The Five Most Likeliest Candidates to be Moshiach

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee The Five Most Likeliest Candidates to be Moshiach

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 409 total)
  • Author
  • #2173399

    Ben Toiro, have you seen my post?


    Ujm, it is highly problematic to believe in a second coming, as in, a messianic candidate would be identified, then die, and come back to finish his job. This is Christianity 101, and absolutely repudiated by the rishonim; the rambam, the rambaN in his vikuach, and loads more.

    The abarbanel is saying that Moshiach can be anyone, even someone who is brought back during techias hameisim. He doesn’t say that “moshiach will die and come back,” rather the language is “don’t be too surprised if moshiach will be from those who come to life during the techiah”

    Big difference. So much, that it is a different religion entirely.


    I have one observation.
    If moshiach can be from the dead I would defenitley choose Moshe Rabbeinu or Ezrah or one of the many tannoim over the Rebbe. Even his predecessors the Baal Hatanya or Tzemach Tzedek would come in first. Not to mention the Vilna Gaon.
    Why the Rebbe???
    This question always mistified me


    Avira, so you’re saying that if someone is called a Mashiach during their lifetime (like some Amoraim were), THAT disqualifies them from being able to be the Mashiach from Techiya?


    American, it’s because first there’s a personality cult. The lubavitcher rebbe made himself into a messianic figure, as the brisker rov said upon his ascension to the position.

    Lubavitchers literally believe that their last rebbe was greater than every tzadik in the last 2000 years, and have no bushah in saying so.


    Amir, you can ask the Gemara the same question. Why Daniel and not M”R or D”HM. Note that Mashiach is from shaivet Yehuda and M”R Rabbainu is from shaivet Laivi.

    The answer might be that if one accepts what Rambam says Mashiach will do, along with him also coming min hamasim, he will lead a Teshuva initiative at the end of galus for example. And based on the language of Rambam it is in a natural manner, as he says “he will ‘compel’ all of Binai Yisrael to go [in the ways of Torah]”. So one may purport that it is not happening at the time of his Techiya. But even the Teshuva thing doesn’t confirm him definitely the Mashiach, it is simply a condition to assume that someone is.

    So if one is presuming a Mashiach min hamasim..
    Short of completing the tasks that constitute the actual culmination of his coming (building the B”HM and bringing all Yiddin to E”Y) all the preliminary identifiers (learns Torah and performs Mitzvos like D”HM, promotes Teshuva..) one would argue are his original initiative in life, and as implied happen at the end of galus. Yet being these tasks do not confirm him 100% yet, he would still be the essence of “min hamasim” if he does the two last tasks after his Techiya.

    So saying the Rebbe will be the one min hamasim follows the spirit of the Gemara pointing to Daniel as a min hamasim example… by identifying relevant characteristics in his life related specifically to Mashiach (in his case Rambam’s characterization), and not simply applying one’s self as the measurer of the piety of the various righteous, which seems preposterous. But rather again, based on qualifiable factors of the person’s life directly related to the initiative of Mashiach.

    Footnote: based on the teaching that “even the smallest among you can revive the dead”, it may be that identifying the actual Mashiach based on the fulfilment of prerequisites (during his life), as Rambam brings, empowers his soul, and actually contributes to his Techiya, bringing about the building of the B”HM etc. Another level of “bringing Mashiach”.


    Avira, a personality cult??? Like Rebbe Akiva deciding to be a nosai kailim for Bar Kochba???

    Better their dedication than your cynicism!!!
    On that note, don’t be like servant who serves his master for a reward. (Your cynicism would dissipate by following this.)

    Hevai misabek baafar raglaihem.
    Hevai shose batzama es divraihem.
    …what you would call “a personality cult”!!!

    But for someone who isn’t accustomed to showing Kavod to Talmidai Chachamim before their very eyes, your handicap is no surprise.


    No one ever did mitzvos to please bar kochva.

    No one said that bar kochva was the greatest jew to live.

    No one carried around pictures of hin thinking that he will protect them after his death.

    No one followed him after his death.

    No one prayed to him when they were in trouble.

    No one thought that bar kochva knew their thoughts

    No one said that bar kochva is the essence of god wrapped in a body.


    Footnote on the previous comment: I did not intend to imply that those teachings are exclusive to Chassidus; by no means; but rather simply that some teachings are reserved or veiled in some circles, while commonplace or even core study in another.

    Menachem Shmei

    If the commenters here want to know the true opinions and answers of Lubavitch – talk to a real life Lubavitcher with brains (there are many such).

    If you want to know the opinion of internet posters on Lubavitch – check out the dozens of threads on YWN about Lubavitch (אין חדש תחת השמש).

    If you’re feeling pained that 3 weeks have gone by already without arguing about Lubavitch – go ahead, continue rehashing all the nonsense. אין לדבר סוף


    Dear Avira,

    No one? How would you know what his supporters were saying? We weren’t there. And they all (mostly) died along with him. So we don’t know how they would have reacted to his death. There are better analogies to today. I would love to see how you would twist yourself to answer for all the Accepted Rabbonim that went along with messianic movements. But more than that, I would love to know why your so troubled by it. Let Chabad be Chabad. You don’t care anyway.


    Replace the Rebbe with it being about someone’s righteous father and look at how heartless, cynical and bitter it shows you to be.
    Looks lve RDS: Rebbe derangement syndrome.

    Note: All know that M”R was the humblest of all as well as the only one reaching the highest level of Nevus. But if you mean “the wisest” do know that whoever he may be, Mashiach is certainly wiser than even Sh”HM. But again, at this point I’m not expecting you to know these things.

    I’ll give you credit for that last one though; since it takes some knowledge to understand it, and at this point we don’t have high expectations of you in this regard.

    Yisroel veOraisa veKudisha Brich Hu chad Hu intimates that Yiddin and Torah are part and parcel with the Atzmus of the Aibishter. And the Nasi Hador (whoever he may be) is the collective manifestation thereof; being an individual representation of the whole Am, and one who embodies the ratzon penimi of a Yid which is rooted in Atzmus.

    ALSO, this explains “veamaich kulam Tzaddikim” connected to “Tzaddik Hashem bechol derachav”, and “zedonos nasseh lo kezochiyos” when the shoresh/ratzon penimi of the Yid, Atzmus, is revealed.

    This is also elucidated in the highest level of the Neshama, Yechida, where the yetzer hara doesn’t reach, but rather it is kulo Tov.

    Again, you might not be privy to this, but know that that’s a chisaron in you, not them.

    I’m sharing the above as a courtesy and responsibility, not for additional ignorance and cynicism from you. Note: the latter is more egregious and the root of arrogant challenges rooted in ignorance. You can accept the above or delve into it on your own; but certainly spare me the “I know better” about things you only first learning from me. No, you don’t know everything. And being comfortably familiar with e.g. YvOvKBH… but not what is related above is no justification for arrogant cynicism. And if you’re jaded for never having been taught such pearls, now you know the value of a Chassidishe Chinuch as opposed to one rooted in Mussar.

    And now might be the time to let you know that I grew up in a cherishable Litvishe Mosad Chinuch (which one will be withheld so my ayin tov can proliferate more…); so rest assured I am not speaking from ignorance or opposition. It’s simply the nature of the two Derachim being Mussar is rooted in Yira and Chassidus is rooted in Ahava, and so their levels are inherent, in that Avoda maiAhava is the higher approach. Note: there is also Yira shebiYira, YshbA, AshbY & AshbA, so certainly no exceptions were made for each level. Also, it may be that throughout the course of our exchange my Litvishe background is more pronounced at times. I certainly would admit that it too can serve well, however we would surely both agree that this would have been more beneficial if I more consistently embodied my Chassidishe inspiration & [ever increasing] development.

    Should you be interested in answering this question…:

    Were you saying that if someone is called a Mashiach during their lifetime (like some Amoraim were), that one could argue that this disqualifies them from being able to be the Mashiach from Techiya?

    Note: feel free to defer.


    @benToiroh There is a simple solution to this argument that everyone is ignoring. Ask any non-Chabad Rov if they believe if the late Rav MM Schneerson ZT”L can be Moshiach. They will overwhelmingly answer in the negative. Press the issue and ask if it is within the boundaries of emunah to believe so. They will mostly answer that yes, it is a problem emunah wise if one believes that.

    What this means, is that we can split Torah fearing Jews of Klal Yisroel up into two camps: Those that have no problem accepted that a dead man can be (or is) Moshiach, and those that say absolutely not. At this point, it isn’t even an “Elu v’Elu Divrei Chaim” question, since the side that rejects the messianism believes the other side to be following a non-Torah path.

    So we are left with a choice. You can follow the Torah as it’s been interpreted and accepted by all of our Rabbonim since forever. Or you can follow a small subset of Rabbonim that have broken away from the klal and are no longer accepted as being part of it.



    Those who know things in Torah don’t use their knowledge to whack people over the head and make it look like they know better, questioning their mental abilities and saying things like “it might be a surprise to you,”

    It’s just childish grandstanding, and it shows not only a lack of knowledge, but a profound insecurity. It’s a bully mentality.

    I’ve responded to your interpretations, phantasmagorical as they might be, and I’ve entertained your messianic rantings, but if you want people to take you seriously, you need to cool it with the ad hominem stuff. It’s just embarrassing.

    Kabalah can be twisted into avodah zara very easily. If someone thinks that G-d can be divided in any way, even if he’s basing himself on mekubalim like the arizals comments on chelek elokah, such a person is still an oved avodah zara.

    It is avodah zara to say that Hashem has any body, or that any body reaches him. This is 13 ikkarim. A rebbe or any other tzadik is not god. He doesn’t have god in him, as Hashem cannot be contained, divided, be here and not there, etc..

    What the lubavitcher rebbe wrote was an answer to how a person is allowed to pray at the kever of a tzadik. Instead of going the normal route and saying that it’s either bzchus the tzadik or tbat you’re asking the tzadik to daven for you, the lubavitcher rebbe went into avodah zara and said you can daven there because you’re davening to god, because a rebbe is atzmus elokus, the essence of god, vos ehr hut areingeshtelt in a guf, which he has erapped himself in a body.

    And this is why many in neo chabad have no qualms about asking the rebbe to save them when they’re in trouble.

    And this is why some call him boreinu, our creator r”l.

    And no amount of being told that I don’t understand or don’t know will change that.


    It’s really immaterial where you came from; I’m responding to what you’re saying – you could be a chat GPT bot for all i know or care.


    Dear Yserbius,

    “we can split …… Klal Yisrael”

    Well yes we could do that. But why would anyone want to?


    “It is avodah zara to say that Hashem has any body, or that any body reaches him. This is 13 ikkarim. A rebbe or any other tzadik is not god. He doesn’t have god in him, as Hashem cannot be contained, divided, be here and not there, etc..”

    I agree with “a rebbe or any other tzadik is not god”. I can’t be sure that this a unanimous opinion. But as long as it is not associated with any form of actual worship, it is most definitely not avodah zara.


    Nom, for the same reason we need to break Christianity, islam, karaism, reform, and conservative off of the community. It’s alien, and the tolerance of institutionalized avodah zara or apikorsus is not only a chilul Hashem, but a stumbling block.


    Nom, a person believing in a god with a body, or believing in baal, is avodah zara regardless of if the person serves the deity.

    But here, they DO serve the deity. You’ll see lubavitchers say that they do mitzvos to please the rebbe. At a shluchim conference, an oved avodah zara prayed that the gathering be pleasing to the rebbe, and may he bless our efforts… Effectively a vehi noam. Shlomo cunin, chabad head of the West Coast, said after the Mumbai tragedy that the world will see that it’s the rebbe who runs the world.

    It’s there, and it runs deep. It went from personality cult to full on idolatry.


    Ben T., you quote Kabbalistic concepts here — excellent! Christianity and your Chabad avoda zora are all based on misunderstanig of exactly these concepts! How is your understanding of what your Rebbe is different from the concept of Trinity?


    Ben, on a different topic: did you ever wonder why most azahoros of TaNaCh and Chazal are on dererch ha’yirah?


    I do believe “Hashem has no body” is more complex than you think (we have many Gemaras, pesukim, and ma’amorim that refer to body parts when talking about Hashem). And I think it was one of the Ani Ma’amims that fell under a machlokes Rishonim. Still, there is universal agreement that Hashem absolutely does not have a body in the way we understand and does not C”V put himself into human form.

    Depends on how you define “worship”. I’m pretty sure that most poskim agree that saying a teffila asking for a bakosho from a dead person with the intent that the dead person can hear the teffila and act to fulfill the bakosho constitutes “worship”. Lubavitcher Rabbonim are literally the only Jews who disagree with that.It’s literally on the website of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe’s Ohel HaMeis and repeated in countless Chabad speeches and outreach programs available online. I’m just going to leave off with some Gan Izzy songs:

    His father hears and explains<br>
    “My dear son, there is one indeed<br>
    Since you’re a chossid, you’re personally loved<br>
    By the Rebbe, who cares for your needs”<br>

    To be a chossid I strive, to the Rebbe mekusher<br>
    To give over my life to the Rebbe’s avodah<br>
    I yearn to be close, my heart and my soul<br>
    A connection to the Rebbe I hold<br>

    Though now we don’t see the Rebbe lematah<br>
    In a guf physically, the work so much harder<br>
    But a talmid I am, his Torah I learn<br>
    While I eagerly await his return<br>

    Our Faithful Shepard won’t forsake his flock,<br>
    The Rebbe’s loving care will never stop,<br>
    In spite of the darkness, The Rebbe hears our cry,<br>
    For He is a diamond in the Rebbe’s eyes.<br>


    Ys, you are purporting that every “non-Chabad Rov” is ignorant of a befairush Gemara in Sanhedrin (98b), with Rashi there distinctly explaining the possibility.

    I simply don’t accept what you said for it being motzi Shem ra on all of Daas Torah.

    Furthermore, the Abarbanel, Yeshuos Meshicho and Sidai Chemed explicitly cite that Sugya as a source allowing for Mashiach coming min hamasim.

    So I simply do not accept that Daas Torah forgot a klur Sugya or would contradict the highly regarded Chachamim who explained it so plainly as to be unmistakenly applicable to Mashiach, whoever he is.

    Also note that the Rebbe concluded his first Maamar with “vehu yigalainu” in reference to his father-in-law, the Previous Rebbe, already after his petira.

    And to go so far as to claim “Emuna problems” and ch”vSh disregard a fellow Yid as a result is to be mechadesh Torah shelo keHalacha for which one loses their Chelek in Olam Haba. So that’s an ironic boomerang in that anyone who does so has earned by their code the very same treatment they relegated to another. Talk about “haposel bachaveiro bemumo posel”.

    And make no mistake: it is not even a “fringe opinion”, but rather a bluntly clear Gemara saying in the simplest terms that Mashiach might come min hamasim, and the Rashi there clarifies it further by taking it further into the clear meaning of the Gemara, indicating that it is definitely saying possibly so!

    Sanhedrin Daf Tzadik Yes Amud Bais:
    אמר רב אי מן חייא הוא כגון רבינו הקדוש אי מן מתיא הוא כגון דניאל איש חמודות
    Rav says, if [Mashiach] is from the living he would be like Rabbainu HaKadosh, and if [Mashiach] is from the dead he would be like Daniel Ish Chamudos.

    Note: without making even the slightest of adjustments to the implication of Rav’s statement, what he is quoted as saying is obvious. That Mashiach can come from the living or the dead. It is to avoid this obvious meaning that slight adjustments would be introduced. Rashi however makes adjustments in both directions and expands it to introduce two additional implications, one of which is presented as his preferred expansion, and even further solidifies the statement as allowing for Mashiach min hamasim.

    Rashi says:
    אם משיח מאותן שחיים עכשיו ודאי היינו רבינו הקדוש דסובל תחלואים וחסיד גמור הוה כדאמרינן בבבא מציעא (דף פה.)
    ואם היה מאותן שמתו כבר היה דניאל איש חמודות שנדון ביסורין ב אריות וחסיד גמור היה והאי כגון לאו דווקא
    ל”א כגון רבינו הקדוש כלומר אם יש דוגמתו בחיים היינו רבינו הקדוש ואם דוגמא הוא למתים היינו כגון דניאל איש חמודות

    …if [Mashiach] was from those who have died already he was Daniel Ish Chamudos who was judged with affliction in the lion’s den and he was fully pious. And in this meaning, “he would be like” is not necessarily applied (i.e. either like, or literally)…

    Rashi then goes on to offer another expansion, that Mashiach is being compared to a living or dead personality.
    Note that the plain meaning of Rav’s statement lands squarely in between the primary and secondary expansions of Rashi, and persists as the original statement.
    And again, the later Chachamim simply cite Rav’s statement at its face value, as indicating simply that Mashiach can fcome from the dead and be someone [else, who is] like Daniel Ish Chamudos.

    But it cannot be stressed enough that Rav’s statement, without adjustments, actually says “if he is from the dead … he is like …”, and Rashi draws this out to the point of demonstrating that, yes, “if Mashiach is from the dead…”.

    It’s in no way a hard Gemara. And with Rashi there are three take aways, Rav’s plain statement as is, Rashi’s first introduction further reinforcing the plain implication of the Gemara, and a *secondary* explanation that keeps the living Mashiach prominent. (Arguably because Mashiach will come from both the living and maybe also the dead. I.e. He will live and be known, and die, and then return for more.)

    In conclusion I would argue that during the life of Mashiach, the characteristics of R”HK are seen in him, and after his death the characteristics of Daniel Ish Chamudos are seen in him.
    E.g. if the Rebbe, when he was living he was mostly seen holding Rabbinic court; now he is more and more being seen in a different light from other aspects, such as every President inaugurating his birthday, or just recently every sitting US Governor getting together in one room to celebrate his birthday one year. ..just an example of how he can be seen in his life one way and differently now. Also as his Shluchim continually proliferate and grow in leadership/prominence and wisdom it affects the perspective of him. Bringing this into limited examples doesn’t do the point justice. Certainly now each person themself can maybe perceive in different ways how now we might see that back then he was unflinching in a proverbial lion’s den, whether spiritually facing some group issuing a cherem, or physically in danger of political assasination like so many lehavdil other radical social and political leaders were met with…
    …and this is only a sample..
    Another approach is that his personification in Techiya would be in a similar likeness to Daniel Ish Chamudos.


    We’re going in circles now; we’ve discussed the issues and nothing new is being brought to the table to consider. I’m not going to repeat everything i said above, but it is mind boggling that a person can think of a dead messiah as a “klohr sugya” when almost no seforim on bias hamoshiach even discuss it, and you have to search otzar hachochma to find a few mentions of it, one of which is saying the opposite of neo chabad dogma.

    ☕️coffee addict

    Now my question is if chabad is effectively Christianity with black hats why hasn’t there been someone like Paul (I think he’s the one that made Shabbos on Sunday) that veers it off from yiddishkeit


    pls remember for an every confused moschihist, there is another one who is walking around for the lost Jews based on the teachings and organizations formed by the same Rebbe. Most of other observant Jews live comfortable lives in their shuls disregarding maybe 4 mln of Yidden who are in the process of being totally lost, maybe outsourcing the effort to “kiruv” organizations. _If_ the L Rebbe is on the short list for M, then it would be for this effort, not for the pilpul of differences between Paul and Peter.


    Coffee, you’re going out on a limb to say that paul really did that; it’s not as if it’s in chazal… it’s a theory from a prominent frum historian and talmid chacham, but i wouldn’t take it as a given.

    But leshitascha, i think chabad is not irredeemable, pardon the pun. They still keep halacha and believe in torah she baal peh, which makes them able to be saved…could be in a few decades people will wake up, and the tzfas-nik chabadskers will, indeed, be a different religion, like shabsai tzvi followers post-conversion to islam.



    You are telling people that being called Mashiach during one’s life precludes the person from being Mashiach min hamasim!

    You are telling people that Rav & Rashi do not say that Mashiach can come min hamaisim!

    You are apparently about to tell people that Kudisha Berich Hu is not Atzmus!

    You have no idea what you said!

    Mdd: “Yisrael .. vKB”H chad HU!!!”

    You have no idea what you said!


    @benTorioh You didn’t address a single thing I’ve said! I’m not talking about whether Moshiach will be from the Mechayeh Meisim or before. I’m talking about worshipping dead people. And I stand by that. There is no non-Chabad frum Rov who will say that people in Shomayim watch what’s going on in the world, listen to teffilos directed towards them, and respond to those bakoshois.

    You’re the one being motzei shem ra. The criticism of Chabad for these actions and beliefs is extremely well known and as universal as possible. You’re saying that all these chashuva chashuva Gaonim don’t understand a pashuteh Gemara!?


    Yserb, i have to disagree with you on one point; people in shomayim do look down at the world sometimes and are shown things, especially the lives of family members. But they’re not clairvoyant and are only aware of what they’re shown.


    Ben, you do not know what you are talking about! You can not just pull out a quote from a Kabbolah seifer and take it ke’pshuto!! Any half am ha’orez knows that. What do you think I and Avira and a multitude of others do not know these statements?


    Avira > it’s a theory from a prominent frum historian and talmid chacham,

    I am not sure who your source is, but this is described in at least a medieval Jewish source of unknown (at least to me) origin. It is pretty hilarious – describing every action of paul and peter as a step in separating the new religion from us.


    Ben T, you won’t convince people with obscure references. You have higher chance if people see how you behave and learn according to your Rebbe’s teaching. Then, all Yiddishe mamas in the street will be pointing to their children – do you want to be an Erliche Yid and a Talmid Chacham like that chosid? Then, everyone will eventually become a follower of your Rebbe and you can vote for a Moschiach of your choice. Hatzlaha. Start with helping the old lady cross the street and open a sefer.


    @AviraDeArah Yes, that is true, I should have clarified. Some Neshomos in Shomayim do have a view and understanding of some of the things going on on Earth. However, as far as we know it’s extremely limited.


    Dear Yserbius,

    “There is no non-Chabad frum Rav”

    Meron and the Zohar for starters.

    Unfortunately, your in the minority here.


    Dear Mdd,

    Get a better computer program. I have wondered why most azharos in NaCH, are not on inyanei yirah. Then I found that there is much discussion on the matter.


    Dear Coffee,

    Because they have their own communal network. That is used by all segments of Jews. Except for those that have their own dead leaders.


    Aaq, rav rottenberg, author of toldos am olam wrote about it, and as far as i know it was his own theory. Do you know where it is said in the rishonim? Or by medieval did you mean a secular or unreliable jewish source?


    See here for wishing for the dead a good feeling (תנ):


    It is astounding that one would assume that Torah Yiddin, Talmidai Chachamim who have our treasured Yiddishe sensitivities would do anything but look to Torasainu HaKedosha guidance on what is Pious conduct in this regard.

    So far we’re batting 100!

    With regard to a related subject: “Tzaddik yesod olam”, & “Tzaddika deispatar ishtakach bechulo olmin yatir maibichayohe”!

    Please remember to share with me the secret proprietary Litvish tietch for “YvOvKBH”ChH”.


    @n0mesorah Those who interpret your sources, like the Zohar, to state that a neshoma can see and act in the manner which many Chabad Chassidim attribute to their late Rebbe, is exclusive to Chabad. No non-Chabad Rov interprets them as such. Neshomos have a very limited view into this world.


    besides the zohar, chazal are replete with stories of tzadikim davening on behalf of klal yisroel…by the churban beis hamikdash, the avos, moshe, etc…davened, and only rochel was answered. many such stories, and this is part of why some hold you can ask a tzadik by his kever to daven for you, but nowhere does it say that the tzadik himself answers and fulfills your requests…that would be a violation of the 13 ikkarim, as the rambam says you can only daven to Hashem.

    and yes, a tzadik can accomplish more in shomayim…through his davening…oy, why do i have to explain this?

    As it happens to be, that zohar is not pashut, because there are seforim which say that as tzadikim grow higher and higher in shomayim, they lose the ability to daven for people, because they see how what we consider to be suffering is ultimately for the best.

    but I suppose some tzadikim, such as the avos, etc…, are on an even higher level, where they can see how it’s good but still feel the pain of regular people….this is just my own theory; i have no idea what goes on in shomayim.

    and I’ll humor our friend a little more – what do you intend to take out from the sefer you linked to? it’s about moving meisim, the pain they might feel, which circumstances you can move them, when it might be pleasing to the meis, etc…

    what does that have to do with their ability to help you directly or have absolute insight of what goes on in the world all the time?

    absolutely nothing, of course. But it’s an interesting teshuvah regardless, so thanks for sharing!



    See here for beseeching the living:
    https://www.sefaria. org/Bava_Batra.116a.15?lang=bi

    See here for beseeching the dead:
    https://www. sefaria. org/Taanit.16a.7?lang=bi

    See here for davening to Tzaddikim:
    https://www.sefaria. org/Sotah.34b.7?lang=bi

    For sure see here {15-17}:
    https://www.sefaria .org/Jeremiah.31.15?lang=bi

    Also see here for communicating with the dead:
    https://www.sefaria .org/Berakhot.18b.14?lang=bi
    And see here:
    https://www.sefaria .org/Shulchan_Arukh%2C_Yoreh_De’ah.179.14?lang=bi


    Absolutely see here:
    https://www.rashbi .org/holysites-kever-rachel

    And see here for extended reading:
    https://www.chabad .org/library/article_cdo/aid/562222/jewish/Is-it-okay-to-ask-a-deceased-tzaddik-to-pray-on-my-behalf.htm

    ☕️coffee addict

    Isn’t it a Gemara in brachos that neshamos don’t care about what goes on down here?

    And additionally what is this about davening that a neshoma helps, davening is to Hashem in the merit of the neshoma


    If you listen to the “stump the rabbi” videos, one of them by Rabbi Yosef Paltiel states that everyone agrees that the Rebbe is still alive, just a question of what to tell outsiders. So the Abarbanel and similar views are irrelevant as the die-hard meshichists believe that the Rebbe is alive.


    Does it seem weird to our friend that every single gemara he quoted talks about the tzadikim davening on our behalf? Not a single place in chazal, rishonim or achronim say you can daven to a tzadik so that HE could help you, rather that he should daven for you to Hashem, the only one to whom prayer is suitable.

    And even still, many rishonim held the halacha is not like that, and that you cannot speak to tzadikim at all; in this regard, there are different minhagim, each valid.


    Dear Yserbius,

    Go look what goes on in Meron every year.

    And I wasn’t referencing The Zohar.

    Go look how most of RWO approaches the Zohar.

    These two examples clearly illustrate that modern day Jews, still do not separate commemorating the dead from worship.


    This controversy extended to the inclusion of machnisei rachamim, which was a huge machlokes, because while all we’re doing is asking the malaachim to bring our tefilos to Hashem and to daven for us, it’s still a big issue.

    But no one says that you can pray to anything besides Hashem. It’s all over the rambam; it’s avodah zara and against his 13 ikkarim… Take a look at the siddur, it’s ikkar number 4… Only Hashem is fit to daven to.

    This means that people who actually pray to tzadikim have forfeited their place in klal yisroel.


    @coffee-addict Is that the Gemara about the man who overheard the neshomos of two girls talking and it took them three years to realize that someone was listening?


    Ben, it is a statement from the Zohar! These are very deep, not- simple yinyonim. For the third time — you can’t just pull out a Kabbolah statement, read it literally and draw conclusions. That is why Chazal (second perek of Chagigah) held that sisrei Torah are to be told only to few select individuals.


    Avira, I think I was recalling ספר תולדות ישו, and wiki says it is indeed 10th century at least, maybe 6th to 9th, and possibly a combination of earlier sources. Author unknown, or mahybe a combination of multiple sources,

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 409 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.