The I Am of the Amidah.

[John D. Brey]

The Amidah (Hebrew: תפילת העמידה, Tefilat HaAmidah, 'The Standing Prayer'), also called the Shemoneh Esreh (שמנה עשרה 'eighteen'), is the central prayer of the Jewish liturgy. Observant Jews recite the Amidah at each of three daily prayer services in a typical weekday: morning (Shacharit), afternoon (Mincha), and evening (Ma'ariv). . . Due to its importance, in rabbinic literature it is simply called hatefila (התפילה, 'the prayer').

Wikipedia.​

The importance of The Prayer, the Amidah, or Shemoneh Esreh (eighteen blessings) can hardly be over estimated concerning Jewish thought: "There is never a day---never a morning, never an afternoon, never an evening ----without it" (Levenson 2006). Professor Jon D. Levenson goes on to say the prayer is therefore as authoritative "an epitome of rabbinic theology as one can find." Having been put together by the great chazal, with the express purpose of being found on the tongues of Jews every day and in every corner of the globe, the Amidah is thus the very heart and soul concerning the Jewish understanding of God, his Name, his glory, and his purpose in creation.



John

 

[Link]

בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה’ אֱלֹהֵינוּ וֵאלֹהֵי אֲבוֹתֵינוּ

אֱלֹהֵי אַבְרָהָם אֱלֹהֵי יִצְחָק וֵאלֹהֵי יַעֲקב

[וֵאלֹהֵי שָׁרָה אֱלֹהֵי רִבְקָה אֱלֹהֵי רָחֵל וֵאלֹהֵי לֵאָה]

הָאֵל הַגָּדוֹל הַגִּבּוֹר וְהַנּוֹרָא אֵל עֶלְיוֹן

גּוֹמֵל חֲסָדִים טוֹבִים וְקוֹנֵה הַכּל

[וְזוֹכֵר חַסְדֵּי אָבוֹת [וְאִמָהוֹת

וּמֵבִיא גוֹאֵל לִבְנֵי בְנֵיהֶם לְמַעַן שְׁמוֹ בְּאַהֲבָה

מֶלֶךְ עוֹזֵר וּמוֹשִׁיעַ וּמָגֵן

[בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה’ מָגֵן אַבְרָהָם [וּפוֹקֵד שָׂרָה

Baruch ata Adonai, Eloheinu v’elohei avoteinu

Elohei Avraham, Elohei Yitzchak, v’Elohei Ya’akov

[Elohei Sarah, Elohei Rivka, Elohei Rachel, v’Elohei Leah.]

Ha’El ha’gadol ha’gibor v’ha’nora

El Elyon, gomel hasadim tovim v’koneh ha’kol

Zocher hasdei avot [v’imahot]

Umevi go’el livnei v’neihem l’ma’an shemo b’ahavah

Melech ozer umoshiya umagen

Baruch ata adonai, magen Avraham [u’foked Sarah].

Blessed are You, Lord our God and God of our ancestors

God of Abraham, God of Isaac and God of Jacob

[God of Sarah, God of Rebecca, God of Rachel, and God of Leah.]

The great, mighty and awesome God, God most high

Who bestows loving kindness and goodness and who creates everything

Who remembers the good deeds of the Patriarchs [and Matriarchs]

And who will lovingly bring a redeemer to their children’s children for the sake of His name

King, Helper, Redeemer, and Shield

Blessed are you Adonai, Shield of Abraham [and Gracious Visitor of Sarah].

 

[Link]

This reminds me of Surah Quraysh particularly the phrase "Lord of this family/house" and Surah Fatiha 1:7 emphasis on the favored ones, as well as the three verses about "Lord of Musa and Haroun" (one inversed).

It also reminds me of verse 4:54 with 4:59 and Salawat in Salah to bless Mohammad and the family of Mohammad in the manner he blessed Abraham and the family of Abraham.

My understanding of Quran and what is says about his name, when I say:

"Rabial al-a'laa", I intend the words "Lord of the highest", which links back to Musa (a) being told "fear not you are the highest" and "God's word is the most exalted".

Thanks for sharing this.

 

[John D. Brey]

The Amidah (Hebrew: תפילת העמידה, Tefilat HaAmidah, 'The Standing Prayer'), also called the Shemoneh Esreh (שמנה עשרה 'eighteen'), is the central prayer of the Jewish liturgy. Observant Jews recite the Amidah at each of three daily prayer services in a typical weekday: morning (Shacharit), afternoon (Mincha), and evening (Ma'ariv). . . Due to its importance, in rabbinic literature it is simply called hatefila (התפילה, 'the prayer').

Wikipedia.​

The importance of The Prayer, the Amidah, or Shemoneh Esreh (eighteen blessings) can hardly be over estimated concerning Jewish thought: "There is never a day---never a morning, never an afternoon, never an evening ----without it" (Levenson 2006). Professor Jon D. Levenson goes on to say the prayer is therefore as authoritative "an epitome of rabbinic theology as one can find." Having been put together by the great chazal, with the express purpose of being found on the tongues of Jews every day and in every corner of the globe, the Amidah is thus the very heart and soul concerning the Jewish understanding of God, his Name, his glory, and his purpose in creation.

There are translators who indulge in periphrastic and verbose locutions like "in the flowering of thy saving power gives life" . . . A good translation ought to be authentic and free from deceptions. One must not read into the original what is not there.

Philip Birnbaum, Daily Prayer Book, Intro, p. 18.​

In the quotation above, Philip Birnbaum zero's in on the the very statement that's in the cross-member and which is the very crux of this examination. Because of the intense importance of the Amidah in Jewish life and theology, every single word was (and has been) vetted, examined, cross referenced with scripture, over and over again since the Amidah is something like an offering to God and fellow man concerning the deepest theological instinct of the orthodox Jew. In his own translation of the Hebrew text in the crosshairs, Professor Levenson (basing his translation on Birnbaum's) has the Hebrew read:

Who is like You, Lord of Power? And who can compare to You, O King who brings about death and restores life and makes salvation sprout? Faithful You are to revive the dead. Blessed are You, O Lord, who revive the dead.​

Right from the get-go this blessing, called Gevurot, strikes a serious student of text and theology as peculiar, at best, and even strange, or maybe presumptive, in the extreme. This is the case since theologically speaking (and we have Rashi to confirm this), "gevurah," sometimes translated "power," represents ---throughout the Tanakh --- God's power to judge. Gevurah is God's power to judge, and implement judgment. For instance, the noted Rashi is concerned (in his Torah commentary) that Gevurah (judgment) is noted in Genesis chapter one, instead of Hesed (grace, or love). Rashi is uncomfortable with the idea that Genesis chapter one represents some kind of "judgment" on the original creation, or that the original creation (as noted in chapter one of Genesis) is directly associated with judgment, rather than grace, hesed, love, since in Genesis chapter one, gevurah is the power noted in the text.

In this light, the serious student of theology could be forgiven for being concerned that the very element of God, his judgment, Gevurah, that has the power of death, and institutes the death sentence in every case, is treated in the prayer, and blessing (Gevurot) as though this element is equally the power of life, and resurrection. Worse, for the student who takes his theology seriously, is the fact that in the theology of the great sages like Luria and Abulafia, if not orthodox thought in general, "Gevurah" is situated as the left hand of God's powers (Samael), while mercy, and love, "Hesed," is stationed as his right hand. His left hand Gevurah (Samael) judges, while his right hand "Hesed" saves.




John

 

[John D. Brey]

My understanding of Quran and what is says about his name, when I say:

"Rabial al-a'laa", I intend the words "Lord of the highest", which links back to Musa (a) being told "fear not you are the highest" and "God's word is the most exalted".

Thanks for sharing this.

It's specifically the focus on Hashem, or on the names of God, that's the crux of this examination. Each of God's names represents some aspect of his purpose in creation. In the most simple dichotomy we have "Gevurah" and "Hesed." God's power, of Judgment (his left hand, Gevurah/Samael) versus his hand of Mercy (his right hand, Hesed).

Seguing into the meat of the discussion, we could note that so far, Gevurah has been associated with a more specific name, Samael, whereas Hesed has not. The verse from the siddur that's been noted above threatens to reveal the name of Hesed. Which could be why, as pointed out by Philip Birnbaum, this verse or phrase has been conspicuous in the number of times it's been subjected to "periphrastic and verbose locutions like `in the flowering of thy saving power gives life.'"

I noted how carefully the Amidah has been inspected by Jewish authorities, and Jewish tradition, since, unless I'm mistaken, we can find a gross, obvious, and remarkable, theological error, literally of biblical proportions, in the theology of the Amidah. Not an error based on theology outside of Jewish thought alone, but based on the very basic concepts of Jewish exegesis, and theological understanding. I propose that it's because of this error that the verse in the crosshairs of this examination is often subjected to readings that don't do justice to the Hebrew at the foundation of the text. I suspect that many many times, thoughtful Jews have spied what these eyes have spied, and been concerned to redirect the verse in question in a direction that would save it from careful examination.

