Why The Holocaust? ‘Final Solution’ Finally Solved

Citation (how to properly cite this article; note academic Chicago Style standard italics and quotation marks):
Yirmeyahu Ben-David. “Why The Holocaust? ‘Final Solution’ Finally Solved.” Israel Jews News. Editor: Yirmeyahu Ben-David. (2018.05.15, The Netzarim, http://www.netzarim.co.il). (Date you accessed the Israel Jews News article) https://israeljewsnews.wordpress.com/2018/05/15/why-the-holocaust-final-solution-finally-solved/

Updated: 2018.05.21

Ever since the Nazi “Final Solution” first became evident around 1933, Jews have asked “Why? Where was God during the Holocaust?”

Just the kind of challenge – an enigma that is both significant and that no one in history has been able to solve – that attracts me as worthy of research and fresh, agenda-free, analysis.

All suggestions to date have stretched beyond credulity. Hitler’s nationalist-socialist (i.e. Nazi) delusion of the Aryan race emanated from a prehistoric legend like white (SS) lightning bolts radiating from an occult spiritual sun; a pure “root race” supernaturally empowered to resurrect the world. This bizarro-world Nazi occultism cannot reasonably be attributed to Christian miso-Judaism. Nor, however, can Christian – and Muslim – supersessory miso-Judaism be entirely exonerated from the equation. No one, so far, has found a logically robust and satisfying answer.

(The term “Ta•na”kh,” used in this article, is not synonymous with the Christian “Bible”; since Christians infer inclusion and supersession of their Καινής Διαθήκης (earliest extant, 4th century CE, Hellenist Paul’s Roman gentile displacement of Tanakh; translated into English NT) (For Hebrew Matityahu, see Yirmeyahu Ben-David, ed. The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM). ENGLISH, ISBN 965-7328-00-4. Ra’anana, Israel: 1972-2004. – documented by the earliest extant Church historian as the only account of 1st century Ribi Yehoshua ever accepted by his pre-135 CE Jewish disciples – who forever rejected the Christian NT @ http://www.netzarim.co.il/Mall/NetzShop/NetzShop.htm#NHM. See also History Museum pages at http://www.netzarim.co.il. . Those who object are typically unable to read their own Καινής Διαθήκης, much less תנ”ך (Ta•na”kh).

Jews are the people of the Ta•na”kh. Therefore, Ta•na”kh implications are pertinent to Jewish history and experience.

Accordingly, a contextually viable explanation about “Where was י‑‑ה?” must emanate from Ta•na”kh.

The first thing I notice is that not all Jews were victims of the Holocaust. While Jews everywhere suffered various degrees of miso-Judaism (many from Muslims, not Nazis), and still do, the Holocaust was limited to European Jews. When searching for why, the particular European Jewish experience, how the European Jewish experience differed from Jews elsewhere, must be one key.

A caveat: beware of the logical fallacy of false commutatives. In plain terms, this is the fallacy that might lead one to accept that “All horses are animals. Therefore, all animals are horses.” Clearly illogical reasoning. Similarly, succession does not imply causation.

The point is that, while Ta•na”kh is replete with warnings that when Israel strays from Ta•na”kh, dire consequences will sometimes ensue, the converse is not necessarily true. Punishment doesn’t necessarily imply a preceding straying from Ta•na”kh.

Nevertheless, it would be productive to investigate whether there was any great straying from Ta•na”kh imminently preceding the Holocaust; and which was particular to European Jews.

Especially Ultra-Orthodox (Kha•reid•im) Jews are entirely ignorant of large sections of the Nᵊviy•im that aren’t included in any Ha•phᵊtâr•âh portion. This lacunae includes the prophecy of Zᵊkhar•yâh regarding the Holocaust!!!

Yet another caveat, this time from Zᵊkhar•yâh (13.2): “Then it shall become in that day… I will also transfer the Nᵊviy•im … from ârëtz…”

In Biblical times, the Nâ•vi was one who explicated Tōr•âh with Scriptural Authority; not prophesiers – forth-tellers – of the future. Their vision of what would happen following obedience to, or rebellion against, Tōr•âh was a supplemental function not inherent to all Nᵊviy•im.

Accordingly, since the end of the Nᵊviy•im, explication of Scripture is no longer Nâ•vi-Authoritative. Today, contrary to rabbinic claims of super-Tōr•âh Authority to overrule Scripture with innumerable fences and “pᵊsâq•im” (see Dân•iy•eil 7.25; Hō•sheia 13.4 & Yᵊsha•yâhu 45.21-22), explication is limited to correcting (merely plowing the field) by means of computational logic, science, historical and other facts relative to subsequent (including rabbinic) interpretations of Scripture. Authority rests in the laws of logic, science and hard evidence – not institutional clerical quasi-authority of men.

