Rabbi YY Jacobson: Against the Rambam and Ramban, Jesus could have theoretically come back to be mashiach

This was brought to my attention by Moriah, in a comment on this post.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe based his discussions of mashiach on the Rambam. To cite the Publisher's Forward to The Laws of Moshiach:

Since the time of the Rambam (1135-1204), it has been impossible to discuss the subject of Moshiach and the Era of the Redemption without direct reference to the last two chapters of his monumental halachic code, the Mishneh Torah. For example, it is these two chapters that form the basis of the whole of the next publication of Sichos In English - I Await His Coming Every Day: Studies by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson (shlita) on the Rambam's Conception of Moshiach and the Ultimate Redemption.

In the Rambam's Mishneh Torah, in these chapters in hilchos Melachim, the Rambam writes:

ח  [ד] וְאִם יַעֲמֹד מֶלֶךְ מִבֵּית דָּוִיד הוֹגֶה בַּתּוֹרָה וְעוֹסֵק בַּמִּצְווֹת כְּדָוִיד אָבִיו, כְּפִי תּוֹרָה שֶׁבִּכְתָב וְשֶׁבְּעַל פֶּה, וְיָכֹף כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵילֵךְ בָּהּ וּלְחַזַּק בִּדְקָהּ, וְיִלָּחֵם מִלְחָמוֹת ה'--הֲרֵי זֶה בְּחֶזְקַת שְׁהוּא מָשִׁיחַ:  אִם עָשָׂה וְהִצְלִיחַ, וְנִצַּח כָּל הָאֻמּוֹת שֶׁסְּבִיבָיו, וּבָנָה מִקְדָּשׁ בִּמְקוֹמוֹ, וְקִבַּץ נִדְחֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל--הֲרֵי זֶה מָשִׁיחַ בַּוַּדַּאי.

ט  וְאִם לֹא הִצְלִיחַ עַד כֹּה, אוֹ נֶהְרַג--בַּיָּדוּעַ שְׁאֵינוּ זֶה שֶׁהִבְטִיחָה עָלָיו תּוֹרָה, וַהֲרֵי הוּא כְּכָל מַלְכֵי בֵּית דָּוִיד הַשְּׁלֵמִים הַכְּשֵׁרִים שֶׁמֵּתוּ. וְלֹא הִעְמִידוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֵלָא לְנַסּוֹת בּוֹ רַבִּים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר "וּמִן-הַמַּשְׂכִּילִים יִכָּשְׁלוּ, לִצְרוֹף בָּהֶן וּלְבָרֵר וְלַלְבֵּן--עַד-עֵת קֵץ:  כִּי-עוֹד, לַמּוֹעֵד" (ראה דנייאל יא,לה).

and it continues. To translate:

If a king will arise from the House of David who delves deeply into the study of the Torah and, like David his ancestor, observes its mitzvos as prescribed by the Written Law and the Oral Law; if he will compel all of Israel to walk in [the way of the Torah] and repair the breaches [in its observance]; and if he will fight the wars of G-d; - we may, with assurance, consider him Moshiach. If he succeeds in the above, builds the [Beis Ha]Mikdash on its site, and gathers in the dispersed remnant of Israel, he is definitely the Moshiach.

If he did not succeed to this degree or he was killed, he surely is not [the redeemer] promised by the Torah. [Rather,] he should be considered as all the other proper and legitimate kings of the Davidic dynasty who died. G-d only caused him to arise in order to test the multitude. As it is written [Daniel 11:35], "Some of the wise men will stumble, to purge, to refine, and to clarify, until the appointed time, for it is yet to come."

Thus, according to the Rambam, once a messianic candidate is killed, he can no longer be the redeemer. It is bayadua, known. This is a sore point for meshichist Lubavitchers, who kvetch it by making the distinction between neherag, "killed", and meis, "died". However, even with this kvetch, certainly Jesus, who was killed, and did not fulfill his messianic mission, would not be a candidate for mashiach.






Now listen to is what Rabbi YY Jacobson (a Chabad Rabbi) has to say. In the video below, he gives some good reasons why Jews reject Christianity. But then, at the 37 minute mark, he says something troubling and against the Rambam:





"I once saw an author, he wrote, the reason that Jews reject Christianity is because the Christians believe in a second coming. They believe that Yeshu, the father of Christianity is going to come back, from the dead. He was resurrected, he's going to be resurrected, he's going to come back, as a second coming. He already came as the messiah and he's going to come back. And because of that, Jews can't believe in Christianity, because this idea is antithetical to their faith.

Again, this is a very shallow perspective. It doesn't deal with the basis of the issue, understanding what was the basis of Jewish faith. It's not because we don't believe that Yeshu made miracles, or we don't believe that he could come back. That's not the issue.

In fact, take a look at source #5, I'll show you an interesting thing. The Talmud says inSanhedrin צח amud beis:

{Source #5 from the linked PDF:

}
Amar Rav, Rav, one of the greatest Talmudic Sages said, Iy min chaya hu, If the messiah will come from somebody who's alive, kegon Rabbenu Hakadosh, it will be somebody of the caliber of Rabbenu HaKadosh, our holy master Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, the author of the Mishna. Iy min meisaya hu, If the mashiach is going to come from somebody who died, kegon Daniel ish Chamudos, it's going to be somebody like the prophet Daniel.

So Rav himself says that mashiach come come either from somebody who's alive or who passed away. So to say that we, the only reason that we rejected Christianity is 'cause the belief that mashiach is going to come from somebody who died already, from Yeshu, and that's the reason we reject Christianity, so what are we suspecting Rav, God-forbid, in harboring ideas of Christianity? That's ridiculous, that's absurd. According to Rav, mashiach could be come somebody who's alive, somebody who's alive God may designate as the redeemer of the Jewish people of the world, or maybe somebody passed away. Could be like Daniel, like he says, or somebody else who passed away. 

The basis why the Jewish people rejected Christianity thus has nothing to do with this. It has to do with the fact that the message of Christianity came to undermine the Torah. It undermined the Torah, the prophecy of Moshe Rabbenu. Its message was a message that contradicts the truth of Torah, and this, for the Jewish people, meant that it was false. It was completely dishonest. Have a good night."

Now, it is true that the Rambam talks about the execution of Jesus in a beis din. And it is true that Jesus' message was antithetical to traditional Jewish belief and practice.

But to say that according to normative Jewish belief, we have no problem in a mashiach who is killed coming back to be mashiach?! It is explicitly against the Rambam, and thus the Lubavitcher Rebbe who took the Rambam as normative!

In terms of his shallow interpretation of the gemara in Sanhedrin, he fails to note that Rashi on that gemara gives two interpretations, one of which has the mashiach patterned after a living or dead figure, rather than being the living or dead figure themselves. And that according to that interpretation, one need not "suspect Rav, God-forbid, of harboring ideas of Christianity" at all. And that according to the second explanation of Rashi, it is specifically Daniel, and not, as Rabbi Jacobson extended it, anybody who died. Nor does he speak to the issue of just how normative this is.

Rabbi Jacobson, for example, does not cite the Ramban, Nachmanides:

The next proof is brought from Nachmanides' personal record of a debate he held with a Christian apostate. He quotes himself as arguing that as long as Jesus had not fulfilled the prophesies associated with the redemption it is impossible for him to accept Jesus as Moshiach. The author asserts that the defining factor for Nachmanides is death. At which point, if the man in question has not become Moshiach in its fullest sense, he certainly will never become Moshiach in the future. 

So, when Rabbi Jacobson says that:

I once saw an author, he wrote, the reason that Jews reject Christianity is because the Christians believe in a second coming. 

The "author" he is rejecting is the Rambam and the Ramban!

The Rambam and Ramban, by the way, were not unaware of the gemara in Sanhedrin either. They understood it at least as well as Rabbi Jacobson.

I understand Rabbi YY Jacobson's motivation in saying this. After all, if mashiach can come back from the dead, then so can the Rebbe. But ultimately, this presentation is a corruption and misrepresentation of classic Jewish thought on the subject.