In his Introduction to the Birnbaum Siddur, Philip Birnbaum said that too often Jews who've prayed the prayers all their lives claim they don't know what the words mean; they either don't read or understand the Hebrew, or they can't make sense of the translation into their native tongue be it German or English. They've basically been going through the motions without a deeper appreciation of what's at the heart of the prayers, and there's reason to believe, if this examination is correct, that they might be well advised to continue going through the motions rather than doing a deep examination since there appears to be a fly in the ointment if you take the cap off an look inside rather than merely enjoying the aroma and ambiance of the light of the words.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

In this light, the serious student of theology could be forgiven for being concerned that the very element of God, his judgment, Gevurah, that has the power of death, and institutes the death sentence in every case, is treated in the prayer, and blessing (Gevurot) as though this element is equally the power of life, and resurrection. Worse, for the student who takes his theology seriously, is the fact that in the theology of the great sages like Luria and Abulafia, if not orthodox thought in general, "Gevurah" is situated as the left hand of God's powers (Samael), while mercy, and love, "Hesed," is stationed as his right hand. His left hand Gevurah (Samael) judges, while his right hand "Hesed" saves.

The conception that God’s helping, saving power lies in His right hand, whereas punishment and destruction come from His left hand, springs from the depths of Jewish God-consciousness. God shows His essential power and greatness by creating and helping, by granting life and blessing, not by punishing and destroying. Punishment and destruction coming from Him are themselves only stages on the way to happiness and blessing. His left hand serves his right hand.

Rabbi Samson R. Hirsch, The Hirsch Chumash, Shemos 15:6.​

The second blessing in the Amidah, called "Gevurot," praises God for those things Judaism perceives as being associated with his his left hand (Gevurah):

Thou, O Lord, art mighty forever; thou revivest the dead; thou are powerful to save.​

Rabbi Hirsch points out that the left hand (of power, Gevurah) is at the service of the right hand (of mercy, Hesed). But the first statement from the second blessing of the Amidah (Gevurot) makes it appear that it's the mighty hand of God, his left, Gevurah, that's powerful to save. And no doubt if Israel needs saved by drowning the Egyptians, or defeating Amalek by the sword, then God's strong arm/hand, his left (Gevurah), is naturally your man. But the English translation speaks of "reviving" the dead as though Gevurah is able to "resurrect" the dead when that would presumably be the power of the right hand of God, Hesed.

The Hebrew word translated "revive" מחיה more literally means "preserve," or "sustain," and is used exclusively that way in the Tanakh. Secondarily, there's not a single use of the word for "preserving" or "sustaining" those who are already dead. In every case the word is used concerning the sustaining of the living and is never directly used as a verb associated with death or the dead.

God's left hand, Gevurah, can sustain the living, by destroying their enemies, or acquiring sustenance, but the left hand never "revives" nor raises the dead. And yet the Hebrew text of the second blessing of the Amidah appears as though it's being misused to insinuate that it's the left hand, Gevurah, that raises the dead?



John

 

[Link]

It's specifically the focus on Hashem, or on the names of God, that's the crux of this examination.

It seems the concept of God's chosen is more emphasized then that, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and their wives are special. And it ends with shield of Abraham.

 

[John D. Brey]

God's left hand, Gevurah, can sustain the living, by destroying their enemies, or acquiring sustenance, but the left hand never "revives" nor raises the dead. And yet the Hebrew text of the second blessing of the Amidah appears as though it's being misused to insinuate that it's the left hand, Gevurah, that raises the dead?

Thou sustainest the living with kindness [hesed] and revivest the dead with great mercy; thou supportest all who fall, and healest the sick; thou settest the captives free, and keepest faith with those who sleep in the dust. Who is like the, Lord of power?​

The next verse of the second blessing (Gevurot) says Gevurah sustains the living with grace, or "kindness" (Hesed). According to this reading, the right hand of God, merely sustains the living, while the left hand, Gevurah, revives or resurrects the dead. In the English translation above, the text implies that Gevurah revives the dead with mercy. But the Hebrew word for "mercy" isn't Hesed; it's a word (רחמים) meaning "favor" or "affection." The text is implying that Gevurah raises the dead whom he has affection with, or favors. The left hand of God is still doing the raising from the dead. And he's raising those he has affection for.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

It seems the concept of God's chosen is more emphasized then that, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and their wives are special. And it ends with shield of Abraham.

The first blessing of the prayer is Avot (ancestors) and praises God as the God of the biblical patriarchs. It's the second blessing, Gevurot, that's the crux of this examination.

And for good reason. There appears to be theology in the second blessing that's totally out of sync with not just Christian theology, but orthodox Jewish theology. It appears that this blessing has been purposely bollixed up so that no one notices how it justifies those elements of Christian doctrine that are incompatible with Jewish tradition.

This is important since it's not the case that the traditional Jewish reading is merely opposed to the Christian theology. It's that orthodox Jewish theology is distorted beyond recognition in an attempt, I suppose, to keep the sons and daughter of the patriarchs from seeing how this blessing and prayer (Gevurot) is parallel to the Gospels of the New Testament.



John

 

[Link]

The first blessing of the prayer is Avot (ancestors) and praises God as the God of the biblical patriarchs. It's the second blessing, Gevurot, that's the crux of this examination.

And for good reason. There appears to be theology in the second blessing that's totally out of sync with not just Christian theology, but orthodox Jewish theology. It appears that this blessing has been purposely bollixed up so that no one notices how it justifies those elements of Christian doctrine that are incompatible with Jewish tradition.

This is important since it's not the case that the traditional Jewish reading is opposed to the Christian theology in the crosshairs. It's that the orthodox Jewish theology is distorted beyond recognition in an attempt, I suppose, to keep the sons and daughter of the patriarchs from seeing how this blessing and prayer is parallel to the Gospels of the New Testament.



John

Salam

In Shiite Islam, the Imam of time (a) is considered spiritual father of believers in the sense they are born out of his guidance and light. And that Mohammad (s) and Ali (a) are two fathers of the nation.

Many Jews might interpret it to refer to patriarchs in a literal sense, that they are literal biological offspring, but it's unrealistic that the people who Moses (a) saved were only from them, rather, believers would all be oppressed together with them and be from all sorts of backgrounds in lineage. It's unrealistic to say only believers were from offspring of Jacob (a) and there were no other believers awaiting Musa (a).

The Quran shows Talut (a), believers who followed him, were "from him" and same with Abraham (a), those who followed him were "from him".

Closest to Ibrahim (a) were those who followed him.

But this prayer seems beautiful to me, if you understand the importance of Ahlulbayt. Musa's (a) nation also had an Ahlulbayt, it was Haroun (a) and his chosen offspring (a) including David (a). Ahlulbayt of Haroun (a) was meant to replicate position Ahlulbayt of Ibrahim (a). There are many verses in Torah and Tanakh that show this, but like everything else in the Tanakh, there are contradictions to it too.

 

[John D. Brey]

Thou sustainest the living with kindness [hesed] and revivest the dead with great mercy; thou supportest all who fall, and healest the sick; thou settest the captives free, and keepest faith with those who sleep in the dust. Who is like the, Lord of power?​

The next verse of the second blessing (Gevurot) says Gevurah sustains the living with grace, or "kindness" (Hesed). According to this reading, the right hand of God, merely sustains the living, while the left hand, Gevurah, revives or resurrects the dead. In the English translation above, the text implies that Gevurah revives the dead with mercy. But the Hebrew word for "mercy" isn't Hesed; it's a word (רחמים) meaning "favor" or "affection." The text is implying that Gevurah raises the dead whom he has affection with, or favors. The left hand of God is still doing the raising from the dead. And he's raising those he has affection for.

Who is like thee, Lord of Power?​

With this verse the prayer seems to take a sinister turn as it elevates the left hand of God (Gevurah) to the place where at best the right hand of God (Hesed) is made the servant not the master. The term "Lord of Power" is "Baal Gevurot" בעל גבורות:

O Lord our God, other lords beside they have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name.

Isaiah 26:13.​

In the statement above, Isaiah 26:13, the word for the "dominion" of the false gods over Israel is "Baal." Isaiah says only by Hashem will Israel refer to God, not by "Baal." The Amidah glorifies the "Lord of Power" (literally "powers") ---Baal Gevurot ---- "Who is like thee." Who is able to make war with thee (Revelation 13:4)?




John

 

[John D. Brey]

Who is like thee, Lord of Power?​

With this verse the prayer seems to take a sinister turn as it elevates the left hand of God (Gevurah) to the place where at best the right hand of God (Hesed) is made the servant not the master. The term "Lord of Power" is "Baal Gevurot" בעל גבורות:

O Lord our God, other lords beside they have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name.

Isaiah 26:13.​

In the statement above, Isaiah 26:13, the word for the "dominion" of the false gods over Israel is "Baal." Isaiah says only by Hashem will Israel refer to God, not by "Baal." The Amidah glorifies the "Lord of Power" (literally "powers") ---Baal Gevurot ---- "Who is like thee." Who is able to make war with thee (Revelation 13:4)?

Who resembles thee, O King? Thou bringest death and restorest life, and causest salvation to flourish. Thou art faithful to revive the dead. Blessed art though, O Lord, who revivest the dead.​

Throughout this blessing, the lord of power (baal gevurah) is functioning as the right hand of God, though it's the left ---Gevurah. Whereas the left hand of power is able to slay the enemies of Israel, and provide sustenance for the living, this blessing (Gevurot in the Amidah) implies he can also raise the dead when it's exclusively the right hand alone whereby life is restored, where death, which is the purview of the left hand, is overcome by the right.

Jesus went so far as to say that when the right hand is procuring salvation, it won't let the left hand know what it's doing. Here, in this quintessential Jewish theology (writ large in the Amidah), the left hand is rendered as though it's the master of the right. It can tell the right hand, mercy, Hesed, to raise those from the dead Gevurah finds favor with based on his own judgment. In this theology, the left hand is all powerful, such that mercy is under its power.

Thou bringest death and restorest life, and causest salvation to flourish.​

Professor Levenson translates the Hebrew more literally: "and makes salvation sprout." An yet an even more literally translation from the Hebrew reads: "and preserves Yeshua the Nazarene among the dead." Exegeted carefully, the Hebrew text speaks of "preserving" מחיה among the dead ממית the branch, or shoot צמה who is Yeshua ישועה.

As "Samael" is the proper name for Gevurah (the left hand of God), "Yeshua the Nazarene" נצר, or the "Branch" צמח, is the proper name for the right hand of God. In the reading proffered in the Amidah, Gevurah uses his power to become the soul hand of God both slaving and causing death, the dead, and then raising those he chooses from the grave by the same power and authority whereby he slew them.

Should someone proclaiming salvation through "mercy" and grace (Hesed) arise, say someone named Yeshua the Branch, Yeshua the Nazarene, and should he remind Baal Gevurah he's merely the left hand of God's power (able to sustain the living but with no power over those whom he slays), well, he (Yeshua the Nazarene) must be preserved in the grave with the rest of the dead who've not achieved the fine favor of Baal Gevurah.

According to thy name, O God, so is thy praise unto the ends of the earth: Thy right hand is full of righteousness.

Psalms 48:10.​

That thy beloved may be delivered; Save with thy right hand and hear me.

Psalms 60:5.​

Why withdrawest thou thy hand, even thy right hand? Pluck it out of thy
bosom.

Psalms 74:11.​

Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, Upon the son of man whom though madest strong for thyself.

Psalms 80:17.​

Thou hast a mighty arm: strong is thy hand, and high is thy right hand.

Psalms 89:13.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

Should someone proclaiming salvation through "mercy" and grace (Hesed) arise, say someone named Yeshua the Branch, Yeshua the Nazarene, and should he remind Baal Gevurah he's merely the left hand of God's power (able to sustain the living but with no power over those whom he slays), well, he (Yeshua the Nazarene) must be preserved in the grave with the rest of the dead who've not achieved the fine favor of Baal Gevurah.

Who resembles thee, O King? Thou bringest death and restorest life, and causest salvation to flourish. Thou art faithful to revive the dead. Blessed art though, O Lord, who revivest the dead.​

The bolded statement is the heart of the Amidah. Professor Levenson interprets it to say, "and makes salvation sprout," while a literal, if perhaps bizarre, interpretation reads, "and preserves Yeshua the Nazarene among the dead.":

:ממית ומחיה ומצמיח ישועה

As strange as the second interpretation sounds, it's sound based on numerous exegetical principles and nuance. Case in point is the Hebrew word מחיה which though it means "preserve" life, and never "resurrect from the dead" (it's never related to death in the Tanakh) is nevertheless being used, against the grain of the biblical Hebrew, to speak of "preserving the dead" though in the hands of the Jewish sages this is suppose to refer to "resurrection," not "preserving" the dead.

The peculiarity of this strange manipulation of the biblical Hebrew, and in a place speaking of "salvation" as resurrection from the dead, is literally ground-zero concerning the dichotomy between modern Judaism and Christian exegesis. There's hardly a more seminal exemplification of the differences of exegesis that are used as the root and foundation for the two differing faiths.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

The peculiarity of this strange manipulation of the biblical Hebrew, and in a place speaking of "salvation" as resurrection from the dead, is literally ground-zero concerning the dichotomy between modern Judaism and Christian exegesis. There's hardly a more seminal exemplification of the differences of exegesis that are used as the root and foundation for the two differing faiths.

The Christian foundation and root for determining the nature of the salvation that is resurrection from the dead starts in the beginning with Genesis 2:9:

And out of the ground the Lord made to sprout the tree that is pleasant to sight and good for food, as well as the tree of life, and also in the midst of the garden the the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Genesis 2:9.​

There are three trees in the garden. First is the one that's ornamental, that's pleasant to the sight, and good for food too, the enlarged breasts. Second is the tree of life in the midst of the earthen body previously said to be sprouting the enlarged breasts (which in all cases speak of an impending birth, a pregnant mammal). Lastly is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that's also in the middle of the garden of the human body, precisely where the tree of life resides beneath the enlarged breasts that are pleasant to the sight and good for food.

The Christian doctrine of resurrection from the dead, and specifically as it relates to the Amidah (and most precisely the verse in the crosshairs of this examination) begins with the exegesis of Genesis 2:9, the science of which, lends itself to the Christian version of resurrection from the dead as salvation.

Whereas in all other mammals, enlarged breasts speak loudly of an impending birth (the mammal is pregnant), in the human mammal the female's enlarged breasts are perceived as the ornament par excellent on the human body. The enlarged breasts of the human female are an ornamental enticement to the male, and not a sign signifying that the female has already been taken, has already lost her virginity, i.e., that the veil of her temple is already rent. Secondarily, the same enlarged breasts, after birth, become the quintessential cornucopia of "good food." Never in his life will the male of the species so enjoy the source and the food that sustains his life.

The scientific fact that only the human female possesses the ornament of salvation, the enlarged breasts of a virgin mammal, lends itself to correcting the plethora of incorrect assumptions that have contaminated the exegesis of the scripture from the get-go. This scientific knowledge concerning the uniqueness of the human virgin, and her ornamentally enlarged breasts, has a direct relationship to the verse from the Amidah that's in the crosshairs of this examination:

"and makes salvation sprout," or "and preserves Yeshua the Nazarene among the dead."

:ממית ומחיה ומצמיח ישועה
​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

The scientific fact that only the human female possesses the ornament of salvation, the enlarged breasts of a virgin mammal, lends itself to correcting the plethora of incorrect assumptions that have contaminated the exegesis of the scripture from the get-go. This scientific knowledge concerning the uniqueness of the human virgin, and her ornamentally enlarged breasts, has a direct relationship to the verse from the Amidah that's in the crosshairs of this examination:

"and makes salvation sprout," or "and preserves Yeshua the Nazarene among the dead."

:ממית ומחיה ומצמיח ישועה
​

The keyword in the Hebrew text above is the word צמח "sprout." Salvation will "sprout" from out of the adamah ---be it the womb (the tree of life) or the grave (sheol); the Amidah makes it the latter. The Amidah makes Baal Gevurah, the Lord of Power, preserve מחיה salvation in sheol, the grave, or else he "resurrects" it from the grave; in which case it would be "sprouting" צמח from the grave; salvation would sprout from the grave.

The Amidah implies that salvation occurs when the power of Gevurah, the left hand of God, raises the dead from out of the grave. The Christian take is that salvation ---Yeshua---sprouts first from the womb, the adamah of the second Eve, and is thereafter consigned, with the idea of preserving, salvation ---Yeshua---in the grave, so that salvation is solely left in the left hand of God which is clearly not right but underhanded.

Again, the keyword in all this is צמח "sprout." And when a particular word in the biblical Hebrew is found out to be so seminal, so singular, in the meaning of the text, the careful exegete seeks out the sacred-meaning of the word by dissecting it as though the word retained its hiero-glyphic spirit; which it does. In this particular case, seeking out the sacred meaning of the glyphs, the Hebrew consonants, is too perfect since the difference between a sacred glyph/consonant/word versus a demotic one is whether the word "sprouts" out of the soil as though it were merely hidden there from the get-go, or whether the writer deposits some seminal spirit he possesses into the words he then wouldn't be uncovering but producing.

A priest "uncovers" the soil that allows the sacred glyph to "sprout" out from where it always resided, while a demotic, non-priestly author, uses what his pen-is to participate in what's produced when the soil is opened by means of a process that allows the non-priestly author to call a spade a spade since he knows how it was produced and that he's part-wise seminal in its existence. He used his spade not to free a captive but to produce something he finds captivating since it's partly his or him.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

A priest "uncovers" the soil that allows the sacred glyph to "sprout" out from where it always resided, while a demotic, non-priestly author, uses what his pen-is to participate in what's produced when the soil is opened by means of a process that allows the non-priestly author to call a spade a spade since he knows how it was produced and that he's part-wise seminal in its existence.

The root of the word צמח is the word צמם, which, the latter, means a "veil," or to veil something (Gesenius). The final consonant, which seals the word, i.e., the mem-sofi ם (the final letter of the word) is, in Hebrew letter symbolism, representative of a "womb." The open mem מ is, according to tradition, an evolution from the closed-mem, the mem-sofi ם. The root word for "sprouting" צמח is the word for a "closed-veil" צמם. Furthermore, in the word for a closed "veil" the letter that seals the word is itself a close-womb, a closed-mem, a womb retaining its veil of virginity.

The word for "sprout" צמח is the word for a closed-veil (צמם) but where the closed-womb, with the veil still covering it, is instead opened: the chet ח has an opening at the bottom where the mem-sofi is closed, sealed, veiled. The word for "sprout" or "sprouting" implies, the opening of a closed-mem (mem-sofi), a closed-womb.

צמם
צמח

The second word, from the root (above it), implies the female veil צמם, has been opened not by the left hand (the tree of knowledge of good and evil) but by the right hand, and from the inside out, such that salvation "sprouts" ala Isaiah 9:6-7, from a closed-mem, a closed-mom, a mem-sofi, precisely because salvation's right hand has opened the closed-veil that in all other cases is opened by the flesh made in the image of Baal Gevurah.

Eve and Mary's breasts are enlarged prior to the opening of their bodies because they both come into the world pregnant despite their virginity. One has her mem opened by Baal Gevurah, and the other doesn't. Mary's womb is closed until the birth of Yeshua. Yeshua, salvation, opens the closed-mem with his right hand and "sprouts" out. Yeshua provides salvation when Baal Gevurah consigns him to the grave, sheol, opening that soil as he opens the soil of all mothers of all other children, in an attempt to preserve his power of death over and against the right hand of righteousness and salvation: Yeshua.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

The root of the word צמח is the word צמם, which, the latter, means a "veil," or to veil something (Gesenius). The final consonant, which seals the word, i.e., the mem-sofi ם (the final letter of the word) is, in Hebrew letter symbolism, representative of a "womb." The open mem מ is, according to tradition, an evolution from the closed-mem, the mem-sofi ם. The root word for "sprouting" צמח is the word for a "closed-veil" צמם. Furthermore, in the word for a closed "veil" the letter that seals the word is itself a close-womb, a closed-mem, a womb retaining its veil of virginity.

The word for "sprout" צמח is the word for a closed-veil (צמם) but where the closed-womb, with the veil still covering it, is instead opened: the chet ח has an opening at the bottom where the mem-sofi is closed, sealed, veiled. The word for "sprout" or "sprouting" implies, the opening of a closed-mem (mem-sofi), a closed-womb.

צמם
צמח

The second word, from the root (above it), implies the female veil צמם, has been opened not by the left hand (the tree of knowledge of good and evil) but by the right hand, and from the inside out, such that salvation "sprouts" ala Isaiah 9:6-7, from a closed-mem, a closed-mom, a mem-sofi, precisely because salvation's right hand has opened the closed-veil that in all other cases is opened by the flesh made in the image of Baal Gevurah.

When precisely the resurrection takes place the benediction does not specify. The mention of God's power "to save" and especially the phrase "makes salvation sprout" (masmiah yeshu'a) suggests that the miraculous revival forms part of an eschatological scenario. Later on, following long-standing biblical precedent, the fifteenth benediction of the same prayer will use the language of "sprouting" (semah/tasmiah) to refer to the expected messianic king, "the Branch of David" ---an unmistakable allusion to the end-time restoration of the people Israel after their long degradation.

Jon D. Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel, p. 4.​

In the fifteenth benediction, or prayer, mentioned by Professor Levenson, the "sprouting" is directly related to the scion of David, the messianic son of David, Messiah himself:

Speedily cause the offspring of thy servant David to flourish, and let his glory be exalted by thy help, for we hope for thy deliverance all day. Blessed art thou, O Lord, who causest salvation to flourish.​

The translation "flourish" rather than "sprout" ignores Birnbaum's adage, One must not read into the original what is not there. And the translation "glory" instead of "horn" (for קרן) makes it less likely that the reader connects the "sprouting" of the scion of David to the seminal passage in the Psalms (132:17):

There shall I cause David's horn קרן to sprout צמח. There I have set in order a lamp נר for My anointed.​

What does "sprouting" צמח have to do with a ’lamp’? Gesenius Hebrew lexicon says this about צמח:

צָמַח TO SPROUT FORTH, used of plants, Gen. 2:5; 41:6; of hairs, Lev. 13:37. Transitively, Ecc. 2:6, יַעַר צוֹמֵחַ עֵצִים “the wood sprouting forth,” i.e. producing trees. Metaph. used of the first beginnings of things which occur in the world, Isa. 42:9; 43:19; 58:8. (The primary idea appears to be that of shining forth, compare Syr. ܨܡܰܚ to shine, Arab. طمح id).​

Since in the biblical Hebrew there are other words for "sprouting," Gesenius is trying to explain the unique nuance of these particular consonants צמח and particularly in the context where they're used. He rightly claims these three consonants imply "the first beginnings of things which occur in the world." He next connects this newness to the Arabic word طمح "to shine." A "sprout" is not another branch out of the stock of the tree, but a wholly, shiny, new "shoot" growing, asexually, out of the root beneath the sexual stock. The "sprout" is a basal-shoot and not a branch growing out of the sexual stock of the tree.

Trees reproduce two ways, sexually, by the seed of the fruit, ala through germination, and secondarily through coppicing, whereby a new tree grows, asexually, out of the original root of the tree. These "sprouts" that shoot out of the root, are not just another branch of the tree; they're new trees that are clones of the original.

The use of צמח isn't just speaking of a garden variety "sprout" but a shiny new branch so that it's not surprising that one third of the times the word is used in the Tanakh it refers to the messianic Branch of the Lord, the Branch that sprouts from the line of David as the resurrection of that kingly line. Except that this kingly line is now said to be something new, it's also stated to be the resurrection of a priestly line as well?

Behold the man who's named Branch and who will sprout צמח out of his place and build the temple of the Lord . . . and shall sit and rule upon his throne, and shall be a priest upon his throne.

Zechariah 6:12-13.​

John

 

[dybmh]

@John D. Brey ,

Hi John, I have a few comments on this.

First you've mentioned a few times that Samael is the proper name for the left side/hand of God. Can you provide a citation for this? My recollection is that Samael is associated with the sitra-achra, the other side. Not the left side. My recollection is that the left side is associated with the angel Gavriel ( similar to gevurah ). But I could be wrong. I'm interested in your thoughts.

Second, the translation you're using for zecharia 6:13 is different from my preferred source. I looked at an interlinear translation and it appears that there are two people referenced: a king and a priest. See the last word of the verse "שְׁנֵיהֶֽם" "two of them".

 

[John D. Brey]

@John D. Brey ,

Hi John, I have a few comments on this.

First you've mentioned a few times that Samael is the proper name for the left side/hand of God. Can you provide a citation for this? My recollection is that Samael is associated with the sitra-achra, the other side. Not the left side. My recollection is that the left side is associated with the angel Gavriel ( similar to gevurah ). But I could be wrong. I'm interested in your thoughts.

The very name "Samael" in Hebrew, means "left hand" שמאל. It also means the "name of God" שמ–אל. In Exodus 23:20 God tells Moses he (God) is sending an angel to guard Israel on the way to the promised land by killing their enemies and providing their needs. But God tells Moses to obey whatever the angel commands for he will not forgive sins or rebellion, get this, "for my name is in him." Hashem is hidden in Samael (the right hand of God is hidden in his left, for a time). Samael has taken it upon himself to become judge, jury, and executioner. But it's going too far to believe, preach, or pray, to Samael for resurrection from the dead. He doesn't have that power.

Most of the Jewish Professors I study (Green, Wolfson, Idel, et al.) equate Gevurah with Samael. I can dig up references if you like. And to believe that "Baal Gevurot" the "god of powers," is the savior, or that salvation from the grave is his purview, is pretty over the top.

You have caused us to feel the force of Your "left hand"; now cause Your "right hand" which bestows salvation, to come into play on our behalf.

The Hirsch Tehillim, Commentary on Psalms 60:7.​

Second, the translation you're using for zecharia 6:13 is different from my preferred source. I looked at an interlinear translation and it appears that there are two people referenced: a king and a priest. See the last word of the verse "שְׁנֵיהֶֽם" "two of them".

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch צמח of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.

Jeremiah 33:14-15.​

There's an argument that "judgment" is associated with the king, and righteousness with the priest. Throughout the Tanakh the sprout of David is said to fulfill both positions. In his commentary on the verse in Zechariah (6:13), Rabbi Samson Hirsch's son, Dr. Mendel Hirsch, says:

It is not that the priest will be king, but rather: "the king will be a priest on his throne" [the laity will rule in a priestly fashion]. And all his power is devoted to the realization of the word of God which emanates from the Sanctuary. There will be complete agreement between the two: עצת שלום between king and priest. Regarding this king (המלך המשיח [I.L.) and his priestly rule, cf. Yeshayahu 11:1-10.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch צמח of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.

Jeremiah 33:14-15.​

Here, Jeremiah 33:16, and earlier, Jeremiah 23:6, we read that this Branch צמח that sprouts צמח will be called by a specific name. This is pretty important since Jeremiah already calls the messianic son of David a branch or sprout. The messianic son of David, who is a "branch," or "sprout," will be called a specific --hidden ---name (Isa. 65:15-16) related to his being a branch or sprout.

. . . He shall be called the Lord our Righteousness.

Jeremiah 23:6, and 33:16.​

Jeremiah claims that the messianic son of David (who is a "sprout") will be called "the Lord our righteousness." The prophet is dealing with the deepest kind of oracle when he inquires into the specifics of Hashem, the Name, thereby giving clues to those for whom this oracle is designed. Though the messianic son of David may indeed be called "the Lord of Righteousness" the prophet is undeniably onto something more specific not withstanding the problematic nature of calling the messianic son of David Lord. The prophet is implying that there's a specific name that will be used of the messianic son of David that will, at that time, in those days, leave no doubt who this personage is, and that this particular person, with this specific name, is Messiah.

There is a similar verse above, 23:6, regarding the King Messiah, who will be given the same appellation.

Redak's commentary on Jeremiah 33:16 in Judaic Press, The Book of the Prophets, Jeremiah.​

Redak is commenting on the fact that a distinction between Jeremiah 23:6, and 33:16, is that in the former, it speaks of a personal pronoun "he," while in the latter the pronoun is "she," the city. Nevertheless, there's no way out of the fact that the messianic son of David is being called Lord. The Jewish sages do some impressive gymnastics to get around this fact, but a fair-minded examination of the texts and commentary makes is clear that these two verses are as problematic for modern Judaism as is a literal translation of Psalms 2:6, or 110:1. Why is the messianic son of David being called Lord?

The prophet's oracle will both answer that question and give the actual name of the messianic son of David.



John