha'shahar, regardless of whether or not he personally experiences these phenomena. According to this opinion, the morning blessings express gratitude not for one's personal experience, but rather for the general phenomena mentioned by these Berachot. Even if one is not, Heaven forbid, able to see, for example, he still recites the Beracha of "Poke'ah Ivrim" to praise Hashem for the phenomenon of vision. Common practice follows this view of the Kolbo. One of the interesting questions asked regarding the Birkot Ha'shahar relates to the Halachic principle that applies in situations of a "Beracha Semucha La'haveratah" – a Beracha which is recited immediately following another Beracha. Normally, when a Beracha is recited right after another Beracha, it does not begin with the word "Baruch." Thus, for example, the text of Birkat Ha'mazon consists of four Berachot recited in immediate succession of one another, and thus only the first Beracha begins with "Baruch." The three subsequent Berachot are covered, so-to-speak, by the "Baruch" which begins the first Beracha, and so they do not require the introductory word "Baruch." In the Amida prayer, too, only the first Beracha begins with the word "Baruch," whereas all the subsequent Berachot do not, because they are recited immediately after the first Beracha. When it comes to Birkot Ha'shahar, however, the blessings all begin with the word "Baruch," despite the fact that they are recited as a series of Berachot, one right after the other. Tosafot in Masechet Berachot (46) offer two answers. First, they explain, unlike the blessings of Birkat Ha'mazon and the Amida, the blessings of Birkot Ha'shahar were not instituted as a series of Berachot. The Sages did not require reciting them together in a particular sequence. As we saw, the Rambam maintained that one recites each Beracha as he experiences the phenomenon referred to by each Beracha, and the Rambam writes explicitly that there is no set order for these Berachot. The rule of "Beracha Semucha La'haveratah," Tosafot write, applies only to a series of Berachot which were instituted to be recited together in a particular order, and so it does not apply to Birkot Ha'shahar. Secondly, Tosafot suggest, this rule applies only to relatively lengthy Berachot, such as the Berachot of Birkat Ha'mazon and the Amida. The Birkot Ha'shahar, however, are very brief, and thus they require the introduction of "Baruch Ata Hashem." A person should not unnecessarily get involved in other matters before reciting the Birkot Ha'shahar. Ideally, the Hesed La'alafim (Rav Eliezer Papo, 1785-1827) writes, the first words that come out of a person's mouth in the morning should be words of praise and gratitude to Hashem. One should not write text messages, make phone calls and the like before reciting the morning blessings. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakov Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939) warns that according to the Kabbalah, unnecessarily delaying the recitation of Birkot Ha'shahar has the effect of allowing the Kelipot (negative spiritual energies) access to the person's soul, which can cause great harm. One should not be doing anything else while reciting a Beracha. This applies not only to Birkot Ha'shahar, but to all blessings that we recite. The Ben Ish Hai writes that "Lo Tiheyeh Ka'zot Be'Yisrael" – it should never happen that a Jew recites a Beracha while being involved in some other activity. And the Ben Ish Hai laments the fact that many people make this mistake. One common example is Netilat Yadayim – many people mistakenly recite the Beracha while drying their hands. One must ensure not to begin reciting the Beracha of "Al Netilat Yadayim" until after he finished drying his hands. Another common mistake is people reciting Birkot Ha'shahar while rushing to get to shul. This is improper. One should recite a Beracha while standing in place and doing nothing else, focusing his attention fully on the Beracha. The Taz (Rav David Ha'levi Segal, Poland, 1586-1667) writes that one who recites a Beracha while performing other activities is included in the Torah's harsh warnings against serving Hashem "Be'keri" – in a casual, haphazard manner, without focus and attentiveness. Rav Chaim Brim (1922-2002) tells that he once went to visit Rav Moshe Yehoshua Landau in the middle of the night. Rav Landau was in the restroom when he arrived, and so he waited. When Rav Landau came out, he recited the Beracha of "Asher Yasar" without realizing that he was being watched. Rav Brim said that at 2am, without realizing that anyone was around, Rav Landau recited "Asher Yasar" with greater concentration and emotion than most people have while reciting Ne'ila in the synagogue on Yom Kippur. We start our day by thanking Hashem for all the great blessings He has granted us. I had the occasion during my trips to Israel to visit Israeli soldiers who, unfortunately, sustained injuries that necessitated the amputation of limbs. They do not have the ability that the rest of having to easily get out of bed and move about. We need to appreciate these great blessings that Hashem gives us anew each morning, and try, as much as possible, to recite the Berachot with thought and concentration, truly appreciating all that Hashem does for us.

She was one of the most powerful women of the ancient world…Once mentioned in the same breath as the likes of Cleopatra and Helen of Troy. Yet today she is largely forgotten. Why did this happen?  Today Anya is joined by award-winning novelist Costanza Casati to discuss the ancient Assyrian queen, Semiramis, and the blurry boundary between history and myth.Constanza Casati is the author of the award-winning novel Clytemnestra, as well as her second novel Babylonia, which in inspired by the life of Semiramis. She also works as a screenwriter and freelance journalist.You can buy Babylonia by Constanza Casati here: https://www.amazon.com/Babylonia-Novel-Costanza-Casati-ebook/dp/B0CYKVCRP3Hosted by Anya Leonard of Classical Wisdom. To learn more about Classical Wisdom, and sign up for our free newsletter, please go to https://classicalwisdom.substack.com/

Today's daf is sponsored by Emma Rinberg in memory of her beloved father Dr. Eric N. Glick - Yitzchak Nisan ben Yaacov v'Etta Faiga. "Though you died 35 years ago, your wisdom and caring nature accompany me daily." Rabbi Chanina ben Tradion's death is described - for what was he punished? How and why were others in his family punished with him? Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma predicted his death and in the aftermath of Rabbi Yosi's death, Rabbi Chanina gets caught by the Romans and is killed in exactly the way Rabbi Yosi predicted. His daughter is punished by being sent to be a prostitute, and Bruria, her sister, convinces her husband, Rabbi Meir, to rescue her. This ultimately leads to his being wanted by the Romans and he flees to Babylonia. The Gemara quotes braitot that list different activities that are forbidden to be involved in on account of being connected with idol worship and others because of "moshav leitzim," which is defined as those who sit around idle and scorn others. The antidote to moshav leitzim is learning Torah, as is derived from verses in Tehillim 1:1-2.

Today's daf is sponsored by Emma Rinberg in memory of her beloved father Dr. Eric N. Glick - Yitzchak Nisan ben Yaacov v'Etta Faiga. "Though you died 35 years ago, your wisdom and caring nature accompany me daily." Rabbi Chanina ben Tradion's death is described - for what was he punished? How and why were others in his family punished with him? Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma predicted his death and in the aftermath of Rabbi Yosi's death, Rabbi Chanina gets caught by the Romans and is killed in exactly the way Rabbi Yosi predicted. His daughter is punished by being sent to be a prostitute, and Bruria, her sister, convinces her husband, Rabbi Meir, to rescue her. This ultimately leads to his being wanted by the Romans and he flees to Babylonia. The Gemara quotes braitot that list different activities that are forbidden to be involved in on account of being connected with idol worship and others because of "moshav leitzim," which is defined as those who sit around idle and scorn others. The antidote to moshav leitzim is learning Torah, as is derived from verses in Tehillim 1:1-2.

This episode is the essential starting point for understanding the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In 745 BCE, a relatively obscure man named Tukulti-Apil-Esharra—better known by his biblical name Tiglath-Pileser III—seized the Assyrian throne in what would become one of the most transformative moments in ancient Near Eastern history. This episode explores how Tiglath-Pileser's revolutionary reforms reshaped the military, administration, and ideology of the Assyrian state, laying the foundation for the largest and most durable empire the world had yet seen.We delve into the political collapse that preceded his rise, the obscure origins and contested legitimacy of Tiglath-Pileser himself, and the sudden consolidation of power that enabled him to bring Assyria back from the brink of fragmentation. We then examine his first campaigns in Babylonia, where Assyrian intervention brought order to the chaos left by years of Chaldean misrule, and consider the complex relationship between Assyria and Babylon—one rooted in reverence, rivalry, and shared civilization.This episode also introduces the deep structural changes Tiglath-Pileser initiated: the expansion of a professional standing army, the shift from vassalage to direct imperial administration, and the rising use of Aramaic alongside Akkadian. We explore the rise of eunuch officials, the growing importance of taxation within the core territory of Mat Assur, and how these policies would strengthen the empire in the short term while sowing the seeds of long-term resentment.From palace coups to temple politics, from highland conquests in the Zagros Mountains to the quiet rise of Nabonassar in Babylon, this episode places 745 BCE at the center of a vast historical transformation. It is a turning point not only in Assyrian history, but in the history of the entire ancient Near East, with consequences that would echo into the rise of the Babylonians, Persians, and Greeks. For students of ancient history, biblical history, Assyriology, and the origins of empire, this episode provides a detailed and foundational account of the birth of the Neo-Assyrian world order.I am also doing daily history facts again, at least until I run out of time again. You can find Oldest Stories Daily on Tiktok and Youtube Shorts.If you like the show, consider sharing with your friends, leaving a like, subscribing, or even supporting financially:Buy the Oldest Stories books: https://a.co/d/7Wn4jhSDonate here: https://oldeststories.net/or on patreon: https://patreon.com/JamesBleckleyor on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCG2tPxnHNNvMd0VrInekaA/joinYoutube and Patreon members get access to bonus content about Egyptian culture and myths.

When both parties are untrustworthy and cannot take an oath, Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Meir disagree about the proper procedure. A debate emerges about who holds which opinion, as one maintains the money should be split while the other argues that the oath returns to its original place, though it remains unclear which rabbi said which. Additionally, there is disagreement about the meaning of the position stating "the oath returns to its place." Rabbi Ami explains that one position is held by the rabbis in Israel while the other belongs to the rabbis in Babylonia. Rav Pappa clarifies that the Babylonian rabbis are Rav and Shmuel, while the Israeli position is represented by Rabbi Abba. Shimon ben Tarfon offers several statements concerning the importance of associating with the right people and avoiding the wrong ones. The Gemara examines the case of a storekeeper who was asked to pay someone's workers. The workers claim they never received payment while the storekeeper insists he paid them. The question arises whether Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi agreed with the Mishna's opinion that each party can take an oath to get paid by the employer. Another issue concerns contradictory witness testimony. If two groups of witnesses contradict each other in court, can they be believed to testify in a different case? Or since we know one group certainly lied, should we reject both groups' testimony in future cases? Rav Huna and Rav Chisda each take different positions on this matter.

When both parties are untrustworthy and cannot take an oath, Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Meir disagree about the proper procedure. A debate emerges about who holds which opinion, as one maintains the money should be split while the other argues that the oath returns to its original place, though it remains unclear which rabbi said which. Additionally, there is disagreement about the meaning of the position stating "the oath returns to its place." Rabbi Ami explains that one position is held by the rabbis in Israel while the other belongs to the rabbis in Babylonia. Rav Pappa clarifies that the Babylonian rabbis are Rav and Shmuel, while the Israeli position is represented by Rabbi Abba. Shimon ben Tarfon offers several statements concerning the importance of associating with the right people and avoiding the wrong ones. The Gemara examines the case of a storekeeper who was asked to pay someone's workers. The workers claim they never received payment while the storekeeper insists he paid them. The question arises whether Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi agreed with the Mishna's opinion that each party can take an oath to get paid by the employer. Another issue concerns contradictory witness testimony. If two groups of witnesses contradict each other in court, can they be believed to testify in a different case? Or since we know one group certainly lied, should we reject both groups' testimony in future cases? Rav Huna and Rav Chisda each take different positions on this matter.

In 2014, the late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks stood on the AJC Global Forum stage and delivered a powerful call to action: “We have to celebrate our Judaism. We have to have less oy and more joy… We never defined ourselves as victims. We never lost our sense of humor. Our ancestors were sometimes hated by gentiles, but they defined themselves as the people loved by God.” Over a decade later, at AJC Global Forum 2025, AJC's Director of Jewish Communal Partnerships, Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman, revisits that message in a special crossover episode between People of the Pod and Books and Beyond, the podcast of the Rabbi Sacks Legacy. She speaks with Dr. Tanya White, one of the inaugural Sacks Scholars and host of Books and Beyond, and Joanna Benarroch, Global Chief Executive of the Legacy, about Rabbi Sacks's enduring wisdom and what it means for the Jewish future. Resources: The State of the Jewish World Address: Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks The Inaugural Sacks Conversation with Tony Blair Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod:  Latest Episodes:  “They Were Bridge Builders”: Remembering Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky AJC's CEO Ted Deutch: Messages That Moved Me After the D.C. Tragedy Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: On this week 16 years ago, the late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks published Future Tense, a powerful vision of the future of Judaism, Jewish life, and the state of Israel in the 21st Century. Five years later, he delivered a progress report on that future to AJC Global Forum.  On the sidelines of this year's Global Forum, my colleague Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman spoke with two guests from the Rabbi Sacks Legacy, which was established after his death in 2020 to preserve and teach his timeless and universal wisdom. Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:   In 2014, Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks addressed our Global Forum stage to offer the state of the Jewish world. Modeled after the US President's State of the Union speech given every year before Congress and the American people, this address was intended to offer an overview of what the Jewish people were experiencing, and to look towards our future. The full video is available on AJC's website as well as the Sacks Legacy website. For today's episode, we are holding a crossover between AJC's People of the Pod podcast and Books and Beyond, the Rabbi Sacks podcast. On Books and Beyond, each episode features experts reflecting on particular works from Rabbi Sacks. Channeling that model, we'll be reflecting on Rabbi Sacks' State of the Jewish World here at AJC's 2025 Global Forum in New York. AJC has long taken inspiration from Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks and today, AJC and the Rabbi Sacks legacy have developed a close partnership. To help us understand his insights, I am joined by two esteemed guests. Dr. Tanya White is one of the inaugural Sacks Scholars and the founder and host of the podcast Books and Beyond, the Rabbi Sacks podcast. Joanna Benarroch is the Global Chief Executive of the Rabbi Sacks legacy. And prior to that, worked closely with Rabbi Sacks for over two decades in the Office of the Chief Rabbi.  Joanna, Tanya, thank you for being with us here at AJC's Global Forum.  Tanya White:   It's wonderful to be with you, Meggie. Joanna Benarroch:   Thank you so much, Meggie.  Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:   I want to get to the State of the Jewish World. I vividly remember that address. I was with thousands of people in the room, Jews from different walks of life, Jews from around the globe, as well as a number of non-Jewish leaders and dignitaries. And what was so special is that each of them held onto every single word.  He identifies these three areas of concern: a resurgence of antisemitism in Europe, delegitimization of Israel on the global stage, and the Iranian regime's use of terror and terror proxies towards Israel.  This was 2014, so with exception of, I would say today, needing to broaden, unfortunately, antisemitism far beyond Europe, to the skyrocketing rates we're living through today, it's really remarkable the foresight and the relevance that these areas he identified hold.  What do you think allowed Rabbi Sacks to see and understand these challenges so early, before many in the mainstream did? And how is his framing of antisemitism and its associated threats different from others? And I'll let  Tanya jump in and start. Tanya White:  So firstly, I think there was something very unique about Rabbi Sacks. You know, very often, since he passed, we keep asking the question, how was it that he managed to reach such a broad and diverse audience, from non Jews and even in the Jewish world, you will find Rabbi Sacks his books in a Chabad yeshiva, even a Haredi yeshiva, perhaps, and you will find them in a very left, liberal Jewish institution. There's something about his works, his writing, that somehow fills a space that many Jews of many denominations and many people, not just Jews, are searching for. And I think this unique synthesis of his knowledge, he was clearly a religious leader, but he wasn't just uniquely a religious leader.  He was a scholar of history, of philosophy, of political thought, and the ability to, I think, be able to not just read and have the knowledge, but to integrate the knowledge with what's going on at this moment is something that takes extreme prowess and a very deep sense of moral clarity that Rabbi Sacks had. And I would say more than moral clarity, is a moral imagination. I think it was actually Tony Blair. He spoke about the fact that Rabbi Sacks had this ability, this kind of, I think he even used the term moral imagination, that he was able to see something that other people just couldn't see.  Professor Berman from University of Bar Ilan, Joshua Berman, a brilliant Bible scholar. So he was very close to Rabbi Sacks, and he wrote an article in Israeli, actually, an Israeli newspaper, and he was very bold in calling Rabbi Sacks a modern day prophet.  What is a prophet? A prophet is someone who is able to see a big picture and is able to warn us when we're veering in the wrong direction. And that's what you see in the AJC address, and it's quite incredible, because it was 11 years ago, 2014. And he could have stood up today and said exactly the same thing. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks:  But there is nonetheless a new antisemitism. Unlike the old it isn't hatred of Jews for being a religion. It isn't hatred of Jews as a race. It is hatred of Jews as a sovereign nation in their own land, but it has taken and recycled all the old myths. From the blood libel to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.  Though I have to confess, as I said to the young leaders this morning, I have a very soft spot for antisemites, because they say the nicest things about Jews. I just love the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Because, according to this, Jews control the banks, Jews control the media, Jews control the world. Little though they know, we can't even control a shul board meeting. Tanya White:  So what's fascinating is, if you look at his book Future Tense, which was penned in 2009.The book itself is actually a book about antisemitism, and you'll note its title is very optimistic, Future Tense, because Rabbi Sacks truly, deeply believed, even though he understood exactly what antisemitism was, he believed that antisemitism shouldn't define us. Because if antisemitism defines who we are, we'll become the victims of external circumstances, rather than the agents of change in the future.  But he was very precise in his description of antisemitism, and the way in which he describes it has actually become a prism through which many people use today. Some people don't even quote him. We were discussing it yesterday, Joanna, he called it a mutating virus, and he speaks about the idea that antisemitism is not new, and in every generation, it comes in different forms. But what it does is like a virus. It attacks the immune system by mutating according to how the system is at the time.  So for example, today, people say, I'm not antisemitic, I'm just anti-Zionist. But what Rabbi Sacks said is that throughout history, when people sought to justify their antisemitism, they did it by recourse to the highest source of authority within that culture. So for example, in the Middle Ages, the highest recourse of authority was religion. So obviously we know the Christian pogroms and things that happen were this recourse the fact, well, the Jews are not Christians, and therefore we're justified in killing them.  In the Enlightenment period, it was science. So we have the and the Scientific Study of Race, right and Social Darwinism, which was used to predicate the Nazi ideology. Today, the highest value is, as we all know, human rights.  And so the virus of antisemitism has mutated itself in order to look like a justification of human rights. If we don't challenge that, we are going to end up on the wrong side of history. And unfortunately, his prediction we are seeing come very much to light today. Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  I want to turn to a different topic, and this actually transitioned well, because Tanya, you raised Prime Minister Tony Blair. Joanna, for our listeners who may have less familiarity with Rabbi Sacks, I would love for you to fill in a larger picture of Rabbi Sacks as one of the strongest global Jewish advocates of our time. He was a chief rabbi, his torah knowledge, his philosophical works make him truly a religious and intellectual leader of our generation.  At the same time, he was also counsel to the royal family, to secular thought leaders, world leaders, and in his remarks here at Global Forum, he actually raised addressing leading governing bodies at the European Union at that time, including Chancellor Merkel. These are not the halls that rabbis usually find themselves in. So I would love for you to explain to our audience, help us understand this part of Rabbi Sacks' life and what made him so effective in it.  Joanna Benarroch:  Thanks, Meggie. Over the last couple of weeks, I spent quite a bit of time with people who have been interested in learning more about Rabbi Sacks and looking at his archive, which we've just housed at the National Library in Israel. Then I spent quite a significant amount of time with one of our Sacks Scholars who's doing a project on exactly this.  How did he live that Judaism, engaged with the world that he wrote so eloquently about when he stepped down as chief rabbi. And a couple of days ago, I got an email, actually sent to the Sacks Scholar that I spent time with, from the gifted archivist who's working on cataloging Rabbi Sacks' archive. She brought our attention to a video that's on our website.  Rabbi Sacks was asked by a young woman who was a student at Harvard doing a business leadership course, and she asked Rabbi Sacks for his help with her assignment. So he answered several questions, but the question that I wanted to bring to your attention was: what difference have you sought to make in the world?  The difference that he sought to make in the world, and this is what he said, “is to make Judaism speak to people who are in the world, because it's quite easy being religious in a house of worship, in a synagogue or church, or even actually at home or in the school. But when you're out there in the marketplace, how do you retain those strong values?  And secondly, the challenge came from University. I was studying philosophy at a time when there were virtually no philosophers who were religious believers, or at least, none who were prepared to publicly confess to that. So the intellectual challenges were real. So how do you make Judaism speak to people in those worlds, the world of academic life, the world of economy?  And in the end, I realized that to do that credibly, I actually had to go into the world myself, whether it was broadcasting for the BBC or writing for The Times, and getting a little street cred in the world itself, which actually then broadened the mission. And I found myself being asked by politicians and people like that to advise them on their issues, which forced me to widen my boundaries.” So from the very beginning, I was reminded that John–he wrote a piece. I don't know if you recall, but I think it was in 2005, maybe a little bit earlier. He wrote a piece for The Times about the two teenagers killed a young boy, Jamie Bulger, and he wrote a piece in The Times. And on the back of that, John Major, the prime minister at the time, called him in and asked him for his advice.  Following that, he realized that he had something to offer, and what he would do is he would host dinners at home where he would bring key members of either the parliament or others in high positions to meet with members of the Jewish community. He would have one on one meetings with the Prime Minister of the time and others who would actually come and seek his advice and guidance.  As Tanya reflected, he was extremely well read, but these were books that he read to help him gain a better understanding into the world that we're living in. He took his time around general elections to ring and make contact with those members of parliament that had got in to office, from across the spectrum. So he wasn't party political. He spoke to everybody, and he built up. He worked really hard on those relationships.  People would call him and say so and so had a baby or a life cycle event, and he would make a point of calling and making contact with them. And you and I have discussed the personal effect that he has on people, making those building those relationships. So he didn't just do that within the Jewish community, but he really built up those relationships and broaden the horizons, making him a sought after advisor to many.  And we came across letters from the current king, from Prince Charles at the time, asking his guidance on a speech, or asking Gordon Brown, inviting him to give him serious advice on how to craft a good speech, how long he should speak for? And Gordon Brown actually gave the inaugural annual lecture, Memorial Lecture for Rabbi Sacks last in 2023 and he said, I hope my mentor will be proud of me.  And that gave us, I mean, it's emotional talking about it, but he really, really worked on himself. He realized he had something to offer, but also worked on himself in making his ideas accessible to a broad audience. So many people could write and can speak. He had the ability to do both, but he worked on himself from quite a young age on making his speeches accessible. In the early days, they were academic and not accessible. Why have a good message if you can't share it with a broad audience? Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  What I also am thinking about, we're speaking, of course, here at an advocacy conference. And on the one hand, part of what you're describing are the foundations of being an excellent Jewish educator, having things be deeply accessible.  But the other part that feels very relevant is being an excellent global Jewish advocate is engaging with people on all sides and understanding that we need to engage with whomever is currently in power or may who may be in power in four years. And it again, speaks to his foresight.  Joanna Benarroch:  You know, to your point about being prophetic, he was always looking 10, 15, 20 years ahead. He was never looking at tomorrow or next week. He was always, what are we doing now that can affect our future? How do I need to work to protect our Jewish community? He was focused whilst he was chief rabbi, obviously on the UK, but he was thinking about the global issues that were going to impact the Jewish community worldwide. Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  Yes. I want to turn to the antidote that Rabbi Sacks proposed when he spoke here at Global Forum. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks:  I will tell you the single most important thing we have to do, more important than all the others. We have to celebrate our Judaism. We have to have less oy and more joy.  Do you know why Judaism survived? I'll tell you. Because we never defined ourselves as victims. Because we never lost our sense of humor. Because never in all the centuries did we internalize the disdain of the world. Yes, our ancestors were sometimes hated by gentiles, but they defined themselves as the people loved by God. Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  So he highlights the need to proudly embrace the particularism of Judaism, which really in today's world, feels somewhat at odds with the very heavy reliance we have on universalism in Western society. And underpinning this, Rabbi Sacks calls on us to embrace the joy of Judaism, simchatah, Chaim, or, as he so fittingly puts it, less oy and more joy. How did both of these shape Rabbi Sacks's wider philosophy and advocacy, and what do they mean for us today? Tanya White:  Rabbi Sacks speaks about the idea of human beings having a first and second language. On a metaphorical level, a second language is our particularities. It's the people, it's the family we're born. We're born into. It's where we learn who we are. It's what we would call today in sociology, our thick identity. Okay, it's who, who I am, what I believe in, where I'm going to what my story is. But all of us as human beings also have a first language. And that first language can be, it can manifest itself in many different ways. First language can be a specific society, a specific nation, and it can also be a global my global humanity, my first language, though, has to, I have to be able to speak my first language, but to speak my first language, meaning my universal identity, what we will call today, thin identity. It won't work if I don't have a solid foundation in my thick identity, in my second language. I have nothing to offer my first language if I don't have a thick, particular identity.  And Rabbi Sacks says even more than that. As Jews, we are here to teach the world the dignity of difference. And this was one of Rabbi Sacks' greatest messages. He has a book called The Dignity of Difference, which he wrote on the heels of 9/11. And he said that Judaism comes and you have the whole story of Babel in the Bible, where the people try to create a society that is homogenous, right? The narrative begins, they were of one people and one language, you know, and what, and a oneness of things. Everyone was the same. And Rabbi Sacks says that God imposes diversity on them. And then sees, can they still be unified, even in their diversity? And they can't.  So Rabbi Sacks answers that the kind of antidote to that is Abraham. Who is Abraham? Abraham the Ivri. Ivri is m'ever, the other. Abraham cut this legacy. The story of Abraham is to teach the world the dignity of difference.  And one of the reasons we see antisemitism when it rears its head is when there is no tolerance for the other in society. There is no tolerance for the particular story. For my second language. For the way in which I am different to other people. There's no real space for diversity, even when we may use hashtags, okay, or even when we may, you know, proclaim that we are a very diverse society. When there is no space for the Jew, that's not true dignifying of difference. And so I think for Rabbi Sacks, he told someone once that one of his greatest, he believed, that one of his greatest novelties he brought into the world was the idea of Torah and chochma, which is torah and wisdom, universal wisdom. And Rabbi Sacks says that we need both.  We need to have the particularity of our identity, of our language, of our literacy, of where we came from, of our belief system. But at the same time, we also need to have universal wisdom, and we have to constantly be oscillating and be kind of trying to navigate the space between these two things. And that's exactly what Rabbi Sacks did.  And so I would say, I'll actually just finish with a beautiful story that he used to always tell. He would tell the story, and he heard this story from the late Lubavitcher, Menachem Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, who was a very big influence on Rabbi Sacks and the leader of the Chabad movement.  So in the story, there's two people that are schlepping rocks up a mountain, two workers, and one of them just sees his bags that are full of rocks and just sees no meaning or purpose in his work. The other understands that he's carrying diamonds in his bag.  And one day they get a different bag, and in that bag there's rubies, and the person who carries the rocks sees the rubies as rocks, again, sees that as a burden. But the person who's carrying the rubies and understands their value, even though they may not be diamonds, understands the values of the stones, will see them in a different way.  The Lubavitcher Rebbe said, if we see our identity, our Judaism, as stones to carry as a burden that we have to just schlep up a mountain, then we won't see anyone else's particular religion or particular belief system or particularity as anything to be dignified or to be valued.  But if we see our religion as diamonds, we'll understand that other people's religions, though for me, they may be rubies, they're still of value. You have to understand that your religion is diamonds, and you have to know what your religion is, understand what it is. You have to embrace your particularity. You have to engage with it, value it, and then go out into the world and advocate for it. And that, to me, was exactly what Rabbi Sacks did. Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  So much of what you're outlining is the underpinning of being a successful engager in interfaith and inter religious work. And Rabbi Sacks, of course, was such a leader there. At  AJC, we have taken inspiration from Rabbi Sacks and have long engaged in interfaith and inter-religious work, that's exactly a linchpin of it, of preaching one's own faith in order to engage with others. Tanya White:  That's the oy and the joy. For Rabbi Sacks, it's exactly that, if I see it as the oy, which is schlepping it up the mountain, well, I'm not going to be a very good advocate, but if I see it as the joy, then my advocacy, it's like it shines through. Joanna Benarroch:  It's very interesting, because he was interviewed by Christian Amanpour on CNN in 2014 just after he stepped down, as she she quoted the phrase “less oy and more joy” back to him, referring to his description of the Jewish community. When he came into office in 1991 he was worried about rising assimilation and out-marriage. And she said: How did you turn it around?  He said, “We've done the book of Lamentations for many centuries. There's been a lot of antisemitism and a lot of negativity to Jewish identity. And if you think of yourself, exactly as you're describing, as the people who get hated by others, or you've got something too heavy to carry, you're not going to want to hand that on to your children.  If you've got a very open society, the question is, why should I be anything in particular? Being Jewish is a very particular kind of Jewish identity, but I do feel that our great religious traditions in Judaism is the classic instance of this.  We have enormous gifts to offer in the 21st century, a very strong sense of community, very supportive families, a dedicated approach to education. And we do well with our children. We're a community that believes in giving. We are great givers, charitably and in other ways.  So I think when you stay firm in an identity, it helps you locate yourself in a world that sometimes otherwise can be seen to be changing very fast and make people very anxious. I think when you're rooted in a people that comes through everything that fate and history can throw at it, and has kept surviving and kept being strong and kept going, there's a huge thing for young people to carry with them.” And then he adds, to finish this interview, he said, “I think that by being what we uniquely are, we contribute to humanity what only we can give.” What Rabbi Sacks had was a deep sense of hope. He wore a yellow tie to give people hope and to make them smile. That's why he wore a yellow tie on major occasions. You know, sunshine, bringing hope and a smile to people's faces. And he had hope in humanity and in the Jewish people.  And he was always looking to find good in people and things. And when we talk about less oy and more joy. He took pleasure in the simple things in life. Bringing music into the community as a way to uplift and bring the community together.  We just spent a lovely Shabbat together with AJC, at the AJC Shabbaton with the students. And he would have loved nothing more than being in shul, in synagogue with the community and joining in.  Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  Thank you Joanna, and that's beautiful. I want to end our conversation by channeling how Rabbi Sacks concluded his 2014 address. He speaks about the need for Jewish unity at that time. Let's take a listen.  Rabbi Jonathan Sacks:  We must learn to overcome our differences and our divisions as Jews and work together as a global people. Friends, consider this extraordinary historical fact: Jews in history have been attacked by some of the greatest empires the world has ever known, empires that bestrode the narrow world like a colossus. That seemed invulnerable in their time. Egypt of the pharaohs, Assyria, Babylonia, the Alexandrian Empire, the Roman Empire, the medieval empires of Christianity and Islam, all the way up to the Third Reich and the Soviet Union. Each one of those, seemingly invulnerable, has been consigned to history, while our tiny people can still stand and sing Am Yisrael Chai. Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  In Rabbi Sacks' A Letter in the Scroll, he talks about the seminal moment in his life when he most deeply understood Jewish peoplehood and unity. And that was 1967, the Six Day War, when the Jewish people, of course, witnessed the State of Israel on the brink of existential threat. To our AJC audience, this may ring particularly familiar because it was evoked in a piece by Mijal Bitton, herself a Sacks Scholar, a guest on our podcast, a guest Tanya on your podcast, who wrote a piece about a month after 10/7 titled "That Pain You're Feeling is Peoplehood'.  And that piece went viral in the Jewish world. And she draws this parallel between the moment that Rabbi Sacks highlights in 1967 and 10, seven, I should note, Tanya, of course, is referenced in that article that Mijal wrote. For our audiences, help us understand the centrality of peoplehood and unity to Rabbi Sacks' vision of Judaism. And as we now approach a year and a half past 10/7 and have seen the resurgence of certain communal fractures, what moral clarity can we take from Rabbi Sacks in this moment? Tanya White:  Okay, so it's interesting you talked about Mijal, because I remember straight after 7/10 we were in constant conversation–how it was impacting us, each of us in our own arenas, in different ways. And one of the things I said to her, which I found really comforting, was her constant ability to be in touch. And I think like this, you know, I like to call it after the name of a book that I read to my kid, The Invisible String. This idea that there are these invisible strings. In the book, the mother tells the child that all the people we love have invisible strings that connect us. And when we pull on the string, they feel it the other side.  1967 was the moment Rabbi Sacks felt that invisible pull on the string. They have a very similar trajectory. The seventh of October was the moment in which many, many Jews, who were perhaps disengaged, maybe a little bit ambivalent about their Jewish identity, they felt the tug of that invisible string. And then the question is, what do we do in order to maintain that connection? And I think for Rabbi Sacks, that was really the question. He speaks about 1967 being the moment in which he says, I realized at that moment every, you know, in Cambridge, and everything was about choice. And, you know, 1960s philosophy and enlightenment philosophy says, at that moment, I realized I hadn't chosen Judaism. Judaism had chosen me.  And from that moment forth, Rabbi Sacks feels as if he had been chosen. Judaism had chosen him for a reason. He was a Jew for a reason. And I think today, many, many Jews are coming back to that question. What does it mean that I felt that pull of the string on the seventh of October?  Rabbi Sacks' answer to that question of, where do we go from here? I think very simply, would be to go back to the analogy. You need to work out why Judaism is a diamond. And once you understand why Judaism is a diamond and isn't a burden to carry on my back, everything else will fall into place.  Because you will want to advocate for that particularity and what that particularity brings to the world. In his book, Future Tense, which, again, was a book about antisemitism, there was a picture of a lighthouse at the front of the book. That's how Rabbi Sacks saw the antidote for antisemitism, right? Is that we need to be the lighthouse. Because that's our role, globally, to be able to be the light that directs the rest of the world when they don't know where they're going. And we are living in a time of dizziness at the moment, on every level, morally, sociologically, psychologically, people are dizzy. And Judaism has, and I believe this is exactly what Rabbi Sacks advocated for, Judaism has a way to take us out of that maze that we found ourselves in. And so I think today, more than ever, in response to you, yes, it is peoplehood that we feel. And then the question is, how do we take that feeling of peoplehood and use it towards really building what we need to do in this world. The advocacy that Judaism needs to bring into the world. Meggie Wyschogrod Fredman:  We all have a role, a reason, a purpose. When Rabbi Sacks spoke to us a decade ago, more than a decade ago, at this point, those who were in the room felt the moral imperative to stand up to advocate and why, as Jews, we had that unique role.  I am so honored that today, now with Rabbi Sacks not here, you continue to give us that inspiration of why we are a letter in the scroll, why we must stand up and advocate. So thank you, Tanya and Joanna, for joining us at Global Forum and for this enlightening conversation. Tanya White:  Thank you so much for having us. Thank you. Joanna Benarroch:  Thank you so much.  Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, please be sure to listen as two AJC colleagues pay tribute to their friends Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky who were brutally murdered outside the Capital Jewish Museum in May.   

Is there a board game theme we can all agree on? We're discussing games with largely inoffensive epicurean themes. Kenan takes us on a pleasant stroll through the rapidly changing landscape of board game subject matter while Alba cooks up a spicy quiz show. Kenan reports back on the many strange sights and inhabitants of Dice Tower West in Las Vegas. Then it's time to chomp on some appetizing food-based games. Discussed: Wingspan, Dro Polter, Downfall of Pompeii, SETI, Ostia, Trajan, Bohnanza, Babylonia, The Quest for El Dorado, Cacao, Sushi Go!, Viticulture, Fromage, Tzolk'in, Hungry Hungry Hippos, Coffee Rush, Nusfjord, Clank!, Everdell, On Mars, Vinhos, Evolution/Oceans, interface design, themes that lighten the load, themes that catfish you, games that are invitations, and how to talk to your Zoomer intern. Bon Appétit. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Rabin brought the Torah of Rabbi Yochanan in Israel to Babylonia to establish the difference between a false oath, not keeping one's word, and swearing in vain (with 3 different verses in the Torah that establish the prohibition). Plus, every negative commandment that has an action - gets lashes. But if there's no action, no lashes -- except for the exceptions, where lashes would be incurred. Also, establishing the views of the sages with regard to the unspecified statements - and what they mean in terms of amounts, and so on. For example: if a minute amount of food is prohibited, does it incur a sacrifice? In part, it's contingent on establishing the definitions - what is the minimum amount for eating to count as eating?

We talk about Assyria (and to a lesser extent Babylonia) during the Iron Age.

Born Again - Babylonia (Mitchell Frederick ReWire) I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians Ha! I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of Mitchell Frederick's Eye. Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive ; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive ; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians Ha! This is for my Dancers! I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of Mitchell Frederick's Eye; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of Mitchell Frederick's Eye. Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive ; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive ; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians Ha! This is for my Hustlers! I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of things I do to survive; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians I was born in a system that doesn't give a fuck About you nor me nor the life Don't be a victim of Mitchell Frederick's Eye; Cause I won't wish you any good, you Babylonians If you'd like to support me after all that I've done for this industry.... now would be the right time. I'm getting old and really need some help if you can help a brother out. I have a Patreon and all my magic is free from the get-go. also feel free to check out the radio station! I'm looking for DJs to promote their mixes on the station. we get 10's of Thousands of plays every week. all organic and proper. its great exposure rooted through my OG network of real fans and listeners. one love baby

When Chanania, Mishael and Azaria were saved from the fiery furnace, it shed a bad light on the rest of the Jews, as the gentiles said, if their God is so great, how can the rest of the people be worshipping idols! God wanted to destroy the rest of the Jews because they were worshipping idols, but when God saw the actions of Chanania, Mishael and Azaria, his anger subsided. The sages try to fill in some missing details from the story. What happened to Chanania, Mishael and Azaria after they were saved, as they are not directly heard from again? Several options are brought by amoraim and their opinions match those of tannaim. Where was Daniel when Chanania, Mishael and Azaria were thrown into the fire? Several possibilities are offered. According to a braita, God, Daniel and Nevuchadnetzer each did not want Daniel to be there - each for their own reason. Two false prophets named Achav and Tzidkia were also thrown into a fire by Nevuchadnetzer, but were killed. What is the background story? According to the midrash, Yehoshua the High Priest was sent in with them, but was only singed and came out alive. Why was Yehoshua punished? In the book of Ruth, Ruth tells Naomi that Boaz gave her six grains of barley. Bar Kapara extrapolated this verse to mean that by giving her six grains, he was alluding to her that six sons would be born to her who were each blessed with six blessings - David, the Messiah, Daniel, Chanania, Mishael and Azaria. Verses are brought to show how each was blessed in six ways. There is a debate, however, about Chanania, Mishael and Azaria's lineage and whether or not they were from the tribe of Judah. Yishayahu prophesizes to Chizkiyahu that his descendants will be taken to Babylonia and will become sarisim. The Gemara understands this to be referring to Daniel, Chanania, Mishael and Azaria. What is the meaning of the word sarisim in this context? Rav and Rabbi Chanina disagree. Does it mean they were eunuchs? Or does it mean they were cut off from worshipping idols? The Gemara raises two difficulties against Rav, that they were eunuchs, and one difficulty against Rabbi Chanina, that they were cut off from worshipping idols. The difficulties are brought from verses in Daniel and Yeshayahu but are resolved. Why was the book of Ezra, which much of it was said and written by Nechemia, not called Nechemia? Two suggestions are brought.

If you dream about a white horse (thanks to Zechariah's prophecy), that's a good thing (alluding to God's anger abating). Also, more on Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. With imports to Babylonia from Alexandria, possibly to the exclusion of breeding Egyptian hogs... Plus, Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar's idol. Plus, sexual immorality that is rejected by Nebuchadnezzar, no less. Plus, the experience of another three in the fiery furnace: Yehoshua, the high priest, Achav, and Tzidkiyahu (with a mini-study on Yehoshua, the high priest and a complicated interweaving of verses from many texts). Also, what traits are to be expected in the messiah? What about Bar Koziva who became Bar Kochba? After all, he said: I am the messiah! (What was his leadership? Could he have been the messiah? A false messiah?) Plus, the fortitude to withstand distraction, laughter, and the need for the bathroom, among other factors, when standing in the non-Jewish king's court. Plus, the way Jews are particularly geared to the messiah and redemption in historical periods of travail.

When Chanania, Mishael and Azaria were saved from the fiery furnace, it shed a bad light on the rest of the Jews, as the gentiles said, if their God is so great, how can the rest of the people be worshipping idols! God wanted to destroy the rest of the Jews because they were worshipping idols, but when God saw the actions of Chanania, Mishael and Azaria, his anger subsided. The sages try to fill in some missing details from the story. What happened to Chanania, Mishael and Azaria after they were saved, as they are not directly heard from again? Several options are brought by amoraim and their opinions match those of tannaim. Where was Daniel when Chanania, Mishael and Azaria were thrown into the fire? Several possibilities are offered. According to a braita, God, Daniel and Nevuchadnetzer each did not want Daniel to be there - each for their own reason. Two false prophets named Achav and Tzidkia were also thrown into a fire by Nevuchadnetzer, but were killed. What is the background story? According to the midrash, Yehoshua the High Priest was sent in with them, but was only singed and came out alive. Why was Yehoshua punished? In the book of Ruth, Ruth tells Naomi that Boaz gave her six grains of barley. Bar Kapara extrapolated this verse to mean that by giving her six grains, he was alluding to her that six sons would be born to her who were each blessed with six blessings - David, the Messiah, Daniel, Chanania, Mishael and Azaria. Verses are brought to show how each was blessed in six ways. There is a debate, however, about Chanania, Mishael and Azaria's lineage and whether or not they were from the tribe of Judah. Yishayahu prophesizes to Chizkiyahu that his descendants will be taken to Babylonia and will become sarisim. The Gemara understands this to be referring to Daniel, Chanania, Mishael and Azaria. What is the meaning of the word sarisim in this context? Rav and Rabbi Chanina disagree. Does it mean they were eunuchs? Or does it mean they were cut off from worshipping idols? The Gemara raises two difficulties against Rav, that they were eunuchs, and one difficulty against Rabbi Chanina, that they were cut off from worshipping idols. The difficulties are brought from verses in Daniel and Yeshayahu but are resolved. Why was the book of Ezra, which much of it was said and written by Nechemia, not called Nechemia? Two suggestions are brought.

The Megilla tells us that Ester, the heroine of the Purim story, had another name – Hadasa. What might be the significance of this second name? We should perhaps assume that if the Megilla found it necessary to inform us of Ester's other name, this detail must be important. What does the name "Hadasa" represent, and what does it tell us about Ester's role in the Purim story? The historical backdrop to the Purim story is the destruction of the Bet Ha'mikdash and the Jewish People's banishment to exile. It was during this period, after the Jews had spent over half a century in Babylonia – which was taken over by Persia – that the story told in the Megilla unfolded. We can easily imagine what was going through the Jews' minds at this time. They must have assumed that their special relationship with G-d was over. After all, G-d had sent the Babylonian marauders to set His Bet Ha'mikdash ablaze, and to bring the nation into exile. Decades passed, and they remained far from their homeland. They naturally thought that they were no longer Hashem's special nation, and there was thus no longer any reason to learn Torah, to perform Misvot, or to live a religious lifestyle. Indeed, the Gemara teaches that at Ahashverosh's feast, he came dressed in the special garments of the Kohen Gadol, and used the utensils of the Bet Ha'mikdash. He was celebrating the fact that the Jews' exile was permanent, that they would never be returning to the Land of Israel and would never rebuild the Bet Ha'mikdash. The Jews participated in this feast, showing that they shared this belief. Of course, this was a grave mistake. King Shlomo, the wisest of all men, writes in the Book of Kohelet (4:12), "Ve'ha'hut Ha'meshulash Lo Bi'mhera Yinatek" – "The triple thread will not easily be snapped." A single thread can easily be torn, but if three threads are woven together, this becomes a rope, which is far more difficult to cut. The Jewish Nation is a "triple thread," having been built by three patriarchs – Abraham, Yishak and Yaakob. Had our nation been created by just a single founder, or even two founders, this would not have established a strong enough foundation to withstand the many challenges and upheavals that would occur over the course of Jewish history. But our nation was built by three "threads," three outstanding figures, laying for us a foundation that can never be broken. For this reason, the verse in the Book of Debarim (32:9) says, "Yaakob Hebel Nahalato" – Yaakob is the "rope" of G-d's "lot," the Jewish Nation. Yaakob was the third patriarch, and thus he turned the "threads" of his two predecessors into a "Hebel," a rope, that can never be broken. The Jewish Nation is eternal, and its special relationship with Hashem is eternal. A child might anger his parents, and this relationship might at times be strained, even, perhaps, under drastic circumstances, to the point where the parent must send the child out of the home for a period of time, but he will always be their child, and their love for him will always remain. Similarly, even when Hashem punishes Am Yisrael, and even when He drives us into exile, His love for His treasured nation is everlasting. This was Ester's message to the Jewish People when they faced the threat of annihilation. They had despaired, figuring that G-d had abandoned them, but she reminded them that their bond with Hashem is everlasting and unconditional. She therefore decreed a three-day fast – to remind them of the "Hut Ha'meshulash," the "triple thread" that forms the foundation of Am Yisrael, which cannot ever be broken. Ester was therefore called "Hadasa," an allusion to the "Hadas," the myrtle branch, one of the four species we take on Sukkot. The Torah calls the Hadas "Anaf Etz Abot" (Vayikra 23:40) – a branch with a thick covering of leaves – and Rashi explains this to mean "Kelu'im Ke'hebel" – "braided like a rope." The leaves of the Hadas branch grow in groups of three, with every three leaves emerging from the same spot on the stem. The Hadas' thick covering of leaves is thus likened to a rope, three threads woven together, and it symbolizes the concept of "Yaakob Hebel Nahalato," G-d's eternal bond with the Jewish Nation. In fact, the word "Hut" (thread) in Gematria equals 23, such that three threads are represented by the number 69 (23 X 3) – which is the Gematria of "Hadas." Ester was called "Hadasa" because this was precisely the message she conveyed to the Jews in exile – that Hashem's love for them was everlasting, that this bond could never be broken. We all recognize the numerous spiritual problems that plague the Jewish People in our day and age. It is clear to all of us that there is so much to improve, so many difficult problems to address. But we must never feel discouraged or fall into despair. At no point may we ever think, as the Jews in Persia thought, that Hashem no longer loves us or cares about us, that our special relationship with Him has ended. We must remember that our special bond can never be broken, that Hashem loves us under all circumstances, even when we aren't acting as we should. Sometimes this love is more evident, and sometimes less, but we must believe that it is always present. This awareness should give us the encouragement and resolve we need to work toward growth and improvement, to strive to elevate ourselves as well as our fellow Jews, and thereby strengthen the eternal bond between us and our Creator.

The members of Overeaters Anonymous share their experience, strength, and hope. www.oasgive.org

List of kings who governed entire world, calculations and miscalculations of the 70 year exile (Babylonia and Persia Mede)

The Dark Side, that monstrous, powerful energy from the Star Wars universe is, per George Lucas, "grasping, clutching, greedy desire. It is to want; to control; to have supreme power.” And so, we arrive at Genesis 11 and the remarkable story of the Tower of Babel; something I will refer to this morning as, “The Empire Strikes Back,” for that is exactly what happens here.  The whole post-flood population gets together to do something that not even their ancestors would have dared. They begin building a tower into heaven. This was a siege tower. Their goal was clear, as the Babylonian word for "babel" means, “gateway.” Babylonia means, “gateway to the gods.” They intended to storm heaven; to throw down the Creator; and put themselves in God's place. A line from Bob Dylan summarizes the "Dark Side" - not only of the Force - but as a constant of human nature: “God is in his heaven; and we all want what is his. But power and greed, and corruptible seed, seems to be all there is.”

Send us a textIn the last episode we covered the Early Dynastic Period, from about 2900-2350 B.C. We left off with discussing the differences between northern and southern Babylonia and how the city of Kish functioned as an intermediate point between these two worlds. We begin this episode with the world's first empire: the Akkadian Empire – created by Sargon the Great.Checkout the video version at:https://www.youtube.com/@DWAncientBabylonSupport the showThis Podcast series is available on all major platforms.See more resources, maps, and information at:https://www.dwworldhistory.comOutlines, Maps, and Episode Guides for this series are available for download at:https://www.patreon.com/DWWorldHistory

In the second half of my conversation with Dr. Gad Barnea from the University of Haifa, he rejects the idea that the Exodus stories about leaving Egypt are merely tales about leaving Babylonia, and he presents his own hypothesis.Dr. Barnea is a Faculty Member at the University of Haifa, Department of Jewish History and Thought, he is a Research Fellow  at the École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem, and for Project BEST at the University of Haifa, Department Of Biblical Studies, and an Associate Fellow at the Department of History of the Royal Historical Society.Click here totoo listen to the As Depicted on Film episode about the Ten Commandments (1956) by Cecil B DeMille Join our tribe on Patreon! Check out these cool pages on the podcast's website:Home PageWho wrote the Bible: Timeline and authorsAncient maps: easy to follow maps to see which empire ruled what and whenClick here to see Exodus divided into "sources" according to the Documentary Hypothesis The podcast is written, edited and produced by Gil Kidron

Send us a textIn the last episode we covered the fourth millennium, roughly between 3500-3000 B.C. with the origins of the city-state. We begin this episode with a focus on Babylonia during the Early Dynastic Period, from 2900-2350 B.C.CONTENTS00:00 - Intro01:29 - 3.1 - Political Developments in Southern Mesopotamia06:22 - 3.2 - The Sumerian King List08:52 - 3.3 - The Umma-Lagash Border Conflict13:19 - 3.4 - Writing and Language15:10 - 3.5 - Northern MesopotamiaCheckout the video version at:https://www.youtube.com/@DWAncientBabylonSupport the showThis Podcast series is available on all major platforms.See more resources, maps, and information at:https://www.dwworldhistory.comOutlines, Maps, and Episode Guides for this series are available for download at:https://www.patreon.com/DWWorldHistory

Pastor John Ryan Cantu brings this week's message, “The Blessing." Key Verse: Genesis 14:1-20 NLT: “About this time war broke out in the region. King Amraphel of Babylonia, King Arioch of Ellasar, King Kedorlaomer of Elam, and King Tidal of Goiim fought against King Bera of Sodom, King Birsha of Gomorrah, King Shinab of Admah, King Shemeber of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (also called Zoar). This second group of kings joined forces in Siddim Valley (that is, the valley of the Dead Sea). For twelve years they had been subject to King Kedorlaomer, but in the thirteenth year they rebelled against him. One year later Kedorlaomer and his allies arrived and defeated the Rephaites at Ashteroth-karnaim, the Zuzites at Ham, the Emites at Shaveh-kiriathaim, and the Horites at Mount Seir, as far as El-paran at the edge of the wilderness. Then they turned back and came to En-mishpat (now called Kadesh) and conquered all the territory of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites living in Hazazon-tamar. Then the rebel kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela (also called Zoar) prepared for battle in the valley of the Dead Sea. They fought against King Kedorlaomer of Elam, King Tidal of Goiim, King Amraphel of Babylonia, and King Arioch of Ellasar—four kings against five. As it happened, the valley of the Dead Sea was filled with tar pits. And as the army of the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, some fell into the tar pits, while the rest escaped into the mountains. The victorious invaders then plundered Sodom and Gomorrah and headed for home, taking with them all the spoils of war and the food supplies. They also captured Lot—Abram's nephew who lived in Sodom—and carried off everything he owned. But one of Lot's men escaped and reported everything to Abram the Hebrew, who was living near the oak grove belonging to Mamre the Amorite. Mamre and his relatives, Eshcol and Aner, were Abram's allies. When Abram heard that his nephew Lot had been captured, he mobilized the 318 trained men who had been born into his household. Then he pursued Kedorlaomer's army until he caught up with them at Dan. There he divided his men and attacked during the night. Kedorlaomer's army fled, but Abram chased them as far as Hobah, north of Damascus. Abram recovered all the goods that had been taken, and he brought back his nephew Lot with his possessions and all the women and other captives. After Abram returned from his victory over Kedorlaomer and all his allies, the king of Sodom went out to meet him in the valley of Shaveh (that is, the King's Valley). And Melchizedek, the king of Salem and a priest of God Most High, brought Abram some bread and wine. Melchizedek blessed Abram with this blessing: “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. And blessed be God Most High, who has defeated your enemies for you.” Then Abram gave Melchizedek a tenth of all the goods he had recovered.” Sermon Topics: Blessing If you enjoyed the podcast, please subscribe and share it with your friends on social media. For more information about PNEUMA Church, visit our website at mypneumachurch.org.  Connect with Us: Instagram: https://instagram.com/mypneumachurch YouTube: https://youtube.com/mypneumachurch Facebook: https://facebook.com/mypneumachurch Time Stamps 00:00 - Introduction 00:30 - Welcome 02:34 - Genesis 14:1–20 NLT 06:14 - The Blessing

In this episode, we'll explore the critical decade between the Greek victory at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC and Xerxes' invasion of Greece in 480 BC—a period that shaped the course of the Greco-Persian Wars. Following their defeat at Marathon, the Persians, under King Darius I, began preparing for a renewed campaign, but internal challenges, including rebellions and Darius' death in 486 BC, delayed their plans.With the ascension of Xerxes I, the Persian Empire moved decisively. Xerxes crushed revolts in Egypt and Babylonia and set his sights on Greece, organizing one of the largest invasion forces in ancient history to fulfill his father's uncompleted ambitions of conquest.Meanwhile, growing awareness of the Persian threat pushed some Greek city-states toward greater unity. Despite internal rivalries, alliances began to form, with Athens and Sparta taking the lead in preparing for the storm to come. But would this fledgling cooperation be enough to stand against Xerxes' colossal forces?Let's find out. Contents:00:00  Recap and Introduction01:07 Darius' Legacy04:07 Xerxes becomes King06:38 The Great Debate: Mardonius15:47 The Great Debate: Artabanus19:45 On to War!27:15 The Grand Army of Xerxes 35:07 Gelon of Sicily and the Search for Allies45:52 Thank You and PatronsSupport the show

Today's daf is sponsored by Shulamith and Joel Cohn in loving memory of "Bubby," Rebbitzen Esther Predmesky whose yahrzeit is today, asara b'tevet. Today's day is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of the birth of a grandson, son of Naomi and Dani Weinberger, to our friend and co-learner, Deena Rabinovich. "May the entire family enjoy much nachat from the new arrival as he grows l'Torah (and l'daf), l'chuppa and l'maasim tovim.  May we all continue to celebrate smachot "ad beli dai." Ravin brings (in the name of Rabbi Yochanan) a fourth explanation for Rabbi Meir's position that allows litigants to disqualify witnesses. Reish Lakish's choice of words showed respect for Rabbi Meir, which leads the Gemara into a broader discussion about scholarly respect for one another. Through various interpretations of verses (primarily from Zechariah), the Gemara contrasts the behavior of scholars in Israel and Babylonia. The Israeli rabbis are portrayed as having mutual respect, while the Babylonian rabbis are described as lacking such respect. The text then explores complex scenarios about litigant rights. If someone accepts a single witness, a relative of the opposing party as witness or judge, or agrees to a weaker oath than required, can they later change their mind? This raises questions about whether this debate applies only to cases where the litigant is forgiving a claim (making it more likely they intended to commit to the outcome), or even to cases where they must pay (less likely they intended to commit). There's also discussion about whether this applies before or after the court's ruling. Who is disqualified from being a witness?  Why is someone who gambled not allowed to testify - is it because of asmachta (problematic conditional commitments) or because not having legitimate employment raises concerns they might be bribed to give false testimony?

In the context of disqualifying judges, Resh Laskish expresses great respect for Rabbi Meir, despite his unusual opinion. Which deference the Gemara seems to query. So, how did the sages relate to each other? How was Baylonia different? Plus, drawing connections between arrogance and poverty, and the Torah scholars in Babylonia vs. Persia (Elam). Also, a new mishnah: litigants can accept otherwise people who are not valid to be judges. But whether they are can change their minds with regard to that acceptance is a machloket. And the Gemara discusses the timing of that machloket - when can a litigant change his acceptance? Plus, a list of the disqualifiers.

Today we talk about the governors Nergal-Erish and Mannu-ki-Mat-Assur as they play their part in building the Assyrian empire in a number of often unheralded and underappreciated ways. Then we look at important developments in Babylonia related to the Chaldeans and Itu'eans. Mannu-ki-Mat-Assur's archives: https://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/atae?zoom=67&bkmk=P527340 If you like the show, consider sharing with your friends, leaving a like, subscribing, or even supporting financially: Buy the Oldest Stories books: https://a.co/d/7Wn4jhS Donate here: https://oldeststories.net/ or on patreon: https://patreon.com/JamesBleckley or on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCG2tPxnHNNvMd0VrInekaA/join Youtube and Patreon members get access to bonus content about Egyptian culture and myths.

Due to the brave actions of Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, who defied the Roman decree forbidding semicha (ordination), the tradition of rabbinic ordination continued. Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava was killed for this act, but not before he ordained Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi Yosi, and Rabbi Elazar ben Shamoa. Rav Avia added that Rabbi Nechemia was also ordained at this time. While the story appears to suggest that one person alone could perform ordination, this contradicts a braita requiring three judges. The Gemara resolves this contradiction by explaining that two others must have been present with Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi ruled that rabbinic ordination cannot occur outside of Israel. The Gemara explores whether someone in Israel could ordain someone in Babylonia through written authorization or a messenger. The conclusion is that ordination requires the physical presence of both parties - the ordainer and the one being ordained must be together in person, as demonstrated by several stories of failed attempts at ordination on account of the distance. Rabbi Zeira initially hid to avoid ordination, believing it better to remain humble and avoid positions of power. However, upon hearing that one's sins are forgiven when rising to a position of authority, he agreed to be ordained. Regarding the egla arufa ceremony, Rabbi Shimon holds it requires three judges, while Rabbi Yehuda requires five. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov presents a third position not mentioned in the Mishna - that the king and High Priest must also participate. Rav Yosef concludes that Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov requires the entire Great Sanhedrin to attend, supporting this with a tannatic source. While Abaye interprets this source differently, a braita is brought supporting Rav Yosef's reading. Maaser sheni whose value is unclear must be evaluated by three people. What Is meant by the term "whose value is unclear"? What kind of people can do the evaluation? The Mishna also states that evaluation of consecrated movable items requires three judges. This contradicts Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov's position requiring ten, which he derives from the word 'kohen' appearing ten times in Vayikra 27 in the section about consecrated items. The Gemara leaves unanswered the question of how the rabbis derive their requirement of three judges.

History Of Egypt, Chaldæa, Syria, Babylonia, and Assyria is the masterwork of one of the fathers of modern egyptology. This work, in twelve volumes, was translated from the French original, “Histoire ancienne des peuples de l'Orient classique” and published in 1903-1904. Maspero was a largely self-taught master of hieroglyphic translation. In November 1880, he was placed at the head of a French archeological mission, which developed later into the Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale. Maspero then succeeded Mariette as director-general of excavations and of the antiquities of Egypt.“Aware that his reputation was then more as a linguist than an archaeologist, Maspero's first work in the post was to build on Mariette's achievements at Saqqara. He expanded their scope from the early Old Kingdom to the later, with particular interest in tombs with long and complete hieroglyphic inscriptions that could help illustrate the development of the Egyptian language. Selecting five later Old Kingdom tombs, he was successful in that aim, finding over 4000 lines of hieroglyphics which were then sketched and photographed.“As an aspect of his attempt to curtail the rampant illegal export of Egyptian antiquities by tourists, collectors and agents for the major European and American museums, Maspero arrested the Abd al-Russul brothers from the notorious treasure-hunting village of Gorna, who confessed under torture to having found the great cache of royal mummies at Deir el-Bahri in July 1881. The cache was moved to Cairo as soon as possible to keep it safe from robbers.“In 1886 he resumed work begun by Mariette to uncover the Sphinx, removing more than 65 feet of sand and seeking tombs below it (which he did not find, but have later been found but not opened).”Maspero went on to sponsor and expand the system of national museums and presided over the growing collection of the Bulak Museum. Maspero gave a 17 year old Howard Carter his first Egyptological job – and it was he who recommended Carter to Lord Carnarvon. Carter and Carnarvon would go on to discover the tomb of King Tutankhaman.In the first volume of this master work, Maspero tackles the importance of the Nile, the pantheon of Egyptian gods, and the legendary history of Egyptian gods. (From Wikipedia.)Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

History Of Egypt, Chaldæa, Syria, Babylonia, and Assyria is the masterwork of one of the fathers of modern egyptology. This work, in twelve volumes, was translated from the French original, “Histoire ancienne des peuples de l'Orient classique” and published in 1903-1904. Maspero was a largely self-taught master of hieroglyphic translation. In November 1880, he was placed at the head of a French archeological mission, which developed later into the Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale. Maspero then succeeded Mariette as director-general of excavations and of the antiquities of Egypt.“Aware that his reputation was then more as a linguist than an archaeologist, Maspero's first work in the post was to build on Mariette's achievements at Saqqara. He expanded their scope from the early Old Kingdom to the later, with particular interest in tombs with long and complete hieroglyphic inscriptions that could help illustrate the development of the Egyptian language. Selecting five later Old Kingdom tombs, he was successful in that aim, finding over 4000 lines of hieroglyphics which were then sketched and photographed.“As an aspect of his attempt to curtail the rampant illegal export of Egyptian antiquities by tourists, collectors and agents for the major European and American museums, Maspero arrested the Abd al-Russul brothers from the notorious treasure-hunting village of Gorna, who confessed under torture to having found the great cache of royal mummies at Deir el-Bahri in July 1881. The cache was moved to Cairo as soon as possible to keep it safe from robbers.“In 1886 he resumed work begun by Mariette to uncover the Sphinx, removing more than 65 feet of sand and seeking tombs below it (which he did not find, but have later been found but not opened).”Maspero went on to sponsor and expand the system of national museums and presided over the growing collection of the Bulak Museum. Maspero gave a 17 year old Howard Carter his first Egyptological job – and it was he who recommended Carter to Lord Carnarvon. Carter and Carnarvon would go on to discover the tomb of King Tutankhaman.In the first volume of this master work, Maspero tackles the importance of the Nile, the pantheon of Egyptian gods, and the legendary history of Egyptian gods. (From Wikipedia.)Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Send us a textIn this class, Rabb Yisroel Bernath delves into the profound symbolism of the dreidel, a cherished Chanukah tradition. By examining the four sides of the dreidel and their connection to the human psyche—ego, bodily urges, reason, and the compulsion to destroy—we uncover a deeper narrative about human behavior and spirituality. Through the lens of Jewish mysticism, the dreidel becomes a metaphor for balancing our inner struggles and aligning them with our divine essence. The class further explores historical parallels between the human psyche and the four empires that clashed with Judaism, demonstrating how these lessons remain relevant in contemporary life.Key Takeaways:Four Dimensions of the Psyche: The dreidel's four sides symbolize the ego, bodily urges, reason, and the destructive impulse, all of which can either harm or elevate us.The Fifth Dimension: The dreidel's point represents the divine spark within each of us, guiding our moral clarity and purpose.Historical Reflection: The struggles of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome against Judaism mirror the internal battles of the human spirit.Spiritual Growth: Chanukah teaches us to harness our inner forces, transforming them into tools for divine expression and moral refinement.Relevance Today: Understanding the interplay of our psychological elements can lead to personal and societal improvement rooted in universal morality.Support the showGot your own question for Rabbi Bernath? He can be reached at rabbi@jewishndg.com or http://www.theloverabbi.comSingle? You can make a profile on www.JMontreal.com and Rabbi Bernath will help you find that special someone.Donate and support Rabbi Bernath's work http://www.jewishndg.com/donateFollow Rabbi Bernath's YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/user/ybernathAccess Rabbi Bernath's Articles on Relationships https://medium.com/@loverabbi

Is the idea of Khaos only found within greek mythology?This week join Liv for part 2 of her spiritual discussion on the concept of chaos. Listen along as she covers the chaoskampfs, theomachies, and mythological deities of chaos found within many different cultures including Babylonia, Egyptian, Chinese, Celtic, Indiana, and Old Testament references. Grab your headphones, warm up your car, or whatever it is you do while listening to podcasts and get ready to learn more about the metaphysical ideas that started it all. FOR MORE CHECK OUT THE YOUTUBE CHANNEL: https://www.youtube.com/@MetaPsycKicksOR READ THE BLOG: https://www.metapsyckicks.com/journalOR JOIN OUR PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/metapsyckicks——-BOOK A PSYCHIC MEDIUM READING:Olivia the Medium: https://www.metapsyckicks.com/liv-readings-----CHAPTERS:0:00 - Intro5:16 - ChaosKampf v. Theomachy7:53 - Chaos of Enuma Elish10:40 - Chaos in Egyptian Mythology17:36 - Chaos in Chinese Philosophy19:56 - Chaotic Celtic Deities23:44 - Chaos in India37:13 - Chaos in the Old Testament46:46 - Human Fears & Chaos50:42 - The Hermit of Chaos55:28 - Thanks for Listening!-----RECOMMENDED PRODUCTS:Our YouTube Setup ►► https://kit.co/metapsyckicks/meta-psyckicks-youtube-setupOur Podcast Setup ►► https://kit.co/metapsyckicks/meta-psyckicks-podcasting-setupEm's Tarot Collection ►► https://kit.co/metapsyckicks/em-s-tarot-card-collectionOther Divination Tools: ►► https://kit.co/metapsyckicks/other-divination-toolsDISCLAIMER: This description might contain affiliate links that allow you to find the items mentioned in this video and support the channel at no cost to you. While this channel may earn minimal sums when the viewer uses the links, the viewer is in NO WAY obligated to use these links. Thank you for your support!-----ARE YOU A PSYCHIC QUIZ: https://www.metapsyckicks.com/extrasTELL US YOUR PARANORMAL STORIES HERE: https://www.metapsyckicks.com/extrasCHECK OUT OUR WEBSITE AND BLOG:www.metapsyckicks.comEMAIL US: metapsyckicks@gmail.com——-SAY HI ON SOCIAL:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Np1K0QH8e-EDHhIxX-FaAInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/metapsyckicksTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@metapsyckicks?lang=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/Meta-PsycKicks-107812201171308Olivia The Medium:Instagram -  https://www.instagram.com/oliviathemedium/Threads -https://www.threads.net/@oliviathemedium?invite=4Email - oliviathemedium@gmail.com——-Sources:https://www.theoi.com/Protogenos/Khaos.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_(cosmogony)https://drmsh.com/TheNakedBible/Creation%20in%20Gen%201%201%20to%202%203%20and%20the%20ANE%20Order%20out%20of%20DIsorder%20after%20Chaoskampf%20Walton.pdfhttps://www.worldhistory.org/article/225/enuma-elish---the-babylonian-epic-of-creation---fu/https://www.worldhistory.org/Apophis/#:~:text=Apophis%20(also%20known%20as%20Apep,as%20established%20by%20the%20gods.https://www.thechinastory.org/yearbooks/yearbook-2016/introduction-fifty-shades-of-red/between-order-and-chaos/https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201512/11/WS5a2b41bca310eefe3e99f2c8.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asura#:~:text=In%20the%20oldest%20verses%20of,battle%20between%20good%20and%20evil.https://study.com/academy/lesson/the-hindu-goddess-kali-story-symbols-facts.html#:~:text=From%20one%20perspective%2C%20Kali%20is,those%20who%20threaten%20her%20babies.https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/6145/1/Rackley15MRes.pdfhttps://www.britannica.com/topic/Celtic-religionhttps://www.irishhistory.com/myths-legends/mythological-cycles/echos-of-chaos-the-fomorians-in-irish-mythology-and-modern-culture/#:~:text=Symbols%20of%20Chaos%2C%20Destruction%2C%20and,storms%2C%20earthquakes%2C%20and%20blights.https://intertextual.bible/text/psalm-74.12-isaiah-27.1#:~:text=Notes%20and%20References,establish%20cosmic%20order%20...%22&text=*%20The%20use%20of%20references%20are,the%20use%20of%20these%20texts.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/meta-psyckicks/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

This week's learning is sponsored by Jordana Schoor in honor of their son Saadya's marriage to Odel Perets. "Wishing them a home full of love, mazal, and Torah values." Even though it says in the Mishna that a court comprises three judges, there are exceptions. An expert can judge on his own. What determines that someone is an expert judge? Even though an expert does not need to get permission from the Nasi or Exilarch, if the Nasi or Exilarch gives him permission to judge, and he errs in a particular case, he is not obligated to compensate for the loss he caused. While it is clear that the Exilarch's permission exempt a judge ruling in Israel, but can the Nasi's (in Israel) appointment of the judge exempt the judge from liability in Babylonia? The answer is no, as learned from a story regarding Raba bar Hana who received permission from Rabbi Yehuda haNasi to rule, just as he was leaving Israel. In what cases does a judge who makes a mistake, need to pay to compensate for the loss he caused? Rabbi Yehuda haNasi also granted permission to Rav to rule as an expert, just before he went to Babylonia. However, he did not grant him the authority to permit firstborn animals to be eaten by identifying blemishes. Both Rav and Raba bar Hana were nephews of Rabbi Chiya, who was the one who asked Rabbi Yehuda haNasi to permit them both to judge. However, he called Raba the son of his brother and Rav the son of his sister, even though Rav was also the son of his brother. To explain this, the Gemara explains that Rabbi Chiya's half-brother and half-sister married each other and were Rav's parents. Another possible explanation is provided as well. Why did Rabbi Yehuda haNasi not allow Rav to permit firstborn animals? The Gemara brings two possible suggestions. The first explanation is that it was to ensure people would respect Raba bar Hana when he and Rav arrived in Babylonia, as they would see that he had the authority to do something that Rav did not. The second suggestion is that Rav was such an expert that Rabbi Yehuda haNasi was concerned he would permit certain blemishes and people would conclude on their own that blemishes that seemed similar were also permanent blemishes and incorrectly permit firstborn animals. Why did Rabbi Chiya ask Rabbi Yehuda haNasi not only to grant permission to Rav and Raba bar Hana to rule, but also to teach? An answer is brought from a story of a teacher who taught but was misunderstood and caused many people to make a mistake regarding laws of impurity. Therefore, one must also receive permission to teach only if they can teach clearly. Other stories relating to issues about teaching are brought, relating to not issuing a ruling in a city if one's teacher is nearby. Shmuel ruled that if two judges ruled in a case, their judgment would be effective, even though this is considered to be impudent. However, when mediation is done, only two judges are needed to mediate.

For a judge to not undertake financial responsibility for an error in judgement, he needs permission to judge from the exilarch. Plus, complications between the authority granted by the exilarch in Babylonia and that granted by the nasi in the land of Israel. Plus, the origins of the terms of rabbinic ordination of different levels, even (mostly) to this very day. Also, a focus on the authority of establishing (and permitting) the status of the first-born animals. Plus, some dramatic errors and what happened afterwards, for example, in the liquids that would purify or render impure (or do nothing). Also, the greatness of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi in recognizing the significance of making halakhic decisions.

Decision Space is the podcast about decisions in board games. Join our active and welcoming Discord community, Join the crew today! (Decision Space Patreon), or Leave us a review wherever you find this podcast! Episode 194 - Quintessential Brendan Games Back after a short baby-hiatus, Decision Space returns with the one about Quintessential Brendan Games. We get to pull out the entire Decision Space lexicon and see how Brendan's taste in games fit into what we do here. Enjoy! Timestamps Message from Jake - 0:00 Show Starts - 2:24 Games Mentioned at Least Briefly Chess, Babylonia, Feast for Odin, Cascadia, Quantum, Broom Service, Praga Caput Regni, Root, Zoo Vadis, Unrest, Enchanted Plumes, Ramen Ramen, Cosmic Encounter, BattleCON,  Lost Cities, Fox in the Forest, Cascadia, Dice Hospital, Welcome To, KeyFlower, Lost Ruins of Arnak, The Mind   Preplanners Mexica is next up for a deep dive review!   Music and Sound Credits Thank you to Hembree for our intro and outro music from their song Reach Out. You can listen to the full song on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQuuRPfOyMw&list=TLGGFNH7VEDPgwgyNTA4MjAyMQ&t=3s You can find more information about Hembree at https://www.hembreemusic.com/.  Thank you to Flash Floods for use of their song Palm of Your Hand as a sting from their album Halfway to Anywhere: https://open.spotify.com/album/2fE6LrqzNDKPYWyS5evh3K?si=CCjdAGmeSnOOEui6aV3_nA Rules Overview Music:  Way Home by Tokyo Music Walker https://soundcloud.com/user-356546060​ Creative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported — CC BY 3.0 Free Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/tokyo-music-walker-way...​ Music promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/pJThZlOuDtI Intermission Music: music elevator ext part 1/3 by Jay_You -- https://freesound.org/s/467243/ -- License: Attribution 4.0 Contact We can be reached individually on Twitter at @jakefryd and @burnsidebh. You can also follow Decision Space on Instagram @DecisionSpacePod and talk to us there! If you prefer email, then hit us up at decisionspa@gmail.com. This information is all available along with episodes at our new website decisionspacepodcast.com. Byeee!

The Great Myth of the Sun GodsBy Alvin Boyd KhunIt may be that many of you have come to this lecture with the expectation of hearing about the superstitious beliefs of some ancient fire-worshippers or sun-worshippers. You may wonder why we should presume to waste an evening dilating upon the childish fancies of early peoples who could conceive of no more exalted form of deity in the universe than the physical body of our sun. Can there possibly be anything important in the study of such forms of crude fetishism?Let me disabuse your minds of any such prepossession at once. We have not invited you to hear of infantile nonsense of early child-humanity. On the contrary, it is our opinion that there is not a theme within the entire range of religious interest of such sublimity and authentic grandeur as this subject of the Sun-gods. We have come to the persuasion that this is the most important lecture that we have given or shall ever give. In it there is to be found the central thesis of all religion. We have asked you to hear an exposition of the cardinal principle of all true religion. Instead of dealing with an erratic notion of primitive barbarism, we have to present to you this evening the long-lost supreme datum of all high religion. And it is our design to show that religion in the world has drifted so far away from its original base that it no longer recognizes the very first and fundamental conception about which it was in the beginning constructed. The myth of the Sun-gods is the very heart's core of religion at its best.It is commonly supposed that religious honors were paid to the sun as a deity by a few isolated peoples or sects, such as the Parsees and the ancient Ghebers of Persia, and some African tribes. In correction of this view we are prepared to support the declaration that the worship of the Sun-god was quite universal in the ancient world. It ranged from China and India to Yucatan and Peru. The Emperor and the Mikado, as well as the Incas, and the Pharaohs were Sun-god figures. And is the belief only an empty myth? So far from being such, it is at once the highest embodiment of religious conception in the spiritual history of the race.Since the word "myth" occurs in the title, it is necessary to define it so that we may the better glimpse the nature of the subject. To the modern mind the word carries with it a derogatory implication. To reduce any construction to the status of a myth is to put it out of court and render it valueless. We regard a myth as a fiction and a falsity. To show that a theory or a belief is only a myth, is to relegate it to the world of non-reality, and dismiss it from further consideration as a thing of value.Not so with the ancients. With them (the ancients) a myth was a valuable instrumentality of knowledge. It was an intellectual, even a spiritual, tool, by the aid of which truth and wisdom could at one and the same time both be concealed from the unworthy and expressed for the worthy. The ancients rightly regarded spiritual truth and experience as being incapable of expression or impartation by means of words simply. A myth or an allegory could be made the better means of conveying subtly and with a certain added force, the truth veiled under a set form of dramatic presentation. The myth would enhance spiritual truth as a drama reinforces moral situations. It was all the more powerful in its message precisely because it was known not to be outwardly a true story. No one was caught by the literal falsity of the construction. Attention could therefore be given wholly to the hidden import, which was not obscured by the outward occurrence. The myth was known to be a fiction; therefore it deceived nobody--until the third century. But at the same time it was most ingeniously designed to instruct in the deepest of spiritual truths. It was a literary device to embalm lofty wisdom in the amber of a tradition that could be easily remembered, in the guise of a human story. It was truth incarnated in a dramatic occurrence, which was known to be untrue. Outwardly fictitious, but inwardly the substance of a mighty truth, was the myth. And as such it was the universal dress in which ancient knowledge was clothed.To indicate the universality of the Sun-god myth it is only necessary to enumerate some thirty of the chief figures known as Sun-gods amongst the nations about the Eastern Mediterranean, before the advent of Jesus. There were in Egypt, Osiris, Horus, Serapis, Hermes or Taht (Thoth), Khunsu, Atum (Aten, Adon, the Adonis or Phrygia), Iusa, Iu-sa, Iu-em-hetep; in Syria, Atis, Sabazius, Zagreus, Kybele (femine); in Assyria Tammuz; in Babylonia, Marduk and Sargon; in Persia, Mithra, Ahura-Mazda and the Zoroasters; in Greece, Orpheus, Bacchus (Dionysus), Achilles, Hercules, Theseus, Perseus, Jason, Prometheus; in India, Vyasa, Krishna, Buddha; in Tibet the Boddhisattvas; besides many others elsewhere.Likewise in the ancient Mystery dramas the central character was ever the Sun-god the role being enacted by the candidate for initiation in person. He went through the several initiations as himself the type and representative of the solar divinity in the field of human experience.Moreover, the Patriarchs, Prophets, Priests and Kings of Biblical lore are no less Sun-god figures. For in their several characteristics they are seen to be typical of the Christos.From the study of a mass of the ancient material the sincere and disingenuous student becomes ere long convinced of the fact that the Jesus figure of the Gospels, whether he lived historically or not (and there is much question of it even among theologians), is just another in the long list of the solar gods. They were figured by ancient poetic genius as embodiments of divine solar glory living among men, if they were not purely the mythical constructions of the allegorists.These Sun-god characters, of none of whom can it be said positively that they were living personages, were, it must be clearly noted, purely typical figures in the national epics of the several nations. They were symbols, one might say. But of what were they symbolical? That is the point of central importance. They were representative characters, summing and epitomizing in themselves the spiritual history of the human individual in his march across the field of evolving life on earth. They were the types and models of the divine potentiality pictured as coming to realization in their careers. They were the mirror held up to men, in which could be seen the possibilities locked up in man's own nature. They were type-figures, delineating the divine life that was an ever-possible realization for any devoted man. They were the symbols of an ever-coming deity, a deity that came not once historically in Judea, but that came to ever-fuller expression and liberation in the inner heart of every son of man. The solar deities were the gods that ever came, that were described as coming not once upon a time, but continuously and regularly. Their radiant divinity might be consummated by any earnest person at any time or achieved piecemeal.They were typed as ever-coming or coming regularly because they were symboled by the sun in its annual course around the zodiac of twelve signs, and the regular periodicity of this natural symbol typified the ever-continuing character of their spiritual sunlight. The ancients, in a way and to a degree almost incomprehensible to the unstudied modern, had made of the sun's annual course round the heavens a faithful reproduction of the spiritual history of the divine spirit in man. The god in us was emblemed by the sun in its course, and the sun's varied experiences, as fabulously construed, were a reflection of our own incarnational history. The sun in its movements through the signs was made the mirror of our life in spirit. To follow the yearly round of the zodiac was to epitomize graphically the whole history of human experience. Thus the inner meaning of our mortal life was endlessly repeated in the daily, weekly, monthly and yearly cycle of the sun's passage, the seven or twelve divisions of which marked the seven- or twelvefold segmentation of our spiritual history or our initiations. (They were figured at first as seven, later as twelve, when the solar gods came upon the cosmic scene.)The careers of these solar gods, then, were a type of what is occurring to every man who is dowered with the spark of divine soul within his breast. Each one of us has had or will have his festival of conception in June, his birth into the world of fleshly life in the autumn, his spiritual awakening at Christmas, and his glorious resurrection from the dead body of this life at Easter.The Christians say the Christos came once in a single character in history, Jesus of Judea, saying nothing about his coming to Everyman at all times. They present to the world the Only-Begotten Son of the Father, confusing in one historical figure two distinct characters of ancient philosophy, the Logos and the Christos, and making both historical in a human being born of woman. Suffice it to say that neither character was historical in the ancient systems. The Logos and the Christos were cosmic forces, and the erring Christians confounded these "personages" of ancient philosophy with the mundane career of the man Jesus, who was not other than one of the mythical Sun-god heroes, or national type-figures. What a travesty of truth the Christian representation has become! What a caricature the Gospels have made of the divine spiritual principle in man's life!The ancients had no "only-begotten" son because the term used in their systems, miserably mistranslated "only-begotten," was something with quite a different connotation. It was in Greek "monogenes," and in Latin "unigenitus," and was far from meaning "only-begotten." It meant that which was begotten of one parent, the father, alone, not the offspring of the union of father and mother. By the term the ancients meant to designate him who was the projection into matter of the spirit forces of life, not the final product of the union of spirit and matter, or the male and female elements. Had the early Christian Fathers known of the inner meaning of the symbolism of the Egyptian Ptah, as Khepr-Ra, who was typed by the male beetle that incubated in the ground and without union with the female transformed and regenerated himself after twenty-eight days (exactly a moon cycle) in the form of the young scarab, symbol of the new-born sun in the moon, they would have been intelligent enough to have avoided the great schisms that divided the Church into Roman and Greek Catholic bodies over the abstrusities of this very origin of the persons of the Trinity. But Egypt was farther away from Rome of the third century than it is from us, who can now read the inscriptions that were sealed from them.All this ancient scriptural data accentuates the fact that not the historical Jesus, but the spiritual Christ, or the god within the individual heart (as expounded in the lecture on Platonic Philosophy in the Bible) is the subject of the sacred writings of old, and the kernel of the whole religious ideology. Angelus Silesius has expressed this in a stanza which should be a perpetual reminder of the futility of clinging to the historical interpretation of Gospel literature.Though Christ a thousand times in Bethlehem be born, But not within thyself, thy soul will be forlorn; The cross on Golgotha thou lookest to in vain, Unless within thyself it be set up again. And the Christian hymn, "O Jesus, thou art standing, outside the fast-closed door," gives expression to the kindred idea that while we look across the map to localize the Christos in Judea, we keep the spiritual mentor of our own lives standing without, seeking an entrance into our lives in vain.By the aid of archaic sacred books we have been enabled to trace authentically the origin of the name Jesus. And it is of great importance to present this material, because it throws a flood of clear light upon the ancient conceptions of the Messiah and the coming Son, or Sun-god. In this light the name will be seen to be a type-designation and not the personal name of an historical being.It is derived from the two letters (or numbers) which in the beginning of typology symbolized the two first elements, spirit and matter, into which the primal One Life bifurcated. They are the I (or 1) symboling the male or spirit, and the O (letter) or 0 (cipher) symboling the female or material universe. Together they represented the biune male-female deity. We have, then, the letters IO, or the number 10. As the vowels were freely interchanged, in ancient languages, the name was written either IO, IA, IE , or IU, and all these forms are found. Next the I transformed into consonantal value and became a J (as it is yet in Latin), so that we find the names JO, JA, JE and JU, from each of which many names have arisen. When the creation had combined the male and female and the two had given birth to the Son, or Logoic universe, the name was given the form of three letters, and we then find such forms as IAO, JAH, IEO, JEU, ZUE. When the universe became founded on the four cardinal points or the square of four dimensions, the name was spelled variously as IEOU, JOVE, ZEUS, JEVE, DIOS, T/HEOS, HUHI, IHUH and others. In its character as a sevenfold or seven-lettered name, it took the form of JEHOVAH, SABAOTH, DEBORAH, DELILAH, SEP/HIROT/H, MICHAEL, SOLOMON, and others of seven letters. The I permuted with l (el) or 1 (one), so that IE became LE or, inverted EL, the great Hebrew character of deity. The EL and the IAH (JAH), became the most frequent determinatives of divinity, as a host of names will testify. There are Bethel, Emanuel, Michael, Israel, Gabriel, Samuel, Abdiel, Uriel, Muriel Azazel, and many others, in which the EL is prefixed. The JAH is seen in such names as EliJAH, AbiJAH, while the IAH comes in a host of such names as Nehemiah, Jeremiah, Obediah, Hezekiah, Isaiah, Messiah, Alleluiah and more.But whence comes the "s" in Jesus's name? This is of great importance. It is derived from an Egyptian suffix written either SA, SE, SI, SU, or SAF, SEF, SIF or SUF (SAPH, SEPH, SIPH or SUPH) and meaning "the son," "heir," "prince" or successor to the father. (The F is an Egyptian ending for the masculine singular.) When the original symbol of divinity, IO or IE, JO or JE, was combined with the Egyptian suffix for the succeeding heir, SU or SA, the resultant was the name IUSA, IUSE, IUSU, or IOSE; or IESU, JESU, IUSEF, IOSEF, JOSEF. One of the many forms was JESU and another was JOSEF. The final F became sibilant at times and gave us the eventual form of JESUS. The name then meant the "divine son," and combined in the Egyptian IU the idea of the coming one. Hence JESUS was the Messiah, the coming son of the divine life. There was in Egypt for ten thousand years B.C. the character of this functionary under the name of IUSA. Later he was the Iu-em-hetep, which means "the divine son who comes with peace (hetep). But most interestingly, this last word also means seven. Hence Jesus is he who comes as the seventh principle to complete the six elementary powers of natural evolution with the gift of divine intelligence, which supplants the elementary chaos with the rulership of love and intelligence and thus brings peace into a warring situation. Hence finally, Jesus is the seventh cosmic principle, announced in all religious lore as he who comes to bring peace and good will to men. And as such he was announced in the Christian Gospels. But there was more than one Jesus or IUSA or IU before the coming of the alleged historical Jesus.Startling as are the implications of this bit of etymology, a far more amazing denouement of Bible study is the revelation that not only were there over thirty Sun-god figures in the cults of the various nations of old, but there are immediately in the Bible itself, in the Old Testament, some twenty more Sun-god characters under the very name of Jesus! Are we speaking arrant nonsense or sober truth when we make a claim which seems at first sight so unsupportable? Twenty Jesus characters in the Old Testament! Let us see. We have noted the many variant forms of the Jesus name. There are still others in the Old Testament, never suspected as being related to the name of the Christian Redeemer. There are Isaac, Esau, Jesse, Jacob, Jeshu, Joachim, Joshua, Jonah and others. All these are variant forms of the one name, which has still other forms among the Hebrews in secular life, Yusuf, Yehoshua, Yeshu, etc. Joshua, Hosea and Jesse are from this name indisputably. A few might be the subject of controversy.Furthermore, beside these that bear the original divine name, there are other Sun-god figures in the Old Testament under a wide variety of names. They are Samson (whose name means "solar"), David, Solomon, Saul (equals soul, or sol, the sun--Latin.), Abraham, Moses, Gideon, Jephtha and the like. Their actions identify them as solar representatives.Now let us see what the conception of our divinity as a Sun-god in reality meant to the sages of old, and what it should mean to us. It meant that the divinity within us, our divine soul or Self, was itself the Sun-god, or solar deity. And what does this signify in concrete terms for us? Just this; that the god within us is constituted of the imperishable essence of solar light and energy! In short, we ourselves, in our higher nature, are solar gods in potentiality! Our highest nature is an incorruptible body composed of the glorious essence of the sun's energy! The gods in the Bible were always symboled by the light or fire of the sun. We are now enlightened to see it as a description of our nature as veritable truth and fact. We are Sun-gods. Our immortal spirits within us are composed of the radiant substance of solar energy.At the very time we were first assembling the material for this lecture, there came an announcement in the daily press of a discovery by a modern physicist, Dr. George W. Crile, of the Cleveland Laboratories, which practically fixed the seal of truth upon every word we have uttered or shall utter in this lecture. It was most startlingly corroborative of our exegesis. He announced that he had discovered at the heart of every living organism a tiny nucleus of energy, all aglow, with temperatures ranging from 3000 to 6000 degrees of heat, which he called "radiogens" or "hot points." These, he said, were precisely akin to the radiant energy of solar matter. He affirmed, in short, that a tiny particle of the sun's power and radiance was lodged within the heart of every organic unit! The light and energy that has life. What would be Crile's surprise, however, if he were to be shown a sentence taken from Hargrave Jennings' old book on the Rosicrucians, written over sixty years ago: "Every man has a little spark (sun) in his own bosom?" For this was one item in the teaching of the Medieval Fire-Philosophers, and the reason they were styled such. They knew what Crile has discovered, as likewise did the ancient Bible-writers. They based their Sun-god religions upon it. Our souls are composed of the imperishable essence of solar light! We are immortal because we are Sun-gods.But many will impatiently rise to expostulate with us, and ask why, if this was the universal fundamentum of the old religions, the Bible itself does not categorically carry this message and state this central fact. Wait a moment! Who that knows this primary datum has searched the Bible to see if it has nothing to say on the point? We, too, believed the Bible was remiss in expressing this conception, until we searched with a more watchful eye. And now let us hear what the Bible says as to our solar constitution, and determine for ourselves whether it is silent on the groundwork of religion or not. Let us hear first the Psalms. "Our God is a living fire," say they; and "Our God is a consuming fire." "The Lord God is a sun," avers the same book. "I am come to send fire on earth," says Jesus, meaning he came to scatter the separated sparks of solar essence amongst mankind, a spark to each soul. In Revelation the angels scatter the fire and the incense of their seven censers over the earth, among the inhabitants. Then says John the Baptist: "I indeed baptize you with water, but he that cometh after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire!" Jesus says: "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven." (Satan was the descending Lucifer, or Light-bringer, before he was lifted up and divinized.) The fire that falls on Jeremiah's altar and many another in the Bible narrative types the deity coming to dwell with mortals. Says Jesus: "When I am in the world I am the light of the world." Again he said: "Ye are the light of the world," and "Let your light so shine that others may . . . glory your father which is in heaven." The Lord, say the Psalms, "made his angels messengers and his ministers a flame of fire." The New Testament Jesus, following the well-known Egyptian diagram of the Ankh, the solar disk with the spread wings, is described as "the sun of righteousness, risen with healing in his wings." John has Jesus saying that the condemnation of the world lay in that it rejected the light when it was sent into the world. Says Job: "Yea, the light of the wicked shall be put out, and the spark of his fire shall not shine. The light shall be dark in his tabernacle and his candle shall be put out with him." Isaiah writes: "Behold all ye that kindle a fire, that compass yourselves about with sparks; walk in the light of your fire and in the sparks that ye have kindled." We are adjured to "Rise, shine, for thy light is come." "The Lord is my light," reiterates the Psalms. And again: "In thy light shall we see light." "Light is sown for the righteous." "We wait for light," cry the souls in the darkness of incarnation, far from their original fount of light. John declares that the Christos "was the true light" which was to come Messianically for the redemption of our lower nature. And again he declares that with the Christos "light is come into the world." No cry echoes with more resounding intensity down to this age than Paul's exhortation to our souls buried in lethal darkness: "Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine upon thee!" And in Revelation there are those mighty pronouncements: in the spiritual resurrection "there shall be no more need of the sun to shine by day nor the moon by night, for the glory of the Lord did lighten it." And there is no more heartening assurance anywhere in the Bible than Jesus's statement: "Ye have light in yourselves."And these are only a gleaning from the great score of similar passages with which the Bible teems. And still folks will say they find no warrant for the Sun-god idea in the Bible!In Rome the sacred fire in the temple of Vesta was guarded by seven Vestal Virgins, chosen for purity and for psychic vision. If they permitted the fire to die out (symbolic of the light of deity dying out in the heart) the penalty upon them was death. If they violated their sexual purity, they were buried alive in the city. And from the great old Egyptian Book of the Dead we take just one passage among scores: "Lo, I come from the Lake of Flame, from the Lake of Fire, and from the field of flame, and I live." And again, from an old Book of Adam and Eve we quote a great passage in which the Lord says: "I made thee of the light, and I wished to bring out children of the light from thee." If only we had been taught by our religious teachers that our spiritual natures are woven and fabricated of solar light, we should have had a clearer apprehension of our potentialities for divine education.Supplementing all this material from the Bible and ancient scriptures, there is at hand for our supreme enlightenment one grand pronouncement from Greek Platonic philosophy which we conceive to be that lost ultimate link between science and religion. It is the truth before whose altar both science and religion can kneel at last and find themselves paying tribute to the same god,--the god of solar radiance. It is a sentence from the learned Proclus, last of the Great Platonists: "The light of the sun is the pure energy of intellect." Are we big enough to catch the mighty significance of that statement? Is it not the essence of what the modern physicist means when he talks of "mind-stuff?" The fiery radiance of the sun is already the motivating genius of intellect! Matter is itself intelligent and intelligence! Here is the basic link between all naturalism and all spirituality. Matter enshrouds and contains the soul of mind and spirit. The light of the sun is the deific flash of intellect! And the very core of our conscious being is a spark of that infinite indestructible energy of solar light. There is the "seminal soul of light" or the seed of fiery divinity (Prometheus's "fire" stolen from the gods) in each of us. It makes us a god.Armed with this unquenchable fire which is intellect, we are sent on earth to inhabit a body which is described as a watery and miry swamp. The body is nearly eighty per cent. water! It is the duty of the fiery spark to enlighten the whole dark realm of mortal life, to transmute by its alchemical power the baser dross of animal propensity into the finer motivation of love and brotherhood. This life is a purgation--Purgatory--because it is a process of burning and tempering crude animal elements into the pure gold of spiritual light. In Egyptian scriptures the twelve sons of Ra (the twelve sons of Jacob, and the twelve tribes of Israel) were called the "twelve saviors of the treasure of light." An Egyptian text reads: "This is the sun within us, the seminal source of light. Do not dim its luster or cause it to suffer eclipse." And another runs: "Give ye glory as to the sun; he is the chief, the only one coming from the body, the head of those who belong to the race of the sun."With this force of fire we must uplift the lower man and transmute his nature into the spiritual glow of love and intelligence. With it we must turn the water of the lower nature into the wine of spiritual force. Around it we must aggregate the refined material which we shall build into that temple of the soul, that body of the resurrection, the great garment of solar light, in which we shall rise out of the tomb of the physical corpus and ascend with the angels. This is the radiant Augoeides of the Greeks, the Sahu of the Egyptians, in which the soul wings its flight aloft like the phoenix, after rending the veil of the temple of the body. It is our garment of immortality, the seamless robe of glory, in prospect of which we groan and travail, says St. Paul, as we earnestly desire to be clothed upon with the garment of incorruption. As flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdom of heaven, we must fashion for our tenancy there this body of solar glory, in whose self-generated light we may live eternally, having overcome the realms of darkness, or spiritualized the body. Jesus prays the Father to grant unto him that glory that he had with him before the world was, and his prayer is fulfilled in the formation of the spirit body out of the elements of the sun.Who is this King of Glory?--says the Psalmist. And we are exhorted to lift up the aeonial gates, the age-lasting doors, to let the King of Glory enter into our realm. The King of Glory is the Sun-soul within us, raised in his final perfection in the fulness of Christly stature to the state of magnificent effulgence. The King of Glory is the immortal Sun-god, the deity in our hearts; and when at last he blazes forth in the heyday of his glory, and comes in majesty into our lives, then we behold his glory, as of the alone-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. And when he appears to those still sitting in the shadow of darkness, they report that "they have seen a great light, and to those that sat in the valley of darkness did the light shine." And this light, seen ever and anon by some illuminated son of man, as he gropes in the murks of incarnation, is truly "that light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world."And when that light shineth clearer and brighter unto the perfect day, then, indeed, we know of a surety that we ourselves are nucleated of that same glorious essence of combined intellect and spirit. Then we know that we ourselves are the Sun-gods, and that the ancient allegory is not a "myth," but the very essence of our own Selfhood.The Great Myth of the Sun GodsBy Alvin Boyd Khunhttp://mountainman.com.au/ab_kuhn.html This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dwtruthwarrior.substack.com/subscribe

Today's daf is sponsored by Rabbi Heshie and Rookie Billet in honor of the bar mitzva of their grandson Elihai Yonah Jacobson in Neve Daniel. "May you continue to grow in Torah learning, middot tovot, chesed, and identification with Klal Yisrael. So proud of you!" A ruling was sent from Israel to Babylonia with a halakhic ruling that was said to be one of the more difficult monetary laws to understand. However, the Gemara initially does not understand the details of the case and offers five suggestions. After rejecting each suggestion because there was no real difficulty with the logic of the ruling, they reinstate the first suggestion and explain the difficulty. The first two suggestions relate to a grandson inheriting from a grandfather directly as the father had previously died. Does inheritance go through the father to the grandson or does it go directly from the grandfather to the grandson. If it goes through the father, does the grandson inherit the double portion that was meant to be given to his father? The last three suggestions relate to one who signs a document and later becomes a disqualified witness (for different reasons). Is there an issue with ratifying that document? They asked Rav Sheshet: does a son who predeceases his mother inherit from his mother "in his grave" thereby passing on the inheritance to his half brothers through his father or does her inheritance stay with her father's family? Rav Sheshet answers it from a braita and Rav Acha bar Minyumei answers it from our Mishna. Both conclude that the son does not inherit his mother in the grave, but her money is given to her heirs from her father's family. The reason for this law is derived from a gezeira shava in the Torah from Bamidbar 36:7, 9. The chapter ends with a sale where there was a doubt regarding what was sold and the two sides each claim that the land in question belongs to them. Rava and Rav Nachman disagree. The Gemara raises a different debate between Rava and Rav Nachman where they seem to side the other way. However, the issue is resolved as one can differentiate between the two cases and see that the logic of each of their positions is consistent.

Please note that we don't know what we don't know as we discuss nation state creation and travel through the Fertile Crescent, Mesopotamia and Babylonia to learn more about this delicious thing with a pocket. No re-gumming allowed! After waxing nostalgic about our missed panini experiences, Matthew assigns himself some homework and Molly misses tornados? Episode 605: Falafel with Yumna JawadMelissa Clark's za'atar chickenAli Slagle's chicken-zucchini meatballs with feta  Support Spilled Milk Podcast!Molly's SubstackMatthew's Bands: Early to the Airport and Twilight DinersProducer Abby's WebsiteListen to our spinoff show Dire DesiresJoin our reddit