A zaken mamre was not liable to the
death penalty unless he was an ordained scholar, who was fit to pass
judgment and whose decision had validity. His defiance of the supreme bet din had to be in a matter which if done willfully carried with it the penalty of *karet
, and if done inadvertently a sin-offering, or in a matter that if done
deliberately would lead to a transgression carrying with it the same
penalties, for instance, a disagreement on the intercalation of the year
that would lead to leaven being eaten during Passover (Sanh. 87a;
Maim., Yad, Mamrim, 3:5, 4:2). A zaken mamre is liable to the
death penalty when he disagrees about a matter whose basis is in the
written Torah and whose explanation is from the *soferim
("scribes"), or about a halakhah given to Moses at Sinai, or about something derived from the 13 hermeneutical principles (see *Hermeneutics
) whereby the Torah is interpreted, but not when he disagrees on a law
of rabbinic provenance which has no basis in the Torah (Maim., ibid., 1:2).
רמב"ם הלכות ממרים פרק ג
הלכה ד
אבל זקן ממרא האמור בתורה הוא חכם אחד מחכמי ישראל שיש בידו קבלה ודן ומורה בדברי תורה כמו שידונו ויורו כל חכמי ישראל שבאת לו מחלוקת בדין מן הדינים עם בית דין הגדול, ולא חזר לדבריהם אלא חלק עליהם והורה לעשות שלא כהוראתן, גזרה עליו תורה מיתה ומתודה ויש לו חלק לעולם הבא, אף על פי שהוא דן והן דנים הוא קבל והם קבלו הרי התורה חלקה להם כבוד, ואם רצו בית דין למחול על כבודן ולהניחו אינן יכולין כדי שלא א ירבו מחלוקת בישראל.
רמב"ם הלכות ממרים פרק ג
הלכה ד
אבל זקן ממרא האמור בתורה הוא חכם אחד מחכמי ישראל שיש בידו קבלה ודן ומורה בדברי תורה כמו שידונו ויורו כל חכמי ישראל שבאת לו מחלוקת בדין מן הדינים עם בית דין הגדול, ולא חזר לדבריהם אלא חלק עליהם והורה לעשות שלא כהוראתן, גזרה עליו תורה מיתה ומתודה ויש לו חלק לעולם הבא, אף על פי שהוא דן והן דנים הוא קבל והם קבלו הרי התורה חלקה להם כבוד, ואם רצו בית דין למחול על כבודן ולהניחו אינן יכולין כדי שלא א ירבו מחלוקת בישראל.
Rav kaminetsky is not a ZM.
ReplyDeletegood to find it out
ReplyDeleteSo what do you call a rabbi who encourages a married woman to remarry without receiving a get?
Where was the BD he sat in to discuss this, and who dissented?
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, dayan Sherman was the dissenting voice in the rabbanut BD, and he refused to accept the opinion of the majority regarding conversions. He then set up his own private bd.
all the major poskim including Rav Dovid Feinstein concluded that Tamar is still married to Ahron Friedman actually the question is who says the heter is valid? the answer is no one. Rabbi Greenblatt said based entirely on the urging of Rabbi Kaminetsky he poskened that Tamar was free to remarry but he did not ascertain the facts himself. Thus the point is that every posek and beis din in the world agrees she is still married to Aharon. This has been put in writing by the Baltimore Beis Din which both Tamar and Aharon agreed was the beis din in charge. so I will repeat myself what do you call a rabbi who encourages a married woman to remarry without a Get
ReplyDeleteWhich R' K are you referring to? One is Shalom, the other is Shmuel. I am only referring to Shmuel - who is still one of the members of the Moetzes.
ReplyDeleteNext, you said earlier, " you don't have to follow everybody". Upon which I rhetorically replied that in that case, I would follow R' shmuel.
These are theoretical statements, to test the claims you are making.
What evidence did Rav Akiva have that bar Kuziva was Moshiach, and even from the line of David? the campaign effectively ended the jewish presence in Israel, cost half a million lives, and got them nowhere.
