Ortho: “it says after chezkas moshiach “if he does this and succeeds” meaning at the time of chezkas he has not made everybody frum yet”
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you UNINTENTIONALLY misunderstood the Rambam, but it is nonetheless a misunderstanding.
Here is what the Rambam writes:
אם יעמוד מלך מבית דוד הוגה בתורה ועוסק במצוות כדוד אביו כפי תורה שבכתב ושבעל פה ויכוף כל ישראל לילך בה ולחזק בדקה וילחם מלחמות ה’ הרי זה בחזקת שהוא משיח אם עשה והצליח ונצח כל האומות שסביביו ובנה מקדש במקומו וקבץ נדחי ישראל הרי זה משיח בודאי
Translation: If a king will arise… and he will force all Israel to go in [the way of Torah] and to strengthen its weaknesses [maybe you can come up with a better word], and he will wage the wars of Hashem, then this person has the presumption of being Mashiach. If he did this, was successul and beat all the nations around him, built the Beis Hamkidosh in its place and gathered nidchei Yisrael, then he is certainlly Mashiach.
It says that he has to FIRST force all Israel to keep Torah and Mitzvos before he can be considered chezkas Mashiach. He also has to WAGE wars FIRST, but he doesn’t have to succeed in winning those wars in order to be bechezkas Mashiach! Then if he is successful in those wars and beats all the surrounding nations etc he is certainly Mashiach.
You can’t explain that the “success” mentioned by the Rambam is referring to “he will force”. It is clearly referring to success in waging wars, and this is also clear from the ensuing words.
Furthermore, the Lubavicher rebbe didn’t force ANYONE to keep Torah and Mitzvos. He encouraged and sent people to encourage, but he didn’t force, and the Rambam explicitly says “he will force”.
“Please see Reb Moshe’s Teshuva which explains that weapons are not required for moshiach as many kings have fought wars without any weapons and certainly moshiach doesnt need to.”
No one ruled out the Lubavicher rebbe as bechezkas Mashiach because he did not use weapons. We ruled it out because he did not wage wars, period.
“There is something weird about saying he isnt succeeding because for every frum jew he makes two jews who never heard of chabad intermarried…”
I don’t remember every word that every poster wrote, but regardless of what was said, your argument above is irrelevant. The Lubavicher rebbe did NOT force, and was NOT successful in getting all of Israel to keep Torah and Mitzvos. As long as there are Yidden who do not keep Torah and Mitzvos – and Rachmono litzlan most Yidden fall into this category – NO ONE can be considered bechezkas Mashiach!
“Your king argument is misplaced. This is a much deeper sugya than u realize i think.”
Funny, the Rambam was always the last word in Lubavich on the qualifications and identity of Mashiach, and he actually writes these halachos in Hilchos Melochim. Yet all of a sudden when he says “king” here it is open to interpretation and the sugya is deeper.
Do you realize that this is what I and others have been complaining about all the time? You interpret everything the way it suits you because the original premise – the Lubavicher rebbe is Mashiach – must be true, so anything that says otherwise is altered or ignored.
“The rebbe was zera dovid as again we have his familial records like anyone.”
You’re joking… aren’t you? What familial records? I find it hard to believe that a ksav yichus that someone CLAIMS to be true is good enough to say someone is certainly from zera Dovid.