The Brit-Am Rose
Symbol of United Israel
Brit-Am Now no. 1133
Date 17th April 2008, 12 Nissan 5768
1. Answer in Reply to Brit-Am's
Challenges to Ephraimites:
The Rabbis and the Talmud
2. Question on Male Lineage and the daughters of
3. Brit-Am and the Khazars
1. Answer in Reply to Brit-Am's
Challenges to Ephraimites:
The Rabbis and the Talmud.
We challenged Ephraimites as to why they do not support Brit-Am more, why
they are against
Rabbinicial Opinion in Principle, and why they do not spread Brit-Am type
identity information more.
Concerning our Challenge about respecting Rabbinicial Opinion
somebody sent us a long list of quotations form an anti-Semitic site purporting
to be from the
Talmud and saying things that Gentiles who are unfamiliar with the subject matter might consider offensive.
First of all by the Brit-Am Challenge for Ephraimites in interpreting the Law to
take consideration of
we did not mean that they should study the Talmud or accept the Talmud.
We meant more that in trying to understand a specific law and its practical
they should see how the Rabbis interpreted the HEBREW verses and take their
into account in a positive manner. They should want to be able to accept the
and not the opposite as sometimes seems to be the case.
When it comes to reconciliation between Judah and Joseph there is no need to be
contrary just for the sake of it.
Concerning the Talmud in general we do not recommend that non-Jews study it
since it is pertinent more to those who keep
[Out of curiosity however it should be noted that a right-wing nationalist
English politician, Enoch Powell,
would now and again quote positively from the Talmud in support of his
We are not trying to convert Ephraimites to Judaism and in most cases would
dissuade them from such a step.
It is not the task of Brit-Am to explain or defend Judaism or the Talmud.
We are not qualified for it nor do we have a desire for it.
Concerning criticisms against the Talmud it should be noted that the Talmud is
equivalent in size to the Encyclopedia Brittanica and on nearly every page there
are several different opinions
and the recording of free-for-all discussion and sometimes fierce debate.
To quote a single sentence out of context is not fair.
You sent a long list of misquotations from the Talmud.
Some of these quotations are opinions stated in discussion before the conclusion
which is the obligatory decision and often the DIAMETRICAL OPPOSITE of the
I study the Talmud every day attending regular classes and have at the very
basic level some familiarity
with a good portion of it having read much of it through at least once.
Quite a few (in fact nearly all to some degree) of the quotations you listed are
Others are statements taken out of context.
Often the quotations quoted are actually opinions stated that are the opposite
of the final legal decision.
In several cases all three aspects of this deliberate dishonesty are apparent,
a mistranslation, taken out of context, and an opinion expressed in discussion
but the opposite of
the legal decision reached.
For a FURTHER reply to some of the accusations against the Talmud see:
2. Question on Male Lineage and the
daughters of Zelophehad
Stephen Allen wrote:
I enjoyed reading your note about how Ephraim seems to bend over backward to
find a way to disagree with the rabbis. How true, but in the end, Ephraim
will overcome this too.
I have a question regarding something that you said about being Jewish. You
wrote, "It does not
affect which Tribe one belongs to or which Tribal Inheritance one is to
receive or whether or not one can claim to be a direct descendant of King
David through the male line since if there was female there this would be a
You state that it would be difficult (but not impossible?) to claim legal
descent from David through a female. Under what conditions would it be
possible? Does the precedent regarding the daughters of Zelophehad have
anything to do with it, that for an inheritance to pass through a female to
the next generation (when no male sons exist in that certain generation)
that the female would have to marry within the tribe (in this case, Judah)?
Brit-Am Reply: What we said was,
"It [i.e. being Jewish because of having a Jewish mother] does not affect which
Tribe one belongs to or which
Tribal Inheritance one is to receive or whether or not one can claim to be a
direct descendant of King David
through the male line since if there was [a] female there this would be a bit
By the expression, "if there was [a] female there this would be a bit difficult"
we were being sarcastic.
This is a sense of humor that Yair Davidiy is afflicted with and some people
have trouble getting used to.
Concerning the daughters of Zelophehad,
The whole incident affirms Tribal Lineage through the male line.
It was commanded that if a man had no sons then his inheritance should pass to
If one of these daughters married a man from another Israelite Tribe and they
had sons then the inheritance would
pass to them. It would therefore happen that part of the Tribal Inheritance
would end up belonging to people from another
It was therefore decided that in the case of the daughters of Zelophehad (from
the Tribe of Manasseh)
that they should marry their cousins thus ensuring that the inheritance remain
with the Tribe.
[Numbers 36:1] AND THE CHIEF FATHERS OF
THE FAMILIES OF THE CHILDREN OF GILEAD, THE SON OF
THE SON OF MANASSEH, OF THE FAMILIES OF THE SONS OF JOSEPH, CAME NEAR, AND
BEFORE MOSES, AND BEFORE THE PRINCES, THE CHIEF FATHERS OF THE CHILDREN OF
[Numbers 36:2] AND THEY SAID, THE LORD COMMANDED MY LORD TO GIVE THE LAND FOR
AN INHERITANCE BY LOT TO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL: AND MY LORD WAS COMMANDED BY
THE LORD TO GIVE THE INHERITANCE OF
OUR BROTHER UNTO HIS DAUGHTERS.