This test was to see if your shimush theory works, and it seems to act contrary to what you are saying. Rambam says that the sages withdrew their support from R' Akiva and bar Kuziva. So why should an individual follow a minority liek Akiva? Indeed, according to your above claims, it might even suggest chas v'shalom that he was
opposing the majority of sages and could be Zaken mamre!
what exactly happened with bar kochba? where did you get your information?
ReplyDeletehow do you know R Akiva was wrong? You claim to be testing the theory but you seem to actually be just making up facts or relying on questionable sources which are based on questionable conjectures as if they were clear facts
“zaken Mamre Encyclopedia Judaica” “Should a man act presumptuously and disregard the priest charged with serving there the Lord your God, or the magistrate, that man shall die. Thus you will sweep out evil from Israel:” (Deuteronomy 17:12).
ReplyDeleteHertz Chumash p. 823: “the man that doeth presumptuously. The decisions of this Court must be strictly obeyed. Refusal to do so would, in a theocracy, be tantamount to revolt against the Constitution, and involve capital punishment for the offender. Tradition explains this v. to refer to a judge (זקן ממרה) who defies the ruling of the Supreme Court. the priest. The ecclesiastical president of the tribunal.”
What do you call a rabbi who encourages a married woman to remarry without a Get? A rebellious elder a zaken mamre.
Allow me to update that the NYS Court of Appeals gave me a motion number 2020-352 return date June 29, 2020. They acknowledge receipt of every document I sent them May-June 2020, God bless them. They promise to summit all my documents to the court on June 29, 2020. I have patience. I don’t mind submitting documents and letters to the court. UPS is excellent.
Maybe..
ReplyDeleteJerusalem Talmud Ta’anit 4:6 (68d-69a): Rabbi Akiva and Bar Kokhba
Jerusalem Talmud gives evidence of the inner Rabbinic debate over the messianic status of Bar Kokhba. Unable to understand his defeat after the initial success of the rebellion, the Rabbis attributed it to the killing of Rabbi Eleazar of Modiin. The passage also indicates the terrible death and destruction that the revolt brought in its wake.
Rabbi Simeon bar Yobai taught, “Akiva, my master, expounded, ‘A star will go forth from Jacob’ (Num. 28-17), (as) ‘Koziba has come forth from Jacob.’ “When Rabbi Akiva would see Bar Koziba, he would say, “This is the King Messiah!” Rabbi Yohanan ben Torta said to him, “Akiva, grass will grow on your cheeks and still the Son of David will not have come.”
Rabbi Yohanan said, “At Hadrian’s command, they killed 800,000 in Betar….”
Hadrian besieged Betar for three and a half years. 147 Rabbi Eleazar of Modiin used to sit on sackcloth and ashes and pray every day, saying, “Master of the Universe! Do not sit in judgment today, do not sit in judgment today.” 148
Hadrian wanted to go to him. 149 One Samaritan said to him, “Do not go, for I will go and see what can be done to deliver the city to you.”
[The Samaritan] went through the city’s drain pipe. He went and found Rabbi Eleazer of Modiin standing and praying. He pretended to whisper in his ear. The people of the city saw him and brought him to Ben Koziba. They said to [Ben Koziba], “We saw this old man conversing with your uncle.” 150
[Ben Koziba] said to [the Samaritan], “What did you say to him, and what did he [Rabbi Eleazer of Modiin] say to you?”
He said to him, “If I tell you, the king will kill me, and if I do not tell you, you will kill me. I prefer that the king should kill me, and not you.” [The Samaritan continued and] said to him, “He [Rabbi Eleazer of Modiin] said to me, ‘I will surrender the city.’’’
[Ben Koziba] went to Rabbi Eleazer of Modiin, [and] said to him,
“What did that Samaritan tell you?”
[Rabbi Eleazer] said to him, “Nothing.”
[Ben Koziba] said, “What did you say to [the Samaritan]?”
[Rabbi Eleazer] said to him, “Nothing.”
[Bar Koziba] gave [Rabbi Eleazer] one kick and he killed him. Immediately, a heavenly voice went forth saying- “‘Woe to the worthless shepherd who abandons his flock! Let a sword descend upon his arm and his right eye. His
arm will wither and his right eye will be blinded’ (Zech. 11-17). You have killed Rabbi Eleazar of Modiin, the arm of Israel and their right eye. Thus, your arm will wither, and your right eye will be blinded.” Immediately, Betar was captured and Ben Koziba was killed.
The enterprise was a disaster , was r'akiva the leader of the generation?
ReplyDeleteand again what is your evidence?
ReplyDeletesources?
ReplyDeleteI'm not following along too closely on the main discussion but this... is just strange:
ReplyDelete"How do you know R. Akiva was wrong?"
Huh? Bar Kochva revolt failed and Bar Kochva died without achieving the accomplishments of a messiah. So R. Akiva was therefore incorrect in calling him the messiah.
According to Rambam Messiah is not a one time event but is a process. so the failure of bar Kochva proves nothing about R Akiva
ReplyDeleteIf Messiah is a "process" and not a person, why did Rabbi Akiva call a person (namely, Bar Kochva) the messiah?
ReplyDeleteevidence that the Revolt was a disaster?
ReplyDeleteIt failed. Bar Kohba was killed, everyone else was also killed, including Akiva himself.
the source is this book - you may well be correct
ReplyDeletehttps://books.google.co.uk/books?id=nQDkLzQimk8C&pg=PA288&lpg=PA288&dq=Jerusalem+Talmud+gives+evidence+of+the+inner+Rabbinic+debate+over+the+messianic+status+of+Bar+Kokhba.+Unable+to+understand+his+defeat+after+the+initial+success+of+the+rebellion,+the+Rabbis+attributed+it+to+the+killing+of+Rabbi+Eleazar+of+Modiin.&source=bl&ots=fCbGWHwGvw&sig=ACfU3U0N_eBbyeMuQlnOSWF-8sPxRY6ZpA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiuy4Gs7ZjqAhUJYcAKHaUCBCYQ6AEwAHoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=Jerusalem%20Talmud%20gives%20evidence%20of%20the%20inner%20Rabbinic%20debate%20over%20the%20messianic%20status%20of%20Bar%20Kokhba.%20Unable%20to%20understand%20his%20defeat%20after%20the%20initial%20success%20of%20the%20rebellion%2C%20the%20Rabbis%20attributed%20it%20to%20the%20killing%20of%20Rabbi%20Eleazar%20of%20Modiin.&f=false
The book I quoted has an error in their source. it is actually in Taanit 24a of the yerushalmi:
ReplyDeleteתני א"ר יהודה בן ר' אלעאי ברוך ר' היה דורש (בראשית כ״ז:כ״ב) הקול קול יעקב והידים ידי עשו קולו של יעקב צווח ממה שעשו לו ידי עשו בביתר. תני ר' שמעון בן יוחי עקיבה ר' היה דורש (במדבר כ״ד:י״ז) דרך כוכב מיעקב דרך כוזבא מיעקב. ר' עקיבה כד הוה חמי בר כוזבה הוה אמר דין הוא מלכא משיחא א"ל ר' יוחנן בן תורתא עקיבה יעלו עשבים בלחייך ועדיין בן דוד לא יבא. א"ר יוחנן קול אדריינוס קיסר הורג בביתר שמונים אלף ריבוא. א"ר יוחנן שמונים אלף זוג של תוקעי קרנות היו מקיפין את ביתר וכל אחד ואחד היה ממונה על כמה חיילות והיה שם בן כוזבה והיה לו מאתים אלף מטיפי אצבע. שלחו חכמים ואמרו לו עד אימתי אתה עושה את ישראל בעלי מומין אמר להן וכי היאך איפשר לבדקן. אמרו לו כל מי שאינו רוכב על סוסו ועוקר ארץ מן לבנון לא יהיה נכתב באיסרטיא שלך היו לו מאתים אלף כך ומאתים אלף כך וכד דהוה נפק לקרבא הוה אמר ריבוניה דעלמא לא תסעוד ולא תכסוף (תהילים ס׳:י״ב) הלא אתה אלהים זנחתנו ולא תצא בצבאותינו שלש שנים ומחצה עשה אדריינוס מקיף על ביתר. והוה ר' אלעזר המודעי יושב על השק ועל האפר ומתפלל בכל יום ואומר רבון העולמים אל תשב בדין היום אל תשב בדין היום בעא אדריינוס מיזל ליה. אמר ליה חד כותיי לא תיזיל לך דאנא חמי מה מיעבד ומשלים לך מדינתא עאל ליה מן ביבא דמתינתא עאל ואשכח רבי אלעזר המודעי קאים מצלי. עבד נפשיה לחיש ליה בגו אודניה חמוניה בני מדינתא ואייתוניה גבי בן כוזבא. אמרון ליה חמינן ההן סבא משתעי לחביבך אמר ליה מה אמרת ליה ומה אמר לך אמר ליה אנא אמר לך מלכא קטל לי ואי לא אנא אמר לך את קטל יתי טב לי מלכא קטל יתי ולא את אמר ליה אמר לי דאננא משלים מדינתאי. אתא גבי רבי אלעזר המודעי אמר ליה מה אמר לך הדין כותייא אמר ליה לא כלום מה אמרת ליה א"ל לא כלום
Messianic era is a process. Melech Hamashiach is a one off person, who will have sons , and die a natural death himself.
ReplyDeleteThe sources are in Yerushalmi Taanit 24a, . the online book I was citing made an error, and i transferred that error - th but the quote is from 24a.
ReplyDelete"and again what is your evidence?"
ReplyDeletewhat is your evidence that Yashke wasn't/isn't Moshiach?
what is your evidence that Hydroxychloroquinone has not benefit for Covid 19?
what is your evidence that Tamar Epstein is comitting adultery?
Well the evidence that Bar Kochba was a disaster is that his mismanaged campaign is that it was the end of the jewish settlement in Israel. R' Yochanan reproves Akiva, saying grass will grow on his face and Messiah will not come. Bar Kuziba kicks Elazar haModai to death! He is clearly a madman.
Here in Bnei Brak we all love Rabbi Akiba...in the Haggadah of Passover etc.
ReplyDeleteYossi Belin did a TV in Israel trial of Rabbi Akiba some years ago.
Sanhedrin 32b
“Our Rabbis taught: justice, justice shalt thou follow, this means, Follow the scholars to their academies. e.g.. R. Eliezer to Lydda, R. Johanan b. Zakkai to Beror Hail, R. Joshua to Peki'in, Rabban Gamaliel [II] to Jabneh, R. Akiba to Benai Berak, R. Mathia to Rome, R. Hanania b. Teradion to Sikni, R. Jose [b. Halafta] to Sepphoris. R. Judah b. Bathyra to Nisibis, R. Joshua to the Exile, Rabbi to Beth She'arim, or the Sages to the chamber of hewn stones.”
that doesn't mean the initial designation was a mistake
ReplyDeletesee rabbi Mintz
ReplyDeleteNow, if a king should arise from the House of David who is versed in Torah and engages in Commandments, as did David his forefather, in accordance with both the Written and the Oral Torahs, and he enjoins all of Israel to follow in its ways and encourages them to repair its breaches, and he fights the Wars of G-d128, then he may be presumed to be the Messiah. If he succeeds in his efforts and defeats the enemies around and builds the Sanctuary in its proper place and gathers the dispersed of Israel, he is definitely the Messiah.
ReplyDeleteBut, if he does not succeed in these matters or is killed, we will know that he was not the one Torah has promised. He is (merely to be considered) like all the (other) exemplary and qualified kings of the House of David who have died. G-d set him up only to try the masses, as it says, “And some of the wise will stumble, to refine among them and to purify and to make white, even to the time of the end, for it is yet for the time appointed” (Daniel 11:35).
He succeeded for a short time see Abramson video
ReplyDeletesee Rambam I posted
ReplyDeleteSee my article
ReplyDeletehttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/23868
I like Abraham Joshua Heschel’s treatment of Rabbi Akiva. I read closely Abraham Joshua Heschel’s excellent 3 volumes in Hebrew תורה מן השמים באספקלריה של הדורת. I use to see him time to time when I ate at the Jewish Theological Seminary’s cafeteria while studying for my MBA at Columbia U right after I got my BA from Yeshiva U June 1967. The Jewish Theological Seminary then had separate sitting men from women and great Torah scholars. I davened there time to time since they had separate sitting, God bless them. My mother studied there. My daughter, Rachel was ordained from there. My son Aryea studied there.
Agreed.
ReplyDeleteIt's true Rambam makes the case that bar kochba was presumed Messiah. It is unlikely that he managed to make all Israel Torah observant. There was already a diaspora that he had little or no contact with, there were Jewish Christians etc.
Military succeeded, yes.
ReplyDeleteRambam mentions a King. Bar kochba was no King. There was no King for the entire 2nd temple period (except for the Hashmonaim - who were not from King David).
ReplyDeleteThe King's lineage was long lost.
A general does not simply become king.
so you acknowledge that you are claiming Rambam was wrong.
ReplyDeleteSo while you disagree with my view of Mesorah you also disagree with the traditional view that places Rambam as a critical link in the chain. That means you have your own independent ability to cherry pick what you consider Mesorah.
so you are the only true Daas Torah!
No, Rambam has a basis for everything he says. No way I could know what he did.
ReplyDeleteThe opinion of rabbi Yochanan disagreed with r Akiva, and was proven to be correct. However, I don't know all of the other sources.
I heard from Rav Sacha Stern in London that the gemara never gave honor to bar kochba, and that he is called bar kuziva - the deceiver. If his thesis is correct, then there is a possible difference of opinion between the Rambam and the sages - which I trust can be resolved.
ReplyDeleteRambam says that the sages withdrew support for him.
Perhaps one of the reasons were that his apparent qualifications were false?
again conjecture not evidence
ReplyDeleterambam clearly disagrees with your understanding
ReplyDeleteFor Rabbi Akiva, one of the wisest of the Sages of the Mishna, was King Ben Coziba’s124Bar Cochba. arms-bearer125I.e. his staunch supporter. and said that he was the King Messiah.
He and all the Sages of his generation thought that he was the King Messiah,
until he was killed because of his sins126He killed Rabbi Elazar HaModai.. Since he was killed, they then understood that he was not the one.
Rambam writes
ReplyDeleteאֵין הַדָּבָר כָּךְ. שֶׁהֲרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא חָכָם גָּדוֹל מֵחַכְמֵי מִשְׁנָה הָיָה. וְהוּא הָיָה נוֹשֵׂא כֵּלָיו שֶׁל בֶּן כּוֹזִיבָא הַמֶּלֶךְ. וְהוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר עָלָיו שֶׁהוּא הַמֶּלֶךְ הַמָּשִׁיחַ. וְדִמָּה הוּא וְכָל חַכְמֵי דּוֹרוֹ שֶׁהוּא הַמֶּלֶךְ הַמָּשִׁיחַ. עַד שֶׁנֶּהֱרַג בַּעֲוֹנוֹת. כֵּיוָן שֶׁנֶּהֱרַג נוֹדַע לָהֶם שֶׁאֵינוֹ. וְלֹא שָׁאֲלוּ מִמֶּנּוּ חֲכָמִים לֹא אוֹת וְלֹא מוֹפֵת. וְעִקַּר הַדְּבָרִים כָּכָה הֵן. שֶׁהַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת חֻקֶּיהָ וּמִשְׁפָּטֶיהָ לְעוֹלָם וּלְעוֹלְמֵי עוֹלָמִים. וְאֵין מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן וְלֹא גּוֹרְעִין מֵהֶן:
They realized he wasn't moshiach, hence their chazakah was wrong.
He is not saying the chazaka was right despite the outcome. His point is they didn't ask for miracles.
Q1) was there a formal Sanhedrin that ruled or was it the view of rabbi Akiva?
Q2) when did rabbi yochanan make his statement about grass growing? Whilst Akiva still supported bar kuxba or after he was killed?
Q3) the identification of somebody as king must be either by lineage or by prophecy/ urim v'thumim. Hence, since temple was gone, no prophets or urim in 2nd temple, how was his davidic lineage established?
Finally - Rambam says that rabbi Akiva was one of the greatest sages in the mishnah - but his later statement shows that the presumption was false. This is Halacha - it's a presumption that is refutable. We are not given every single detail of his ascension to the throne, but several details about his fall ( cutting fingers in loyalty, killing a Tanna, deliberately praying only for Hashem not to help the enemy).
Rabbi yochanan view is not brought in the Rambam as far as I know, but it does still seem to be true.
see also the Raavad's hasagah to this Rambam, where he disagrees:
ReplyDeleteאל יעלה על דעתך וכו'. א''א והלא בן כוזיבא היה אומר אנא הוא מלכא משיחא ושלחו חכמים לבדקו אי מורח ודאין או לא וכיון דלא עביד הכי קטלוהו:
did you see the commentaries that discuss this Raavad?
ReplyDeleteYou are reading too much into the Rambam
ReplyDeleteNo, please enlighten me
ReplyDeleteI'm reading it in it's entirety whereas you are cherry picking the parts you like.
ReplyDeleteRight, so it is a person. Not a process.
ReplyDeleteThey (Rabbi Akiva and others) presumed Bar Kochva was that person and was the messiah. And then he didn't succeed, so then they knew he was not. That's called being incorrect. It happens.
Built into this entire premise is that we will rightly presume based on certain criteria, but then that presumption may turn out to be incorrect. Which we then know by hindsight. Should the presumed messiah succeed, then it will turn out the presumption was correct.
What exactly are you trying to say by saying Rabbi Akiva (and others) were CORRECT?
"Rambam mentions a King. Bar kochba was no King. There was no King for the entire 2nd temple period"
ReplyDeleteThe coins, letters, and documents we have indicate Bar Kochva was proclaimed leader of Israel during the early stages of the revolt, for 3 years while they gained advantage over the Roman occupier. However, to my knowledge in all of these items he is referred to as Nasi Yisrael. So does this mean his reign was technically not as King and we must distinguish between the terms Melech and Nasi? Was everyone involved (including Bar Kochva) also consciously making this distinction when they titled him this way? What did they have in mind? Interesting question.
I saw a sicho of Lubavitcher rebbe in the time of their own messianic campaign. I think he tried to unify the Raavad and the Rambam.
ReplyDeleteI am still searching to find that online.
The Raavad says the sages tested b. Kuziva, and found he was a fake. Rambam says they supported him, until they found he was not the Messiah, and then withdrew.
ReplyDeleteRaavad is as great as Rambam in Talmud and Halacha. Many Jews followed the Raavad, he was one of the gedolei hador.
But the most important question is what was the individual meant to do at the time?
clearly they accepted Rabbi Akiva i.e the Rambam rather than the Raavad
ReplyDeleteMaybe for a short time.
ReplyDeleteIn the shabbetai zvi era, even the Taz, or at least his son in law accepted shabbetai. Europe was doing teshuva, ships from Amsterdam were all full of Jews returning to Israel.
The Taz was one of the greatest poskim of all time, and a tzaddik.
It's a very interesting comparison. The man bar kuziva was a sinner - he violated Torah, eg self mutilation, murder of Eleazar hamodai.
If you read the Rambam, he says a king who fails is still a righteous king. Is bar kuziba a righteous King?
in a disagreement between R Akiva and one other sage - which is what the Yerushalmi says it was - what is the halacha? hint look at the Rambam again
ReplyDeleteValid point.
ReplyDeleteAnd when the majority go against R Akiva, as per the Raavad?
what is his source?
ReplyDeleteKessef Mishneh brings his source
ReplyDeleteרבינו אל יעלה בדעתך וכו' עד שנהרג בעונות וכו'. וכתב הראב״ד א״א והלא בן כוזיבא היה אומר וכו'. ודברי הראב״ד אמת והכי איתא בפרק חלק (סנהדרין דף צ״ג:) אבל באיכה רבתי בפסוק בלע ה' ולא חמל אומר שנהרג על ידי א״ה וסובר רבינו דהא דאמרו פרק חלק אתיא דלא כשמואל דאמר אין בין העוה״ז לימות המשיח אלא שעבוד מלכיות ורבינו סובר כשמואל וכמבואר בפרק שאחר זה ולכן כתב סברת המדרש. ומ״מ מה שכתב שר״ע היה נושא כליו צ״ע היכא מייתי לה: