Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@ARSo
I think you ‘dont see it’
is because you have not tried [properly].
Chazon Ish said that whenever he is deliberating on a pshat to gauge its merits, he tries the following.First he banishes all possible problems with that pshat- as if they do not exist and fully concentrates on its merits and how it would make sense with the language, other sources and its logic.
Then- and only then, he changes course totally, concentrates fully on its problems as if its merits do not exist at all.
Only after all said and done , once , as a result of the above, its merits and deficiencies are totally clear to him , then he weighs them up , merits vs deficiency, and decides whether the pshat is emet or not.
—————–
Its important to establish here that this idea of a test is not mine. it is the RAMBAM’s.
RAMBAM clearly is worried also in the case of a navi, also in the case of mashiach, about the same issue.
How do we differentiate between false pretenders and rightful claimants ?
And he gives solutions to both.There is a test the claimant has to pass , in order to be established as a rightful name bearer.
You have not addressed the question of how the test could have any meaning if there is the possibility of a second chance ?Going back to our previous discussion re mashiach min hameitim-
It is clear from RAMBAM that he was concerned about lack of credibility .That any and all pretenders to the throne can and therefore will attempt to usurp it.
He [in igeret teiman] states with certainty that it [false pretenders] will happen in the leadup to the true mashiach.
So how are we [klal israel] meant to differentiate between the pretender and rightful possessor of mashiach’s name ?[Rambam similarly is concerned [hilch yesode torah] about the differentiation between a navi sheker and navi emet . How can we know who is emet and who not ? ]
In the case of mashiach, RAMBAM gives us a simple test . Results.
It is results based .
So if someone CLAIMS the mashiach mantle , he is directed to the RESULTS TEST.If he passes – he is the rightful possessor . If he fails, he is a false pretender.
Failing – according to RAMBAM [and RAMBAN too], constitutes of the claimant’s demise without the expected results.So here the point comes. If a person failing the test [because of his results-less demise], is accorded a second chance to produce results, then per force there is no test whatsoever. He can ALWAYS claim a second coming during which he produces the results …..
Thus by sheer logic , there CANNOT be a second chance nor a second coming.
But in the case of Daniel, or anyone else similar to him , who never laid any claims , never failed any test. So why should someone like him be disqualified ? Provided of course that the RBSH’O is willing to revive him first , that is.
Am happy to hear any question on the above.
@ARSo
@philosopher
@menachem
@qwertyLooked at this whole Yaakov Lo Met business.
I simply cannot understand the whole hullaballoo.
Rashi on humash is medayek that since it does not say vayamat [he died], rather vayigva [he expired] by yaakov. that tells us yaakov did not die.
Rashi in ta’anit 5B says that although yaakov was embalmed , the embalmers did not notice and thought he had died. [nidmeh la’hem]So, we do know that ‘something’ happened to yaakov.
What is that ‘something’ ?It says vayigva, vaye’osef el amav.
It’s not death.
But it is so similar to death, that the embalmers were tricked into believing that it was actual death.It is my belief that embalmers are in close proximity of the body they are embalming.
If there was a heartbeat and / or breathing, they ‘d notice.
Seems that there was no heartbeat and no breathing , which normally would be an indication of death as we know it.Nevertheless since RASHI tells us that there was no death , we have to say that there was , as a nes, especially for yaakov ‘s sake, a new situation whereby there was a measure of life in yaakov’s body although his vital signs did stop.
Thats why the passuk says vayigva , he expired and not that he died.
So, he did not need to breathe after his expiry , nor did his heart need to beat.But the source for yakov avinu being considered as “not died”, is strong – A passuk in humash.
To say the same for any other mortal, you will need a source at least as strong.So can we say that the object of “wrongful deification” and “wrongful messiahfication”, also did not die ?
That should rightfully be called “wrongful expiryfication.”
Hope the above will succeed in putting things into perspective.
================
Bearing in mind that I saw it brought down from Rav Chida in his Shem HaGdolim quoting sources that RASHI’s peirush on Ta’anit is not from RASHI himself, and is mistakenly meyuchas to RASHI.
@ARSo
You write that someone who argues on rishonim and meforshim about pshat in gmara is apikorsus.
Not necessarily so. But I will grant you that it is foolish to do so.
About your other comments – od hazon lamo’ed.@ARSo
Proclaiming to Klal Yisrael by force of a full-fledged Prophesy that RMMS has arrived to irrevocably take klal yisrael out of galut is an as clear as possible claim to the messiahship.A claim which has to verified thru results and reality.
If there is a second coming and a second chance , then there is NO VERFICATION at all.I am just elaborating on the words of RAMBAN and RAMBAM.
And there is zero connection to the gmara in sanhedrin , as mentioned.
@ARSo
a] As far as I remember RASHI says ‘kegon’ Daniel. Not that Daniel is the only possibility if its min hameitim . There are other possibilities.
So j would NOT be excluded according to that pshat of RASHI.b] I am not ‘concerned’ about RAMBAN excluding j [because of his death], because he is contradicting RASHI. He contradicts RASHI many times.
I am rather, ‘very concerned’ why RAMBAN sees fit to present to vulnerable Jews AND powerful gentiles alike, a proof , which is so easily refutable.
Refutable with DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES.Its refutable by the gmara , even without RASHI, as you correctly noted. The gmara could be telling us that a dead mashiach is not automatically disqualified.
And that puts into doubt the whole premise of RAMBAN, the foundation of the yahadut upon which he exhorts all yehudim to build their emuna.
And even more so, since RASHI possibly interprets the gmara that way.c] Re having it back to front.
Not at all , this is very simple. The mashiach job is a very appealing job.
Admittedly not to everyone, but certain types of individuals would be VERY attracted to it.
As history amply bears witness.RASHBA and RAMBAM and the rabbanim after tach vetat, for example, could tell you a thing or two about this . They all had to counter false messiah claims in their generations.
How can we know the difference ? The difference between the real and the plastic . The difference between the authentic and the forged ?
It’s obvious that RAMBAM is concerned about separating the chaff from the wheat : how will we know how to differentiate ?
Only as RAMBAM rightly points out [hilch melachim] : RESULTS.The plastic and the forged will not be able to produce verifiable results.
Whereas the true one, will.Now , let’s ask you . If the plastic and the forged one [or his followers for that matter] are able claim that a so called second coming will clear up all the left over mess, then we are back to square one.
Any failed , forged or plastic one , will say – I am still the right one . Just wait until I reappear.
.
Think about this.@always ask
I do not know your background .
But I do not consider “interpreting gmara and rishonim” as “esoteric”.“Interpreting gmara and rishonim” just happens to be considered as ‘bread and butter issues’ for any serious [ex] yeshiva student ,
After all , this is what any serious yehiva student occupies most of his waking hours with.RAMBAM versus Ptolemy, Einstein and Newton , has zero bearing on “interpreting gmara and rishonim” ……
@ARSo
a] There is no reason at all to believe RAMBAN should not have had RASHI . He Quotes RASHI countless times, al hatorah and on shas. I imagine it reaches into the hundreds if not more. Btw, RAMBAN lived 200 years after RASHI.b]I don’t understand what you mean by the disputant ‘believing’ in RASHI.
He [or better- they] for sure did not believe in RASHI.They believed in only one thing, victory.
They [meaning a massive apparatus consisting of catholic clergy, the superstitious commoners filled with hate and envy against their Jewish neighbors, and the state machinery combined] all wanted VICTORY and get rid of this thorn in their side.
They wanted mass conversion of the Jews or alternatively their forced exile.
Victory at all costs.They even aimed to prove j’s messiahship FROM THE TALMUDS OWN WRITING .
If RAMBAN would disprove j’s messiahship, they would give anything to be able to refute RAMBAN’s words from the Talmud itself .
Now, think for a second, there is a clear gemara contradicting RAMBAN , which seems [to at least possibly] say that mashiach could be from the dead.
Isn’t that gmara a virtual g-dsend to RAMBAN’s opponents ?And didn’t RAMBAN think about that gmara ?
Why would RAMBAN advance a proof , so easily and obviously refutable from a gmara ?Answer is very clear : RAMBAN knew that his line of reasoning is not against that gmara.
Why not ???
c] Am amazed ARSo could even claim that the rebbi of the habad hasidim did not start the process.
Did he not accept and encourage petitions from his followers that he is mashiach ? For sure he did.
Wasn’t that the prophecy that he prophesied [like a full fledged navi, that mashiach is here – meaning himself ?
Mashiach self proclaiming his messiahship and telling all yehudim mashiach is here to take you out of galut.
If this is not a claim as a mashiach wannabe , then what is ?If habad offer a moratorium for hodesh elul whereby they cease any mention of second coming, any mention of yehi, any mention of their rebbi being mashiach , Yes there should be a moratorium on habad bashing .
Agreed ?Kavod for resha’im should be avoided.
But the methodology employed by these resha’im [and non reshaim] should be carefully studied and if successful in saving lives and property, should be emulated. Like a non frum doctor who happens to excel in his field, patients should be referred to him.
With no need to give him undue kavod.
Same with other military pikuach Nefesh dilemma’s.@ARSo
Look in RAMBAM hilchot mlachim at the end where he discusses the candidacy of mashiach wannabe’s .
It is clear that there are here some requirements at work.
Requirements which ensure that only one candidate reaches the finish line.
The one and truly.
The real one.
Therefore there is a ‘vetting process’ in place.
A stringent one.
An absolutely foolproof one.
Which weeds out any and all pretenders.Which makes absolutely sense.
Where did RAMBAM take this vetting process from , do you think ? Is it just ‘common sense’ ?
Or is it based on the nevu’ot of the nevi’im themselves who mention the ‘job description’ of mashiach ?RAMBAM held that if Mashiach has according to the message of the nevi’im a tafkid, a job to do , it is implicit that pretenders should be measured against the requirements of that tafkid.
Now, why would/should you think that according to RASHI all this doesn’t exist ?
The nevi’im put the bar in its place . We need Binyan B’H. We need Kibuts Galuyot. We need the eradication of the yetser hara. The eradication of Shib’ud Malhuyot. The job description is here.
Isnt it implicit that wannabe’s should be measured against that yardstick ?Like RAMBAM and RAMBAN say , this is the pashtut.
Miheichi Teiti to make a machloket on this very pashute and sensible point ?@ARSo
j started the process by claiming to his followers that he is the messiah, they got it from him.
According to his followers’ claims, at least.
It is them who claim that he was the messiah.
And it is them who claim that they got this idea that he was the messiah from j himself.
They do not claim to have dreamed it up.
They claim that that they are acting according to his instructions and guidance.
And it is them who RAMBAN debated.
Whether their claims could be valid or are per force invalid.
Where RAMBAN stated in the absolute negative , because of lack of realization of the nevu’ot in j’s lifetime .
Stated publicly in a major high stakes debate in front of the absolute ruler of his country, in the presence of the Jews’ most implacable enemies.
And disseminated far and wide with the express intention that Jews all over should base their belief on this rock-solid argument and withstand the enormous pressures they were facing.
Which obviously could not be ‘open to further discussion’.
Possible discussion being- maybe gmara sanhedrin does lend its support for j’s possible candidacy.
[obviously not taking j ‘s personality into consideration]
This was clearly unthinkable.
Why ?@ARSo
According to you –
Why did RAMBAN consider the gmara of sanhedrin as a non challenge ?
————————————————————————————-We cannot fully grasp the ahrayut of being at the helm of a vulnerable Jewish population, not only vulnerable in physical manner at the whim of the above, but also vulnerable in a spiritual sense where huge chunks of this population were torn of it, converting to the overwhelmingly dominant religion of Xtianity .
It was under these circumstances that RAMBAN struggled to provide physical protection to his flock [losing a high profile disputation like this one , could result in exile deportation or worse] and spiritual protection for them , as they were constantly bombarded by zealous preachers whose threats, blandishments and bribes they were forced to listen to.
It goes without saying that RAMBAN fully realized the ultimate stakes of this debate and the impact it would have. And prepared accordingly.
This wasn’t just a flippant conversation over coffee and cake.
He for sure took into account any possible rejoinder from his opponent[s] and its possible repercussions.Nevertheless he stated , and publicly disseminated written records thereof , that a mashiach who died or disappeared without fulfilling the nevu’ot is unequivocally a mashiach sheker , exhorting all of Spanish Jewry TO BASE THEIR BELIEF on this.
Did he not expect or anticipate a challenge [by believing Jews or lehavdil learned apostates] from sanhedrin about Daniel , according to one pshat in Rashi ? What would he say if he would be challenged ?
——————————————————————-@ARSo
1] We cannot fully appreciate what it means to live under a medieval absolute monarchy. With a medieval populace.
We also cannot fully grasp the ahrayut of being at the helm of a vulnerable Jewish population, not only vulnerable in physical manner at the whim of the above, but also vulnerable in a spiritual sense where huge chunks of this population were torn of it, converting to the overwhelmingly dominant religion of Xtianity .It was under these circumstances that RAMBAN struggled to provide physical protection to his flock [losing a high profile disputation like this one , could result in exile deportation or worse] and spiritual protection for them , as they were constantly bombarded by zealous preachers whose threats, blandishments and bribes they were forced to listen to.
It goes without saying that RAMBAN fully realized the ultimate stakes of this debate and the impact it would have. And prepared accordingly.
This wasn’t just a flippant conversation over coffee and cake.
He for sure took into account any possible rejoinder from his opponent[s] and its possible repercussions.Nevertheless he stated , and publicly disseminated written records thereof , that a mashiach who died or disappeared without fulfilling the nevu’ot is unequivocally a mashiach sheker , exhorting all of Spanish Jewry TO BASE THEIR BELIEF on this.
Did he not expect or anticipate a challenge [by believing Jews or lehavdil learned apostates] from sanhedrin about Daniel , according to one pshat in Rashi ? What would he say if he would be challenged ?Saying : “I disagree with Rashi ? BASE YOUR BELIEF on my interpretation”, if there exist valid alternatives ?
The fanatical debating clergy would seize this like a hungry wolf would a fresh carcass.
All this per force went through his mind. And he nevertheless stated that a mashiach who died or disappeared without fulfilling the nevu’ot is unequivocally a mashiach sheker , exhorting all of Spanish Jewry TO BASE THEIR BELIEF on this.It is obvious , therefore, that RAMBAN considered the gmara of sanhedrin as a non challenge.
For the simple and logical reason I mentioned – Daniel never laid claim to Messiahship and did not start it. Therefore he did not fail and is unsullied .
As opposed to j who clearly started and claimed messiahship and failed .
This distinction is so ironclad and obvious that RAMBAN was prepared to BASE Spanish Jewry’s TOTAL BELIEF on it.2] Re Ramban arguing on RASHI whenever he disagreed with him. I am unable give an ultimate absolute positive answer. But , go through his peirushim al shas and al hatorah , on halacha AND ON AGADETA , there are countless places where he argues and raises objections with RASHI explanations.
Why would he stay silent on this one ? A quite important one, if you ask me.
Again , this is not an argument for example, about makat dever whether Egyptian animals in their houses were subject to the maka or not ? Which happens to be an argument between RAMBAN and RASHI.
Remember ,we are talking here about something which people have to use as yesodot for their ikarei emuna.RAMBAN is not arguing with RASHI on this. There is no reason to assume so, aderaba , there is ample reason to take on the other way, as mentioned.
@qwerty
Wasn’t really serious.
Habad people ARE Jewish.@ARSo
Re RAMBAN agreeing to RASHI whether Daniel could be mashiach.1] I cannot imagine RAMBAN giving a public answer in front of the King and afterwards sending written accounts all over Spain , all the while knowing that RASHI , the foremost mefaresh on the gmara , is disagreeing with his pshat. If RAMBAN uses that as proof klapei huts and klapei pnim [for his coreligionists who were under constant pressures to convert] , It must have been in RAMBAN’s own opinion ,totally ironclad.
Not something which someone could come tomorrow and say – hey, this is against an offene RASHI in sanhedrin.
Per force that he agrees with RASHI.2] RAMBAN consistently brings , and argues with RASHI wherever he disagrees with his pshat , whether al hashas or al hatorah. If he would argue with RASHI in sanhedrin, why is he keeping quiet about it ?
Per force that he agrees with RASHI.3] So , if RAMBAN agrees with RASHI that Daniel is a fitting candidate even though he was niftar already , then why is he disqualifying j on the grounds that he died ? The answer is simple. There is no problem in dying in of itself. There is a problem ,however, in dying WITHOUT realization of nevu’ot hanevi’im.
Why is that a problem ? Because we cannot have a situation of a free for all vacancy, where first come first served, the mashiach job is open for all wannabe’s who happen to lay claim to throne.
So, to lay a claim and start the mashiach process and FAIL by dying [dissappearing/hiding/going on permanent sick leave] without realization of the nevu’ot , is a reliable filter to keep out all plastic mashiachs.Daniel, however, never started , never lay a claim to the throne, so why should he be any less qualified than a living person who would want to lay a claim and be equally subject to the reliable filter we mentioned before ?
So, there is ample reason to reject j ,according to all of RASHI’s explanations, on the sole grounds that he started and subsequently failed
Ditto with habads late leader .There is no point whatsoever going into whether Yaakov Avinu died or disappeared. This is totally irrelevant here.
.@philosopher
As continuation of my previous post, RAMBAM equally mandates a TEST for any wannabe mashiach. A test which he can either fail or pass.
If the ‘Lo Met Business’ guarantees a pass, then the test is worthless.
Per force, that RAMBAM and RAMBAN need a positive and tangible result , in the here and now.Otherwise, the mashiach claim is PROVEN to be a FALSE CLAIM.
.
So, we can safely state : the late habad leader/rebbi is a FALSE MASHIACH.
.@lostspark
It is RAV Shach.
Not because he is “my” godol, and am asking for common courtesy, but because there happen to be some halachot of kvod talmid haham which you happen to be bound to, as the bottom line stays … you are Jewish.
Even if qwerty seems to have a problem with that.@philosopher
Menachem Shmei will not answer on the Ramban’s and Rambam’s psak on a moshiach sheker not fullfilling the prophecies during their lifetimes and how it applies to their moshiach sheker because he’s afraid to tell you that he believes that his rebbe is still physically alive. He knows when he will “sound like a legitimate talmud chachum” and when he will come off looking stupid…This is a crucial part why Lubavitche NEED their rebbe to have been buried alive because if he is still physically alive his “nevuah” can still come true.
====================
It may be as you say that this their motivation [whole or in part]
but it is not going to help them , for the simple reason :
When RAMBAN and RAMBAM say that there is an objective test for a wannabe mashiach to assume the mantle, they mean what they say.Wannabe’s have to TESTED .
They have to PASS .
Passing means ACTUALLY building the B’H and gathering all Jews.
Not hiding behind some worthless ‘not dying claim’.This claim is worthless because this can be employed by any wannabe, from j to sh’ts to ….
It is clear that RAMBAN , using j’s failure as proof to disqualify him , considered realization of nevu’ot hanevi’im as a necessity PRIOR to any disappearance/ hiding/whatever/dying.
Lack of tangible results , result in automatic eternal disqualification.
So the ‘Lo Met Business’ has , when considered carefully , no ‘fringe benefits’ whatsoever.Nu,
1] Am still waiting for any reaction re RAMBAN and RAMBAM’s psak that a wannabe mashiach who fails the test of realizing the relevant nevu’ot during his lifetime-
is a Mashiach sheker …..2] Am equally waiting for an explanation of habad post on a truck of a picture of their rebbi with the inscription god right next to it …
Lostspark?
Menachem ?
CS ?
Sechel ?It is eerily quiet …….
@Arso
You wroteDaniel never started. Therefore, he never failed. And therefore, he could still [at least according to one pshat in sanhedrin] be a candidate for mashiach.
As RAMBAN and RAMBAM point out, starting the ge’ula process and then, dying & leaving unfinished business, equals failureMy argument with the above is that you write that the Ramban and the Rambam reject a dead person being Mashiach ONLY IF that person started the process and died leaving it unfinished. Therefore, Daniel who died without having started the process of geulah could be resurrected and be Mashiach.
But you don’t cite a source for that!
It seems to me that you came to the conclusion that there is this difference because the Ramban and the Rambam reject a dead person’s candidacy, while the gemoro in Sanhedrin, according to one explanation of Rashi (Are we allowed to quote Rashi nowadays in this thread, or have certain fanatics ruled him persona non grata c”v?) allows the possibility that Daniel is Mashiach. But that gemoro is not something that is brought lehalocho by the Ramban or the Rambam, and we don’t even know how they interpreted that gemoro. Don’t forget that even Rashi has an alternative explanation which does not allow Daniel himself to be Mashiach.
Therefore, the simple pshat in the Ramban and the Rambam is that someone who has died cannot be Mashiach, regardless of what he achieved in his lifetime. This would then, apparently, include Daniel.
=================================================
You are right .
just due to the klal of afushei plugta lo mafshinan, I Wasn’t happy to force RAMBAN and RAMBAM against this apparently valid pshat in sanhedrin, which forces the obvious hiluk I made regarding the difference between someone who started and someone who did not….Nu …
Am still waiting for any reaction re RAMBAN and RAMBAM’s psak that a wannabe mashiach who fails the test of realizing the relevant nevu’ot during his lifetime-
is a Mashiach sheker …..Hello
Is there a problem with my post ?@lostspark
its childish to concentrate on the messenger.
Concentrate on the message.To make it clear – I do not care about j .
He is NOT THE ISSUE here. the issue here is the late leader of habad.
We are only using the candidacy of j to discuss the candidacy of habads leader.
If RAMBAN says that j is proven as mashiach sheker because of his failure to realise nevu’ot hanevi’im, the same applies to all other wannabe’s who fail to realise nevu’ot hanevi’m .
RAMBAM specifically addresses the wannabe’s . And how we should evaluate them . They have to pass a simple test.
Did they build the B’h , or not.
If they did not, they are out. They are not mashiach.So, according to both, RAMBAN and RAMBAM, your leader is not mashiach.
Period.[Thats besides other potential problems, not discussed here.]
@menachem
That’s strange – you have an opinion about everything under the sun , and on mashiach min hameitim , not ?I quote RAMBAN and RAMBAM .
RAMBAN is sefer havikuach [part of kitvei haramban mosad rav kuk helek 1, page 315-316], where he clearly states that j is proven not to be mashiach since he did not realize all the prophesies of tanach in his lifetime.
RAMBAM is hilch melachim perek 11 halaha 4 : “if mashiach succeeds, is victorious in battle over the nations and builds the beit hamikdash ,gathering all Jews to EY, then we know that he is mashiach . If, however he is not successful or he is killed , then we know for a fact that he is not the one which the torah was talking about.”
The late leader of habad was not successful in building the b’h nor in gathering the Jews to EY and did not realize the prophesies of tanach – hence we know that is not the one the torah was talking about.
[There are other reasons why the late leader of habad is disqualified, but the discussion here is about RAMBAM and RAMBAN.]
Daniel who according to one pshat in sanhedrin seems to be qualified as a candidate, never started the ge’ula process , never was proclaimed as mashiach, so never failed the test of kiyum nevu’ot hatanach.
If the rbsh’o will be mehayeh him and he will start the ge’ula and not fail the test of kiyum hanevu’ot hatanach, then he could fit the bill.
Simple.
@menachem
To recap
your changing of topics and [deliberately] ignoring the points the other side is making, serves as an indictment of your position.
I would have thought that if you would have a on the point rebuttal, you would not keep it a secret , right?
Seems like we can use the klal of shtika ke hoda’a ….THE LATE LEADER OF HABAD IS A MASHIACH SHEKER.!!
Or in qwerty ‘s parlance, a certain word starting with C…
.@Menachem
Daniel did not start the ge’ula process, Therefore, he could still be considered as a potential candidate. [if there will be a private thiyat hameitim].Daniel never started. Therefore, he never failed. And therefore, he could still [at least according to one pshat in sanhedrin] be a candidate for mashiach.
But, As RAMBAN and RAMBAM point out, starting the ge’ula process and then,
dying & leaving unfinished business, equals failure.Failure equals sheker.
Thats how we know now that j is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know that bar kohba is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that shabtai tzvi is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that the last leader of habad is a mashiach sheker.They are all -equally- meshichei sheker.
Are the other possible disqualifications ? Yes.
For example the j personality and his actions, or shabtai tzvi’s conversion to islam, [or other possible problems with the personality of habads leader.]The point RAMBAM and RAMBAN are discussing is : unfinished business.
Which is as clear as day disqualifying the late habad leader from being mashiach.
So clear is this , that [for the umpteenth time, again] habad itself [pre 94] considered this so axiomatic, that they were prepared to go so far, to the extent of building a new castles-in-the-sky theology , on this basis, proclaiming to all and sundry that their leader simply cannot die [!].So, to our question : is the late leader of habad a mashiach sheker ?
The answer can only be:a resounding ‘yes’.
All of klal yisrael, besides the majority of habad hasidim, know this answer.
They feel it in their bones.@ menachem
You claimed that according to the Rambam. The problem with Christianity is not מסית ומדיח, rather only that Yoshke was killed.
==========
Wrong .
Never claimed that.I will reiterate what I said –
RAMBAN is in Sefer havikuach . We know j is not mashiach because the promises of our nevi’im did not materialize during his lifetime.
RAMBAM is in hilch melachim . When a candidate for mashiach dies in war and did not bring about the promises of the nevi’im we know that he is not mashiach.Both do not say that’s xtianities’ ONLY problem . Pashut to any straight-thinking person that there are more problems.
They say clearly, however, that someone who dies without finishing the business , is proven not to be mashiach.Hence the logical and simple conclusion , not refuted by anyone on this thread:
THE LATE LEADER OF HABAD IS A MASHIACH SHEKER.
That is simple clear logic at work. Nothing more,
After we have already established the late leader of habad is a mashiach sheker , and everyone on this thread agrees to it , as there is only shtika which is rightfully interpreted as hoda’a.
Hoda’a that he is a mashiach sheker, as attested to by those two luminaries, RAMBAN and RAMBAM.
We have to, however, still examine the a’z complaint.Atsmut betoh haguf was meant only non literal, so they claim.
So, why did my eyes have to see a poster of their leader with the inscription god right next it ?
And I happened to see this, multiple times.
Are you going to tell me that this inscription was also non literal ???No, it definitely was literal. And it was habad people who put it up.
Inspired by exactly who ?
Inspired by the totally self educated leader of habad, who never learnt in a yeshiva and studied at the two top universities in Berlin and Paris….@arso
@shmeiRAMBAN is in Sefer havikuach . We know j is not mashiach because the promises of our nevi’im did not materialize during his lifetime.
RAMBAM is in hilch melachim . When a candidate for mashiach dies in war and did not bring about the promises of the nevi’im we know that he is not mashiach.For the umpteenth time, the gmara in sanhedrin is not a contradiction to this AT ALL.
Daniel did not start the ge’ula process, nor did he or his disciples [at his instigation] declare himself as mashiach. Therefore, he could still be considered as a potential candidate. [if there will be a private thiyat hameitim].Daniel never started. Therefore, he never failed. And therefore, he could still [at least according to one pshat in sanhedrin] be a candidate for mashiach.
But, As RAMBAN and RAMBAM point out, starting and then, dying & leaving unfinished business, equals failure.Failure equals sheker.
Thats how we know now that j is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know that bar kohba is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that shabtai tzvi is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that the last leader of habad is a mashiach sheker.Are these people equal to each other in other respects ? No, not at all.
But they are all -equally- meshichei sheker.
Yaakov avinu’s alive/dead status is totally irrelevant to this.
Neither is habad’s last leaders alive/dead status.And neither are other valid disqualifications relevant here.
For example the j personality and his actions, or shabtai tzvi’s conversion to islam, or other possible problems with the personality of habads leader.
The point RAMBAM and RAMBAN are discussing is : unfinished business.Which is as clear as day disqualifying the late habad leader from being mashiach.
So clear is this , that [for the umpteenth time, again] habad itself [pre 94] considered this so axiomatic, that they were prepared to go so far, to the extent of building a new castles-in-the-sky theology , on this basis, proclaiming to all and sundry that their leader simply cannot die [!].So, to our question : is the late leader of habad a mashiach sheker ?
The answer can only be:a resounding ‘yes’.
All of klal yisrael, besides the majority of habad hasidim, know this answer.
They feel it in their bones.When you study habad literature , you will see that after each and everyone of their rebeim’s expired name there is a navgam , an acronym for Nishmato Bginzei Meromim, translated to english ‘his soul is in the treasured heavens’
It seems to me that no habad faction – even those who ostensibly agree that he died – would use this about their deceased leader .
The most they would write , is ‘zhuto yagen aleinu’
Why is their recent leader any different to their previous rebei’m , who did deserve ‘navgam’ and their present one who somehow does not ?
And who decided to differentiate ?
.Gm
Hi
@arso
@shmei
Again, for those of you who struggle with comprehension
Never claimed that Ramban and Rambam were machshir j for mashiach if not his dying/disappearing.
That’s crystal clear to anyone who reads my posts carefully.
And that should be self evident to any straight thinking person.They do however state very clearly that WE KNOW that j is out because of the inadmissibility of a second coming
I repeat
They state very clearly that WE KNOW that j is out because of the inadmissibility of a second coming !!!!Whether yakov avinu is considered dead or not is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT here.
Again , when our gdolei harishonim mamash said their piece, the discussion should be over and done.
Besides for the fools who would want to argue against those cherished Rebei’im amiti’im of THE WHOLE KLAL YISRAEL DURING ALL THE GENERATIONS SINCE THEIR LIFETIME.
I rest my case.
@Arso
How can you ignore Ramban and Rambam ?The reason we know that j is not mashiach is because he did not effect the nevuot about yemot hamashiach IN HIS LIFETIME !
He doesn’t say because he was a meisit umadiah , [which he very well may have been]
I suggest we stick with our gdolei harishonim here , just like in any other area in the torah.
Discussion should be closed after they said their piece.
Heard from my rebbi – if you want to argue with the ramban , you might not be an apikorus, but a fool you most certainly are…..
.Hello ?
I am reading this thread and I am left scratching my head again and again .
Why is everyone ignoring a CLEAR RAMBAN who unambiguously states that j cannot be mashiach because the inadmissibility of a second coming ?
The language of the Rambam is nearly as clear , in hilch melahim . Why are people so happy to book a place on this merry go round and stay seated on this silly thing for such a long time ?
Time to get off , and look around …
I don’t know of any area of the torah, where we afford to ignore the combined voices of Rambam and Ramban and start speculating about the status of yakov avinu.THERE IS NO SECOND COMING IN JUDAISM . Period.
For the Gmara in sanhedrin , I can promise you that The two Rabeinu Moshe’s knew that gmara BETTER THAN ALL POSTERS COMBINED .
And yours truly suggested a pshat before on these pages .It seems to me that indeed ignorance is bliss but still , the ostrich should also get sick of the taste of sand after a while .
.@philosopher
you mention a link to R Avigdor Miller’s shmuess on voting in the Israeli elections .
Can you tell me where I can get that link ?
Ty.The answer to candace owens’ question is –
that …. she is right!
The question was if the reason you reject j is because of the inadmissibility of a second coming , then why is the habad leader afforded that possibility ?The logical habad answer is that j is not rejected because of the inadmissibility of a second coming.
Simple.He is rejected because of other reasons.
The only problem is that this goes straight against a clear Ramban , who states that j cannot be mashiach because of -exactly that- , the inadmissibility of a second coming.
Besides that, it also goes against an authority far greater than Ramban , [tongue in cheek] namely ….. habad itself with all its rabbanim and mashpi’im , pre 1994 ….
As far as I am concerned , the matter is closed, here and now.
—————————————————————————–
But I know that the innocent reader might question , what’s with the [one] pshat in the gmara in sanhedrin etc ? indicating that mashiach can come min hameitim ?The answer is pashut . Those who learn the gmara that way are chvsh NOT cholek on one of the greatest we possessed [apologies here to habad pre 94 .. ]
They are talking about those meitim who DID NOT START THE PROCESS OF GE’ULA.
To announce to klal yisrael that you are mashiach and have come to redeem them , and then abdicate and die and so called finish the job , that’s impossible.That’s what j did and thats what habad did.
Both equally inadmissible, on the grounds of the ramban , the inadmissibility of a second coming.If HKBH will choose [according to this pshat in sanhedrin] a leader from the dead WHO HAS NOT STARTED THE GE’ULA PROCESS IN ANY WAY , and revive him and START AND FINISH the ge’ula in ONE LIFETIME, then that is also a possibility. [at least according to that pshat]
.
So , in short , ‘j’ is out and so is habad .Dear reader, think about this, as this is la’d the only emes’dig way to reconcile that pshat in sanhedrin with ramban.
.When we look at the theological mess habad has left us with, when you look at all the twists and turns they took in order to stay relevant, the internal contradictions they so blatantly ignore, the only reaction I can have is
Kama Gdolim Divrei Hahamim
and give credit where its due….
I never liked R shach and could not stand his fight against habad. But what can I do- as much as I would like to say I told you so, the evidence and the reality trump everything else.
His chashashot about habad came true and habad’s defenders’ teirutsim fell by the wayside, one after the other.
Mindboggling.Re the LITERAL interpretation og atsmut betoch haguf
I MYSELF saw the habad poster on a truck clearly proclaiming on the street to all passerby , under a picture of their a’z , Prophet Rebbi Leader King God Advisor Tsaddiq, Rabbi.
Clear mention of them calling him god in a literal sense ….
no answer given , nor has any been attempted ………Was away for a while.
A lot of catching up to do.Fact is and remains :
1] the statements of their leader re the Gulf War, promising no one will be hurt in EY :
I FOLLOWED IT MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.
Anyone denying this , automatically disqualifies himself as either a plain liar or as someone who mentally suffers from selective amnesia when faced with the realistic option of dismantlement of a multidecade old house of cards .2] Official Habad claims at the time:
their leader is a LITERAL HALAHIC NAVI , like hagai zharya malahi [- not like the non literal ba’alei ruah hakodesh who were sometimes nick named navi’im a NON LITERAL SENSE.]
Based on the halahic requirement of testing a navi, by predicting the future in advance [- no one will be hurt] and all details happening exactly as predicted [- no one was actually hurt].
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.3] Actual result of the missile barrage on EY : One person [incidentally a lawyer dedicated against religion] died due to a direct missile hit, many others were wounded.
Thats besides many who died indirectly due to panic related incidents.
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.4] Official Habad claims at the time:
A halahic navi proclaims mashiach is here [and it is their rebbi] !
This is nevua letova and cannot be reversed halachically and HAS TO HAPPEN.
This is the end of galut and mashiach [their rebbi] CANNOT DIE without actualizing the ge’ula , building the BH , ingathering of exiles , bring all the mashiach era’s prophesies to fruition.
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.5] The entirety of habad without fail, from the hozer r yoel kahn and all rabanim at the vanguard of this messianic movement till the latest fresh BT addition to this messianic movement, they all agreed to this dogma.
This was an essential AND LITERAL part of ikarei emuna.
He LITERALLY COULD NOT DIE.
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.6] We all know that it DID happen . He died , disappeared, hid, or whatever …
I have not heard from anyone an HONEST answer, not from sehel , not from lostspark, and not from shmei ….
7] Candace Owens is right . Totally right. If their rebbi is afforded the luxury of a second coming , then why not the j-rebbi [?!] of Owens ?
Hu asher dibarnu from the first moment ….Bekitsur, habad with their ridiculous claims are putting all of us le’la’g ulekeles in front of the whole world .
Hilul haShem of the first order.
The Jews’ belief and their ikarei emuna are changed and discarded like used socks , based on nothing more than flimsy, wishful and imaginary feel good claims.It is high time that all their Shtuyot claims are exposed and called out for what they really are:
Plain Shtuyot , and
Not part of normative Judaism .@lostspark
Its RAV Shach , not Shach.
Please read the haskama of the Rav miBrisk.
[btw read all other haskamoth of rav mibrisk and compare the language]Clear as day – if R Shach would have approved of the late leader of habad , this very same R shach with all his exact same characteristics would have merited at least “harav hagaon’ by the habadi’s .
So much for emet ….
And shows the worth of habad issued titles …..
‘New Habad’ is same gematria as ‘One Big Bloff’
@shmei
Very important to remember
Philosopher is not attacking Habad PEOPLE .
He is questioning habad PRETSEL THEOLOGY.Antisemites attack the JEWISH PEOPLE.
Huge difference.
.Logic is struggling to find its way to lostsparks mind .
He attributes his ‘hutspadig’ so called crusade against habad to …. limudei chol in MO circles.
Without which there would not be habad criticism ….
—
Got some news for lostspark.98% of Orthodox Jews view habads ever changing and developing theology re mashiach and rebbe cult with a ‘left eye’ .
That ranges and is equal in all different colors – from those espousing a total ban on chol [like satmar] to those who totally embrace chol [like MO].The approach generally is one of indulgent tolerance for harmless folly.
But folly it most definitely is , in everyone’s eyes.
Everyone, besides the blind, the deaf and the brainwashed [in short, habad people], that is.We can all rest assured when we hear the uncensored real reaction of non habad people [behind habads back] re habad theology:
there is no connection whatsoever between criticism of habad “pretsel theology” and limudei hol.
.@lostspark
A] your empty accusation/slander against berger is as verifiable as the empty accusation/slander of your leader against rav shachs tfillin.
As verifiable and as worthless.Potato conveniently ignores the well documented habad ikarei emuna stand which loudly proclaimed that their mashiach [sheker] COULD NOT die because it was promised by [false] nevua that their “leader/navi/god/yoets/university graduate/ge’an hage’onim/tsadiq yesod olam/nasi hador” is mashiach.
That [supposedly] was a nevua amitit which CANNOT be changed.
That [supposedly] was part ikarei emuna which renders the non believer into a kofer.No second coming, that was heresy.
No mashiach min hameitim , that was heresy.To top it all of – just to remind the world of what my very own eyes have seen and what my very own ears have heard, is now being classified by a totally brainwashed and blind follower of this purim charade as nothing less than SIN’AT HINAM !!!
Could not make it up even if I wanted …