⅔ Shall Be Excised, Remnant ⅓ Refined In Fire

c BCE 519, Zᵊkhar•yâh explicated, in a distinct, separate, section quoting י‑‑ה of armies as declaring (13.7): “A sword upon רֹעִי (ro•i [1st pers. sing. poss. sufffix, “My”, on compound form of רוֹעֶה {rō•ëh; shepherd}]) and upon My am. Strike הָרֹעֶה (; “the” + rō•ëh) and תְפוּצֶיןָ (tᵊphutz•eynâ; paal fu. 3rd pers. fem. pl. of פוץ; they (fem. אהבי, beloveds in previous verse is nearest fem. pl. n.) will be dispersed, scattered) of הַצֹּאן (the tzōn).” (See also 11.15-17.)

This precedes a monumental passage virtually unknown to Jews (13.8): “So it shall become, declares י‑‑ה, that, in all of ârëtz, ⅔ therein shall be excised and atrophy; but ⅓ shall be a remnant therein.”

While some will undoubtedly dispute the idea, the logic, science, hard evidence and facts of the matter are that there is only one instance in the historical record of the Jewish people that can fit this description: the Sho•âh (Holocaust). And that dictates that “ârëtz” refers, in this context, to the affected lands of Europe.

The telling detail is the mention (v 7), immediately preceding the excision of the ⅔ (v 8), of a רֹעִי הָאֱלִיל rō•iy (My shepherd) (the)-ë•lil (worthless shepherd; 11.15-17) who would incur this horrendous Holocaust!

So the question looms: who was this evil rō•ëh who immediately preceded the Holocaust? And why?

The silly misdirection asserting that the passage refers to the Christian idol or Muslim “prophet” – or, alternately, that it’s punishment for “killing Christ” – separated from the punishment by a 2 millennia hiatus, is a monumental blame-shift that buries the true answer; an answer that would be pregnant with insight, undiscovered until now, for future instruction and direction. First, י‑‑ה could not possibly describe either a Christian idol nor a Muslim false prophet as רֹעִי (ro•i [1st pers. sing. poss. sufffix of רוֹעֶה {rō•ëh}]; i.e. “My Shepherd”)! Additionally, Scripture (11.17) stipulates הָאֱלִיל (ha; the + ë•lil) — “My Worthless rō•ëh“! So, of the 3 above, which one and why not the other two? The suggestion amounts to throwing 3 hated icons in a bucket with no substantial basis, hoping that focus would simply remain on the bucket.

So what happened among Jews preceding the Sho•âh that could have brought on such a dire punishment? One shouldn’t need to look hard for such a grievous straying.

Only one pivotal issue stands out during the period between 1933, the embryonic beginning of the ‘Final Solution’, and its implementation around 1941: the הַשְׂכָּלָה (Hasᵊkâl•âh: education, knowledge, Enlightenment). A proponent of הַשְׂכָּלָה was a מַשְׂכִּיל (Masᵊkil; an enlightened one, an enlightener), pl. מַשְׂכִּילִים (Masᵊkil•im; the Enlightened, Enlighteners).

A priori, the Hasᵊkâl•âh frames the time window in which the רֹעִי הָאֱלִיל (My Worthless Shepherd, 11.17) must be found. We need to identify him. Helpful Scriptures describing this rō•ëh hâ-ë•lil include Yᵊsha•yâhu 19.1 (אֱלִילֵי); Yᵊkhë•zᵊq•eil 34; Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhu 10.21; 23.1-8; 3.15 and Zᵊkhar•yâh 11.15-17.

The Hasᵊkâl•âh is roughly dated to early 1800s Europe and thereafter. Two relevant facets glare out relative to the Hasᵊkâl•âh: [1] it immediately preceded and coincided with the Sho•âh, and [2] it was Euro-centric.

Rabbis will likely argue that Ram•ba”m was the villainous Shepherd, displacing Ta•lᵊmud and yᵊshiv•ōt (Talmud schools) with emphasis on “secular” logic, science and hard evidence – and particularly reversion to Hebrew instead of German-assimilated Yiddish. This is the core reason that today’s Ultra-Orthodox refuse education in logic (and math), science and extra-Talmud (“secular”) history and hard-evidence – and prefer German-assimilated Yiddish over Hebrew. Seriously?!?

The Hasᵊkâl•âh is repeatedly cited as the cause of Reform Judaism, which Orthodox will likely cite, relative to this article, as the better reason for the Sho•âh. Really?!? Even if Reform Judaism is considered a bit of a backsliding, it still reveres Ta•na”kh, who, so long as they continue to revere Ta•na”kh, remain part of the kindred. Hardly, meriting a Sho•âh. Furthermore, both the Reform Movement and the subsequent large assimilation of European Jews resulted not from Hasᵊkâl•âh but, rather, from rejection of Orthodox obstinacy; i.e. Orthodox refusal of conspicuous logic, science and hard evidence – mimicking the Church’s earlier refusal to acknowledge our solar system – reality, the real universe created by י‑‑ה.

So, who does that leave to possibly satisfy the description of רֹעִי הָאֱלִיל rō•iy (My shepherd) (the)-ë•lil immediately preceding the Sho•âh?

For this, we have to look at what was the greatest, contra-Scriptural change to Judaism in the specified time window. (Extra-Scriptural is contra-Scriptural: Dᵊvâr•im 13.1, plus Shᵊm•ōt 23.2.) Then the answer finally comes into focus.

The most momentous advance in all preceding civilization happened in this period, not only changing the world, but leading the rabbis to malform the definition of Sha•bât: electricity! From the time the rabbis first saw and experienced what they ignorantly (having rejected science as “secular,” epikoros) perceived to be “supernatural magic fire” and, based on that “definition,” prohibited electricity on Sha•bât, thereby displacingmalforming & Reforming — the Tōr•âh definition Sha•bât. (When rabbis later learned that electricity is not magic fire and, therefore, their premise to prohibit the use of electricity on Sha•bât was invalid, they retreated to a “fall-back” blasphemous explanation, not a whit less ignorant, that switching electricity on (and off rolleyes2015x15) was an act of “creating.” Only י‑‑ה creates!)

One of the first cities in the world to have electricity was New York City. The first light bulb in Times Square was first switched on in 1904. My Mom (b. 1908) recounted to me her memory, as a girl, when electricity came to her town of Pine Castle, a suburb of Orlando, Florida. Most places in the European rabbinic world that we’re focused on were first introduced to electricity well after, perhaps decades after, that.

Prior to the 20th century, Sha•bât was about deferring mᵊlâkh•âh to either before or after Sha•bât. Since, though, avoidance of electricity on Sha•bât has fanatically taken over, displacing the Scriptural definition of Sha•bât.

And desecration of Scripturally-defined Sha•bât is the most blatant violation in Tōr•âh!

Thus, רֹעִי הָאֱלִיל (rō•iy ë•lil) prophesied by the Nᵊviy•im can only be found among the set of European rabbis who were responsible for defining electricity as “fire” (and, therefore prohibited on Sha•bât), but this is not enough to identify rō•iy ë•lil from the other pre-Sho•âh European rabbis.

Nevertheless, redefining Sha•bât was certainly the reason for the Sho•âh!

רֹעִי הָאֱלִיל (rō•iy; My shepherd + (the)-ë•lil — My Worthless Shepherd, 11.17)

The earliest European rabbis recorded as associated with forming the rabbinic definition of electricity relative to Sha•bât were:

  • Rabbi Yitzkhaq Yehudah Schmelkes (1828-1906, Lviv-Lemberg, Ukraine near Poland; died prior to the Sho•âh).

  • Rabbi Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz (“Khazon Ish”; 1878-1953, Kossovo, Belarus; later Vilna, Lithuania and Israel; died in bᵊn•ei-Bᵊraq, Israel)

  • Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (1910-1995; Yᵊru•shâ•layim) ruled prohibition of electricity on Sha•bât a mi•nᵊhâg.

None of these, however, died in the Sho•âh. While רֹעִי הָאֱלִיל (rō•iy ë•lil) (v 11.17) must have been some rabbi who died in the Sho•âh, whose name is unrecorded (or not yet identified), the Malform (redefinition reform) of Sha•bât with the consequent Sho•âh — being practically unanimous in pre-Sho•âh Europe — isn’t specific to any particular shepherd (rabbi).

Zᵊkhar•yâh continues by describing a glimpse of the ⅓ remnant (v. 9): “Then I will bring the ⅓ through fire [not electricity] and refine them as silver is refined, and I will test-prove them as gold is test-proven on a touchstone. Then they shall call on My Name and I shall answer them. I will say “That is My kindred!” And they shall reply, “י‑‑ה is my ël•oh•im” (the Shᵊm•a).

May you be blessed with a joyful Khag haShâvu•ot and a Tōr•âh-defined Sha•bât shâ•lom.

Save this URL and, on future “Holocaust Days”, post the link to this article to Fb, Tweet & other media.


One thought on “Why The Holocaust? ‘Final Solution’ Finally Solved

  1. Pingback: רֹעִי הָאֱלִיל (rō•iyꞋ hâ–ë•lilꞋ) | Israel Jews News

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s