[Numbers 36:3] AND IF THEY BE MARRIED TO ANY OF THE SONS OF THE OTHER TRIBES OF
THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, THEN SHALL THEIR INHERITANCE BE TAKEN FROM THE
INHERITANCE OF OUR FATHERS, AND SHALL BE PUT TO THE INHERITANCE OF THE TRIBE
WHEREUNTO THEY ARE RECEIVED: SO SHALL IT BE TAKEN FROM THE LOT OF OUR
[Numbers 36:4] AND WHEN THE
JUBILE OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL
SHALL BE, THEN SHALL THEIR INHERITANCE BE PUT UNTO THE INHERITANCE OF THE TRIBE
WHEREUNTO THEY ARE RECEIVED: SO SHALL THEIR INHERITANCE BE TAKEN AWAY FROM THE
INHERITANCE OF THE TRIBE OF OUR FATHERS.
[Numbers 36:5] AND MOSES COMMANDED THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL ACCORDING TO THE WORD
OF THE LORD, SAYING, THE TRIBE OF THE SONS OF JOSEPH HATH SAID
[Numbers 36:6] THIS IS THE THING WHICH THE LORD DOTH COMMAND CONCERNING THE
DAUGHTERS OF ZELOPHEHAD,
SAYING, LET THEM MARRY TO WHOM THEY THINK BEST; ONLY TO THE FAMILY OF THE TRIBE
OF THEIR FATHER SHALL THEY MARRY.
[Numbers 36:7] SO SHALL NOT THE INHERITANCE OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL REMOVE
FROM TRIBE TO TRIBE: FOR EVERY ONE OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL KEEP HIMSELF
TO THE INHERITANCE OF THE TRIBE OF HIS FATHERS.
[Numbers 36:8] AND EVERY DAUGHTER, THAT
AN INHERITANCE IN ANY TRIBE OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, SHALL BE WIFE UNTO ONE
OF THE FAMILY OF THE TRIBE OF HER FATHER, THAT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL MAY ENJOY
EVERY MAN THE INHERITANCE OF HIS FATHERS.
[Numbers 36:9] NEITHER SHALL THE INHERITANCE REMOVE FROM ONE TRIBE TO ANOTHER
TRIBE; BUT EVERY ONE OF THE TRIBES OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL KEEP HIMSELF
TO HIS OWN INHERITANCE.
[Numbers 36:10] EVEN AS THE LORD COMMANDED MOSES, SO DID THE DAUGHTERS OF
This Law was only applied to the Generation that Came out of Egypt and conquered
and divided the land of Canaan.
Why this is so is not clear to us since we have not studied it.
At all events, the whole incident concerning the Daughters of Zelophehad affirms
Tribal Lineage through the male line.
3. Brit-Am and the
On our web site we have a few articles about the Khazars:
We have also prepared a short but important book on the subject which we may
The Khazars were basically of Israelite stock and are a connecting link between
Ten Tribes, the Scythians, Anglo-Saxons, Finns, and peoples of Scandinavia.
A few sites of interest (that we have probably mentioned before) include:
and the Scythians
This site links Khazars with Scythians but also mistakenly connects them with
Huns, and Bulgarians. Quite short. Worth reading but not agreeing with. Some
Beyond the Mountains of Darkness
Says that the Lost Ten Tribes were taken directly to Scythia north of the
Caucasus and there became the Khazars.
Brit-Am understands that the Lost Ten Tribes first were taken to North-west
Iran, Azerbaijan, etc and from there moved
to the north. There may however be some truth in both concepts.
There was a once-widely quoted Assyrian inscription that was understood to
describe Assyrian trading activity in
the "northern" Eurasian regions.
It appears that the places to which the
Ten Tribes were removed by the Assyrian kings must have been far more remote
than northeastern Syria.
Assyria, with its capital cities of
and Nineveh -all
on the Tigris- expanded
greatly in the days of its warrior kings
Sargon, and Sennacherib. Repeatedly, the Assyrian kings led their troops across
the Caucasus northward. Not satisfied with the passage along the coastal road of
the Caspian Sea, they also explored the mountainous passes. Sargon, the
conqueror of Samaria, wrote in his annals:
I opened up mighty mountains, whose passes were difficult and countless, and I
spied out their trails.
Over inaccessible paths in steep and terrifying places I crossed . . .(5)
The descriptions of
and Sargon of their campaigns in the north lead us to recognize that they passed
the mountains of the Caucasus and reached the steppes between the Don and the
Volga. When the barrier of the mountains was overcome, they could proceed
northward in a scarcely populated area barren of natural defenses, where they
would have met less resistance than in the foothills of the mountains. It is
unknown how far they may have let their armies of conquest march across the
steppes, but probably they did not give the order to return homeward until the
army brought its insignia to some really remote point: it could be as far as the
place of the confluence of the
Kama with the Volga, or even of
still farther north. The middle flow of the Volga would be the furthermost
region of the Assyrian realm.
The roads to the Russian steppes along
the Caspian and Black seas were much more readily passable than the narrow path
along the river Terek
and the Daryal
Canyon that cut the Caucasus and wind at the foot of Mount
over sixteen thousand feet high.
The fact that the "confluence of the river
is considered a sufficient designation suggests that it must have been a great
A large river in the plain behind the crest of the Caucasus is the Don, and a
still larger river, the
largest in Europe, is
the Volga. If the Assyrians did not make a halt on the plain that stretches
immediately behind the Caucasus and moved along the great rivers without
crossing them to conquer the great plain that lies open behind the narrow span
where the rivers Don and Volga
converge, then the most probable
place of exile might be reckoned to be at the middle Volga. The distance from
to this region on the Russian (Scythian) plain is in fact much less than the
distance from Nineveh to Thebes in Egypt, a path taken by
several decades later.
But Assyrian occupation of Scythia is
not a mere conjecture: it is confirmed by archaeological evidence. "The earliest
objects from Scythia that we can date," writes a student of the
antiquities, "referred to the
centuries B.C., are under overwhelming Assyrian influence. . ." (6)
(6). Ellis H. Minns, Scythians and
Greeks (Cambridge, 1913), p. 263.
The Real Scythians of Messopotamia
based on a work by Gyula Mezios
The real Scythians, however lived first
in Anatolia before the 7th century BC, then moved in large numbers to the
Region in early 6th century BC, then to the
Steppes and later to eastern Europe and to
Before this time they must have conducted long term trade with the region also.
They greatly influenced the culture of the peoples they interacted with
including the so called
Finnougrians in the north and
also the Hunic-Turkic
peoples in the east and probably also some Indo Europeans.
First of all a comparison of early Scythian customs, art forms, religious
beliefs and even their first historic mention is all from Anatolia and Northern
First in Assyrian documents. The early Greek writers confirm this also.
Therefore they were not a northern people at all ! Nor an eastern one from
Central Asia. Plinius
writes of their origins "Ultra
They came from an area in Northern
often called Arameos,
which is but a name of Urartu
whose first king was called Aram.
Later the term was also applied to Syria where another colony of Scythians &
(2000BC to 714BC) settled after the collapse of their old empire in Anatolia.
Indeed this was but one of the reasons for the spreading of Anatolian people to
the north also. Both Assyrian and Mede attacks forced them to look for new lands
Herodotus also tells of the origin of
the Scythians from the area of eastern Anatolia watered by the
River (modern Turkish Aras)
and not the Amu
which the historians of Alexander invented to enlarge their own conquests.
Herodotus writes: "The nomad Scythians living in Asia (once only the near east)
were attacked by the Sarmatians
and were forced to cross the
Araxes and wander to the land of
7th Century BC, writes: The inventors of bronze working were the Scythians. The
name of the metal Zubur,
indicates that the northern
or a people of the region were indeed the inventors of the process. The
Scythians also of this region were therefore but a different designation of such
people that the Greeks associated with them.
The Greeks also associated the invention of iron working with the Scythians.
This again is a northern
Messopotamian and Anatolian
invention and being Anatolian in origin the Scythians also had some great iron
working tribes like the Kalybs
tribe which gave steel its name in many early European languages. In time they
became absorbed by the Sarmatians
They must have also been remembered by the
cavalry taken by the Romans to early Britain and were the foundation of the King
Arthur myths of Ex-Calibur,
and the sword myths which are all early Anatolian traditions. These traditions
were also found in Hun and Magyar traditions and mentioned by Herodotus amongst
the early Scythians.
Besides bronze and iron they are credited by the early Greeks to have invented
the bellows used for metal smelting. The invention of the pottery wheel and the
boat anchor. Products of a very early civilization.
Therefore when Justinius
II writes that the Scythians are one of the most ancient races in the world,
older than the Egyptians, He cannot be talking of simply the late Scythian
immigrants to the Pontic
steppes but the early northern
Messopotamian cultures. Similarly
he cannot be talking of the Iranian tribesmen which spread into Central Asia.
Nor is he talking of the later Hun tribes for sure, since they were hardly known
for a such a long time in the west.
It is Deodorus
who talks of the death and disappearance of the true Scythians at the hands of
who could not have been their relatives, and therefore not real Scythians. The
early Scythian art style is an extension of
art, a fact which cannot be denied any longer.
Brit-Am is the "still small voice" that contains the truth.
[1-Kings 19:12] AND AFTER THE EARTHQUAKE A FIRE; BUT THE LORD WAS NOT IN THE
FIRE: AND AFTER THE FIRE A STILL SMALL VOICE.