Sunday, September 13, 2009

Should we fault Rav Elchonan Wasserman, Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky, and Rambam for Mispredicting the Keitz?

No, we should not.

Last week Sunday, as part of the never-ending silliness, was supposed to be the apocalypse. As Geulah Perspectives writes:
When I was in the United States recently, I was in Philadelphia, and I had the opportunity to daven in the Philadelphia Yeshiva and speak to its Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky. I asked him about the seventy year period that Rav Elya Svei spoke of in the name of Reb Elchanan Wasserman. He told me that Rav Elya had heard it directly from Rav Wasserman's mouth. Rav Kaminetsky told me, as his eyes crinkled into a smile, that he is also waiting. He also added that the seventy years corresponds to the seventy words in the chapter of Tehillim "למנצח... יענך ה' ביום צרה" which I was not aware of.

If we calculate seventy years from the beginning of World War II, we find ourselves on this coming Sunday, September 6th.

As I always say, I do not like to predict anything, because one looks foolish when nothing happens. But, these may be interesting dates to look out for, so keep your eyes and ears open.

May we merit a speedy and painless redemption, Amen.
And indeed, mashiach did not arrive last week. Now, I am certain that people will still attempt to harness this prediction for other dates, by starting the 70 year count at other initial starting points. Indeed, people already were doing this in the comment section.

Yet here we have a ketz from Rav Elchonan Wasserman, where Rabbi Yochanan in the gemara said "Let the bones be blasted of those who calculate the end of days!"

This is not so surprising, since there is precedent for such disregarding of this Talmudic injunction. While Rambam cites it lehalacha and lehashkafah, in his Iggeret Teiman (3rd perek) he cites a tradition that the ketz was 1212 CE, a date which has long passed. And Ramban gave a teretz for why one can do this, namely that the injunction was only when mashiach was not so close (it seems because people would become disheartened), but now that it is so close, it is permissible. Of course, that was more than 700 years ago, so they were wrong about just how close the ketz was. And everyone who mispredicts the ketz -- and there have been many -- thinks that the end is nigh.

So perhaps Rav Elchonon Wasserman has ample precedent on what to rely upon. I still think it is extremely misguiding and dangerous to predict the keitz in this way, and there is potential for disaster. And it is awful when Rav Amnon Yitzchak did it, proclaiming to a large audience that mashiach will absolutely arrive this year, 5769!

Yet there is a difference, which is why, to my mind, we should not fault Rav Elchonan Wasserman.

We cannot even begin to understand the horrors of the Holocaust. When someone (or a group of people) encounters such a terrible tragedy, it can be a great blow to one's emunah in Hashem's direction of the world or of Hashem's righteousness. One way of coping with tzaddik veRa lo to such an extreme is to understand that it is all part of a master plan. And the chevlei mashiach accounts for such terrible tragedy admirably. To cope with this himself, and to allow others to cope, it helps to see oneself as playing a part in a greater master plan, in which redemption eventually occurs.

And what callous person would deny him, and others suffering similarly, this comfort? Forget the potential negative consequences. There is this immediate emotional need, and the potential theological danger is far off.

Indeed, Rav Wasserman did not say that mashiach would arrive the next year. He gave it a 70 year count from the start of the war. He was born in 1874, and WWII broke out in September 1, 1939, when he was 65. In another 70 years, he would be 135 years old, and so he did not really hope to live this long. It was not an immediate, apocalyptic messianic belief, which would change the way one lived from day to day. It was a coping mechanism, and a way of trying to explain Divine Justice in a way humans could comprehend.

The same with the Iggeres Teiman of the Rambam. He wrote it in 1172, if I understand correctly. The Jews in Yemen at the time were undergoing tremendous troubles at the time: oppression by a fanatical Muslim ruler; efforts to convert them to Islam, in which many converted; and a false mashiach.

The Rambam was faced with the difficult task of encouraging the Jews of Teiman in their Judaism, and not to be swayed by, or discouraged by the failure of, the false mashiach. And while he indeed held that one should not calculate the ketz, there is a concept of עת לעשת להשם הפירו תורתך, and the idea of horaat shaah. Not necessarily should one stubbornly hold onto one's true principles. And here, the damage done would be worse than potential damage of his repetition of a ketz.

Indeed, in Iggeret Teiman, he encouraged them by explaining how their suffering was part of the general Divine Plan preceding mashiach, which gave them comfort. And by giving a ketz, he undermined the present false mashiach as one who came before the time; and if and when that mashiach failed, they had to look forward to a ketz in the future. And 1212 was a good forty years in the future, which would hopefully be after this crisis had passed. And indeed, it was successful. He did not predict a ketz for the very next day, and encourage apocalyptic beliefs and practices.

What about Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky? As far as I can tell, he just nodded politely to Geulah Perspectives, confirmed that Rav Elchanan Wasserman indeed said this, and said he was watching it. But he did not shout from the rooftops that mashiach was coming, and that everyone should leave Philadelphia for Eretz Yisrael, because an atomic bomb would explode on that day. He put stock in the prediction, though he did not innovate it himself, enough to watch it. But he did not encourage frantic apocalyptic madness, which is how some other Jews who are always anticipating the next ketz live their lives.

I wonder if he knows of the broader context, or a new ketz every few weeks, and people moving to Eretz Yisrael without thinking or planning, like chickens without heads? If so, he might have had a very different response.

So no, there is a vast difference between different people nowadays, in their approach to ketz, and I don't think we should "fault" any of the above.

16 comments:

yaak said...

R' Josh,

1) Your portrayal of R' Amnon Yitzhak's prediction as "absolute" is incorrect. This is obviously not his intent - rather, it is to encourage Teshuva due to a suggested, possible keitz occurring.

2) I consider immediate predictions more faithful to the Rambam's 12th principle than distant predictions. Plus, it encourages more Teshuva and less Yi'ush right now.

גילוי said...

Yaak, how do you harmonize your opinion of the Rambam's intent to the Rambam's prediction that Moshiach was *not* coming right away?

joshwaxman said...

i admittedly did not see enough of his speech, but this wasn't the impression that seems to come across. telling people in America that they should come now, because otherwise, there would be a long, long wait at the airport. i wonder how many baalei teshuva, and others, receive it one way, or the other...

joshwaxman said...

here is an example:

"It's interesting to mention, that based on this prophecy of the Talmud, Rabbi Amnon Yitzhak of the Shofar organization said in a public appearance in Britain just 2 days before the attack on the US, that before the end of the Hebrew year (which was just 10 days away) a major war will emerge. A skeptic man in the crowd asked him how can he know this for certain. The Rabbi answered - "I am basing my words on Jewish writings throughout the centuries". 2 days later he proved to be right"

rav amnon yitzchak did not respond: well, if this report was accurate, this is a guess, and it could come to pass or maybe not. rather, he was "sure" about it, and puts up the integrity of jewish writings throughout the centuries against "skeptics" who ask how he can know this for certain. yet you'll tell me that he agrees with the skeptic, that he doesn't know this for certain? why didn't he tell this to his audience??

kt,
josh

yaak said...

גילוי, that's a good question. However, you could say that he had a קבלה from his father (as Josh points out in the other post) that such a date is known, so he felt that he needed to share it with the inhabitants of Teiman to boost their Emunah in their trying time. But really, if he had a קבלה for an immediate ge'ula, that would have been better.

yaak said...

Josh, he doesn't claim to be a Navi whose predictions *have* to come true. He believes his predictions to be true - if they're not, he'll revise his beliefs.
You're making a big deal out of nothing.

joshwaxman said...

"But really, if he had a קבלה for an immediate ge'ula, that would have been better"

Since Rambam was trying to combat a specific false messiah in Teiman, I would guess that had he had a kabbalah for that, he would not have shared it. Rambam's goal was to take down the fake mashiach, and adding that this was indeed the predestined time, when this fellow just happened to have showed up, would have undermined Rambam's goals.

Also, could you imagine if he had said that mashiach was coming the next year, and then mashiach did not arrive. What sort of discouragement would that have presented to the people of that generation. If The Rabbi was wrong about this, then perhaps he was wrong about everything else, and we should indeed become Muslims! After all, Rambam's ketz historically did not come to pass.

"he doesn't claim to be a Navi whose predictions *have* to come true"
no, but Judaism does have people who were neviim or who spoke with ruach hakodesh. while he does not claim to possess it himself, as far as I know, he presents this under their authority, as their words, and the one true Torah view. compare to the autistics, who claim they are not prophets, but are merely explaining what the prophets of old have clearly said.

why did he oppose the skeptic in this way, if he really agreed with the skeptic? why did he insist that he knew this "for certain", and why did he claim to represent the authoritative view, stating "I am basing my words on Jewish writings throughout the centuries." Forget whether in that particular instance he lucked out, what drives someone to say this?

kol tuv,
josh

yaak said...

Since Rambam was trying to combat a specific false messiah in Teiman, I would guess that had he had a kabbalah for that, he would not have shared it. Rambam's goal was to take down the fake mashiach, and adding that this was indeed the predestined time, when this fellow just happened to have showed up, would have undermined Rambam's goals.

You're right. I retract my statement.

Also, could you imagine if he had said that mashiach was coming the next year, and then mashiach did not arrive. What sort of discouragement would that have presented to the people of that generation. If The Rabbi was wrong about this, then perhaps he was wrong about everything else, and we should indeed become Muslims! After all, Rambam's ketz historically did not come to pass.

And yet, the Teimanim are gung-ho for the Rambam nowadays, even though his prediction didn't come to pass, so this argument is disproven from a historical perspective.

why did he oppose the skeptic in this way, if he really agreed with the skeptic? why did he insist that he knew this "for certain", and why did he claim to represent the authoritative view, stating "I am basing my words on Jewish writings throughout the centuries." Forget whether in that particular instance he lucked out, what drives someone to say this?
He's basing his prediction on the אמרי בינה. Whether the אמרי בינה meant 5768 or 5769 is a matter of discussion, but he held it to mean 5769. Would you rather he used more cautious lingo so that people know that the entire basis of Judaism is not based on this prediction? OK, but I'm sure he knows his audience better than either of us do. He knows whether or not such statements are necessary. He deemed it unnecessary in order to inspire others toward Teshuva. And he's pretty much unparralleled in making Ba'alei Teshuva - so I'm not going to argue on his methods as they seem to be working quite well.

joshwaxman said...

"And yet, the Teimanim are gung-ho for the Rambam nowadays, even though his prediction didn't come to pass, so this argument is disproven from a historical perspective."

true they are gung-ho, but that was because it was the next generation, or perhaps two generations later, with the people's children grandchildren. forty years had passed, the fake mashiach had been executed, and the people had already reverted to Judaism from Islam. there is a difference between beshaas maaseh and generations after the fact.

if in Aish, they use fake Torah Codes among other methods to create baalei teshuva, and two generations later the really frum chareidim are convinced that Torah Codes are bunk, Aish would have still been successful at their immediate and long term goals. if on the other hand they show Torah Codes, and a month later this person who is now convinced is convinced the other way, that it is all false, and that "predictive" codes occur equally as well in Shakespeare, that Baal Teshuva might fall away.

"OK, but I'm sure he knows his audience better than either of us do. He knows whether or not such statements are necessary."
I know of at least one person, whom i delinked at his request, who was greatly upset at the rabbis who tricked him into moving to Israel because otherwise he would die in the apocalypse, several years ago.

i don't know if rabbi amnon yitzchak does follow up surveys.

but even if it in fact does work, certain methods can be upsetting. i recall the reaction of certain rabbis i know, when it was proposed in a kiruv conference that they study and emulate the missionary practices of the Southern Baptists, the missionaries. many rabbis would consider it disgraceful. i would frown at a Jewish version of the 700-club.

from other snippets I've seen, it seems that Rav Amnon Yitzchak does not believe that their is teshuva me-ahava, only from yireah. He said precisely that statement! and so he is scaring people with visions of the apocalypse, into doing teshuva. i would imagine that inviting people over for Shabbos meals, in the form of Hillel programs, such that they can experience the beauty of Judaism, and become baalei teshuva from ahava, could be effective. maybe not *as* effective, but the ends don't always justify the means.

and i wonder at the ends. i don't know what typical baalei teshuva of his are, but do they live normal, well balanced Jewish lives. or are they apocalyptic, *superstitious* Jews? one can go for quality rather than quantity.

kol tuv,
josh

גילוי said...

Why is 5768 or 5769 open for discussion? It isn't for anyone that has read the sefer from beginning to end. His prediction was proven false before he said it.

joshwaxman said...

maybe because we can distinguish the person from the prediction. that is, Imrei Binah predicted it as Yovel, which Imrei Bina thought to be 5768. if so, the prediction about Yovel stands for what *we* hold to be Yovel, even though it is inconsistent within Imrei Bina.

But then, I never learned Imrei Binah myself...

גילוי said...

No one holds that 5769 was Yovel independently. Imrei Binah says 5768, I have a shitah for 5776. Going by the Rambam, it would have been 5765... see my online book if you want more info:

http://sites.google.com/site/yovelgeulah/

Or check the comparison chart here:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p_YrEhIuWkGbLO9pASa1seA&gid=2

joshwaxman said...

"No one holds that 5769 was Yovel independently"
do you mean that Imrei Binah's reasoning that mashiach must arrive at yovel is tied in to his calculation of that same yovel?

if not, what do you mean by independently?

kol tuv,
josh

גילוי said...

No, I mean no one has a calculation that gives 5769 as Yovel. Just people saw it, saw that his year, 5768, is shmitah by our calculation, and assumed that we need to add 1, even though the author already added 1.

גילוי said...

The relation between the current Yovel and Moshiach is based on other teachings, but I believe the Yovel calculation there is not accurate.

joshwaxman said...

"No, I mean no one has a calculation that gives 5769 as Yovel. Just people saw it, saw that his year, 5768, is shmitah by our calculation, and assumed that we need to add 1"

ah, now i understand. thanks for the explanation.

kt,
josh

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin