Volume 34: Number 26
Fri, 04 Mar 2016
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Micha Berger
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 20:54:05 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Shaming a gett refuser
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 09:17:15PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
: My translation of a piece Rav Chayim Navon wrote about the Rabbinate's
: decision to allow public shaming of a gett refuser:
:
: The shaming of gett refuser Oded Gaz is justified. Why? Because
: this is what the beit din ruled to do... Lynching someone on the web
: simply because he's different, or because I'm suspicious of him,
: or I don't like his opinion, or he said something wrong (faux pas),
: that's disgusting....
It's interesting... If BD tells you to shame a mesareiv gett or a
mesareiv BD so that they cannot even determine if he is mechuyav to give
a gett, it's a mitzvah, and the gett would still be kosher.
Do the same on your own initiative, and unless you have halachic right
to consider the guy a rasha, it's assur. AND worse, any gett you thereby
elicit would be ma'usah. YET worse, if you make his life sufficiently
misrable, the possibility of gett me'usah has to be ruled out in the case
of any gett he later gives -- and how do you prove someone's motives?
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Never must we think that the Jewish element
mi...@aishdas.org in us could exist without the human element
http://www.aishdas.org or vice versa.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: via Avodah
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 20:53:53 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
From: Isaac Balbin via Avodah <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
>> Moshiach Ben Yosef prepares the ground for Moshiach Ben David. Once so
prepared, there is a potential Moshiach Ben David at all times amongst
the living. Rav Kook held that Herzl was Moshiach Ben Yosef, and that
it didn't need to even be a religious person.<<
>>>>>
Is there anyone alive today who knows that he is from the tribe of Ephraim,
Menashe or Binyamin? I assume that the way the shevatim will be restored
to us is that Eliyahu Hanavi will come and tell each person what shevet
he's from, ben achar ben, and that at least some of us are from shevatim other
than Yehuda and Levi, unbeknownst to us. So does Eliyahu Hanavi have to
come before Moshiach ben Yosef can come, so that people will actually know
they're from Yosef? Or is it the case that Moshiach ben Yosef does not have
to know that he's from Yosef, and does not even have to know that he's a
Moshiach?
--Toby Katz
t6...@aol.com
..
=============
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160303/14ad7b05/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Isaac Balbin
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:12:53 +1100
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
On 4 Mar 2016, at 11:37 AM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> I agree 100%. That is exactly what I meant. But dying *after* it has
> been established bevadai that the person is Moshaich doesn't create a
> reiusa, because we *expect* Moshiach to die.
The Rambam clearly says that someone who doesn't complete the job is
NOT Moshiach. End of Story. Why would he tell us this AT ALL?
He should have simply said whoever does a), b) and c) IS Moshiach. END.
Who cares if they die and come to life ten times with summersaults,
as long as they do a, b, and c they are Moshiach.
But the Rambam does NOT say that. He tells us that if you FAILED, you
are NOT it. For example, Bar Kochba.
According to other reasoning, Bar Kochba could still be
Moshiach. Really? How do you squeeze that into the Rambam's Lashon
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Zev Sero
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 20:33:46 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
On 03/03/2016 08:18 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 03:42:31PM +0200, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
>> First of all, yes, of course Mashiach has to be ben achar ben from
>> David HaMelech.
>
> In Divrei haYamim I 22:9-10, HQBH promises "... ki Shelomoh yihyeh shemo
> ... vehakhinosi kissei malkhuso el Yisrael ad olam."
>
> It looks like the mashiach will not only come from David, but through
> Shelomo in particular.
1. As I understand it, though, the descent from Shlomo does not need to be
in the male line. If a female descendant of Shlomo married a male descendant
of one of his brothers, their descendants would be eligible.
2. In any case the Rambam doesn't seem to pasken like this.
On 03/03/2016 08:12 PM, Isaac Balbin wrote:
> The Rambam clearly says that someone who doesn't complete the job is
> NOT Moshiach. End of Story. Why would he tell us this AT ALL?
> He should have simply said whoever does a), b) and c) IS Moshiach. END.
His point is that one should not think his death shows that he was never
worthy, and we were wrong to have supported him in the first place.
No, says the Rambam, he remains a kosher king, and he may very well have
turned out to be Moshiach, but he didn't. The reason he didn't could be
because we sinned and lost it, as may have been the case with Bar Kochva.
> According to other reasoning, Bar Kochba could still be Moshiach.
Not while he's dead. If he comes back then sure, why not? The Rambam
doesn't rule that out. He isn't Moshiach now, but he could become
Moshiach in the future.
--
Zev Sero All around myself I will wave the green willow
z...@sero.name The myrtle and the palm and the citron for a week
And if anyone should ask me the reason why I'm doing that
I'll say "It's a Jewish thing; if you have a few minutes
I'll explain it to you".
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Isaac Balbin
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:22:56 +1100
Subject: Re: [Avodah] What Do French Jews Do On Shabbath?
I think it's worth noting that Amira L'Amira L'Nochri is Muttar according
to many Rishonim, especially B'Shaas Hadchak.
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Micha Berger
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 21:12:22 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 08:53:53PM -0500, RnTK via Avodah wrote:
: Is there anyone alive today who knows that he is from the tribe of Ephraim,
: Menashe or Binyamin? ... So does Eliyahu Hanavi have to
: come before Moshiach ben Yosef can come, so that people will actually know
: they're from Yosef? Or is it the case that Moshiach ben Yosef does not have
: to know that he's from Yosef, and does not even have to know that he's a
: Moshiach?
Malkhus Yehudah included Yehudah, Shim'on and Binyamin, as well as most
of Levi (they tended to prefer proximity to Y-m). Shim'on only got lost
in the sense that as they only held a constellation of cities within
Yehudah's territory, they assimilated into Yehudah. But they should be
among today's Jews. I do not know how we get "10 lost tribes" rather
than 9, but the count is in the Bavli.
So even non-Leviim have a chance of being from Binyamin, Shim'on, or
patrlineally from a geir. For that matter, a many may have a better
chance of descending from a refugee from one of Yoseif's shevatim than
from Shelomo. And yet, you aren't asking the same question for the
mashiach ben David.
Pet peeve: Capitalized "M" in "Moshiach". Would you write, "...does not
even have to know that he's a King?" with a capital "K"? To my jaundiced
eye, it smells too much of Notzrim thinking it's a term for deity.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger A wise man is careful during the Purim banquet
mi...@aishdas.org about things most people don't watch even on
http://www.aishdas.org Yom Kippur.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Zev Sero
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 21:23:31 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
On 03/03/2016 09:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> Pet peeve: Capitalized "M" in "Moshiach". Would you write, "...does not
> even have to know that he's a King?" with a capital "K"? To my jaundiced
> eye, it smells too much of Notzrim thinking it's a term for deity.
Titles are capitalised when they are used to identify a specific person.
Thus, "the president's term is four years", but "the President's term
will expire on 20-Jan-2017". The first example refers to any president,
the second refers to the current incumbent.
On 03/03/2016 09:10 PM, Isaac Balbin wrote:
> You are mixing chezkas and real.
I don't understand what you mean by that. Also, I don't know exactly
which text you're replying to. Please in future quote what you're
replying to, and put it *before* your reply, so people can follow the
thread of argument.
> Why bother even telling us about chezkas!
> Waste of time. Chazoko goes when dead
Yes, it does, since a dead person is incapable of doing the things
Moshiach is meant to do. That's precisely his point. But it doesn't
change the fact that there *was* a valid chazaka.
On reflection I no longer agree 100% with what RMB wrote, because he's
assuming that whether a person is or isn't the Moshiach is already
determined and known to Heaven, just as whether a piece of meat is
kosher or treif. But whether someone will end up being the moshiach
isn't determined. It depends on future events. Bar Kochva was meant
to be the one, and was derailed by sins (the Rambam is ambiguous about
whose sins). So the chazaka isn't just a description of the state of
our knowledge, but also refers to the metzius.
--
Zev Sero All around myself I will wave the green willow
z...@sero.name The myrtle and the palm and the citron for a week
And if anyone should ask me the reason why I'm doing that
I'll say "It's a Jewish thing; if you have a few minutes
I'll explain it to you".
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Isaac Balbin
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 13:45:24 +1100
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
On 4 Mar 2016, at 1:30 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> On 03/03/2016 09:10 PM, Isaac Balbin wrote:
>> You are mixing chezkas and real.
> I don't understand what you mean by that. Also, I don't know exactly
> which text you're replying to. Please in future quote what you're
> replying to, and put it *before* your reply, so people can follow the
> thread of argument.
What is the point of the nomenclature B'Chezkas Moshiach. If I've done
NOTHING, I might come back and then do the job.
>> Why bother even telling us about chezkas!
>> Waste of time. Chazoko goes when dead
> Yes, it does, since a dead person is incapable of doing the things
> Moshiach is meant to do. That's precisely his point. But it doesn't
> change the fact that there *was* a valid chazaka.
And what, pray tell, is the significance of this Chazaka? Chazaka has
a practical upshot.
> On reflection I no longer agree 100% with what RMB wrote, because he's
> assuming that whether a person is or isn't the Moshiach is already
> determined and known to Heaven, just as whether a piece of meat is
> kosher or treif. But whether someone will end up being the moshiach
> isn't determined. It depends on future events.
No, it depends on NOW. If a person performs what they are meant to
perform, they are Moshiach. What's the deal with telling us someone was
a great fighter once, so he was on the way?
> Bar Kochva was meant
> to be the one, and was derailed by sins (the Rambam is ambiguous about
> whose sins). So the chazaka isn't just a description of the state of
> our knowledge, but also refers to the metzius.
That's an EXAMPLE. The Gemora also gives examples of people who COULD
HAVE been Moshiach. Eg. Daniel. That they weren't is because they are
dead and didn't do the job!
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Eli Turkel
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:02:56 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] moshiach ben yosef
<<I think it's because Bar Kochva was not preceded by a Moshiach ben
Yosef.>>
There is also Hezekiah who could have been moshiach. Others seem also to
have been considered a potential Moshiach without the appearance of a
Moshiach Ben Yosef
--
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160304/9b95a335/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: Simon Montagu
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:50:46 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] Ten lost tribes (was Re: Moshiach Ben Yosef)
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:12 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah
<avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
> Malkhus Yehudah included Yehudah, Shim'on and Binyamin, as well as most
> of Levi (they tended to prefer proximity to Y-m). Shim'on only got lost
> in the sense that as they only held a constellation of cities within
> Yehudah's territory, they assimilated into Yehudah. But they should be
> among today's Jews. I do not know how we get "10 lost tribes" rather
> than 9, but the count is in the Bavli.
And before that in Sefer Melachim, e.g.
http://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt09a11.htm#31. I'm not sure either what
ten the navi is counting, but there it is.
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: Isaac Balbin and Zev Serw
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 15:52:57 +1100
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Moshiach Ben Yosef
[The two continued their exchange while I was sleeping, so, rather than
clutter the digest with unnecessary headers, here's a digest of what
I slept through.
-micha]
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 22:03:28 -0500
On 03/03/2016 09:45 PM, Isaac Balbin wrote:
> What is the point of the nomenclature B'Chezkas Moshiach.
It's exactly like any other chazaka in halacha. If there is a chazaka
that someone is Moshiach then we have to act as if he is, unless and
until we find out otherwise.
> And what, pray tell, is the significance of this Chazaka? Chazaka has
> a practical upshot.
We are obligated to rally around and support the Moshiach. Therefore
if there is a chazakah that someone is him, we must do so. We are not
allowed to wait until we can find out for sure. We must join his army
and help him achieve his mission.
>> On reflection I no longer agree 100% with what RMB wrote, because he's
>> assuming that whether a person is or isn't the Moshiach is already
>> determined and known to Heaben, just as whether a piece of meat is
>> kosher or treif. But whether someone will end up being the moshiach
>> isn't determined. It depends on future events.
> No, it depends on NOW. If a person performs what they are meant to
> perform, they are Moshiach. What's the deal with telling us someone
> was a great fighter once, so he was on the way?
When the person has not yet done what Moshiach is meant to do, *is*
he Moshiach? Or *will* he be? RMB assumes that he either is or isn't,
and Heaven knows whether he is or isn't, and it's only we who have to
rely on a chazaka. But that's not the case. Whether he will end up
being Moshiach depends on things that haven't happened yet. Bar Kochva
was not a case of a misleading chazaka; it was not known even to Heaven,
so to speak, that he wouldn't end up being Moshiach. (Of course Hashem
knows the future, so it *was* known to Him, but within time it was not
knowable, and therefore not known.)
>> Bar Kochva was meant
>> to be the one, and was derailed by sins (the Rambam is ambiguous about
>> whose sins). So the chazaka isn't just a description of the state of
>> our knowledge, but also refers to the metzius.
> That's an EXAMPLE. The Gemora also gives examples of people who COULD
> HAVE been Moshiach. Eg. Daniel. That they weren't is because they are
> dead and didn't do the job!
Bar Kochva is the *only* example we have. The Rambam's entire shita
is based on him. I don't understand why you keep raising an irrelevant
gemara that played no role at all in the Rambam's psak.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
From: Isaac Balbin <isaac.bal...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 14:12:10 +1100
On 4 Mar 2016, at 2:03 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> It's exactly like any other chazaka in halacha. If there is a chazaka
> that someone is Moshiach then we have to act as if he is, unless and
> until we find out otherwise.
Other Chazakos have practical import. What does the Chazoko achieve here?
>> And what, pray tell, is the significance of this Chazaka? Chazaka has
>> a practical upshot.
> We are obligated to rally around and support the Moshiach.
No, the Moshiach has to rally us.
> Therefore
> if there is a chazakah that someone is him, we must do so.
Which Seif are you quoting?
> We are not
> allowed to wait until we can find out for sure. We must join his army
> and help him achieve his mission.
On the contrary, he has to force us. Furthermore, the Gemora tells us
it is one of the 3 things that shouldn't be on our minds
>>> On reflection I no longer agree 100% with what RMB wrote, because he's
>>> assuming that whether a person is or isn't the Moshiach is already
>>> determined and known to Heaben, just as whether a piece of meat is
>>> kosher or treif. But whether someone will end up being the moshiach
>>> isn't determined. It depends on future events.
>> No, it depends on NOW. If a person performs what they are meant to
>> perform, they are Moshiach. What’s the deal with telling us someone
>> was a great fighter once, so he was on the way?
> You're not making any sense. When the person has not yet done what
> Moshiach is meant to do, *is* he Moshiach?
No he is not. That's the Rambam clearly.
> Or *will* he be? RMB assumes
> that he either is or isn't, and Heaven knows whether he is or isn't,
> and it's only we who have to rely on a chazaka.
The Chazaka here is in my opinion that a person seems to be heading in
the direction of being Moshiach. No more, no less.
> But that's not the case.
> Whether he will end up being Moshiach depends on things that haven't
> happened yet.
Indeed, and BEING Moshiach is the issue. Anything less is one of many.
> Bar Kochva was not a case of a misleading chazaka;
It turned out to be no Chazoko once he died. Ovar Zmano Botel Korbon.
The Chazoko died at the same time that he failed to be the anointed one.
> it
> was not known even to Heaven, so to speak, that he wouldn't end up
> being Moshiach.
How do you know that? We have plenty of people who have spoken to
Moshiach and asked him when he's coming. Are there 30 with Chazokos
standing in line?
> (Of course Hashem knows the future, so it *was* known
> to Him, but within time it was not knowable, and therefore not known.)
That’s life in general
>>> Bar Kochva was meant
>>> to be the one, and was derailed by sins (the Rambam is ambiguous about
>>> whose sins). So the chazaka isn't just a description of the state of
>>> our knowledge, but also refers to the metzius.
>> That's an EXAMPLE. The Gemora also gives examples of people who COULD
>> HAVE been Moshiach. Eg. Daniel. That they weren’t is because they are
>> dead and didn't do the job!
> Bar Kochva is the *only* example we have.
Sorry, the Gemora tells us that POTENTIALLY Daniel and Yishai and I
forget the other COULD have been Moshiach. Why would the Gemora bother
telling us that?
It's because people have potential. When it's Achishena, we need someone
to DO it. When it's B'Ito, I would imagine Hashem has given up with our
potentials and sends us someone who simply won't fail in the task.
> The Rambam's entire shita
> is based on him. I don't understand why you keep raising an irrelevant
> gemara that played no role at all in the Rambam's peak.
You need to ask yourself also what the Rambam believed al pi mesora. Read
Iggeres Taimon. Was he writing fiction?
It all needs to be reconciled.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 22:46:08 -0500
On 03/03/2016 10:12 PM, Isaac Balbin wrote:
>> >It's exactly like any other chazaka in halacha. If there is a chazaka
>> >that someone is Moshiach then we have to act as if he is, unless and
>> >until we find out otherwise.
> Other Chazakos have practical import. What does the Chazoko achieve here?
That we are obligated to rally around him and support him. Until he
achieves this chazaka we could just sit back and wait. He may be the
king of Israel, but we are in America or Australia. Must we get on a
plane and join his army, or may we stay and write blog comments picking
him apart? Once he has a chazaka we must go.
> No, the Moshiach has to rally us.
What does that even *mean*?
>> We are not allowed to wait until we can find out for sure. We must
>> join his army and help him achieve his mission.
> On the contrary, he has to force us.
Force us how? Send MPs to our homes to drag us to the nearest base?!
> Furthermore, the Gemora tells us it is one of the 3 things that
> shouldn't be on our minds
What gemora?
>> When the person has not yet done what
>> Moshiach is meant to do, *is* he Moshiach?
> No he is not. That's the Rambam clearly.
Where does he say that? As RMB pointed out, when someone is bechezkas
eishes ish, she either is or she isn't. Heaven knows, and we have to
play the odds. So when someone is bechezkas moshiach, *is* he really
Moshiach, but we don't know it yet? Or is he not yet Moshiach because
he won't be until he's done it all? It's not clear from the Rambam.
>> Whether he will end up being Moshiach depends on things that haven't
>> happened yet.
> Indeed, and BEING Moshiach is the issue. Anything less is one of many.
Or perhaps, as RMB wrote, he already is (or isn't) Moshiach, we just
don't know it yet.
>> Bar Kochva was not a case of a misleading chazaka;
> It turned out to be no Chazoko once he died. Ovar Zmano Botel Korbon.
> The Chazoko died at the same time that he failed to be the anointed one.
What exactly is your point? When he was alive there was a chazaka that
he was Moshiach. His death proved that he wasn't, or perhaps merely
that he wasn't *any more*. Chizkiyahu was meant to be Moshiach, and
then he blew it. So, was he or wasn't he?
>> it was not known even to Heaven, so to speak, that he wouldn't end up
>> being Moshiach.
> How do you know that?
Because there was nothing at the time preventing him. Unless it's
predetermined. We don't know that.
> We have plenty of people who have spoken to
> Moshiach and asked him when he's coming. Are there 30 with Chazokos
> standing in line?
Again I can't make head or tail of what you mean. People have spoken
to the neshama of Moshiach. What has that got to do with anything?
> Sorry, the Gemora tells us that POTENTIALLY Daniel and Yishai and I
> forget the other COULD have been Moshiach. Why would the Gemora
> bother telling us that?
The gemara tells us lots of things. It's not relevant lehalacha.
>> The Rambam's entire shita
>> is based on him. I don't understand why you keep raising an irrelevant
>> gemara that played no role at all in the Rambam's peak.
> You need to ask yourself also what the Rambam believed al pi mesora.
> Read Iggeres Taimon. Was he writing fiction? It all needs to be
> reconciled.
No, it doesn't. Igeres Teman is an inspirational letter. The Yad
is a halacha sefer. They are two completely different things.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
From: Isaac Balbin <isaac.bal...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 15:06:45 +1100
On 4 Mar 2016, at 2:46 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
>> Other Chazakos have practical import. What does the Chazoko achieve here?
> That we are obligated to rally around him and support him.
Where is that Mitzvah codified by anyone (including the Rambam)
> Until he
> achieves this chazaka we could just sit back and wait.
No, we do Mitzvos al pi Halacha, which includes Milchamos etc
> He may be the
> king of Israel, but we are in America or Australia. Must we get on a
> plane and join his army, or may we stay and write blog comments picking
> him apart? Once he has a chazaka we must go.
Again, I look forward to your source. I note that R’ Moshe himself
introduces the notion of a Mitzvah Kiyumis (which is a Chiddush itself, but
which certainly implies one can stay put).
>> No, the Moshiach has to rally us.
> What does that even *mean*?
The Rambam says he has to force us!
>>> We are not allowed to wait until we can find out for sure. We must
>>> join his army and help him achieve his mission.
>> On the contrary, he has to force us.
> Force us how? Send MPs to our homes to drag us to the nearest base?!
That's his job. It's not specified how he does it. He, however, must
achieve it.
>> Furthermore, the Gemora tells us it is one of the 3 things that
>> shouldn’t be on our minds
> What remora?
The Gemora that tells us about scorpions and something else. I will find it.
>>> When the person has not yet done what
>>> Moshiach is meant to do, *is* he Moshiach?
>> No he is not. That's the Rambam clearly.
> Where does he say that? As RMB pointed out, when someone is bechezkas
> eishes ish, she either is or she isn't.
And where do we have a Hava Amina to say that a Get is required to remove
the Chazoko! No, death/not achieving the tasks removes the Chazoko,
in the plain words of the Rambam.
> Heaven knows, and we have to
> play the odds. So when someone is bechezkas moshiach, *is* he really
> Moshiach, but we don't know it yet?
No he is on the way, but hasn't reached it. Why would you think
otherwise? I'm not B'Chezkas Moshiach. I am a Cohen!
> Or is he not yet Moshiach because
> he won't be until he's done it all? It's not clear from the Rambam.
I think it's very clear.
>>> Whether he will end up being Moshiach depends on things that haven't
>>> happened yet.
>> Indeed, and BEING Moshiach is the issue. Anything less is one of many.
> Or perhaps, as RMB wrote, he already is (or isn't) Moshiach, we just
> don't know it yet.
Someone who is not known, is not even known as Chezkas Moshiach by
anyone. How much Agadata do we need to show this?
>>> Bar Kochva was not a case of a misleading chazaka;
>> It turned out to be no Chazoko once he died. Ovar Zmano Botel Korbon.
>> The Chazoko died at the same time that he failed to be the anointed one.
> What exactly is your point? When he was alive there was a chazaka that
> he was Moshiach.
Could be Moshiach.
> His death proved that he wasn't,
Yes
> or perhaps merely
> that he wasn't any more.
No, he wasn't the one.
> Chizkiyahu was meant to be Moshiach, and then
> he blew it. So, was he or wasn't he?
No he wasn't. But he had the potential. (The Gra held he was a Nitzuz
of Moshiach Ben Yosef, and send Talmidim from Israel, by the way)
>>> it was not known even to Heaven, so to speak, that he wouldn't end up
>>> being Moshiach.
>> How do you know that?
> Because there was nothing at the time preventing him. Unless it's
> predetermined. We don't know that.
Sure, there are things called wars, recalcitrant people and more. They
can destroy his mission.
>> We have plenty of people who have spoken to
>> Moshiach and asked him when he's coming. Are there 30 with Chazokos
>> standing in line?
> Again I can't make head or tail of what you mean. People have spoken
> to the neshama of Moshiach. What has that got to do with anything?
Well, you believe that MOSHIACH VADAI was asked in the Heichalos EIMOSAY
KOSI MAR
How does that gel with a whole lot of people BECHEZKAS.
>> Sorry, the Gemora tells us that POTENTIALLY Daniel and Yishai and I
>> forget the other COULD have been Moshiach. Why would the Gemora
>> bother telling us that?
> The gemara tells us lots of things. It's not relevant lehalacha.
Really, Many Meshichisten quote it as Halacha. Do you remove yourself from their philosophy and say that the last LR can't be Moshiach?
>>> The Rambam's entire shita
>>> is based on him. I don't understand why you keep raising an irrelevant
>>> gemara that played no role at all in the Rambam's peak.
>> You need to ask yourself also what the Rambam believed al pi mesora.
>> Read Iggeres Taimon. Was he writing fiction? It all needs to be
>> reconciled.
> No, it doesn't. Igeres Teman is an inspirational letter.
It wasn't a NOVEL
> The Yad
> is a halacha sefer. They are two completely different things.
Yes, but he isn't going to make things up in Igeres Taimon! His
METHODOLOGY of what he puts in the Yad is documented. He doesn't put lots
of things in. Eg Yishuv Eretz Yisrael. Did he not pine to go there? Was
it for romantic reasons?
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 23:33:11 -0500
On 03/03/2016 11:06 PM, Isaac Balbin wrote:
>>> >>Other Chazakos have practical import. What does the Chazoko
>>> >>achieve here?
>> >That we are obligated to rally around him and support him.
> Where is that Mitzvah codified by anyone (including the Rambam)
Mitzvah?! Who said anything about a mitzvah? But if he's our king we
have to obey him.
>> Until he achieves this chazaka we could just sit back and wait.
> No, we do Mitzvos al pi Halacha, which includes Milchamos etc
Which means what?
>> Once he has a chazaka we must go.
> Again, I look forward to your source. I note that R' Moshe himself
> introduces the notion of a Mitzvah Kiyumis (which is a Chiddush
> itself, but which certainly implies one can stay put).
I have no idea what you're talking about. Was it optional to follow
Bar Kochva?
>>> No, the Moshiach has to rally us.
>> What does that even mean?
> The Rambam says he has to force us!
No, he doesn't.
...
>>> On the contrary, he has to force us.
>> Force us how? Send MPs to our homes to drag us to the nearest base?!
> That's his job. It's not specified how he does it. He, however, must
> achieve it.
This is simply not there. You're making it up.
>>>> When the person has not yet done what
>>>> Moshiach is meant to do, is he Moshiach?
>>> No he is not. That's the Rambam clearly.
>> Where does he say that? As RMB pointed out, when someone is bechezkas
>> eishes ish, she either is or she isn't.
> And where do we have a Hava Amina to say that a Get is required to
> remove the Chazoko!
What are you on about now? This makes no sense at all.
>> Heaven knows, and we have to
>> play the odds. So when someone is bechezkas moshiach, is he really
>> Moshiach, but we don't know it yet?
> No he is on the way, but hasn't reached it. Why would you think otherwise?
Because if moshiach is predetermined then he already is moshiach.
> I'm not B'Chezkas Moshiach. I am a Cohen!
What have you got to do with it?
>> Or is he not yet Moshiach because
>> he won't be until he's done it all? It's not clear from the Rambam.
> I think it's very clear.
Then you're wrong. It is not clear at all. Point to the words that
make it clear. You can't because they don't exist.
>> Or perhaps, as RMB wrote, he already is (or isn't) Moshiach, we just
>> don't know it yet.
> Someone who is not known, is not even known as Chezkas Moshiach by
> anyone.
You're just stating a tautology. How does it address the question?
> How much Agadata do we need to show this?
None. Agadeta is irrelevant to halacha.
>> Chizkiyahu was meant to be Moshiach, and then
>> he blew it. So, was he or wasn't he?
> No he wasn't. But he had the potential.
He didn't just have the potential, he was meant to be it. According
to Rav Hillel he was the only one who could be it, and when he blew
it that was it for all time. So how do you know he wasn't originally
the one, until he lost it? Don't forget, he was an anointed king.
He had a beis hamikdosh. As the Malbim points out, all he had to do
was bring the 10 tribes back.
>> Again I can't make head or tail of what you mean. People have spoken
>> to the neshama of Moshiach. What has that got to do with anything?
> Well, you believe that MOSHIACH VADAI was asked in the Heichalos
> EIMOSAY KOSI MAR
THe neshama of moshiach. By definition there are no living people
in Heaven (except for R Yehoshua ben Levi).
> How does that gel with a whole lot of people BECHEZKAS.
I have no idea what this means.
>> No, it doesn't. Igeres Teman is an inspirational letter.
> It wasn't a NOVEL
No, it was an inspirational letter. Not a halacha sefer.
>> The Yad
>> is a halacha sefer. They are two completely different things.
> Yes, but he isn't going to make things up in Igeres Taimon! His
> METHODOLOGY of what he puts in the Yad is documented.
Yes, he put in that which is halacha, and not that which is not.
> He doesn't put lots of things in. Eg Yishuv Eretz Yisrael. Did he not
> pine to go there? Was it for romantic reasons?
He did put the relevant halachos in the Yad. He didn't put that
it's a mitzvah because he held that it isn't. He held that it
was an ad hoc command for the generation that entered the land,
not ledoros. Living in EY now is a very good thing, he held, much
to be desired, but not a mitzvah. And leaving Bavel, he held, is
assur.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
From: Isaac Balbin <isaac.bal...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 15:52:57 +1100
On 4 Mar 2016, at 3:33 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> Mitzvah?! Who said anything about a mitzvah? But if he's our king we
> have to obey him.
When does he become king? A Chazoko?
>> No, we do Mitzvos al pi Halacha, which includes Milchamos etc
> Which means what?
Don't understand. Doing MITZVOS is Mekarev the GEULA
>>> Once he has a chazaka we must go.
>> Again, I look forward to your source. I note that R' Moshe himself
>> introduces the notion of a Mitzvah Kiyumis (which is a Chiddush
>> itself, but which certainly implies one can stay put).
> I have no idea what you're talking about. Was it optional to follow
> Bar Kochva?
Of course it was. Many didn't
>>>> No, the Moshiach has to rally us.
>>> What does that even *mean*?
>> The Rambam says he has to force us!
> No, he doesn't.
VEYIKOF ... What does that mean
>>> Force us how? Send MPs to our homes to drag us to the nearest base?!
>> That's his job. It's not specified how he does it. He, however, must
>> achieve it.
> This is simply not there. You're making it up.
No I'm reading Rambam kipshuto
...
>>> Where does he say that? As RMB pointed out, when someone is bechezkas
>>> eishes ish, she either is or she isn't.
>> And where do we have a Hava Amina to say that a Get is required to
>> remove the Chazoko!
> What are you on about now? This makes no sense at all.
Exactly.
>>> Heaven knows, and we have to
>>> play the odds. So when someone is bechezkas moshiach, *is* he really
>>> Moshiach, but we don't know it yet?
>> No he is on the way, but hasn't reached it. Why would you think otherwise?
> Because if moshiach is predetermined then he already is moshiach.
>> I'm not B'Chezkas Moshiach. I am a Cohen!
> What have you got to do with it?
Not everyone can even be Bchezkas
>>> Or is he not yet Moshiach because
>>> he won't be until he's done it all? It's not clear from the Rambam.
>> I think it's very clear.
> Then you're wrong. It is not clear at all. Point to the words that
> make it clear. You can't because they don't exist.
I re-read the original version and it's very clear to me
>>> Or perhaps, as RMB wrote, he already is (or isn't) Moshiach, we just
>>> don't know it yet.
>> Someone who is not known, is not even known as Chezkas Moshiach by
>> anyone.
> You're just stating a tautology. How does it address the question?
It means that you don't even have CHEZKAS. They ARE
>> How much Agadata do we need to show this?
> None. Agadeta is irrelevant to halacha.
Is that true of the Meetings between Rebbe's and the higher worlds?
>>> Chizkiyahu was meant to be Moshiach, and then
>>> he blew it. So, was he or wasn't he?
>> No he wasn't. But he had the potential.
> He didn't just have the potential, he was meant to be it. According
> to Rav Hillel he was the only one who *could* be it, and when he blew
> it that was it for all time. So how do you know he wasn't originally
> the one, until he lost it?
He lost it because he didn't say Shira. Bfeirush in the Gemora yet
curiously the Rambam ignores that
> Don't forget, he *was* an anointed king.
> He had a beis hamikdosh. As the Malbim points out, all he had to do
> was bring the 10 tribes back.
Try the Gemora above
>>> Again I can't make head or tail of what you mean. People have spoken
>>> to the neshama of Moshiach. What has that got to do with anything?
>> Well, you believe that MOSHIACH VADAI was asked in the Heichalos
>> EIMOSAY KOSI MAR
> THe *neshama* of moshiach. By definition there are no living people
> in Heaven (except for R Yehoshua ben Levi).
Really and Eliyohu HaNovi? The Neshoma is in earth in a human being. The
Gemora tells us that for each Dor
>> How does that gel with a whole lot of people BECHEZKAS.
> I have no idea what this means.
According to you this neshoma is assigned to ONE person or can it be
split acording to potentials ... The King doesn't have to be Moshuach
as I recall
>>> No, it doesn't. Igeres Teman is an inspirational letter.
>> It wasn't a NOVEL
> No, it was an inspirational letter. Not a halacha sefer.
Come now! You think the Rambam made things up to inspire them?
>>> The Yad
>>> is a halacha sefer. They are two completely different things.
>> Yes, but he isn't going to make things up in Igeres Taimon! His
>> METHODOLOGY of what he puts in the Yad is documented.
> Yes, he put in that which is halacha, and not that which is not.
It's actually deeper than that and you know it
There are klollim
>> He doesn't put lots of things in. Eg Yishuv Eretz Yisrael. Did he not
>> pine to go there? Was it for romantic reasons?
> He did put the relevant halachos in the Yad. He didn't put that
> it's a mitzvah *because he held that it isn't*.
Ask the Ohr Someach and more who disavow your comment
> He held that it
> was an ad hoc command for the generation that entered the land,
> not ledoros.
ad loc MITZVOS ... A new concept
I heard Rav Hershel say the Shita of the Igros Moshe was unprecedented
and mechudashtik
> Living in EY now is a very good thing, he held, much
> to be desired, but not a mitzvah.
Desired? He didn't want to be mekayem MITZVOS like Moshe Rabbeinu?
Going daled Amos you are koneh Olam habo
Is that just some more romantic stuff or perhaps Mesora passed down
midor dor.
Even the Alter Rebbe went but was told by his Rebbe to turn back (even
though R Mendel Horodocker was somehow not included in the Lubavitcher
shalsheles despite the Alter Rebbe being his Chossid and addressing him
as Rebbe)
> And leaving Bavel, he held, is
> assur.
Leaving Bavel today is a mitzvah
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
------------------------------
**************************************
Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
avodah@lists.aishdas.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."
A list of common acronyms is available at
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)