Mashiach and Eliyahu Hanavi

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Previous 1 2 3 7 8 9 15 16 17 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

↑ chani8 ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 1:50 am

I'm sorry to sound so stubborn. Unless I missed it, I didn't see one single 'proof' here from the Torah itself.

It was "alluded to", or Rashi, or midrash, etc, otherwise, it's not until Naviim.

Why are you all ignoring that fact? Brushing it off?

↑ 5*Mom

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 2:47 am

chani8 wrote:

chani, what is it that you are finding so disturbing about that?

↑ Potato Kugel ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 2:50 am

Chani.
It's a great question.
No one is brushing it off in any way.
I am going to try and give you a short explanation, however I hope you will realize that alot of this stuff touches on some of the deepest parts of our Jewish Faith, the foundations so to speak.
This is the stuff that people sit and study Day and night and as such it's really impossible to give full justice to this topic on a forum such as imamother.
So while I might be giving you a short "overview" of some things,, Please realize that your questions are deserving of much more detailed ansewers and the only way for you to really truly get those ansewers is if you find yourself someone who is really learned in these matters, knows all the sources from begining to end, speaks your language (meaning in a way you understand) and will sit down and explain this stuff to you.
Again the questions are great and you should find someone who will help you learn these things.
They are fascinating, They are deep, They are enlightning, and knowing them will enrich youre life in so many ways.

Now.
We as believing Jews know that there are two things there is Torah SheBiksav and there is Torah Shel Ba'l Peh.
Both were given at Sinai, both came from HKBH and one without the other does'nt work.
The Torah without the "Ba'l Peh" is impossible to understand.
The Torah says Keep Shabbos, It gives us some general guidlines, but it does'nt do more than that.
How should we keep it?
The Kareites said there was no Torah Shel Bal Peh so they ended up living in the dark on SHabbos since the Torah says simply there should be no light in your house on Shabbos.
As another poster alluded to, The Torah says "take a fruit" it does'nt say which one We know from Torah Shel Bal Peh it means esrog.
So So you see the only way to fully undeerstand verse after verse in the Torah is throught the Torah Shel Bal Peh one without the other makes no sense.
So there are numerous verses throughout Tanach that make no sense on the surface HKBH gave them to us "locked" just as Shabbos is locked so to speak.
Chazal come along and tell us what these cryptic verses that are confusing on the surface mean.
And in fact many of these cases (some of which have already been qouted by other posters) once Chazal give us the "glasses" so to speak that allow us to read these verses you can go back and all of a sudden what doesn't make sense makes perfect sense.
Now the question remains why is it that in some of the most fundemental parts of our Theology the HKBU chose to include only cryptic hints at it in the Torah Shebiksav.
Well this gets at one of the deeper concepts in Judaisim there is Torat HaNigleh and Torat HaNistar. The Revealed and the Hidden Torah.
Each verse in the Torah has layers of meaning.
At a minimum there are four, which are referred to as Pshat, Remez, Drush, and Sod.
The simple verse in Torah Shebiksab is the most open of open parts of Torat HaniGleh the Revealed Torah.
By virtue of it being revealed only that which is seeable which can be proven as an actuality in front of our eyes is included in the actual Torah anything else was hinted at was cryptically indicated but it was not written in an open way as is fitting for something which is not open to all ather is "hidden".
(and again thanks to my ever patient DH, who keeps showing me that they do learn thing in Kollel LOL

)

↑ chocolate fondue ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 3:21 am

Potato Kugel wrote:

)

I was just coming to write something like this.
Chani8; the Written Torah and Oral Torah come together as one unit. Most mitzvos cannot be kept properly directly from the Torah. Are Tefillin clear from the Torah? It just says 'and they shall be for a sign between the eyes.' Where does it speak about black leather boxes with straps and pesukim written on parchment.

Even basic stories that every kid learns are not explicit in the Torah. You know Sorah Imeinu went down to Mitzrayim and hid in a box and the customs officials found her etc. Where does it say that she hid in a box? In Rashi. (That was just one example that sprang to mind because someone asked my about it once. I'm sure there are countless more)

Rashi just comes to explain peshuto shel mikra; the literal meaning of the posuk. If you can't accept Rashi as an intrinsic part of understanding Torah, you will understand very very little.

By the way, I didn't mention Parshas Netzavim in my list of times that Moshiach is mentioned in the Torah. See Devarim, 30, where Hashem speaks about kibbutz goluyos and more. Again, it is not necessarily crystal clear just by reading the posuk.

↑ chocolate fondue ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 3:22 am

goodmorning wrote:

jerusalem-girl wrote:

I woke up early, because I really wanted to respond on this thread and I typed up a whole response before checking in (don't ask why I did THAT) and now I feel pretty superfluous, seeing all the amazing posts here.
Sad

I guess it was a good thing for me to get thinking about Mashiach properly.

OP, are your questions answered?

Post anyway! (This was a great topic to think about on 17 Tammuz...)

Yes, please post anyway!

↑ etky ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 3:31 am

Chocolate - are you saying that Rashi brings the story of Sara in the box as pshuto shel mikra?

↑ Potato Kugel ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 3:39 am

I just wanted to add (off topic from what this thread has become but when I told my DH he was pretty upset and said I have to write this)
Way back FS gave an example of "Social Construct" by citing the minhag "custom of Yemenite women to wash the floors on Tisha Bav something which FS said "is not keeping with the spirit of the day and was a "Social Construct".
Now thers a concept of "Minhag Yisrael Torah" You don't mess with minhagim (customs) and when you do you better know what youre talking about
And if there's any groups "minhagim" that every Rabbi knows you especially don't mess with, its the Yemenis since they had the most intact Mesorah having always been in one place till after WW2.
FS brings something from what some Priest taught women to think everyday in their household chores, Notice the beginings of a difference?
The Yemenites womens custom was on one day of the year Tisha Bav.
The Non-jewish custom was every day.
Now sources in Jewish Theology state that Moshiach and Tisha Bav are intrinsically connected, Either Moshiach will be born on Tisha Bav or his coming will actually be on or around Tisha Bav (like everything regarding this topic it's not clear for many reasons).
So The Yemenite custom was Davka on Tisha Bav in the spirit of the dy to "prepare" for Moshiachs coming in keeping with the Mesorah that by Keeping the Day of Fasting we will come to a day of Feasting.
Don't play around with Minhagim, it's not smart.
And a personal Thank's to all the posters here who went to the trouble to post such "informative posts.

↑ freidasima ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 3:58 am

Potato - <snip>
The yemenite tradition came from the social construct of women being ignorant. They swept every day for moshiach. Not once a year. The rabbis did not stop them on Tisha be'av although one should not clean, because being totally ignorant they could not express their judaism any other way as they could not read and could not daven.

<snip>

[edited by a mod for snarkiness]

↑ yogabird ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 4:19 am

freidasima wrote:

The yemenite tradition came from the social construct of women being ignorant. They swept every day for moshiach. Not once a year. The rabbis did not stop them on Tisha be'av although one should not clean, because being totally ignorant they could not express their judaism any other way as they could not read and could not daven.

If there wasanything of jewish value these ignorant jewish would understood, it was emunas chachomim. we all know how the sephardim are about that.

Are you trying to say that their rabbis couldn't even try educating them on this tiny little halacha because the knew it was a lost cause?

I don't buy it.

↑ yogabird ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 4:20 am

chocolate fondue wrote:

goodmorning wrote:

jerusalem-girl wrote:

I guess it was a good thing for me to get thinking about Mashiach properly.

OP, are your questions answered?

Post anyway! (This was a great topic to think about on 17 Tammuz...)

Yes, please post anyway!

pretty please!

↑ jerusalem-girl ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 4:26 am

freidasima wrote:

Actually, I've read a responsa which justifies this practice, while acknowledging that regular cleaning is not permitted on tisha b'av.
As an aside, it's my family's tradition as well (brought over from Russia by my great-grandmother. ) We do very light de-cluttering/ sweeping in order to prepare for Mashiach only on tisha b'av.
I guess illiteracy is not exclusive to Yemeni women.

I'll try to find the responsa.

↑ yogabird ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 4:26 am

FS, <snipped>

Permit me to model a reading comprehension strategy called summarization, using potato's post.

Although yemenite women were not themselves educated, their ancestors were, and knowing this, they clung to mesorah in all aspects of their life to ensure that they do not transgress on any halachos. Thus we can conclude that washing floors on erev tisha beav was not their own innovation, it must have had a mesorah going back to a time when their people were knowledgeable in halacha, and as such, they knew it was permitted.

Last edited by yogabird on Wed, Jun 26 2013, 7:10 am; edited 1 time in total

↑ chocolate fondue ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 4:38 am

etky wrote:

Chocolate - are you saying that Rashi brings the story of Sara in the box as pshuto shel mikra?

Why not?
Rashi says “va’ani lo bassi ela l’faresh peshuto shel mikra”.

He brings a very clear proof from the posuk: Why does the posuk say 'But it occured with Avram's coming to Egypt'? It should have said 'with their coming to Egypt'. But it teaches us that he his her in a box and because [the Egyptians] claimed customs duties they open [the box] and saw her.

Very clear in the Rashi; not explicitly mentioned in the Posuk.

↑ jerusalem-girl

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 4:44 am

yogabird wrote:

chocolate fondue wrote:

goodmorning wrote:

jerusalem-girl wrote:

I guess it was a good thing for me to get thinking about Mashiach properly.

OP, are your questions answered?

Post anyway! (This was a great topic to think about on 17 Tammuz...)

Yes, please post anyway!

pretty please!

So here’s my long awaited post Wink

I’ve taken out the sources which I so strenuously Googled based on half-remembered pessukim, because they’re all listed above. But here’s the skeleton of my post, in which I tried to give an overall understanding of the issue, based on what I know.

We have to differentiate between Mashiach (literally, the anointed- a person) and Achris Hayamim (The Messianic age- a time period).

Little is known about Mashiach. We know that he will be descendant of the Davidic dynasty, that he will be a righteous man (see the descriptions of Yeshaya 11:1-4 in which Mashiach is described as a shoot from the lineage of Yishai, a just judge, with wisdom, insight, and ruach hakodesh.)

He will be the man that will be our leader during the coming of the Achris Hayamim. Every great revolution needs a fitting leader, and Achris Hayamim is no different.

There is no mitzvah to accept Mashiach, believe in him, or in any way see him as anything other than a regular leader. We are supposed to believe that he is coming אני מאמין באמונה שלימה בביאת המשיח... . But until it’s clear to all that the real Mashiach is here, we won’t be held accountable for not accepting a person before the Achris Hayamim (unlike J-esus/ Shabbetai Tzvi who 'tested' the faith of their followers). It is clear that Mashiach will have to prove that he is Mashiach, just as any Navi must first prove his credentials. Bar Kochva failed the test, although admittedly, R’ Akiva first did believe that he was Mashiach. But when he failed, he failed. There was no later attempt to prove that his lack of messianic characteristics were just a test to check who was really faithful.
Hashem doesn’t want Messianic imposters.

We’ll know Mashiach is here: 1) After Eliyahu Hanavi announces his arrival (As Shalhevet wrote, on the first page, Malachi (3) prophesized that Eliyahu would precede and announce Mashiach’s arrival) 2) When it gets pretty clear that we’re living in Messianic times. There will be no need to convince others; it will be clear to all כי פי ה' דבר

About Achris Hayamim, there are many, many passages in Tanach (Mostly in Nevi’im) that describe the end of days.
The common themes are: (in no particular order)
1) Kibbutz galiyos
2) Justice
3) The rebuilding of Yerushalayim and the Beis Hamikdash
4) A return to Am Yisrael’s glory
5) Universal knowledge of Hashem
6) The revival of the dead

We don’t know in what order these things will occur or how long they’ll last. The order of the amida seems to suggest kibbutz galiyos as coming before Mashiach.
Possibly, some of the ‘miraculous’ end of days events will happen in a rather uneventful, un-miraculous way. Some say (no, not just DL rabbis) that Hashem is guiding history and slowly starting the processes of kibbutz galiyos and the rebuilding of Zion, even before Mashiach’s times. We’ll see if this actually leads to Geulah, or not.

↑ etky ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 5:00 am

chocolate fondue wrote:

etky wrote:

Chocolate - are you saying that Rashi brings the story of Sara in the box as pshuto shel mikra?

The rashi you brought is a midrash from Breishit Raba, not the pshat. Rashi employs both exegetical methods, often relying heavily on the midrash, but it's important to be able to differentiate between the two.

sarahd ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 5:23 am

No, Rashi always explains the pshat of the posuk. He will bring a midrash when that is the only pshat explanation or when the pshat is not a complete explanation of the posuk. But in those cases, the midrash IS the simple meaning of the posuk.

↑ etky ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 5:57 am

sarahd wrote:

Actually Rashi is not known as one of the strictly "pshatist" commentators and that is one of the Rashbam's main criticisms of him. Saying that the midrash is the pshat of the passuk is more than a bit stretched. It is an entirely different exegetical method. Just because a pshat explanation is lacking does not transform the midrash into pshat. The story fits in nicely and could be a possible explanation to the grammatical difficulty but it is hardly the pshat of the passuk.

↑ freidasima ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 5:58 am

Tthere isn't a single poster who has brought a source that it is a mitzva to believe in the ikkarim other than the ones about the existence, singularity and omnipotence of Hashem who created the universe and gave us the torah. And there isn't a single poster who has brought a source showing that it is an aveiro not to believe in the ikkarim that don't speak about the above.
Perek chelek speaks about one who doesn't believe in ressurection as not having a place in the world to come. However chazal do not speak of it as an aveiro.
And as for the real topic at hand - moshiach - none of chazal, nor the SA or any of its commentaries claim it is a mitzvo to believe in moshiach or an aveiro not to...and we are referring, just to make this clear, to the eschatalogical type of moshiach that most of you posters are discussing.

No one here, not me and not you, are discussing the pshat concept which no one disagrees with, the hope and belief that one day Israel will be ruled by a Jewish leader at a time where there is no shiabut malchuyot, no yoke of nations on us.

THAT is not the topic at hand.

↑ chocolate fondue ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 7:57 am

FS. Why are you paskening according Shmuel? If you are taking the view of the Rambam, you have to accept the other things the Rambam paskens as well.

And how do you reply to all the other quotes I brought from the Gemara that disagree with Shmuel?

↑ freidasima ↓

Wed, Jun 26 2013, 8:01 am

We aren't talking paskening here, we are talking hashkofo.

Shmuel's statement is the only one that is accepted hashkofically across the board by all Orthodox Jewish rabbonim from all orthodox Jewish groups, with which the Rambam himself agrees, saying there will be nothing magical mystical or against nature at the time of the moshiach.

Page 8 of 17

Previous 1 2 3 7 8 9 15 16 17 Next