This study concludes my systematic account of the hermeneutics of comparison and contrast of Rabbinic Judaism. It concerns the definition of the category-formations of the Halakhah: why these, not others? The question breaks into two parts: Why the particular method I have identified as the generative hermeneutics of the Halakhah, or law, of that Judaism? Second, can I account for the topics that the Mishnah-Tosefta-Yerushalmi-Bavli would introduce into the system, beyond the repertoire at the foundations defined by the analytical-topical hermeneutics that defines the normative category-formations? In answering the second question, I propose to account for the analytical topics themselves. Building on the results of the first six parts of this project, I propose to identify the indicative traits that characterize all topical-analytical category-formations. For I claim to have identified the architectonics of the building, to know what holds the whole together, to account for the composition and the construction of the parts. These, all together, in proportion and in balance and sublimity seen whole on site, define Judaism.