<div dir="ltr">Carried over from Areivim.<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"><div class="Ih2E3d"><br>On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Eli Turkel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eliturkel@gmail.com" target="_blank">eliturkel@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The Jews of first temple days living under Menashe or other kings who<br>
worship idols were not living in galus.</blockquote><div><br></div></div></div>OTOH, you have the example brought by RMB about Galus Yavan, which was while we were in EY, and we had the BHMK.<br><br>Why was Galus Yavan considered galus and the days of Menashe not? I would say that the relevant criterion would be whether we are subject to other nations' rule, but we still have the problem of towards the end of Bayis Sheni, when the Babylonians were essentially in power, even while we had the BHMK. We don't call that period galus, and instead we say that our current galus began with the Churban.<br>
<br>I would like to see some kind of answer to these seeming contradictions.<br><br>KT,<br>Michael<br></div>
</div><br></div>