Problem with Melech HaMashiach from the Dead

We need another anti lubavitch thread? You couldn’t just piggy back on a different thread?

Anyways is this a pre three weeks thread so we can get ready for sinas chinam?

This does not sound like a theological argument against a Moshiach’s candidacy after death (hard to make one knowing the amount of sources that support such an idea), more like a concern of the ramifications of such a Torah idea. I suppose we can add onto that the concerns of a false prophet only making negative prophecies and therefore never being able to be disproved (at least in the view of Rambam), or the fact that Moshiachs can take many years to complete their mission. It is also a bit interesting that you would think that this particular idea would help False Moshiachs as false Moshiachs are quite common throughout Jewish History without using this particular method (probably because as long as you are not dead you can still be a running Moshiach who is finishing his mission, and once you are dead the gig is temporarily up).
You also seem to be confusing someone attempting to be Moshiach, with the actual arrival of Moshiach. The latter would require the fulfillment of certain big action items (see Rambam end of Hilchos Melachim). Saying I will do those action items after I return from the dead will not help his actualized Moshiach status. But, his lack of completing those actions while he is still alive does not hurt his potential Moshiach status, so not much to be gained by such a claim.
Furthermore, not everybody can Moshiach. There are a lot of prerequisites. It is not like the dead Moshiach idea was the only barrier to becoming Moshiach (again, I am still very confused as to how it was a barrier at all.)
Also, what if it was not a true idea and the false Moshiach convinced everyone it was a true idea, then what? Like is this a policy suggestion? Is this meant to be a statement related to the true and falsehood of Torah? Very confusing.
All in all, it must have been before your first coffee when you decided to write this. Not exactly a paradigm of coherent thought.

Give this subject a rest.

I have a novel idea. Why don’t we all agree that when Mashiach arrives, we will welcome him, whomever he may be?

“Why is criticizing an ideology hateful, and if it is, why is it baseless?”
because the specific ideology you are looking to criticize, is a criticism that has no toeles plus you are doing it very publicly to an audience that it not connected to the proponents of the ideology.

Your question lacks any sincerity. If you really want to know the answer to your question, for yourself, you would ask your rav to clarify how or if the ideology is tenable. If you personally are not interested in have concluded that the ideology is wrong, yet you want to understand how it is possible for an honest Jew to believe that ideology, you would need to address your question privately to someone who is an adherent of or at least well versed in that ideology. If you don’t know anyone to ask privately in that community, there are very public rabbanim from that community that are not hard to find.

On top of that, the issue you bring up has been well discussed and debated and you (seemingly) are not bringing anything new to the conversation.

At best, you are trying to give tochacha to a community you think is wrong, however, no cherem, psak, or announcement has denounced the community or the ideology from any prominent rabanim or bataei dinim. If I am wrong, and such a move has been publicly made, than you wouldn’t need to ask your questions here, you can just reference the authority.

You are just a bully trying to get people to think bad on other holy Jews. sinas chinam.

We learn from Korach not to get involved with Machlokes.

A

It may be a “only” a shtus, but it’s a dangerous and harmful one.

Still, the OP’s tayna doesn’t work – the false moshiach is still alive, so why would he need Moshiach min hameisim as a defense? Hrs not taynaing anything after he died.

I personally find Redleg’s tayna more compelling than the OP’s. Still more compelling is the fact that until the Rebbe’s petirah, the idea of Moshiach coming from the dead was never accepted as a mainstram position in Klal Yisroel, even in Chabad/Lubavitch. That’s why his petirah was so devastating to those who believed he was definitely Moshiach – because it totally didn’t fit the narrative. Some of those who couldn’t wrap their heads around the fact the Rebbe wasn’t Moshiach retrofit their hashkafa around his petirah, finding sources which may or may not support the notion – but at most those sources had the status of a daas yochid (bracing for comments about my screen name).

1] ramban [vikuach in front of spanish king] categorically rejects possibility of mashiach from the dead.
2] chabad itself universally rejected that possibility .All their mashpiiim. All their rabbanim.
When their rebbi was alive still , it was an article of faith , one of the IKAREI EMUNA . that he could not die . Dying would be classified as a failure of mashiachs mission .
Doubting that , would classify one as an Apikores , no less.
Not me saying this . ALL of chabads rabbanim and mashpiiim ! said this.

mods didn’t like?

“Lake, i suppose opposing tzedukim, karaim, shabsai tzvi, reform, conservative, zionism, and every other bad idea was against the Torahs lesson from korach?”

Again, if the ideology is indeed “against the Torah”, you would be correct. However, there has been no authority who has made such claim, so at this point it is “sinas chinam” to publicly deride the ideology or its adherents.

You have to be careful that you’re doing it in a way that’s Lshem Shomayim. Chabad isn’t Karaite.

@lakewhut You’re right. There are very few Kara’im around these days and they don’t prostelize. No yid, whether they are frum or not yet, will confuse a Kara’i with a legitimate Torah true Jew and think that they represent frum Jews.

1. As rav Chaim said when someone wanted to bring proof from a debate that moshiach has to be ben acher ben to shlomo “one cannot bring proofs from debates”. But even if you wish to say that you can, there are other debates which say moshiach will come from the dead and he will be dovid!
2. Let chabad decide if they are being consistent or jumped the gun with conclusions etc. Thats for chabad to figure out, whatever the conclusion of that is has no affect on the topic of the thread which is whether moshiach can come from the dead and whether in the end g-d will choose the rebbe. G-d could choose the rebbe independent of what the movement says. But as an aside, I personally know lubavitchers who held moshiach could come from the dead before gimmel tammuz as i likewise heard from lubavitchers that people told them the rebbe cant be moshiach because moshiach will come from the dead and nobody today is worthy.

1995,

If you and Chabad want to twist yourselves into pretzels tirelessly defending why Mashiach can come from the dead, that’s fine. Just don’t call it sinas chinam when the rest of Jewry consider you all certifiably nuts and beyond the pale.

There was a lot of push back to this thread. Some specific responses to somejewiknow:

“because the specific ideology you are looking to criticize, is a criticism that has no toeles plus you are doing it very publicly to an audience that it not connected to the proponents of the ideology.”

1. What makes it have no toeles? I’m not convinced that it does or it does not, but you made a definitive statement and I’m wondering what you’ve based it on.
2. AviraDeArah has been debating extensively with Chabad proponents on other threads. There are many Chabad posters in the CR. This kashya was not stated in a rude way.

“Your question lacks any sincerity. If you really want to know the answer to your question, for yourself, you would ask” [snip]”

Are all questions asked on the CR insincere? Or just ones asked about Chabad? And why do you see yourself as a gatekeeper on what’s ok or not ok to ask in the CR? And at the end of the day, the OP didn’t even ask a question.

“On top of that, the issue you bring up has been well discussed and debated and you (seemingly) are not bringing anything new to the conversation.”

Actually, it has not, and I have never heard a clear and cogent answer to this question.

“You are just a bully trying to get people to think bad on other holy Jews. sinas chinam.”

Neither the OP nor AviraDeArah made any personal attacks in this thread. This, however, was a personal attack. AviraDeArah expresses his opposition to certain ideologies quite strongly and in a way that seems to inflame passions, and he is sometimes too quick to declare a statement kefira without first getting clarification, but I cannot recall him ever personally attacking or disrespecting another poster. And that is despite other posters frequently attacking him personally, calling him names (e.g., “Aveirah”), and even subtly threatening him.

RSo,

This isnt quite accurate. If you want to actually understand a movement you need to listen to what they claim. David Berger who is considered to be an expert himself acknowledges that this belief was in major part fueled by things the rebbe said. The claim is the rebbe taught it, not that we just want him to be. As for criteria, look you again are watching from far away so u do not know all the various strains of thought in lubavitch, but there are messianists who dont think he is doing any of the criteria. Some hold he will return to fulfill them. Yes there are a great many who hold he matched until the status of chezkas moshiach. The problem with “proving” this is that like anything people have different pshatim and arguments for their pshatim. Much of what lubavitchers say is taken from the rebbes sichas themselves. Perhaps you should check those out before you comment further. I dont know where ur getting the idea that we dont know the rebbe was from king david. He himself testified that his father is from zera dovid in an edited sicha. We have the rebbes family background recorded. He is related to the alter rebbe, who is related to the maharal who is related to dovid hamelech. None of this is disputed by anyone in entire lubavitch.

lakewhut,

“We learn from Korach not to get involved with Machlokes”

You don’t shy away from machlokes when the topic is politics.

Avram,

There is a particular minority section who annoyingly(to put it lightly) proclaims it and have more right leaning views. Most dont like them. But even the ones that dont like them think the rebbe is moshiach.
“And my ancestors are the villains of their stories” you clearly have a lot more issues here with lubavitch than the messianism. Coincidently everybody who posts about this issue always has another 50 problems with something chabad does that makes them intolerable. Im not saying its sinas chinam but it definitely isnt a simple pure and kind question of sources either

I looked up the headlines podcast. Rav dovid cohen did not say that the idea of a dead messiah is valid, only that it doesn’t make one pasul, as in, an apikores. He also claimed that other jews have had such ideas in the past, but did not say that gedolim or talmidei chachamim did.

The host also only played a snipet of what rav Cohen said. We have no idea what other caveats or qualifying statements he may have made. The host also clearly had a pro-chabad agenda, praising them at every chance he got, and throwing around gemaras without giving the rabbis he interviewed a chance to answer them. Same thing with his snipet of rav shmuel kaminetzky saying that they’re our brothers.

I think it’s understood that the rabbonim who go on headlines know who their audience is and would likely say something different if asked in person; rav shmuels Rebbe was rav aharon, who held very strong views on Lubavitch.

He did have rabbi Hershel shechter speak, who he allowed to speak longer. Rabbi Shechter said that the plain messianics are not doing avodah zara, but that a sizeable, growing amount pray to the Lubavitcher rebbe, which he agrees is avodah zara and requires richuk. He also said that this is exactly how Christianity started; first he was messianic, then they prayed to him, etc…

I agree that it’s not apikorsus to believe in a dead messiah. It’s wrong, and it’s a twisted interpretation of a gemara that the rishonim and achronim do not use in explaining moshiach nearly at all, and it’s of course wrong because they say he started his mission and will return to finish it, which the rambam clearly says won’t happen(if he was not successful to this point…)

But no one’s giving them a stamp of approval. Rav dovid cohens rebbe, rav hutner, had very, very strong things to say about Lubavitch as well. I daven in his shul sometimes; maybe I’ll ask him why he said those things on the podcast, if he’s feeling up to talking.

Either way, rav dovid cohen isn’t rav shach, the chazon ish, and brisker rov, who all held anti chabad views, with the chazon ish calling the Lubavitcher rebbe a kofer for his god- wrapped-in-a-body line.

And oh so the rebbe is a kofer now? I think u have revealed enough bias for one day. As always those who keep bringing up this topic have much more motivating this conversation than a logical argument of facts

Regarding my mention of rav shach, the chazon ish, etc…my point wasn’t to move the goalpost. I was trying to say that the Torah world’s policies on dead messiahs and the Lubavitcher rebbe’s status in our eyes was already determined 70 years ago. When someone, even a big person, tells me something i know that the briser rov and chazon ish were opposed to, i listen to the latter, because they were far bigger than anyone alive today. Perhaps eav dovid cohen has more important things to do with his time rhan ponder messianics and their beliefs, but if he were shown the kinds of rebbe worship and cult like messianic fervor, he would have something else to say entirely.

Rav pam and rav avigdor miller stepped back their support for the Lubavitcher rebbe in the late 90s, when more information became available. Not all rabbonim know the metzius about everything; if rav dovid cohen told me something that i know b’metzius to be based on mistaken facts, i would not be allowed to follow that psak.

ChabadOrthodoxrabbi1995:
Yes, that is our mesorah, going all the way back to that gemara. And nobody called your deceased leader a heretic. But your theology does contain heresy.

Also, it’s not “bias” and it’s not “sinas chinam” and it’s not any sina at all, despite Chabad trying to deflect edited; in fact, as a card-carrying Chabad defender, you are obviously the one with the bias.

Most Jews appreciate Chabad’s services and therefore would have no reason to want to speak against Chabad’s theology. So, if anything, they would be biased in favor of Chabad.

But the Torah is truth, and you cannot corrupt it with your heretical theology of what was heretofore normative Christian theology, Rav Keller Zatza”l noted.

Anyone interested in the truth, including the quote from Rav Keller above, can find it at the Identifying Chabad Organizational Website. They also sell a sefer of the material so that you can learn it on Shabbos or Yom Tov or anytime.

(I apologize in advance for the length of this post.)

There is so much that could be said in reply, I can’t remember all the points I wanted to contest. But I do remember a few (not in any particular order).

“Quote me a Rambam and I’ll quote you an Abarbanel.”

Even before 1994 Lubavichers were saying that the Rambam is a sefer Halocho and that that is what is relevant, not other Rishonim or Achronim who aren’t paskening. (This is exactly the same reasoning Lubavichers use when arguing that the branches of the menora were straight and not round. The Rambam says so, so other meforshim don’t count against Halocho.) To now say that Moshiach can come from the dead because the Abarbanel apparently says so is disingenuous.

“I dont know where ur getting the idea that we dont know the rebbe was from king david. He himself testified that his father is from zera dovid in an edited sicha. We have the rebbes family background recorded. He is related to the alter rebbe, who is related to the maharal who is related to dovid hamelech. None of this is disputed by anyone in entire lubavitch.”

Sorry for the long quote but I wanted to give everyone out there the opportunity to enjoy it once again. The proof that he is from zera Dovid is… (drumroll)… he himself said so! And his family connection is recorded with NO ONE IN LUBAVITCH disputing it! Well, then. That’s good enough, isn’t it? How very woke! The Lubavicher rebbe identifies as zera Dovid, so we take his word for it. If he identifies as Mashiach we’ll take his word for it. edited
And one other point on the Davidic claim: the claim is that the line goes through Rashi, who had no sons, so that line is not ben achar ben.

You claim that people have other issues against Lubavich, not just the Mashiach matter. I agree with you!

As I have written in other threads, I have been in very close contact with Lubavichers – both familially and parnossa-wise – for many many many years. And that means decades before 1994. Even before they started hounding us about Mashiach, they were hounding us about the “correct” things we should be learning, the “correct” way to put on tefillin, the “correct” nusach to daven, the “correct” days to celebrate etc. Everyone else was wrong or at the very best, insignificant. There were no other tzaddikim and no other gedolei Yisrael. People who slept in the sukkah were shallow or stupid, as were people who ate Seudah Shlishis. Everybody was mechuyav to recite Chumash-Tehillim-Tanya, aka Chitas, daily. Everyone was mechuyav to learn Rambam daily. Everyone was mechuyav to learn mesechta Sotah during Sefirah. And the list goes on.

As the Kohein Gadol said on Yom Kippur (and no, I am not chas veShalom comparing myself to him, just using a quote) יותר ממה שקריתי יש כאן. There’s a lot more to say, but I think you get the point.

One final thing I’d like to say. I really liked Yserblus’ statement that it doesn’t say anywhere in the Torah that Mashiach can’t be a purple monkey. Very clever, and VERY to the point!

The abarbanel and sdei chemed have been discussed here at length; check out the other threads.

But in no universe would we pasken lile an abarbanel over a ramban in any case; they were completely different classes of rabbonim. And the abarbanel’s sefer which is quoted, yeshuos meshicho, is machniah to the ramban and quotes his vikuach all the time. Funny thing is that I’ve been through the yeshuos meshicho, i can tell you the main themes and points that the abarbanel makes, etc…but that one line is something i didn’t notice. On the other hand, messianic Lubavitchers don’t know the sefer at all, and just quote that one line!

And what was that one line? He says that you shouldn’t be surprised if moshiach is from those who get up by techias hamaysim. It isn’t clear id techias hamaysim happens before or after bias hamoshiach, so the question is up in the air; that in no way is an acceptance of second -coming ideology, where a messianic candidate begins his mission, dies, ks resurrected, and finishes it. This would be clearly against both the rambam and ramban, and the abarbanel basically never argues on either one of those rishonim. While the sefer deals extensively with christian issues, it never makes this concession; if he did, he would have been clearer about it, because it’s a dramatic deviation from the rishonim.

Go through the sefer. Learn it. It’s a great sefer.

But even if tha abarbanel says it could happen, we would respectfully not accept it if the rambam and ramban disagreed, just like we would take the gedolei rishonim over a lone acharon in a shailoh of kashrus, shabbos , etc..

The sdei chemed on the other hand, actually refutes chabad messianics. Because he interprets the gemara about moshiach being min hamaysim metaphorically, as referring to if klal yisroel is zocheh or not, if moshiach will be from shomayim or down here. But he deviates from the plain translation of maysim/chayim.

Also should be noted that this whole thing is only according to the first pshat in rashi. It’s known that Rashi usually prefers the second pshat, and in this gemaea, rashis 2nd pshat is that the tzadikim mentioned are dugmos, and that the gemara is not saying that moshiach will actually be from the dead.

What is meant by mesorah, is that the seforim which talk about moshiach; rambam in yad, igros taiman, igeres techias hamaysim, ramban shaar hagemul, vikuach, maharal, ramchal, kisveo arizal, gaon, yaaros dvash, drashos haran, and tons more… don’t even quote this gemara about the possibility of him being min hamaysim. They ignore it, either because rashis 2nd pshat was accepted, or because it was a machlokes in which we as a klal paskened not like that maan d’amar.

Regarding the chazon ish…sometimes it stings, but yes, there were and are many gedolim who believed that the Lubavitcher rebbe was not a tzadik, a gadol, a nasi, or whatever else. The majority of the yeshiva world believes that. Some think he was a tzadik – i have no opinion, and i don’t care if he was or not. It makes no difference to me, not only because he wasn’t my rebbe, bit because my yiddishkeit does not rest on the idea of the greatness of one man. If i discovered that one of my rebbeim was not a tzadik, it would hurt, but I wouldn’t fall apart in my yiddishkeit, because i do not believe in men. I believe in Hashem, the Torah, and the unbroken mesorah from talmidei chachamim over the generations, who were guided by ruach hakodesh and siyata dishmaya. One person doesn’t make or break that mesorah.

The Lubavitcher rebbes status is between him and Hashem; it’s not productive for me to delve into it, and it’s not really my business. But ideologies that affect my people are my business, and as long as chabad situates itself at the forefront of community issues, including gerus and marriages, it will be high on my priority list to make people aware of the dangers of the neo chabad movement.

For example, nasan of gaza was once regarded as a tzadik and mekubal, but he joined shabsai tzvi; acher went off the derech, one of the rishonim became a priest r”l, and many young talmidei chachamim became maskilim….that doesn’t shake me. But for someone who does mitzvos for their rebbe, talks to him, writes him letters, believes that he himself saves him, that he can answer your questions….yes, a realization or a doubt about him xan rock your world. So perhaps it’s better not to go in that direction; whether or not he was a tzadik, messianism is wrong, and the entire Torah world either laughs at it or repudiates it. Finding a podcast with carefully curated snipets doesn’t change it. Go to BMG, chaim berlin, mir, Torah vodaas, ner yisroel, etc…and see what rebbeim and talmidim have to say about it. Do some footwork.