Mashiach and Eliyahu Hanavi

↑ 5*Mom ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 3:10 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.

Yeah, I was going to say that I think yogabird and I understand each other here, but it still doesn't help, bc others may define these terms differently than we do, and round and round goes the confusion...

↑ freidasima ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 3:58 am

5* mom you post a very important point earlier. That about what I wrote vis a vis "being a good Jew".

What I have noticed in the past years with the shift to the right everywhere in the Jewish world (including the charedi world) is that it is very common to be told that one is "not a good Jew" if they don't do X or believe in Y.

And therefore my first question is truly a simple one. What is the nucleus of what it takes to "be a good Jew" without all the hashkofic (which change from generation to generation, from group to group, from country to country and from society to society) additions.

So yes, you can say that I am looking for what you may think is the "bare minimum". I prefer to think of it as those concepts that are the basis of Judaism and the halochic requirements of being a Jew.

The minute one goes there it suddenly appears that what you call the "bare minimum" is a HECK of a lot of stuff. I would like to see people keep that correctly first, before going into the hashkofic stuff. Because what I have seen is that in many cases a lot of people aren't keeping the bare minimum too well (just look at the threads here about religious leaders, rabbonim sinning, rabbonim being arrested, etc.) while being so gung-ho on telling the rest of the world that because they (I.e. rest of the world) aren't keeping to all sorts of hashkofic stuff THEY aren't being good Jews.

Yeah well.

So maybe let's really start with that bare minimum and do it well, do it correctly, do it honestly. And then if someone wants to add something hashkofic that they believe in, in ADDITION to that bare minimum, and add it for themselves, not requiring the whole world to believe and act that way, that's fine too.

But that is not what I am seeing in practice.

Which is why I am so big on starting at least with trying to understand and keep what you call that "bare minimum" correctly. And then if someone wants, to go further.

Not to start with the further while futzing that bare minimum over and over.
Let's see people keep to the halochos of maso umaton biyosher, let's see them keep to the laws of gossip and slander, let's see them keep to the laws of honest dealings, lets see them keep to the laws of not shaming their fellow Jew, etc. and then tell me about not wearing denim, not reading secular literature, not having a TV at home, and not using the internet...ok?

↑ 5*Mom ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 4:04 am

yogabird wrote:

chani8 wrote:

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.

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.

And vice versa.

Torah includes both the Written and Oral Torah. Written Torah includes all of Tanach, not just the mitzvos distilled. And the Oral Torah is rooted in the Written Torah. They are intertwined and one cannot be considered learned if he has just one without the other.

↑ 5*Mom ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 4:53 am

freidasima wrote:

I hear you, FS, which is why I think it is crucial NOT to focus exclusively on bottom line Halacha absent any context, which unfortunately is the way it is commonly done today. I think that makes it so much easier to perform those mental gymnastics to twist things around and end up being "matir issurim," both halachically and ethically. If one learns halacha within the context of Tanach, including the narrative, as a holistic whole, it becomes much harder to ignore those values and priorities and context that give meaning and framework to the mitzvos and halachos (collectively), and consequently harder to manipulate Halacha to be a "naval b'reshus haTorah."

haleyaskins

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 5:18 am

Friedasima,
I must say you have given some real thought to this (and other) topics with real intellectual honesty. I commend that. It is difficult to put aside everything we have been trained to believe as children and to review and analyze from a fresh perspective. For instance, I was recently teaching my students the Eliyahu narrative and it was very hard for them to see how critical meforshim are of his actions (and how critical we could be of his actions from our own analysis of the text), when we are indoctrinated as young children to believe in Eliyahu as some 'angel' type figure who could do no wrong.

My question for you is this: It is clear how committed you are to "rabbinic Judaism" in which we accept Chazal's interpretations of the written text. That said, the example being discussed, namely, Chazal placing importance in the concept of moshiach as a reaction to the Christians giving weight to the same topic, is not to be taken lightly. I can think of many other examples, but I will give just one. I recently read an article regarding the halachot of niddah. We may all be familiar with the gemara which claims that because the issues of Zava and Niddah were too confusing, the WOMEN asked to make it all one thing; whenever we have discharge, regardless of the length, we will just be a niddah. The author suggests that this was really instituted by the Rabbis because they were aware of other communities which had very strict policies regarding discharge and they wanted ours to be stricter.

Now, don't get me wrong, I follow the halachot of niddah. Like frieda said, I am a Rabbinic Jew. My question is: What do you FEEL about this? What are your thoughts and opinions regarding these alleged changes that the Rabbis made in reaction to other communities? It's something I have difficulty with.

↑ fromthedepths ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 7:36 am

ITA with 5*Mom. The "bare minimum" sounds completely uninspiring. I don't know about you, FS, but I like to have a bigger picture. In order to be motivated to keep the bare minimum, I need to know that it came from Hashem, that Hashem is good, that He gave us the mitzvos for our own benefit, that the world was created imperfect for a reason, that our task is to perfect it, that eventually it will reach complete rectification, when mashiach comes (finally, we're back to OP's question!) True, these questions are discussed in works of hashkafa, such as the Ramchal's Derech Hashem. Which is why I believe that in this generation, it is important to study hashkafic works.

The OP asked a hashkafic question, about the role of mashiach vs. the role of Eliyahu Hanavi. I believe I'm the only one who actually attempted to answer that question Smile

. FS, you're basically dismissing the question, claiming that it's not important to answer that in order to be a good Jew. I don't see why you feel the need to say that. If your child would have asked the same question, would you have dismissed it? I wouldn't. I would say, that's a great question! And then I would encourage/help the said child look up the various sources that discuss the question. (Not that I'm comparing OP to a child; just giving an example that's closer to one's heart.)

Personally, I'm not afraid of the fact that they don't all agree on one thing. What difference does it make? IMO, the more you learn the better. Why settle for the minimum when you can analyze the nuances of all the different opinions, understand where they're coming from, and see what bigger picture is formed in your own mind? That's precisely why the Oral Torah was not written down for centuries -- because it's so much more than can be expressed in words. It was meant to help one form his or her own picture rather than telling them what to think. There is much to be gained from studying aggada, even if it seems confusing and contradictory at first.

As to your assertion that no Orthodox rabbi considers belief in the coming of mashiach required, I don't think that's true, as pointed out above. I think another distinction that needs to be made is between lehatchila and bedieved. If you were to ask, what should I believe? I would assume, based on Potato Kugel's list of sources, that the vast majority of Orthodox rabbis would tell you to believe in mashiach coming. But if you were to ask a very different question, Person X does not believe that mashiach will come. Am I still required to love him as myself? The answer will likely be yes, in a bedieved sort of way: this is what the person already believes, so what do we do about that.

↑ freidasima ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 10:36 am

From the Depths, I don't think you can even begin to fathom my religious world and that of many people like me.
To us, you are looking for a "broader context", as you call it, solely within what your rabbis from your group, whatever it is, are about to teach you. Our broader context includes the historical, cultural etc. background of the period in which something was discussed, but as what we are looking for is bottom line halocho, it is a nice thing to know but has no bearing on the halocho we keep "halocho lima'aseh". I see that you are really into what you consider "hashkofo" which is, of course, what your groups' rabbis are telling you it's ok to learn. Well in my world we don't ask "our rabbis" if something is "ok to learn", and we also kind of keep to the letter of what was said, unlike what you did to my post.
Your addition of "loving someone as yourself"? What in the world does that have to do with anything. Again, your interpretation from only G-d knows where. Keep to the letter of what was written, seems you have trouble maintaining that string of thought. I stated "aveiro" versus "mitzvo" and nothing else. It is not a mitzvo to believe in moshiach, it is not an aveiro not to believe in moshiach. Period. Keep your additions to your own issues and don't rewrite other people's posts. Nowhere did I speak of milechaschila and bedieved, again, your addition.
And you can't seem to wrap your head around what I am saying about it being difficult enough to keep the actual LAW correctly. You seem to be some kind of tzadekes who has no trouble with that ever so you can spend lots of time learning Ramchal and other meforshim that float your boat. That's great. But you know? For the rest of us plebs, we kind of have to spend a lot of time learning the actual LAW, the letter of the LAW, how one is halochically supposed to keep the LAW correctly...because you know what? That's what Judaism is all about.
First and foremost, keeping Jewish LAW correctly. That is Mitzvos. And how correctly not to committ aveiros.
That can take a lifetime to learn correctly. Again if hashkofo floats your boat then float it. But it doesn't float everyone's boat so don't knock them. Let's see you keep the LAW correctly first and foremost. ALL the laws. And then we can talk further about hashkofo this or hashkofo that.

My sneaking suspicion is that you may belong to a group where....a lot of emphasis is put on hashkofo and not a lot on halocho and keeping the law correctly. Otherwise you would chap what I am talking about immediately.

↑ freidasima ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 10:42 am

haleyaskins, if I understand you correctly you are asking how I feel about the interpretation that says that rabbonim added the extra week not because women asked but rather because of their own desire to make mainstream Judaism closer to the groups which kept a stricter form of discharge. An interesting comment, can you point me to a source? I've heard many interpretations of the extra seven days but this one is new for me.

What I can tell you in practice is that the list of rabbis who are willing to bend those extra seven days to the point of breaking in cases, let's say, of halochic infertility is b"h long and getting longer by the day. Only they do it very quietly because of the charedi backlach, but they exist in droves. In other words whatever the reason is for those extra seven days, in various situations it seems that very learned rabbis realize that these are not biblically mandated days and even their rabbinic addition is a bit dicey, hence the minute one has circumstances overriding what is supposed to have been even the straighforward consideration for keeping the extra week, they are quite willing to forgo part of it, or if necessary, even most of it.

In other words, from the halochic way that these very orthodox rabbis relate today to that extra week, in view of what we now know biologiclaly vis a vis halochic infertility, it teaches me that WHATEVER the reason for its addition, there are now clear limits how much it is supposed to run (or ruin) our lives. And as my basis, as I keep saying, is halocho, I find that the most telling fact of all.

↑ Potato Kugel ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 12:35 pm

[quote="freidasima"]
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)
quote]

To be clear I quoted you.
Now lets see if you are correct.

I don't have to bother bringing down the exact Gemorah or Midrashim that state that one who does not beleive is the Coming of Moshiach is a "Kofer" or "Min". You acknowledge those.
Nor do I have to bring the Rambam. It's been qouted ad nauseam.

You want Halachic sources, that belief in Moshiach is required to be considered a good jew.
The pointed questions.
Well heres another partial list of sources (again courtesy of my ever patient DH).

1) Rav Tzaddok HaKohe in Pri Tzaddik on Parshas Kedoshim goes into a detailed explanation of the Talmudical source.
n2)Shut AchiEzer- 3Rd Chelek 72nd Responsa rules one who has themselves "cremated" is considered a "heretic" as they are Kofer in Techiyas Hameisim.
3)Ravyah-Hilchos Taanis Siman Tuf Tuf Mem Hey discusses the fact one who does not believe in Techiyas HaMaesm is a "Min".
4)Shut Igros Moshe- Yoreh Deah Vol. 2 in Responsa 153 states one who does not believe in the coming of Moshiach is a "Kofer" (heretic)
5)Shut Melamed Lehoyil- Vol One Responsa 12 states one who does not believe in the coming of Moshiach is a "Rusha" (BTW that does not mean good jew).
6)Ber Sheva-In Tractate Sanhedrin Daf Tzaddik brings the aforementioned Rambam as the simple Halacha.
7)Ikrim- In the Fourth Mamar states it is "obligatory on each and every Jew who considers themselves a believer in "Toras Moshe" to believe in the coming of Moshiach.
8) Shut Ksav Sofer- In Responsa 4 states one who does not believe in the coming of Moshiach is a Kofer again that means heretic which is not a good jew.

And lastly please examine that very Chareidi source Encyclepedia Talmudis Vol 2 where it among those listed as having no share in the World to Come are those who do not believe in the Coming of Moshiach.

Again the list of sources here is in no particular order, they are all from the Greatest Rabbonim of their era. they span all era's and all "streams".
Now between this list and the last I have given you[b] that you are 100% WRONG.
I am still waiting for even one souce from you.
And youre crack about having no time to learn Ramchal.

↑ freidasima ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 12:39 pm

Who taught you that Yoga?
We must serve Hashem. Period. We do mitzvot "ki katuv". Because that's what it says we do, that's what we are commanded to do.
Not because it "inspires us".
that's dangerous. Because a day will come when it just won't inspire us and then what? We don't do? We don't serve?
My father z"l taught me something from his days in Auschwitz. That the day comes that if you don't do mitzvot pretty much by rote, because we do them, period, because we are commanded to, period, something is going to happen in life that will make us, if we are looking for explanations, inspirations, anything, say "forget it". To him it happened the day that a transport came to the camp and he learned that he was alone in the world, that his entire family, town, friends, had all been exterminated and he was the only one left. That day he - a frum man, a posek - yadin yadin - wanted to "go to the fence"(electrocute himself). And his friends held him all night long in his plank so that he wouldn't go to the fence. in the morning he got up for appel (roll call) and without thinking his mouth began saying the words of shachris. Without thinking even what he was doing. "Vetargilanu bitoratecho" as we say in davening. Hergel, habit. And that habit - no inspiration, just plain doing because that's the halocho period, got him through that time, kept him davening, until he could do it with kavvono of thinking about what he was saying again and not just "doing it by rote".

in other words, first and foremost do it, ki katuv. Because we are commanded to. Because that's the halocho, period.
If someone wants inspiration, terrific. But that's not WHY we do it or HOW we do it. We do it period because it's the din. And we keep the din because we believe in Hashem and thus buy into the system.

The system doesn't REQUIRE insipiration.

↑ yogabird ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 12:44 pm

freidasima wrote:

I didn't say because they inpire us. Quite the contrary! I said in an inspired fashion.

(I can't imagine how someone goes on to do mitzvos in the darkness of Aushwitz if they are not an inspired Jew)

But you probably right. It all just the koolaid. And the dope.

↑ Potato Kugel ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 12:45 pm

Considering the fact that I have listed numerous sources that state the Belief in Moshiach is required of any good Jew or they are a "heretic".
In spite of it all you have been unable to provide a single one.
I think that pretty much means even the book written by Kallner cannot provide any sources.
And since you complete inability to back yourself up with any source what so ever simply demonstrates to me that there is no need to read Kallner as well I think my time is better served by reading the actual source material for any study done.
If you can ever find any sources for anything you have stated please post them.

↑ PinkFridge ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 12:46 pm

OK, I've sort of caught up on this thread.
My understanding is that theology means knowing or studying G-d. Which we can't quite do. We can do what's expected of us and that is to learn what He wants from us. If more people, myself included, were to learn what the mitzvos involve of us, and consistently do them because we believe this is what we were commanded to do...well, if I may be forgiven for saying so, Moshiach would well be here already Tongue Out

Now if I'm going to want some continuity and want my kids to keep this going, and keep going myself, I would have a hard time continuing to do so without some fundamental beliefs, hashkafas if you will, such as
- Hashem knows what's best for me
- Hashem loves me and doesn't act capriciously. (If there are times when the mashchis has reign lo aleinu, that's another story and if this ventures into the realm of hashkafa I would do well to learn about it to keep me going during the tough times, or learning about historical tough times.)
- Doing mitzos mechanically, by rote, is not a good thing. As is coming up in this week's haftorah or next's - Yirmiyahu warns us of the perils of doing mitzos anashim melumada. IOW mitzvos are supposed to be performed consciously, with awareness. What we've needed to be motivated, individually and as a people, has varied in time and place, but I'm not sure how much is chiddushim and how much is just emphasizing one piece of mesorah over another.

That's about all I can say now.

↑ Potato Kugel ↓

Mon, Jun 24 2013, 1:08 pm

I wonder if this part of Dr. David Bergers review of Kallners book is also "taken out of context"
(Tradition, 33:4 1999), "While significant elements of Kellner's argument are convincing, others, I think, are flawed to the point where they render the historical thesis misleading and the contemporary message, for all its good intentions, confusing and unworkable."
For the Record
Kallner is a Profesor in Haifa University.
Berger is a self identified MO Professor in Brooklyn College (I think) and Tradiion is a MO publication.

After reading the reviews I think 20 bucks is a pretty big waste to spend on this book.