Rotten Orthodoxy : The Heresy of Open Orthodoxy

[muman613]

Last night I downloaded and listened to Chaims presentation of Ask JTF. One question posed to Chaim asked what he thought of the 'Modern Orthodox' strain of Judaism. I, for the most part, have never had a problem with 'Modern Orthodox' and I actually support a few of their Rabbis with Tzedakah during the year. Chaim gave an honest answer but left off the comment with remarks I didn't fully agree with (but that is another issue). Chaim basically said that the 'Modern Orthodox' in Israel 'worship' the state. He also mentioned Rabbi Kook who I believed was a 'Religious Zionist' rabbi who was Chassidic who today is a model for the settlers in Judea and Samaria. But I digress...

Today I read an article (which I will repost below) which explains about 'Open Orthodoxy' movement which is moving quickly along the lines of Deformed Judaism. Recently one leading OO Rabbi published a research article where he suggests the Torah was written by multiple authors, and is not the Torah given from Hashem to Moses at Sinai. This is HERESY according to Orthodox Judaism as it is clearly stated in RAMBAMS 13 principles that belief in the divine origin of the Torah is essential for Jewish faith. Feminism, Homosexual Rights and Marriage, and other abominations are taking hold within this rotten, putrid form of 'Open Orthodoxy'.

I cannot REBUKE any Jew so much as to say STAY AWAY FROM OPEN ORTHODOX 'JUDAISM'. Stay far, far away from this heresy. Anyone who believes any of that treif is making a grave mistake and abandoning the mesorah of our faith. Judaism has only been held together by those who keep the Torah, and believe there is divinity in it's pages.

Read this article and WEEP again at the lost souls being created by this travesty..



Openness versus Heresy

The Rambam's 13 Principles of Faith include believing that the Torah was God's creation.
From Rabbi Avraham Gordiner

Heresy is emanating from the heart of the YCT rabbinic world. No, this time we are not dealing with Open Orthodoxy (as YCT founder Rabbi Avi Weiss refers to his movement) innovating novel practices that can sort of be reconciled with minority or exotic halakhic opinions, nor are we dealing with Open Orthodoxy promoting yet another new brand of controversial inclusiveness or further blazing socio-religious trails that mainstream Orthodoxy and its halakhic leadership deem as beyond the pale.

This time, we are dealing with denial of the singular Divine authorship of the Torah – heresy of the highest order – publicly espoused in writing by one of Open Orthodoxy’s most prominent rabbinic leaders. And we are also dealing with the rest of Open Orthodox rabbinic leadership refusing to condemn this heresy in its midst.

Rabbi Zev Farber, PhD., who holds Yoreh Yoreh and Yadin Yadin semicha from Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, is coordinator of the Vaad Hagiyur of International Rabbinic Fellowship and is an IRF board member, and is an Advisory Board member of Yeshivat Maharat. Rabbi Farber recently published a brief article entitled “The Opening Of Devarim: A Recounting Or Different Version Of The Wilderness Experience?” in which he addresses textual differences between the events recounted in Parshas Devarim and the presentation of these events in earlier parts of the Torah.

Several examples: The Torah in Sefer Shemos refers to Mount Sinai as “Sinai” and in Sefer Devarim, the mountain is termed “Chorev”; the court system in Sefer Shemos is presented as Yisro’s idea, whereas in Sefer Devarim, it seems to be presented as Moshe’s idea, as it is not attributed there to Yisro; Sefer Bamidbar presents the dispatching of scouts to explore Eretz Yisroel as Hashem’s idea, whereas in Sefer Devarim, Moshe attributes this endeavor to the people; Sefer Bamidbar describes the confrontation with Edom following B’nei Yisroel’s request to pass through Edom’s territory, whereas Sefer Devarim omits mention of this confrontation; in Sefer Devarim, Moshe states that Hashem commanded him to fight Sichon, whereas this command is absent in Sefer Bamidbar, where it appears that the battle with Sichon was a consequence of his own belligerence; etc.

A typical Orthodox Jew would reconcile these apparent differences by working within the system, realizing that these differences are not contradictions, and turning for elaboration to the commentators, Meforshim, who address these issues. Furthermore, Sefer Devarim is Mishneh Torah – Restatement of the Torah – and as such, by definition is somewhat of an interpretation and an elucidation of events, geared to a different generation and emphasizing certain things while omitting others.

Rabbi Farber adopts what he terms the “academic approach” to understand the above differences. Shockingly, he writes:

"The simplest explanation for these differences between the accounts in Exodus-Numbers and Deuteronomy is that they were penned by (at least) two different authors with different conceptions of the desert experience."

Then, after presenting a two-paragraph synopsis of the narrative of Parshas Devarim, Rabbi Farber concludes with his “Summary” section:

"Despite sharing many details with the desert story as told in Exodus and Numbers, there is no way to make the two versions work with each other without unreasonably stretching the meaning of the texts. Whether it be the description of the scout story, the reaction of the Edomites and Moabites to Israel’s request, or the legitimacy of dwelling in the Transjordan, the two versions work with contradictory assumptions."

Rabbi Farber writes that the Torah was penned by at least two different authors, and that its sections are irreconcilably contradictory. This is heresy. (Rabbi Farber, in another exposition about Parshas Devarim further demonstrates his approach of denial of the singular Divine authorship of the Torah, writing that the Torah reflects a “multivocality of a work redacted from disparate sources”.)

While it is a grave sin and a tragedy for any Jew to espouse heresy, especially if he is a rabbi, it is important to realize that Rabbi Farber is the most accomplished, high-ranking and showcased YCT graduate out there: he is the only person ever to have been ordained by YCT with Yadin Yadin semicha, qualifying him as a dayan; he regularly publishes articles in Open Orthodoxy’s journals and is a staff writer for Morethodoxy, the Open Orthodox hashkafa website; his role as the head of the IRF geirus authority is extremely significant. Rabbi Farber, quite arguably YCT’s most scholarly and eminent rabbinic graduate, is Open Orthodoxy’s greatest “poster boy”, if one can employ such terminology.

For these reasons in particular, and in light of Rabbi Farber’s general high-profile and authoritative role in the Open Orthodox rabbinate and its IRF and Yeshivat Maharat affiliates, one would hope and expect that YCT and IRF leadership would condemn Rabbi Farber’s words in no uncertain terms and disassociate from the heresy espoused by Rabbi Farber that the Torah is a man-made document (“penned by (at least) two different authors with different conceptions of the desert experience”).

The jarring reality is that YCT and IRF leadership have refused to speak up on the issue and condemn this open heresy in its midst, despite having been apprised of it a week ago (and perhaps even prior) and despite its being disseminated in a very public manner.

It is time for Open Orthodoxy’s leadership to reassess the direction of the movement and take strong steps to redirect it, for articles such as that of Rabbi Farber are way beyond being described as “Far Left” Orthodox or representing the “Reform branch of Orthodoxy”, as some have referred to Open Orthodoxy. (But see here and here.)

We have witnessed Open Orthodoxy break ground by welcoming the leadership of Jewish Theological Seminary and Hebrew Union College as “honored guests” at YCT’s first chag ha-semicha, where these Reform and Conservative leaders danced in celebration with the YCT musmachim (YCT Newsletter Spring 2006), to engaging in interfaith activity that goes way beyond what Rav Soloveitchik permitted, as described here, here, and here; to devoting massive efforts to fighting “Homophobia” (going back to a shocking article about this in the 2005 YCT Newsletter, which featured a YCT campus rabbi’s extensive support of LGBT groups; (see also); to advocating changes in geirus requirements here, and here and here; to suggesting significantly modifying parts of the morning berachos here and here; to promoting the celebration of homosexual lifecycle events here and here; to advocating recognition of “gay marriage” here and hereand here; to halakhically rationalizing the homosexual act and encouraging gay relationships (and see here and here); to attacking statements in Tanach and Chazal and disparaging our liturgy here and here; to advocating for feminization of the synagogue and tefillah; to having women serve as chazzan for male-female services here and here; to ordaining women; to expressing discomfort and dismissive attitudes regarding Talmudic opinions that do not conform with modern liberal sensibilities here pg.36 of this; to slandering the character of the Avos and Imahos here and here and here; to somewhat celebrating intermarriage; to its most accomplished musmach now writing outright heresy that denies the singular Divine authorship of the Torah.

The total degeneration of commitment to belief and tradition that took the Conservative movement well over a century to undergo is being accomplished by Open Orthodoxy in about one short decade.

How did this all happen? There appear to be two factors at play:

Agenda-driven Judaism: Rather than surrendering (to use Rav Soloveitchik’s terminology) to the yoke and objective directives of halakha, Open Orthodoxy first set forth its goals (feminism, egalitarianism, etc.) and then tried to fit the halakha into them. Picking and choosing opinions and authorities that meet a predetermined agenda rather than submitting to the Torah’s values and dictates regardless of what they state, leads one to Reform his Judaism and eventually craft (or “Reconstruct”) it as he sees fit. As the Rav homiletically commented, “Kavata itim l’Torah?” implies, “Did you make the values of the times fit into the values of the Torah, or did you try to fit the Torah into the values of the times?”

Mesorah-light Judaism: Many of the innovations of Open Orthodoxy have been defended and justified by Open Orthodox leadership due to these innovations not being technically codified in sifrei halakha as prohibited or invalid; Open Orthodox leadership has consistently dismissed claims that its controversial innovations are problematic because they violate Mesorah, the uncodified part of Torah. (See here and here.)

This cavalier approach, of denying that there is more to halakha than one can find on a sefarim shelf and denying that deference to Torah tradition and to greater Torah authorities are part of the bricks and mortar of Orthodoxy, has led to a total disconnect and the spinning off a very foreign ideology under the term “Orthodox”. Without a sense of connection, fidelity and reverence toward the Ba’alei Ha-Mesorah and their methodology, Torah study and theology become a free-for-all, such that radical and heretical approaches emerge.

One can follow the paths of distortion of Torah straight to the door of Yeshivat Maharat. As Yeshivat Maharat’s graduates and students now begin to publish essays about women in the rabbinate and the role of women as halakhic authorities (see, for example, and a whole collection of related writings), the very problematic message of personal subjectivity in halakha rather than submission to the objective Divine halachic mandate is very clear.

These Yeshivat Maharat writings approach Torah She-b’al Peh as a misogynistic, man-made body of laws that egregiously lack women’s input, arguing that women’s voices must contribute in order to (re)shape halakha. Halakha is denigrated in this Yeshivat Maharat literature as an unfair system that needs female input in order to become equitable, with the Yeshivat Maharat literature glorifying the Maharat women as comparable to heroic abortionists fighting for women’s rights in an oppressive male-dominated society.

This halakhic subjectivism, distorted understanding and disparagement of Torah She-b’al Peh are precisely what the Conservative movement has historically invoked in justifying its gradual abandonment of halakha, and are extremely antithetical to Orthodox belief. Disparagement of the Chachmei Ha-Mesorah as misguided chauvinists, as the Yeshivat Maharat literature presents things, is outright heresy, as shown here in the thought of Rav Soloveitchik zt”l, and here and undermines any sense of belief and real acceptance of Torah law.


Yeshivat Maharat writings approach Torah She-b’al Peh as a misogynistic, man-made body of laws that egregiously lack women’s input.

Whither does Open Orthodoxy view itself headed? These words from Rabbi Asher Lopatin, incoming president of YCT, are quite foreboding:

But my dream is to have Hebrew Union College, the Jewish Theological Seminary, Hadar, and Chovevei on one campus, to move in together. We’d each daven in our own ways, but it could transform the Upper West Side.

There is not much more to say. The path to abandonment of Orthodoxy has been set in motion, and the ball is in the court of Open Orthodoxy’s leadership. Serious introspection and swift action are indeed needed.

Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer is a member of the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America and a member of the New York Bar.

[muman613]

I just posted a talk given by a Breslov Rabbi who addresses this very topic at one point during his 1 hour talk.

I believe the part which talks about this starts around 30min into the talk. But I recommend watching the entire thing, the Rabbi addresses several important topics facing the religious Jewish world.

http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,64584.msg603252.html#msg603252

[Sveta]

"Open Orthodoxy"?? I am glad that I never heard of these people but it is very troubling that now the heresy is starting to creep up on the term "Orthodox", what's next- "Modern Chassidic"?? "Reform Yeshivish"?

Here is the main issue I have with this after the entire heresy aspect of it. At least a messianic church has "messianic" in there and I know to avoid it. But "Open Orthodox" does not sound off on my radar because it contains orthodox. And that is what troubles me the most! That people will see "Orthodox" and think it's ok.
It's obviously not, but how are we supposed to know. I never heard of these people before, I would have just assumed it was some Orthodox Organization.

Thank you for the heads up!

[Zelhar]

I think the Torah was penned by different people through a long period of time. Now I am just a skeptic, I don't pretend to be orthodox or any other type of religious person.

I also have a question to religious Jews: Where does it say in the Torah it was all given at one piece to one person ?

I also think that the Rambam's 13 articles of Jewish faith are not to be held as canonical theology. It can help you get a very concise understanding of the Jewish faith but if you make it canonical document you demean the Torah and the authentic faith that had preceded the Rambam. Take note that before Rambam there were other sages who came up with different set of principles, that for example doesn't include his statement about the Torah nor about resurrection.

[Dr. Dan]

I suggest an easy read called "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt".  This is for any of who even had an ounce of skepticism even in Gd's existence. It's a book which logically argues that Gd exists and that Gd is a "Jewish" Gd.

Let us know your thoughts. 

Good posts, muman. Just when I though leaving the conserved movement to upgrade to so called deformed modern orthodox just as a transition. It's a tough world out there and for the past 10 yrs especially the last 4, have not participated on any synagogue nor temple except for Yom Kippur Nehila. My only temple is JTF and my rabbi is Meir Kahane.

I think the Torah was penned by different people through a long period of time. Now I am just a skeptic, I don't pretend to be orthodox or any other type of religious person.

I also have a question to religious Jews: Where does it say in the Torah it was all given at one piece to one person ?

I also think that the Rambam's 13 articles of Jewish faith are not to be held as canonical theology. It can help you get a very concise understanding of the Jewish faith but if you make it canonical document you demean the Torah and the authentic faith that had preceded the Rambam. Take note that before Rambam there were other sages who came up with different set of principles, that for example doesn't include his statement about the Torah nor about resurrection.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

That's Avi Weiss's nonsense.  They also ordain women.   Even the modern orthodox world (the mainstream part) considers them nuts.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I think the Torah was penned by different people through a long period of time. Now I am just a skeptic, I don't pretend to be orthodox or any other type of religious person.

I also have a question to religious Jews: Where does it say in the Torah it was all given at one piece to one person ? 

Actually it doesn't (at least not the first part of your question).  In fact it seems from the views of chazal and rishonim such as Ramban (and I think their explanation is undeniable) that different parts of the Torah were given in different locations - For example there was the Sinai event, and then Moshe received further prophecies in the tent of meeting and their appearance in the Torah at later points represent the first time he announced them publicly to the whole people.  (Example, Parshat Devarim and Vetchanan).     But the narrative makes it pretty clear IMO that Moshe is the one who received all of the prophecies and wrote the whole Torah, with the exception of the part about his death (and that is where there is disagreement among the sages because it seems like that may have been written by someone else such as Joshua).    Aside from that small part about Moshe's death, how does one get the idea from the text itself that anyone else could have written it?  I think that's simply mistaken.    And I do think Chazal stress the single authorship of Moshe as fundamental.

There is a gemara which cites a "machloket" between Resh Lakish and Rabbi Yochanon about the compilation of the Torah.  One says Moshe received it megilla by megilla and then redacted them into one text.  The other says it wasn't until the end of the 40-year period that Moshe wrote it all down at once.    Rabbi Meir Triebitz has a lecture series on this subject which may interest you.    He actually says that this is not a machloketh but in fact they are stressing two different aspects of text creation which both took place in this case.    And that an oral tradition (of written Torah itself) existed before the written Torah was converted into a text format.   So for example, Moshe received some commandments from Hashem which the whole people didn't necessarily hear, and only later revealed these to them in the Midbar.    It was like a torah shebaal peh between Hashem and Moshe.   

I have my own hypothesis on this subject to add to what he is teaching but I'm still working on it.

http://www.hashkafacircle.com/category/written-law/page/2/   shiur 1
http://www.hashkafacircle.com/category/written-law/     shiurim 2-10

I also think that the Rambam's 13 articles of Jewish faith are not to be held as canonical theology. It can help you get a very concise understanding of the Jewish faith but if you make it canonical document you demean the Torah and the authentic faith that had preceded the Rambam. Take note that before Rambam there were other sages who came up with different set of principles, that for example doesn't include his statement about the Torah nor about resurrection.

Speaking of the 13 ikarim, you also might like this series http://www.hashkafacircle.com/category/ikarim/
Although it's 19 lectures, the 19th and final one gives a good overview.   You might find yourself in agreement with this rabbi's point of view.   

There indeed has been some disagreement over the articles of faith over the centuries.  But if I'm not mistaken, isn't resurrection of the dead a universally accepted concept of Judaism?    (Although admittedly maybe not an ikkar of faith, I'm not familiar with the non-Rambam sources on that.  Marc Shapiro wrote a book on this subject).

Either way, what YCT is doing is simple leftism for the sake of american cultural values IMO.

[Dr. Dan]

Besides the Oral and Written Torah were received at Sinai.

Some say that written Torah is nothing more than the "cliff notes" of the oral Torah.  So even if there was multiple authorship, it doesn't change the divineness of any Torah that was received and passed down through the generations, as predicted would happen against all odds.

[Zelhar]

Besides the Oral and Written Torah were received at Sinai.

Some say that written Torah is nothing more than the "cliff notes" of the oral Torah.  So even if there was multiple authorship, it doesn't change the divineness of any Torah that was received and passed down through the generations, as predicted would happen against all odds.

It is a charedism sort of approach to demean the Torah as just a cliff note to halacha. The fact that the written Torah was preserved on text so meticulously and has always been regarded as the holiest text shows it is means more then cliff notes to Judaism.

[Zelhar]

I agree that the prophesies (aside from the Torah) are major part of Judaism but they are not an essential part they are more like spiritual guidance. All the mitzvot are already in the Torah. You could erase everything in the bible except the Torah and still follow Judaism to the letter.

Why is that heresy to say I don't believe the prophets literally spoke about mashiach, or resurrection ? To me at least the text is not clear and I cannot know for sure what they meant. I don't know of any mitzva to believe in some ambiguous statement about some event taking place on some undetermined. There is a mitzva to do all that the sages order (which means Jews must follow the halacha), it doesn't say to think the way they do or believe in every concept they develop.

[muman613]

I agree that the prophesies (aside from the Torah) are major part of Judaism but they are not an essential part they are more like spiritual guidance. All the mitzvot are already in the Torah. You could erase everything in the bible except the Torah and still follow Judaism to the letter.

Why is that heresy to say I don't believe the prophets literally spoke about mashiach, or resurrection ? To me at least the text is not clear and I cannot know for sure what they meant. I don't know of any mitzva to believe in some ambiguous statement about some event taking place on some undetermined. There is a mitzva to do all that the sages order (which means Jews must follow the halacha), it doesn't say to think the way they do or believe in every concept they develop.

Your approach is what leads to Deform and other forms of Heresy. Maybe you don't realize it. Judaism is much more than the Torah as you assume. Judaism is a system of mesorah (tradition passed down in a lineage from father to son from Moses to Today). The Torah is just Five books and Judaism is much much more than these five books, and this is why we (Orthodox) call the Torah cliff notes, because the Torah doesn't expound on the mitzvot other than to just mention them. The Karaites and Samaritans (who are virtually extinct today) believed only in the Written law, so they ate cold meals in the dark on Shabbat, they didn't know to wear Tefillin or put up mezuzahs because the Torah doesn't explain what they are.

Obviously the Torah is a part of a much larger system. Without the Oral law as we have in the Talmud we would not be able to observe the commandments. There would be much doubt about what constitutes 'honoring your parents' and what 'loving G-d' means (both actual written commandments).

Denying the spiritual and prophetic aspect of Judaism is just as dangerous as following reform. Those who dryly follow halachic mitzvahs without having the spiritual knowledge to better the world are not doing any great deed. Mitzvot require Kevannah just like prayer, which is why we must say a Brachot on every mitzvah.

I realize you are a secular Israeli Zelhar, and I don't expect you to change by reading my writing, but Judaism includes belief in Resurrection of the Dead and the coming of Moshiach. We have held these beliefs from time immemorial and it is the reason the Jewish people are still alive today. The prophets promised us that the day will come when Hashem sends us redemption through the Moshiach.

PS: It is incorrect to disrespect the 13 principals of Rambam. These principles have been UNIVERSALLY accepted by all strains of Orthodox Judaism.

[muman613]

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/jewfaq/beliefs.htm

What Do Jews Believe?

Level:  Basic

This is a far more difficult question than you might expect.  Torah has no dogma, no formal set of beliefs that one must hold to be a Jew.  In Torah, actions are far more important than beliefs, although there is certainly a place for belief within Torah.

The closest that anyone has ever come to creating a widely-accepted list of Jewish beliefs is Maimonides' thirteen principles of faith.  Maimonides' thirteen principles of faith, which he thought were the minimum requirements of Jewish belief, are:

* God exists
* God is one and unique
* God is incorporeal
* God is eternal
* Prayer is to be directed to God alone and to no other
* The words of the prophets are true
* Moses' prophecy is better than any other prophet's
* The Written Torah (first 5 books of the Bible) and Oral Torah (teachings all recorded in the Talmud and other ancient writings, all summarized in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah) were given to Moses
* There will be no other Torah
* God knows the thoughts and deeds of men
* God will reward the good and punish the wicked
* The Mashiach will come
* The dead will be resurrected

As you can see, these are very basic and general principles.  Yet as basic as these principles are, the necessity of believing each one of these has been disputed at one time or another, and the liberal movements of Judaism dispute many of these principles.

Unlike many religions, Torah does not focus much on abstract cosmological concepts.  Although Jews have certainly considered the nature of God, man, the universe, life, and the afterlife at great length, there is no mandated, official, definitive belief on these subjects, outside of very general concepts such as the thirteen listed above.  There is substantial room for personal opinion on all of these matters, because as said before, Torah is more concerned about actions than beliefs.

Torah focuses on relationships:

* the relationship between God and mankind (both as individuals and as groups)
* between human beings (whether Jews, or Gentiles, or both)
* between God and the Jewish nation
* between the Jewish nation and the Land of Israel

Our scriptures tell the story of the development of these relationships, from the time of creation

* through the creation of the relationship between God and Noah (relevant even today to Gentiles in the Seven Laws of Noah)
* through the creation of the relationship between God and Abraham (relevant today mostly to Jews, but also to Arabs who circumcise)
* to the creation of the special relationship between God and the Jewish people in the full set of 613 commandments of the Torah (binding on Jews, but also recommended to Gentiles who wish to gain extra rewards from God)

The scriptures also specify the mutual obligations created by these relationships, although various movements of Judaism disagree about the nature of these obligations.  Some say they are absolute, unchanging laws from God (Orthodox); some say they are laws from God that change and evolve over time (Conservative); some say that they are guidelines that you can choose whether or not to follow (Reform, Reconstructionist).  For more on these distinctions, see Movements of Judaism.

Maimonides' position in Mishneh Torah is that while the core of the Law is fixed for all time, there is room for rabbinical legislation and interpretation.  This is rather like seeing the God-given Written Law and Oral Law as a constitutional framework for legislation; in this case, the constitution is fixed for all time without amendments, unlike a man-made constitution, but its understanding and application are not inflexible, when a Supreme Rabbinical Court (or Sanhedrin) exists.  Only this position fully fits the evidence in the ancient Oral-Law literature, in our opinion.  Unfortunately, we have not had a Sanhedrin for about 1500 years, so that as a practical matter, the Law is not given to change today.

So, what are these actions that Torah is so concerned about?  These actions include the 613 commandments given by God in the Written Torah as well as laws instituted by the rabbis.  These actions are discussed in some depth on the page regarding Halakhah (Jewish Law) and the pages following it.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

"Numbers 24:17 “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near.  A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel.  He will crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the people of Sheth. 18 Edom will be conquered; Seir, his enemy, will be conquered, but Israel will grow strong. 19 A ruler will come out of Jacob and destroy the survivors of the city.”  "

 That is talking about King Dawidh and about Moshiah. (meaning first like is Dawidh then its Moshiah, then Dawidh etc.) Its in Mesechet Berachot which explains each line.

[muman613]

RAMBAM, who is considered a sage of Israel and who's codification of Jewish law is universally recognized by all modern strains of Orthodox Judaism (including Chassidic and Mitnagdim, Yeshivish and Litvish), clearly states that one who denies the coming of Moshiach is an apostate, a heretic, and outside of Jewish faith... From his masterpiece work, Mishneh Torah, here are some of the laws concerning Moshiach.


http://www.chabad.org/library/moshiach/article_cdo/aid/101744/jewish/Laws-Concerning-Kings-and-the-Messiah.htm

MISHNEH TORAH:
Hilchot Melachim
Laws Concerning Kings

Chapter XI

1. The Messianic King will arise in the future and restore the Davidic Kingdom to its former state and original sovereignty. He will build the Sanctuary1 and gather the dispersed of Israel.2 All the laws will be re-instituted in his days as they had been aforetimes;3 sacrifices will be offered, and the Sabbatical years and Jubilee years will be observed4 fully as ordained by the Torah.5

Anyone who does not believe in [Mashiach], or whoever does not look forward to his coming,6 denies not only [the teachings of] the other prophets but [also those] of the Torah and of Moses our Teacher. For the Torah attested to him, as it is said:

“G-d, your G-d, will return your captivity and have mercy on you. He will return and gather you [from all the nations whither G-d, your G-d, has scattered you]. If your banished shall be at the utmost end of the heavens [G-d, your G-d, will gather you from there]… and G-d, your G-d, will bring you [to the land that your fathers possessed, and you will possess it]…”7

These words, explicitly stated in the Torah, include all the [Messianic] statements made by all the prophets.

There is reference [to this principle] also in the section of Bilam.8 There he prophesied about the two meshichim (anointed ones): the first anointed one who is [King] David who saved Israel from the hand of their oppressors; and the final anointed one [i.e., Mashiach] who will arise from [the former’s] descendants and save Israel in the end.9 Thus it says there:

“I see him, but not now”10 this refers to David;

“I behold him, but not nigh” this refers to the Messianic King.

“A star steps out from Jacob” this refers to David;

“and a scepter will arise from Israel” this refers to the Messianic King.

“He will smite the great ones of Moab” this refers to David, as it says, “He smote Moab and measured them with a rope;”11

“and break all the children of Seth” this refers to the Messianic King, of whom it is said, “His rule will be from sea to sea.”12

“Edom will be a possession”13 this refers to David, as it is said, “Edom became servants to David;14

“[and Seir] shall be a possession” this refers to the Messianic King, as it is said, “Saviors shall ascend Mount Zion [to judge the mount of Esau]…”15

2. In context of the “cities of refuge,” too, it says, “When G-d, your G-d, will expand your borders… you shall add three additional cities…”16 This has never yet taken place, and the Holy One, blessed is He, does not command anything in vain.17

As for the [other] prophets’ utterances [about Mashiach], there is no need for prooftexts as all the [prophets’] books are full of this concept.

3. Do not think that the Messianic King will have to perform signs and wonders and bring about novel things in the world, or resurrect the dead, and other such things. It is not so.18 This is seen from the fact that Rabbi Akiva was a great sage, of the sages of the Mishnah, and he was an armor-bearer of King Bar Koziba19 and said of him that he is the Messianic King: [R. Akiva] and all the wise men of his generation considered him to be the Messianic King until [Bar Koziba] was killed because of sins, and when he was killed they realized that he was not;20 but the sages had not asked him for any sign or wonder.

The essence of all this is that this Torah [of ours], its statutes and its laws, are forever and all eternity, and nothing is to be added to them or diminished from them.21

(Whoever adds or diminishes anything, or interprets the Torah to change the plain sense of the commandments, is surely an impostor, wicked, and a heretic.)22

4. If a king arises from the House of David23 who meditates on the Torah and occupies himself with the commandments like his ancestor David, in accordance with the written and oral Torah,24 and he will prevail upon all of Israel to walk in [the ways of the Torah] and strengthen its breaches,25 and he will fight the battles of G-d26 it may be assumed that he is Mashiach.27

If he did [these things] successfully (and defeated all the nations around him28), built the Sanctuary on its site29 and gathered the dispersed of Israel he is definitely Mashiach!30 He will [then] correct the entire world to serve G-d in unity, as it is said, “For then I will turn to the peoples a pure tongue that all shall call upon the Name of G-d and serve Him with one consent.”31

(If he did not succeed to that extent or was killed, it is clear that he is not the [Mashiach] promised by the Torah … for all the prophets said that Mashiach is the redeemer of Israel and their savior, and he gathers their dispersed and reinforces their commandments…)32

Chapter XII

1. One is not to presume that anything of the ways of the world will be set aside in the Messianic era, or that there will be any innovation in the order of creation; rather, the world will continue according to its norms.33

As for that which is said in Isaiah, that “the wolf will dwell with the sheep and the leopard will lie down with the kid” 34 this is an allegory and metaphor. It means that Israel shall dwell securely alongside the wicked heathens who are likened to wolves and leopards, as it is said “a wolf from the plains ravages, a leopard lies in wait over their cities.”35 [In the Messianic era] all will return to the true religion and will neither steal nor destroy, but consume that which is permitted, in repose alongside Israel, as it is said, “the lion will eat straw like the ox.”36 All other such expressions are also allegories, and in the era of the Messianic King everyone will come to know what the allegory is about and what allusions are indicated.37

2. The sages said: “There is no difference between the present age and the Messianic era but [delivery from] subjection to foreign powers.”38

From the plain sense of the words of the prophets it is apparent that in the beginning of the Messianic era will occur the war of Gog and Magog;39 and that prior to the war of Gog and Magog a prophet will arise to correct Israel and to prepare their hearts, as it is said, “Behold, I am sending you the prophet Elijah [before the coming of the great and awesome day of G-d].”40 He will not come to declare the pure impure or the impure pure, nor to disqualify people presumed to be of legitimate lineage or to legitimize those presumed to be of disqualified lineage;41 but to establish peace in the world, as it is said, “He will turn the heart of the fathers to the children…”42

Some sages say that Elijah will come before the coming of Mashiach.43

All these and similar matters, however, man will not know how they will occur until they come to pass; for in the [statements of the] prophets these are undefined matters, and the sages, too, do not have a clear tradition on these subjects except for the [apparent] implications of the Scriptural verses. That is why they have differences of opinion in these matters. In any case, neither the sequence of these events nor their details are fundamental to the faith.

A person should not involve himself with the homiletical statements or protract on the Midrashim speaking of these or similar matters, nor is one to consider them fundamental; for they do not lead to either fear or love [of G-d].44

Likewise, one is not to calculate “ends” [dates of the Messianic redemption]. The sages said, “May the spirit expire of those who calculate the ‘ends.’ ”45 Rather, one is to await [the redemption] and believe the principle of this matter as we have explained.

3. In the era of the Messianic King, when his kingdom will be established and all of Israel will gather around him, all of them will have their pedigree determined by him,46 by means of the Holy Spirit that will rest upon him, as it is said, “He will sit as a refiner and purifier.”47 First he will purify the descendants of Levi,48 saying “This one is a legitimate Kohen (priest), and this one is a legitimate Levite,” while diverting those of improper lineage to the [rank of] Israelites.49 Thus it is said, “The governor [Nechemiah] said to them… until there will rise a Kohen with the Urim and Tumim;”50 from this you can infer that the determination of presumed pedigree and the public declaration of lineage is by means of the Holy Spirit.51

As for the Israelites, he will only determine their tribal lineage, that is, he will inform that “this one is of such-and-such a tribe and that one is of such-and-such a tribe.”52 He will not pronounce on those presumed to be of legitimate ancestry that “this one is a mamzer and that one is a ‘slave’;”53 for the law stipulates that once a family is intermixed [with the Jewish community at large] it remains intermixed.54

4. The sages and the prophets did not long for the Messianic era so that they may rule over the whole world or dominate the heathens, nor to be exalted by the nations, nor in order that they may eat, drink and be merry; but only to be free [for involvement] with the Torah and its wisdom, without anyone to oppress and disturb them, so that they may merit the life of the World-to-Come, as we explained in Hilchot Teshuvah.55

5. In that era there will be neither famine56 nor war,57 neither envy nor strife,58 because good will emanate in abundance and all delightful things will be accessible as dust.59 The one preoccupation of the entire world will be solely to know G-d. The Israelites, therefore, will be great sages and know the hidden matters,60 and they will attain knowledge of their Creator to the extent of human capacity, as it is said: “The earth shall be full with the knowledge of G-d as the waters cover the sea!”61


See the footnotes for actual references..

See also :
http://www.chabad.org/library/moshiach/article_cdo/aid/100903/jewish/Awaiting-Mashiach.htm

[Zelhar]

#1 The text in the prophets/writings is crystal clear when it speaks about resurrection and mashiach.  To give a few examples:

1 Samuel 2:6 “The Lord brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up.

That's a very generic statement about the omnipotence of God. Of course if God wants to resurrect the remains of dead people it is within his power.

Isaiah 26:19 But your dead will live, Lord; their bodies will rise—let those who dwell in the dust wake up and shout for joy—your dew is like the dew of the morning; the earth will give birth to her dead.

Allot of sages including the Rambam didn't consider this passage as direct evidence, at most a hint.

Daniel 12:2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

So you need to go as far as the book of Daniel which is a late addition to the bible, it is not a prophesy per se as it belongs to Ketuvim rather then Nevi'im.

And finally, appologies for quoting a despicable person, what difference does it make, if you believe in a very specific and literal description of resurrection, or you just believe in reward and punishment, which means there must be some sort of payback for our actions, somehow, in the after life or whatever you want to call it.

#2 Mashiach is also predicted in the Torah itself and is not just an invention of the prophets:

Numbers 24:17 “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near.  A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel.  He will crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the people of Sheth. 18 Edom will be conquered; Seir, his enemy, will be conquered, but Israel will grow strong. 19 A ruler will come out of Jacob and destroy the survivors of the city.”

It seems very much like this passage speaks about king David. The Messiah will have to wait for Edom and Moab to rise from the dead before he crushes them, again.

Also resurrection is explicitly mentioned in the Shmone Esre (Amida) prayer, which dates long before Rambam, and it is a mitzva to pray this daily.  It is the Deform-type movements who erase this part of the prayer and replace it--not out of honest evaluation of the Torah/prophets/sages--but out of disbelief that God has the ability to do anything miraculous.  Any reason to disbelieve in these concepts does not come from Judaism, but from OUTSIDE Judaism.  In other words, Gentile Bible skeptics invent dopey reasons not to believe in it and some Jews for some reason gravitate toward these thinkers instead of Jewish ones. That is why all movements that don't believe in the resurrection of the dead are at best lukewarm in their observance of mitzvot.

On the negative side if you turn so much of your faith into axioms you are not allowed to question you also risk straying out of the search for truth and then out of the faith.

[Zelhar]

Your approach is what leads to Deform and other forms of Heresy. Maybe you don't realize it. Judaism is much more than the Torah as you assume. Judaism is a system of mesorah (tradition passed down in a lineage from father to son from Moses to Today). The Torah is just Five books and Judaism is much much more than these five books, and this is why we (Orthodox) call the Torah cliff notes, because the Torah doesn't expound on the mitzvot other than to just mention them. The Karaites and Samaritans (who are virtually extinct today) believed only in the Written law, so they ate cold meals in the dark on Shabbat, they didn't know to wear Tefillin or put up mezuzahs because the Torah doesn't explain what they are.

Obviously the Torah is a part of a much larger system. Without the Oral law as we have in the Talmud we would not be able to observe the commandments. There would be much doubt about what constitutes 'honoring your parents' and what 'loving G-d' means (both actual written commandments).

Denying the spiritual and prophetic aspect of Judaism is just as dangerous as following reform. Those who dryly follow halachic mitzvahs without having the spiritual knowledge to better the world are not doing any great deed. Mitzvot require Kevannah just like prayer, which is why we must say a Brachot on every mitzvah.

I realize you are a secular Israeli Zelhar, and I don't expect you to change by reading my writing, but Judaism includes belief in Resurrection of the Dead and the coming of Moshiach. We have held these beliefs from time immemorial and it is the reason the Jewish people are still alive today. The prophets promised us that the day will come when Hashem sends us redemption through the Moshiach.

PS: It is incorrect to disrespect the 13 principals of Rambam. These principles have been UNIVERSALLY accepted by all strains of Orthodox Judaism.

I consider myself Jewish and by that I mean I belong to the "orthodox" branch which is the only authentic and valid form of Judaism. So I am not saying we should change the way religious Jews practice Judaism or the principles of the faith just because I don't want to practice or believe in what Judaism stands for.

When I said, hypothetically, you can practice Judaism even if you erased the rest of the bible other then the Torah I didn't say you can also erase the oral Torah, that's a different story. You definitely can't practice Judaism if you do away with the oral Torah.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Dan those passages have to do with BOTH king David and the Messiah. I believe it is in Berachot explained line by line when its for Dawidh and when it is for the Messiah.

[muman613]

Dan those passages have to do with BOTH king David and the Messiah. I believe it is in Berachot explained line by line when its for Dawidh and when it is for the Messiah.

If you noticed I provided support to what you repeated twice in this thread...

http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70653.msg603301.html#msg603301

There is reference [to this principle] also in the section of Bilam.8 There he prophesied about the two meshichim (anointed ones): the first anointed one who is [King] David who saved Israel from the hand of their oppressors; and the final anointed one [i.e., Mashiach] who will arise from [the former’s] descendants and save Israel in the end.9 Thus it says there:

“I see him, but not now”10 this refers to David;

“I behold him, but not nigh” this refers to the Messianic King.

“A star steps out from Jacob” this refers to David;

“and a scepter will arise from Israel” this refers to the Messianic King.

“He will smite the great ones of Moab” this refers to David, as it says, “He smote Moab and measured them with a rope;”11

“and break all the children of Seth” this refers to the Messianic King, of whom it is said, “His rule will be from sea to sea.”12

“Edom will be a possession”13 this refers to David, as it is said, “Edom became servants to David;14

“[and Seir] shall be a possession” this refers to the Messianic King, as it is said, “Saviors shall ascend Mount Zion [to judge the mount of Esau]…”15

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Your approach is what leads to Deform and other forms of Heresy.

Why?  He is not forming a movement or claiming to be a leader.  He's just stating his own personal skepticism.  I don't agree with his view but I don't see why he would lead to a deform movement.

In addition, have you read Marc Shapiro's book, "the limits of orthodox theology" ?  You may be surprised, but in there you will find there has been some disagreement among the rabbis over the ages about what views constitute the unassailable articles of faith in Judaism.   Rambam provided a now famous list but he was not the only one and some argued on him.   Its clear that Judaism as a belief system DOES assert the resurrection of the dead as one of its premises, but that doesn't necessarily mean that if one doesn't believe that (or other beliefs of Judaism depending on which ones) he loses his olam haba.  Because the question of losing olam haba is what rambam addresses with the articles of faith and why the list is so short.  Because that is a very serious thing.   Chazal didn't make it clear what the absolutely essential beliefs are and that's why rambam and others even had to formulate lists which they thought best represented it.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

#1 The text in the prophets/writings is crystal clear when it speaks about resurrection and mashiach.  To give a few examples:

1 Samuel 2:6 “The Lord brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up.

Isaiah 26:19 But your dead will live, Lord; their bodies will rise—let those who dwell in the dust wake up and shout for joy—your dew is like the dew of the morning; the earth will give birth to her dead.

Daniel 12:2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

#2 Mashiach is also predicted in the Torah itself and is not just an invention of the prophets:

Numbers 24:17 “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near.  A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel.  He will crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the people of Sheth. 18 Edom will be conquered; Seir, his enemy, will be conquered, but Israel will grow strong. 19 A ruler will come out of Jacob and destroy the survivors of the city.”

Also resurrection is explicitly mentioned in the Shmone Esre (Amida) prayer, which dates long before Rambam, and it is a mitzva to pray this daily.  It is the Deform-type movements who erase this part of the prayer and replace it--not out of honest evaluation of the Torah/prophets/sages--but out of disbelief that God has the ability to do anything miraculous.  Any reason to disbelieve in these concepts does not come from Judaism, but from OUTSIDE Judaism.  In other words, Gentile Bible skeptics invent dopey reasons not to believe in it and some Jews for some reason gravitate toward these thinkers instead of Jewish ones. That is why all movements that don't believe in the resurrection of the dead are at best lukewarm in their observance of mitzvot.

Very good points.  Still, do we have 100% consensus that not accepting these prophecies literally will cause one to lose olam haba?  Unfortunately I haven't read the definitive book on the subject to know for sure ( I myself do accept resurrection of the dead so it is an academic concern for me, not practical).

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Very good points.  Still, do we have 100% consensus that not accepting these prophecies literally will cause one to lose olam haba?  Unfortunately I haven't read the definitive book on the subject to know for sure ( I myself do accept resurrection of the dead so it is an academic concern for me, not practical).

 In Rambam's book it says one must accept it or looses his olam Haba.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

In Rambam's book it says one must accept it or looses his olam Haba.

Well of course.   Its one of the 13 principles ("ikkarim").  But other rishonim argued on his list!

[Ephraim Ben Noach]

KWRBT has went off the deep end, lets stone him!

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

KWRBT has went off the deep end, lets stone him!

How so?

I guess that is supposed to be a joke?

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

KWRBT, my argument was not whether the belief affects Olam HaBa, my argument was that resurrection of the dead is a clear Jewish belief, which it is.  I strongly suspect that most of those who disbelieve in the resurrection of the dead are the Deform types who don't believe God can do anything, who deny all the miracles of the Torah and disbelieve that any miracle can occur in the future either--that attitude I think would have repercussions in the afterlife.  However HaShem is the only One who knows people's hearts and He will decide whether each individual merits a share in Olam Haba (after the resurrection of the dead HAPPENS).

Yeah I think I'm pretty much in agreement with this.