@ARSo
@philosopher
@menachem
@qwerty
Looked at this whole Yaakov Lo Met business.
I simply cannot understand the whole hullaballoo.
Rashi on humash is medayek that since it does not say vayamat [he died], rather vayigva [he expired] by yaakov. that tells us yaakov did not die.
Rashi in ta’anit 5B says that although yaakov was embalmed , the embalmers did not notice and thought he had died. [nidmeh la’hem]
So, we do know that ‘something’ happened to yaakov.
What is that ‘something’ ?
It says vayigva, vaye’osef el amav.
It’s not death.
But it is so similar to death, that the embalmers were tricked into believing that it was actual death.
It is my belief that embalmers are in close proximity of the body they are embalming.
If there was a heartbeat and / or breathing, they ‘d notice.
Seems that there was no heartbeat and no breathing , which normally would be an indication of death as we know it.
Nevertheless since RASHI tells us that there was no death , we have to say that there was , as a nes, especially for yaakov ‘s sake, a new situation whereby there was a measure of life in yaakov’s body although his vital signs did stop.
Thats why the passuk says vayigva , he expired and not that he died.
So, he did not need to breathe after his expiry , nor did his heart need to beat.
But the source for yakov avinu being considered as “not died”, is strong – A passuk in humash.
To say the same for any other mortal, you will need a source at least as strong.
So can we say that the object of “wrongful deification” and “wrongful messiahfication”, also did not die ?
That should rightfully be called “wrongful expiryfication.”
Hope the above will succeed in putting things into perspective.
================
Bearing in mind that I saw it brought down from Rav Chida in his Shem HaGdolim quoting sources that RASHI’s peirush on Ta’anit is not from RASHI himself, and is mistakenly meyuchas to RASHI.