0

I have just watched a "Stump the Rabbi" video about whether mashiach is actually a physical person. Rabbi Shloma Majeski states that mashiach can even be someone that has passed away, and especially if they did something in that generation for the redemption to come.

So after watching this I am wondering, doesn't he basically support the christian idea? I would like to know where exactly he stated in Tractate Sanhedrin if any of you know that mashiach can be someone that passed away. But couldn't a christian watch this and say that their idol is a "candidate".

Here is the video, it is about 5 minutes: https://youtu.be/ZQSYltoKbUY

  • There's a story in the gemara of one of the sages meeting the Meshiach outside the gates of Rome. He was identified by the fact that all the beggars first rubbed ointment and then bandaged their wounds, and the Meshiach did it the other way around. This is an example, I think, of the idea that in every generation there's a man born with the potential of being the Meshiach. The same can be said of Bar Kochva and King Chezekiah, both of whom had Messianic potential. – Harel13 May 11 at 6:19
  • @Harel13 Ah yes thank you. But this Rabbi also stated that someone that has passed away can also be the messiah so maybe I am still not understanding something – Majobri May 11 at 6:22
  • 2
    I realize now that he's a Chabad rabbi. Now it all makes sense - if he says this, then presumably he's one of the 'meshichistim', the sect of Chabad that hold that the Lubavitcher Rebbe was the Meshiach and is destined to somehow come back to life and bring the geulah. Yes, that's a Christian way of thinking, and it's not just me saying - I've heard a number of rabbis say this. It's a problematic way of thinking, to say the least. – Harel13 May 11 at 6:30
  • 1
    There seem to be two distinct questions here: "where exactly he stated in Tractate Sanhedrin if any of you know that mashiach can be someone that passed away"? and "But couldn't a christian watch this and say that their idol is a "candidate""? I suggest that you may want to edit the question to narrow its focus to one or the other – Joel K May 11 at 6:44
  • 1
    @Dude how is being against the meshichistim's view sinat chinam? L'havdil, Ralbag is known to have written some problematic statements in Milchamot Hashem. Being against those views, does that mean we hate Ralbag? No, of course not. I disagree with Reform Judaism. Does that mean I hate Reform Jews? No. Same here. Further, do you mean Chabad consider the Rebbe a "maybe Mashiach"? Because the way they talk about him, it sounds like they consider him a for-sure Mashiach. Also, tchiyat hametim is commonly believed to be after the geulah. How can the Mashiach come back to life before that? – Harel13 May 11 at 14:00
-2

אמר רב נחמן אי מן חייא הוא כגון אנא שנאמר (ירמיהו ל, כא) והיה אדירו ממנו" ומושלו מקרבו יצא אמר רב אי מן חייא הוא כגון רבינו הקדוש אי מן מתיא הוא כגון דניאל איש חמודות Rav Naḥman says: If the Messiah is among the living in this generation, he is a person such as me, who already has dominion over the Jewish people, as it is stated: “And their prince shall be of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from their midst” (Jeremiah 30:21), indicating that the redeemer is already in power. Rav says: If the Messiah is among the living in this generation, he is a person such as our saintly Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who was renowned for his sanctity, piety, and Torah knowledge. If the Messiah is among the dead he is a person such as Daniel, the beloved man." (Sanhedrin 98b) From hereit comes out (at least according to Rav Nachman and Rav) that Moshiach can rise from the dead and the redeem the jews. The misconception that Moshiach cannot be from the dead is from the ramba"m who says, "נֶהֱרָג, בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁאֵינוֹ זֶה שֶׁהִבְטִיחָה עָלָיו תּוֹרָה . if he is killed, we will know that he was not the one Torah has promised." however this is only if he is killed and not if he died, because if so why would the Ramba"m who is very precise on words say killed?

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    This translation is obviously mistaken, as discussed numerous times. Rashi gives two explanations of the Gemara. The correct translation accordingly is "if the Messiah had been someone who has since passed away, it would have been Daniel" or "if [we seek a model of] a Messiah [worthy candidate] from someone who has since passed away, it would be Daniel". (The interpretation you have promulgated about killing vs. dying was made up by some crazy Lubavitchers a few years ago and is not based in traditional Judaism or Maimonidean scholarship.) – Double AA May 11 at 13:10

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .