Mashiach and Eliyahu Hanavi

↑ fromthedepths ↓

Sun, Jun 23 2013, 10:24 pm

goodmorning wrote:

fromthedepths wrote:

He brings views that oppose the Rambam, such as the Sefer Haikkarim, which lists only three principles: 1) G-d exists; 2) G-d rewards good deeds and punishes bad deeds; 3) the Torah is from Heaven. In other words, other views don't include belief in mashiach.

Just to be clear, the Ikrim does not say that one who does not believe in Moshiach is a heretic. He does say that he has transgressed a mandatory precept. See above. (R' Yosef Albo was the author of the Ikrim.)

Thanks for the clarification, goodmorning!

↑ shalhevet ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 2:40 am

fromthedepths wrote:

freidasima wrote:

Once again, we don't pasken by the Rambam NOR by R. Yosef Albo. We pasken by the SA and its commentators as interpreted by our rabbis.

Can you send us to a source in the SA which states that it is an aveiro not to believe in the coming of the moshiach in the sense that the rambam speaks?

Not quite SA, but certainly a halachic work: To Live Among Friends, by Rabbi Dovid Castle, vol. 2, pp.604-615.

Context: there is a mitzvah to hate a sinner (he brings various sources and discusses them). Question: who is considered a sinner? Long discussion. As part of the discussion, he brings the Rambam's view that it is a mitzvah to hate those who do not believe in the thirteen principles of faith [which include belief in mashiach coming]. Long discussion. He brings views that oppose the Rambam, such as the Sefer Haikkarim, which lists only three principles: 1) G-d exists; 2) G-d rewards good deeds and punishes bad deeds; 3) the Torah is from Heaven. In other words, other views don't include belief in mashiach.

My point? Belief in the coming of mashiach is not a purely abstract hashkafic concept. It has practical halachic ramifications.

Just an important correction. Chalila to say Sefer Haikrim didn't believe in mashiach. It is simply that he summed up what a Jew should believe in in three principles, rather than 13.

If you go through the Rambam's principles you will see they are all included in the Ikrim's three. E.g. belief in techiyas hameisim (revival of the dead) and the mashiach are included in Hashem rewarding good deeds and punishing bad. Belief in Moshe Rabbenu as the greatest navi is part of believing the Torah is from Heaven (since it says that there) etc.

↑ freidasima ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 3:07 am

Potato - nice that you gave us a laundry list here but....
Once again you are mixing apples with oranges and not addressing the issue.
Sure you can find ten, fifteen, thirty, a hundred seforim which follow the Rambam's line.

Similarly, however, when asked a direct question about whether one is not a good Jew if one does not accept the ikarim OTHER than those having to do with belief in Hashem's singularity, omnipotence etc. you won't be able to find a single Orthodox rabbi who will state that one is NOT a good Jew. Or that it is a sin not to accept the Rambam's version of his last group of ikkarim (as opposed to the first which have to do with Hashem)

You prove the well known point that if you just look for the superficial, that's what you get. However if you ask the pointed questions, the ones that charedim hate to ask, you will find over and over that there is no mitzva to believe in Moshiach and no issur not to.

There is most definitely an issur to say that Moshiach has arrived. That's Xtianity. That's what your out of context quote from Marc Shapiro's review of Kellner was referring to. But that's not what we are discussing here so I dont understand why you thought that quote was relevant. A bit of reading comprehension here might have helped you find a quote that fits.

Go read Kellner Don't be lazy, it's readily available in any good library and in Amazon.

(Was this post short enough for you dearie? you seem to have an attention span problem with long posts otherwise as such an eidel torah true jew you would surely have refrained from your nasty remarks about the length of my posts....)

↑ 5*Mom ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 4:39 am

freidasima wrote:

Similarly, however, when asked a direct question about whether one is not a good Jew if one does not ...

I have withdrawn from these "hashkafa" threads for the most part because although posters are using the same words, no 2 posters mean the same thing. Another discussion to nowhere, iyam.

BUT regarding the above snippet, why is that the question we should be asking? Why are we reducing Torah to, "to be a good Jew you only have to keep this list of do's and stay away from this list of don't" if, as I have pointed out on the other thread, the Torah itself includes so much more than those lists? There is more, FS. So much more.

You can debate about what the "more" does or does not mean, imply, include. But you cannot deny that there is more.

↑ chani8 ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 4:46 am

5*Mom wrote:

freidasima wrote:

Similarly, however, when asked a direct question about whether one is not a good Jew if one does not ...

I hear what you are saying, but whose 'more' should I listen to? Where do I get the more from? As yogabird suggested, perhaps perkei avos is the place to start. But after that, so much societal influence plays a part that I would rather tease apart the hashkafic influence from the barebone halacha.

↑ 5*Mom ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 4:51 am

chani8 wrote:

5*Mom wrote:

freidasima wrote:

Similarly, however, when asked a direct question about whether one is not a good Jew if one does not ...

You have to learn. Lots. In some kind of organized, connected fashion, not haphazardly. Start at the beginning, with the "more" that's right in the chumash.

↑ chani8 ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 4:58 am

5*Mom wrote:

chani8 wrote:

5*Mom wrote:

freidasima wrote:

Similarly, however, when asked a direct question about whether one is not a good Jew if one does not ...

You have to learn. Lots. In some kind of organized, connected fashion, not haphazardly. Start at the beginning, with the "more" that's right in the chumash.

Right, but just of the top of my head, regarding this thread, I cant recall learning anything in chumash about moshiach. Where would that be? Not until Navi?

↑ 5*Mom ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:02 am

chani8 wrote:

Right, but just of the top of my head, regarding this thread, I cant recall learning anything in chumash about moshiach. Where would that be? Not until Navi?

You're doing it in reverse order. You're asking specific questions and looking for discrete specific answers. Learning is disjointed when done that way and you miss a lot of the context that will put those answers into perspective. You have to start learning and ask as you go.

↑ chani8 ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:03 am

yogabird wrote:

Pirkei Avos is a great place to start! (no references to moshiach there, though Wink

)

Yes, by golly I think you've inspired me to start there.

It's just hard because the only translation I have is by @#$%^&. And well, one of the editors is a known cover-upper of child molesters. So this comment takes me full circle (in the imamother threads I'm following), that how can I learn Torah from someone I don't trust?

Oh well. I might give it a try anyway.

↑ chani8 ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:11 am

yogabird wrote:

Then again, I guess this discussion is about whether belief in moshiach is part of theology, or more like hashkafa.

Eminent authorities point to the former.

Sorry, but I'm confused because I would almost translate hashkafa as theology. Or, theology includes hashkafa. So again, like 5*mom was saying, we've got to get our definitions straight.

↑ yogabird ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:14 am

chani8 wrote:

To answer the bolded, just something that helps me, I always check if whoever is claiming to teach me "the torah worldview" is also a master in halacha. That way, at least I know they are familiar with the primary sources, and there is less likely to be distortion.

↑ chani8 ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:17 am

5. Yosi ben Yochanan of Jerusalem said: Let your house be wide open and let the poor be members of thy household; and do not talk much with women. This was said about one's own wife; how much more so about the wife of one's neighbor. Therefore the sages have said: He who talks too much with women brings evil upon himself and neglects the study of the Torah and will in the end inherit Gehenna.

OUCH. Yogabird, help. How am I to go another step further. This is mishnayos, and this is clearly influenced by societal beliefs.

I'm sorry, OP. I'll start a new thread.

↑ yogabird ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:18 am

chani8 wrote:

yogabird wrote:

Then again, I guess this discussion is about whether belief in moshiach is part of theology, or more like hashkafa.

Eminent authorities point to the former.

Sorry, but I'm confused because I would almost translate hashkafa as theology. Or, theology includes hashkafa. So again, like 5*mom was saying, we've got to get our definitions straight.

To me: theology: beliefs that our religion is predicated on.

haskafah: expanded worldview formed by those beliefs.

I guess they overlap somewhere.

↑ chani8 ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:54 am

yogabird wrote:

chani8 wrote:

yogabird wrote:

Then again, I guess this discussion is about whether belief in moshiach is part of theology, or more like hashkafa.

Eminent authorities point to the former.

Sorry, but I'm confused because I would almost translate hashkafa as theology. Or, theology includes hashkafa. So again, like 5*mom was saying, we've got to get our definitions straight.

To me: theology: beliefs that our religion is predicated on.

haskafah: expanded worldview formed by those beliefs.

I guess they overlap somewhere.

According to google: Theology: "the study of G-d." "... systematic and rational study of concepts of God..."

"'Hashkafah' is Hebrew for the word 'perspective'..." "hashkafa (religious worldview)"