The Suffering Servant in Jewish Kabbalah.

[John D. Brey]

As you know, the Talmud is a text where many ideas are considered and debated, including those that were ultimately rejected. IOW, there are passages in the Talmud that are a bit like reading the minority view of a Supreme Court decision. We cannot know the Jewish position simply by reading the Talmud, just as we cannot know the position of the Supreme Court by reading the minority position.

. . . Comparing the back and forth found in the Talmud with the back and forth found in Supreme Court deliberations, and then declaring a given opinion in the Talmud (say Sanhedrin 98b) to be similar to a minority opinion from the Supreme Court, courts the question of what, and where, we might find the majority opinion of the Talmud, or the Jew?



John

 

[John D. Brey]

I do not believe Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus, I believe it refers to servants/slaves in general.

I agree with you. It is not a messianic passage.

In Maimonides day, report came from Yemen of a false-messiah (Samawal al-Maghribi) who was confusing Jews by claiming he was Messiah. Maimonides penned a long, heart-felt, and important letter to Yemen (which is now a book), to convince the Jews in Yemen that Samawal al-Maghribi was a heretic and not the Messiah. His tool for convincing them was some careful and powerful exegesis and interpretation of Isaiah (to include the suffering servant chapter 53) which lends itself to our more advanced, retrospective, perspective. Note is made of our more advanced frame of reference since today we have access to ancient texts and Hebrew exegesis that give us a clearer perspective on exegeting the Hebrew of Isaiah than was available even to the feted (and rightly so) Maimonides.

As for the nature of his appearance, nothing will be known about it before it takes place. The Messiah is not a person about whom it may be predicted that he will be the son of a certain person or from a certain family, on the contrary, he will be unknown before his revelation; and he will validate the truth of his claim and lineage through signs and wonders.​

​

Maimonides, Letter to Yemen.​

Two things stand out about Maimonides' statement. We know that Messiah is of the lineage of David, and we know, paralleling Maimonides' statement, that the significant signs and wonders are related to a "miraculous" conception and birth the deciphering of which will justify his messianic claim by means of how his birth reveals (significantly and wondrously) his linage and its relationship to his messianic claim. The signs and wonders related to the revelation of Messiah's person, come, as Maimonides notes, from the decipherable nature of his miraculous birth as it's discussed throughout the Tanakh with emphasis on Isaiah, and special emphasis on chapter 53 of Isaiah.

Scripture describes his mysterious arrival, saying, "Behold a man whose name is "Shoot" (Zemach), who will spring up out of his place (Zechariah 6:12). Isaiah also describes his emergence without his father or mother being known. "He will rise up like a sapling, [like a root from dry ground]" (Isaiah 53:2).​

​

Ibid.​

John

 

[IndigoChild5559]

. . . Comparing the back and forth found in the Talmud with the back and forth found in Supreme Court deliberations, and then declaring a given opinion in the Talmud (say Sanhedrin 98b) to be similar to a minority opinion from the Supreme Court, courts the question of what, and where, we might find the majority opinion of the Talmud, or the Jew?



John

Good question. The answers are passed on orally and in other written texts, but regardless, there is disagreement over it. Now matter which Jewish text you go to, whether it is the Torah, the Talmud, Rashi's commentaries, The Torah Mishnah, the Shulchan Aruch, or what have you, the things within it are disputed by religious Jews.

The difference between the diversity of Jews and the diversity of Christians, is that we have no history of killing each other over our disputes. For reasons I don't entirely understand, Jewish culture creates a greater tolerance for differences. Two rabbis can argue quite feverishly over a passage in the Talmud, and then go out to lunch together. As a Jew, I can go into any synagogue, Orthodox, Conservative, or Reform, and feel I am with family, all praising God together.

 

[John D. Brey]

In Maimonides day, report came from Yemen of a false-messiah (Samawal al-Maghribi) who was confusing Jews by claiming he was Messiah. Maimonides penned a long, heart-felt, and important letter to Yemen (which is now a book), to convince the Jews in Yemen that Samawal al-Maghribi was a heretic and not the Messiah. His tool for convincing them was some careful and powerful exegesis and interpretation of Isaiah (to include the suffering servant chapter 53) which lends itself to our more advanced, retrospective, perspective. Note is made of our more advanced frame of reference since today we have access to ancient texts and Hebrew exegesis that give us a clearer perspective on exegeting the Hebrew of Isaiah than was available even to the feted (and rightly so) Maimonides.

As for the nature of his appearance, nothing will be known about it before it takes place. The Messiah is not a person about whom it may be predicted that he will be the son of a certain person or from a certain family, on the contrary, he will be unknown before his revelation; and he will validate the truth of his claim and lineage through signs and wonders.​

​

Maimonides, Letter to Yemen.​

Two things stand out about Maimonides' statement. We know that Messiah is of the lineage of David, and we know, paralleling Maimonides' statement, that the significant signs and wonders are related to a "miraculous" conception and birth the deciphering of which will justify his messianic claim by means of how his birth reveals (significantly and wondrously) his linage and its relationship to his messianic claim. The signs and wonders related to the revelation of Messiah's person, come, as Maimonides notes, from the decipherable nature of his miraculous birth as it's discussed throughout the Tanakh with emphasis on Isaiah, and special emphasis on chapter 53 of Isaiah.

Scripture describes his mysterious arrival, saying, "Behold a man whose name is "Shoot" (Zemach), who will spring up out of his place (Zechariah 6:12). Isaiah also describes his emergence without his father or mother being known. "He will rise up like a sapling, [like a root from dry ground]" (Isaiah 53:2).​

​

Ibid.​

Maimonides states that no one will be able to authenticate Messiah's pedigree as Messiah until after he arrives. His arrival is a decree, or chok חק, whose prophetic signifier can only be evaluated retrospectively, ala the chukkim חקים, or decrees, the meaning of which are hidden, unrevealed, until, as the Jewish sages tell us, they're revealed by Messiah once he is himself revealed. Maimonides thus places a huge emphasis on the "signs and wonders" that reveal that Messiah is in fact Messiah. In context, these signs and wonders are, by Maimonides reckoning, related in some way to his birth, which, retrospectively, reveals who he is. Something about his birth is a wondrous sign that signifies he's Messiah.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

Scripture describes his mysterious arrival, saying, "Behold a man whose name is "Shoot" (Zemach), who will spring up out of his place (Zechariah 6:12). Isaiah also describes his emergence without his father or mother being known. "He will rise up like a sapling, [like a root from dry ground]" (Isaiah 53:2).​

​

Ibid.​

What Maimonides chooses to label his "mysterious arrival," is actually his miraculous birth. Maimonides next quotes Zechariah 6:12 pointing out that Messiah's name is "Zemach," which speaks of a "shoot," which even the Hebrew word, "zemach" (צמח), relates to a basal-shoot, which is an asexual growth from the root of an otherwise sexually propagating plant (the propagation often being caused by the coppicing of the sexual branch in order to cause the basal-shoot to shoot up from the root rather than the sexual fruit) . The miraculous sign that comes from Messiah's unique birth is that he will be conceived, and born, as a biological basal-shoot, a Jewish male, "shooting" up from the root of Judaism rather than through sexual propagation.

To speak of Messiah "shooting" up from the root of Judaism rather than through normal sexual propagation fits too perfectly the fact that the root of Judaism is Abraham's circumspect coppicing of his sexual branch (Genesis chapter 17). Maimonides states that no one will be able to authenticate Messiah's identity until his "mysterious arrival" proves his messianic lineage by means of his unique birth/arrival; a birth and arrival that authenticates his identity once it's realized that his actual conception is the true result of Abraham's ritual coppicing of his fathering organ, his sexual branch, ritual circumcision, brit milah.

By Maimonides' precise reasoning, the only way to know Messiah is indeed Messiah is if his "mysterious arrival" (unique birth) justifies and authenticates his messianic-lineage from the root of Judaism as a "shoot" צמח (an asexual conception resulting in virgin birth), making him Abraham's spiritual firstborn, conceived from the cutting off, the coppicing, of the branch through which Abraham conceived and bore all his natural born progeny. Messiah is Abraham's spiritual progeny. And his birth authenticates this, so that by Maimonides' reasoning, only by means of a virgin birth can any man be known to be, authenticated as, Messiah.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

By Maimonides' precise reasoning, the only way to know Messiah is indeed Messiah is if his "mysterious arrival" (unique birth) justifies and authenticates his messianic-lineage from the root of Judaism as a "shoot" צמח (an asexual conception resulting in virgin birth), making him Abraham's spiritual firstborn, conceived from the cutting off, the coppicing, of the branch through which Abraham conceived and bore all his natural born progeny. Messiah is Abraham's spiritual progeny. And his birth authenticates this, so that by Maimonides' reasoning, only by means of a virgin birth can any man be known to be, authenticated as, Messiah.

Zechariah 6:12 directly relates the name "Zemach" to the "mysterious arrival" (asexual, or virgin, birth) of Messiah when it's realized that the name "Zemach" is the same word used for the nature of the birth, zemach. The word "zemach" is used twice in Zechariah 6:12. Once as the name of Messiah, and secondly as the process associated with his unique arrival/birth. Zechariah says his name is "Zemach" because he will zemach (sprout from the root asexually).

We find the same idea in Isaiah 11, where the prophet says Messiah will grow as an asexual branch (a nazar, or nazarene נצר), and that this branch will rise (53:2) out of unfertilized soil (as an asexual shoot). Since both Hebrew words, zemach, and nazar, speak of an asexual shoot, or sprout, from the root (not the sexual fruit), and since Maimonides claims Messiah's unique birth, as an asexual "shoot" (ala Isaiah and Zechariah) will be his calling card, his authentication, that is to say his claim to messianic fame, it's pushing the boundaries of happenstance to note that a man the Talmud names the "Nazar-ene" (which is a zemach) was said to have been born as a human basal-shoot from the unfertilized root of a Jewish maiden, i.e., from unfertilized soil, as an asexual conception and thus a virgin birth, and was fancied to have been expressly revealed as Messiah to many of his contemporaries and peers.



John

 

[Elihoenai]

In my judgment, the kabbalists hidden behind the personae of the zoharic fraternity sought to divest Christological symbols of their Catholic garb and redress them as the mystical truths of Judaism.​

​

Professor Elliot R. Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being, p. 259.​

​

Much that is to be found in the Zohar was intended to serve as a counterweight to the potential attractiveness of Christianity to Jews, and perhaps even to the kabbalists themselves.​

​

Professor Arthur Green, Intro to Daniel Matt’s first volume of The Pritzker Edition, The Zohar. p. LX.​

Appreciating the linkage between these two quotations and Jewish kabbalah requires the reader already know and acknowledge the degree to which Jewish kabbalah tends to transcend normative Jewish orthodoxy by leaps and bounds when it comes to the task of seeking a comprehensive theological basis for the whole of the Tanakh. This kabbalistic transcending of more general Jewish orthodoxy occurs in the sense of seeking and finding comprehensive answers to the myriad unanswered and unanswerable questions that arise whenever orthodox Jewish sages exegete the Tanakh in the traditional manner of not seeking a comprehensive center, or so called "transcendental-signifier," that all scripture is assumed to lead to, and which consequently leads to the overarching meaning of all scripture.

Since for Christians, Christ is the transcendental-signifier of the entire scripture, and since Isaiah chapter 53 therein acts something like a transcendental-signifier of Christ, as the transcendental-signifier of the entire scripture (since Isaiah 53 more that any other chapter in the Tanakh lends itself to Christian interpretation, interpolation, and or retrospective re-interpretation), Isaiah 53 is thus ground-zero for a Jewish movement, Jewish kabbalah, inspired (by the comprehensiveness of the Christian kerygma) to present a comprehensive, significant, transcendental, synthesis of Jewish learning worthy of being thought of as Jewish theology.

The Shelah is a consummate scholar who demonstrates mastery in every aspect of rabbinic learning, to wit, halakah and talmudic jurisprudence, homiletics and biblical exegesis, philosophy and ethics, and above all else the esoteric traditions known as Kabbalah. Horowitz combines an extensive knowledge of talmudic-halakhic Judaism and kabbalistic lore and thereby forges a synthesis that he presents as the basic reality of Jewish religiosity.​

​

Professor Elliot R. Wolfson.​

John

Isaiah 53:12

12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.


The Old Covenant is the Strength of Sin and the New Covenant the Weakness of Sin. The Old Covenant has Overwhelming Foreigners in the Sanctuary Oppressing the Suffering Servant Messiah/Christ Yeshua/Jesus. Cain Exclaimed: "Greater is My Punishment than to be Borne" or "My Punishment is Greater than I can Bear".

 

[BrokenBread]

Maimonides states that no one will be able to authenticate Messiah's pedigree as Messiah until after he arrives. His arrival is a decree, or chok חק, whose prophetic signifier can only be evaluated retrospectively, ala the chukkim חקים, or decrees, the meaning of which are hidden, unrevealed, until, as the Jewish sages tell us, they're revealed by Messiah once he is himself revealed. Maimonides thus places a huge emphasis on the "signs and wonders" that reveal that Messiah is in fact Messiah. In context, these signs and wonders are, by Maimonides reckoning, related in some way to his birth, which, retrospectively, reveals who he is. Something about his birth is a wondrous sign that signifies he's Messiah.



John

I dd not realize you had already begun a thread more directed to the matter of Messiah's coming and his verification from the Jewish standpoint.
Thank you for doing that .
I have heard of Maimonides writings but I am not familiar with them and I am unsure of his perspective concerning how much. or how little the Temple , or more appropriately that absence of a Temple, will factor into any "signs and wonders" he will produce & might have application to his being verified as the genuine article according to Maimonides.
Does Maimonides connect the Temple to any of his "signs & wonders" at all ?
It just seems to me that it would make sense that any supernatural revelation of himself he would produce designed to arrest the attention of the nation & Temple institute would be something that would provide an immediate spiritual uplift in connection to the past history of Israel.

Kind Regards

" I will now turn aside , and see this great sight." (Exodus 3:3)

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I dd not realize you had already begun a thread more directed to the matter of Messiah's coming and his verification from the Jewish standpoint.

He is a Christian. He often attempts to support his Christian views from Jewish texts. Whether you want to consider his views is entirely up to you. But don't make the mistake of thinking he speaks for Jews or Judaism.

I have heard of Maimonides writings but I am not familiar with them

Maimonides is one of the foremost sages in Jewish history. He wrote many texts, but is most famous for his Mishnah Torah, which takes all the 613 commandments of the Torah, and reorganizes them by topic, and then clarifying them. He is an example of a Jewish rationalist (as opposed to, i.e., a mystic).

In one text, Guide for the Perplexed, Maimonides interprets prophecies in a way that speaks to the Jewish people as a whole, rather than focusing on an individual figure for the "suffering servant." His idea is that the suffering of the Jewish people is represented by the suffering servant motif.

and I am unsure of his perspective concerning how much. or how little the Temple , or more appropriately that absence of a Temple, will factor into any "signs and wonders" he will produce & might have application to his being verified as the genuine article according to Maimonides.

After running a search just to make sure before answering, I was not able to find anything in Maimonides writings, the Tanakh, the Talmud, the Kabbalah, or any other Jewish source that connects the "suffering servant" to the temple.

There is a verse, Isaiah 42:7, that calls the suffering servant (Israel) a "light to the nations, to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon." I see no reason to connect that to the miraculous. Both of those seem to be things that can be done without supernatural intervention.

Although the suffering servant is not the messiah, it is worth noting that Maimonides wrote that the messiah is not obligated to perform signs and wonders in order to prove who he is.

The Kabbalah is very extensive, and I just don't have the background. But what little I was able to learn is that the Kabbalah attaches the "suffering servant" to the Shekinah, not the Messiah. The Shekinah refers to God's special presences in certain locations or moments, particularly where holiness, communal worship, or acts of compassion are manifest, such as in above the Mercy Seat of the Ark, the study of Torah, and during gatherings of the Jewish people.

Does Maimonides connect the Temple to any of his "signs & wonders" at all ?

I couldn't find a single connection by Maimonides between the temple and signs and wonders. He spoke of these miracles of things prophets sometimes did, but not which proved they were prophets. The proof of a prophet was their alignment with the Torah.

 

[BrokenBread]

After running a search just to make sure before answering, I was not able to find anything in Maimonides writings, the Tanakh, the Talmud, the Kabbalah, or any other Jewish source that connects the "suffering servant" to the temple.

Thank you for your response Indigo Child.
It motivated me to look into Maimonides today and I see that in his details of one commandment he expounded upon was the commandment to rebuild the Temple:
" The Creator commanded us to erect a chosen House for His service,
where the sacrificial offerings will be brought for all time.
This commandment is general and includes many details , the menorah,
the table, the altar.... and all of the detailed ordinances of this commandment
including the construction and its design are all explained in the tractate which
is compiled for this purpose, tractate Middot" ( The Book Of Commandments,20 )

The points he makes are , the first purpose of the commandment to build the Temple is to offer sacrifice.
Second, the vessels of the Temple are an intrinsic part of the commandment and constitute a portion of the Temple structure.
Third, the accepted design of the future Temple is that which is described in the tractate Middot of the Babylonian Talmud.
These teachings are universally accepted as legally binding by great Torah scholars since medieval times.
There is group in Jerusalem called the "Temple Mount Faithful" established the fourth day of Israel's Six Day War in 1967.
These men include Gershon Salomon, Zeev Bar Tove, Rabbi Moshe Sagal, Rabbi Levi Isaac Rabinovich, and Professor Israel Eldod.
To these men the capture of the Temple Mount was not just an outcome of the war but it was evidence of God's Hand in Israel's destiny.
There is another similar group among the many called "The Temple Institute" the Spiritual leader of which is one Rabbi Yisrael Ariel .
He was one of the first soldiers to set foot on the Temple Mount after the capture of the Old City in 1967 .
This group has in their possession a stone they intend to use as the cornerstone for the third Temple The stone was found in the Negev and show the working of human hands. It is known that the stones of Temple were taken by the Romans into the Negev for disposal.
I point out all this just in appreciation for the fevered consciousness that exists in that land for the rebuilding of the Temple and God's Hand in it.
To these people it is not a matter of if , but when the supernatural event involving God's Hand will begin the final stage of God's program for the nation.

There is a verse, Isaiah 42:7, that calls the suffering servant (Israel) a "light to the nations, to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon." I see no reason to connect that to the miraculous. Both of those seem to be things that can be done without supernatural intervention.

Given great expectation & the burden for a Temple that exists in Israel combined with the Conditions on earth today being what they are for me I cannot conceive how such worldwide events of divine grace and light could ever come to pass coming from out of Israel without God's supernatural intervention in the rebuilding of Temple is first & foremost , before becoming a 'Light To the Nations" .
I can see no way to subtract it form the equation.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Thank you for your response Indigo Child.
It motivated me to look into Maimonides today and I see that in his details of one commandment he expounded upon was the commandment to rebuild the Temple:

Of course. But the need to rebuild the Temple has nothing to do with the messiah or with signs and wonders.

the first purpose of the commandment to build the Temple is to offer sacrifice.

Yes. Different Jews have different opinions on this, so I will speak for myself.

I hope the Temple will be rebuilt, though I doubt it will happen in my day. But this is not because the Temple is necessary. It's because the Temple is the ideal.

Until the Temple is rebuilt, we simply do as Hosea instructed: The words of our lips (prayers) shall be as bullocks (sacrifices). Just as Daniel prayed three times a day in lieu of sacrifice, so shall we.

 

[BrokenBread]

Of course. But the need to rebuild the Temple has nothing to do with the messiah or with signs and wonders.

I hope the Temple will be rebuilt, though I doubt it will happen in my day......

In your opinion what needs to happen now to create an environment that will allow the building of a Temple ?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

In your opinion what needs to happen now to create an environment that will allow the building of a Temple ?

The accidental destruction of the Mosque that is on the land, such as with an earthquake.

 

[BrokenBread]

The accidental destruction of the Mosque that is on the land, such as with an earthquake.

You're getting warmer!
The expectation of an earthquake destroying the Mosque, especially while leaving the Mount itself in tact would clearly be an event well within the realm of Divine intervention.
But do you think such an occurrence would cause those surrounding Israel to be any less devoted to it's destruction ?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The expectation of an earthquake destroying the Mosque, especially while leaving the Mount itself in tact would clearly be an event well within the realm of Divine intervention.

Nah. Earthquakes are the result of Plate Tectonics, not anything supernatural.

 

[BrokenBread]

Nah. Earthquakes are the result of Plate Tectonics, not anything supernatural.

Sure not supernatural under normal circumstances , but reference to the most disputed spot on the face of the earth , with power targeted to destroy just the Mosque and leave the Mount itself structurally sound .
You are speaking for yourself alone as you said earlier, but I can't believe that scenario describe is the most commonly held view among Jews as to how the Temple will come about ?
What is the most commonly held view among Jews as to how the Temple will come about ?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You are speaking for yourself alone as you said earlier, but I can't believe that scenario describe is the most commonly held view among Jews as to how the Temple will come about ?

Here in the US, only 9-10% of Jews are Orthodox, among them, about 62% are ultra orthodox, meaning that they are far more likely to believe the temple will not be rebuilt until the messiah comes.

 

[BrokenBread]

Here in the US, only 9-10% of Jews are Orthodox, among them, about 62% are ultra orthodox, meaning that they are far more likely to believe the temple will not be rebuilt until the messiah comes.

With History showing us that the building of the Temple was always undertaken & dominated by named individuals not by committee,
Solomon building the first Temple. and Zerubbabel building the second Temple, later modified by Herod.
Given God's previous Divine method of having individual named personalities named in scripture as being responsible for the building of the Temple would it not be in keeping with God's program that there will be a single name attached to the building the third Temple ?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

With History showing us that the building of the Temple was always undertaken & dominated by named individuals not by committee,
Soloman building the first Temple. and Zerubbabel building the second Temple, later modified by Herod.

The fact that the building and rebuilding of the Temple was spearheaded by individuals doesn't mean they happened due to these individuals. If Ezra hadn't had the support and labor of the returning Jews, the second Temple would have never happened.

Given God's previous Divine method of having individual named personalities named in scripture as being responsible for the building of the Temple would it not be in keeping with God's program that there will be a single name attached to the building the third Temple ?

You are going to base an entire theory on just two examples?

When I was in graduate school and learning about how human beings often mistakenly infer patterns based on few instances, the professor did the following example. She had a paper shopping bag, and pulled out a yellow ball. Then she pulled out another yellow ball. Then she pulled out yet another yellow ball. Then she asked us, "What do you think I'll pull out next." We of course all said, "A yellow ball." She then pulled out a blue block.

 

[BrokenBread]

The fact that the building and rebuilding of the Temple was spearheaded by individuals doesn't mean they happened due to these individuals.

That's right It was completely God's choice & method to have an individual head up the building.
The scripture speaks to this fact.
God not only wants an individual to be in charge, but scripture goes so far as let us know that God has disqualifiers in His choosing whom will be in charge.
No one wanted the task of building God's House given to him more that David, but God said that even though he was a man after God's own heart, he did not have the qualifications to be given the honor of building the Temple.
God has an unchanging nature about such sacred things is my observation and it is more reasonable for me to believe His established standards would be in place for the next Temple that a man who met the qualifications would be God's choice to be in charge.

1Ch 28:3
But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build an house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood.