There is NO MESSIAH… and YOU are IT!
If you have read the Bible – I mean really read it – then there are many things which will have stood out to you as surprising, even shocking. Many of these things run contrary to prevailing opinions, customs and minhagim. One of the most surprising things to me, as a young child, was that contrary to popular opinion, Creator – the “God” of the Bible – did not intend for there to be Kings for the B’nei Yisrael, the Children of Israel.
The Tanakh tells us, in Sh’muel Alef (1 Samuel 8), that a significant transition in Israel’s history transpired in defiance of Heavenly decree. The B’nei Yisrael had formerly been ruled by judges – the twelve judges in Sefer Shoftim (Book of Judges) and then Eli and Samuel (Sh’muel Alef 4:18; 7:15-17). However, the B’nei Yisrael rejected Sh’muel and demanded a king, making Sh’muel the last judge of Israel.
Our ancestors had reason to be concerned about Sh’muel acting as a judge, due to the appointment of his own rebellious sons as leaders. The Elders of the Community came to Samuel at his home in Ramah and said, “Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations” (8:4-5).
While any criticism of the appointment of the sons of Sh’muel would have been perfectly valid, the proposed solution of having a “king to judge us like all the nations” was not looked upon favorably.
The request for a king displeased Samuel to such an extent that it literally was described as being Vayyera` ha’davar, be`Einei Sh’mu’el (וירע הדבר, בעיני שמואל), “evil in the eyes of Sh’muel” (8:6). Still, Ha’Shem commanded Sh’muel to obey the will of the people, saying “they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being King over them!” (8:7).
God first instructed Sh’muel to warn the B’nei Yisrael of the ways of the king who would reign over them. The Hebrew word for the “ways” of the king is mishpat (משפט), which is usually translated as “Judgment” (8:9, 11), but can also be rendered “ordinances.” This forms something of a pun, however – a play on words – as the king’s judgments would be a judgment upon the B’nei Yisrael from Ha’Shem.
Interestingly, the Hebrew word lakach (לקח), meaning “to take,” is used four times in this section (8:11, 13, 14, 16). Thus, Ha’Shem warns that such a requested king would “take” their sons and daughters, their produce, their servants, and their flock (8:11-18). As such, this king would be a tyrant, requiring a tenth of their goods, thus setting himself up as equal to Ha’Shem (8:15, 17). Instead of “serving” Ha’Shem (7:4), Israel would become “workers” or “slaves” to the king (8:17). Both “serve” and “slave” come from the Hebrew word, `eved (עבד) but this also can be used to indicate “worship.” The teaching is that instead of `avodah to Ha’Shem, their `avodah was to this king, who they so desperately wanted, in order to emulate the goyyim (nations). They were warned that when they would come to cry out because of such a king, Ha’Shem would not answer them (8:18).
The B’nei Yisrael, unfortunately, did not listen. They insisted on a king and “refused to obey the voice of Sh’muel.” They said, “No! But there shall be a king over us, that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles” (8:19–20).
Even though Ha’Shem was already Judge and King of the B’nei Yisrael; even though Hu fought their battles, and even though a human king would oppress them, they still demanded such a king. Ha’Shem told Sh’muel to obey Yisrael and make them a king (8:22). Sh’muel later “anointed” Sha’ul (שאול) as the first King of Israel (10:1). His name, not coincidentally, is identical in spelling with the word for the Grave or “Sheol” (שאול). However horrible he may have been for the position, in a sense, he – like all of the Kings of Israel – was a “mashiach” (משיח), with all “anointed” (משוח) for such a position also being mashiachim (משיחים).
Indeed, both the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Talmud itself, contain teachings about dual Mashiachayim of “Mashiach ben Yosef,” and “Mashiach ben David.” The origins of eschatological, or even simply socio–religious functions for the former seem to lie in the Chazon Gavriel tablet, a Hebrew inscription of the first century B.C.E., discovered in the late 1990s.
This tablet refers to the Essene revolutionary Shim`on ben Yosef, who was martyred following his failed revolt against Rome, in 4 B.C.E. It was not long before the idea spread to the Talmudic Sages. Indeed, by the Medieval period, Lurianic Kabbalah posited that there could be at least one Mashiach ben Yosef in any given generation. Both “Ha’Ari Ha’Qadosh,” Yitzchaq Ben Sh’lomo Luria Ashkenazi (1534 – 1572), and his talmid, Chayyim Vital (1543 – 1620), proposed that this could apply to them.
Mashiach As Metaphor
Mashiach ben David, however, continued to be viewed as a title of a job… the Liberator (מושיע) of the Jewish People from oppression. Today, however, many Kabbalists and others view the coming of Mashiach ben David as simply a metaphor for the “Messianic Age.” While literalists may detest this, there is no reason why this could not be the case – Mashiach as metaphor!
Yes, there may come a person whose father’s name is David who fulfills this role. But that is a moot point, and is no more necessary for the fulfillment of the Messianic Idea, than is Mashiach being born in Bet Lechem (Mikhah 5:2), as Christianity almost amusingly imagines Judaism to insist upon. The real meaning of this concept is that there will come a righteous mystic, scholar–warrior for the Jewish people, in the spirit and power of King David. Indeed, Rabbi Nachman of Breslov taught that Mashiach Ben David has already been here in multiple incarnations – both as King David himself, and even as Hevel ben Adam (Abel the son of Adam)[1] The teaching is thus that had Hevel not been murdered by Qayin, he would have ushered in the Messianic Age, nearly 6,000 years ago. Whether this is a historical account, or allegory, as Philo of Alexandria (25 B.C.E.) believed, it changes nothing – the story is true because it relays deep, spiritual truths, not because it is a history book.
Rome – Esav – continues to oppress the Jewish people through traditional Catholic and Protestant Christian Antisemitism, rooted in Martin Luther’s rabid hatred of the Jewish people. As well, this oppression continues through the very much related contemporary forms of Nazism. As I write these words, the Margolin Hebrew Academy Yeshivah, in Memphis, Tennessee, was attacked by an antisemitic terrorist. We are without question, the single-most targeted ethno-religious group in history, and currently, in the United States, according to the FBI.
In spite of this, we need not wait for a man (or woman) to step up to the proverbial plate, to fulfill this job description. Like the concept of the “Buddha within,” we all have this potential of Mashiach ben Yosef – just as did Yehudah Ha’Galili, who revolted against Rome in 6 C.E., and his son Menachem ben Yehudah, who kicked off the Great Jewish Revolt in 66 C.E. Both of these revolutionary liberators were considered by the Sages as plausible candidates for Mashiach. When they failed to fulfill the job description of Mashiach ben David, they proved themselves nevertheless to be manifestations of this Primordial Mashiach ben Yosef within us all, in potentia.
Regardless of what we might speculate about the physical personification of this Messianic Ideal in human incarnation, one thing is certain that we need not wait to find out. Should we all manifest this in our own lives and direct action against those bigots and terrorists who would wipe us off the face of the Earth, then there is little question that the Messianic Age would manifest. Should we work together to bring about social justice, peace and reconciliation, from the grassroots up, the characteristics of the Messianic Age will manifest. At the end of the day, if such characteristics are brought to fruition, what is the functional difference between this and a literalistic vision of the Messianic Age?
We might then conclude that as there was no need for a physical, human King of Israel to begin with, there is still no need for one and thus, no need for a physical Mashiach ben David, in order to usher in the Messianic Age.
The Messianic Age
According to Jewish tradition, the Messianic Age is one of global justice, peace, reconciliation and harmony. It is an era free of human conflict and division. It is thus an age which emerges for the advancement of Knowledge of the Creator. The theme of the Mashiach ushering in an age of global peace is enshrined within two of the most famous passages from Sefer Yeshayahu (Book of Isaiah):
They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation will not lift sword against nation and they will no longer study warfare (2:4).
The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them. The cow will feed with the bear, their young will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox. The infant will play near the hole of the cobra, and the young child put his hand into the viper’s nest. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (11:6-9).
In his Mishneh Torah, Maimonides (1138 – 1204 C.E.) describes the Messianic Age in a similar manner, saying that “At that time there will be no hunger or war, no jealousy or rivalry. For the good will be plentiful, and all delicacies available as dust. The entire occupation of the world will be only to know God.” The Rambam adds that “the people Israel will be of great Wisdom; they will perceive the esoteric truths and comprehend their Creator’s wisdom as is the capacity of the [true] Human Being. As it is written (Yeshayahu 11:9): ‘For the Earth shall be filled with the Knowledge of Ha’Shem, as the waters cover the sea’ (Habakkuk 2:14).”[2]
This means that simply through the acts of defending ourselves, yet not using defense as an excuse to transgress and harm those who have not directly aggressed against us (the sort of collective punishment so lauded by the hawkish right), we begin to break ground to build the edifice of the Messianic Age. Similarly, through acts of peace-making and reconciliation, we further such a socio-spiritual project.
According to the Talmud,[3] the Midrash,[4] and the Kabbalistic work, the Zohar,[5] Mashiach ben David must arrive before the year 6000 from the time of creation. In Orthodox Jewish belief, the Hebrew calendar dates to the time of creation, making this correspond to the year 2240 on the Gregorian calendar. Traditionally, Kabbalistically, we have until this date to figure things out, and get our house in order as B’nei Adam.
Perhaps we are not supposed to wait on Mashiach, perhaps Mashiach is waiting on us…
Forward to `Eden
In all my years of studying Indigenous cultures throughout the world, I have come to the conclusion that we could almost regard the Children of Israel as socio–religiously Neo–Primitive in orientation.
That is to say that time and time again, the Torah hearkens back to ancient ways, which are for lack of a better word: Afro–Primitive. Furthermore, the Torah is expressly anti-Sumerian in orientation – a reaction to what author Daniel Quinn termed “Totalitarian Agriculture.” The “guarding” of surplus grain by “Sumer” (שומר), one of the Torah’s many plays on words, particularly in its first book, was the origin of fratricide – the Allegory of Qayin and Hevel.[6]
From circumcision to crop-rotation, and rest for small-scale, communal, horticulturally–cultivated land, the Torah is emphasizing the Primordial “Old Ways” found throughout Indigenous African cultures – what Quinn correlates with the People of Hevel, calling them “Leavers,” as opposed to the Sumerian “Takers” of Qayinism.
Bear in mind, “Primitive” here is far from a euphemism, it is a proud title. Human beings, at least as far as our physical vessels – our Ketanot `Or (כתנות עור) the “Coats of Skin,” as the Torah terms them (Berashit 3:21) – are literally primates. This fact cannot be dismissed, regardless of how estranged we feel from Nature and from our true selves. This scientific fact should not be controversial in the least. The closer a society lives with the Natural Order – the Torah – the more righteous that society.
It is no coincidence that in Yoruba dialects, “Torah” was used both for holy men and women, as well as for the Primordial “Law” itself – what Buddhism would term the “Dharma” or Taoism the “Fa.” It is in this way that before the written Torah was ever delivered, Rashi (1040 – 1105 C.E.) informs us that the true “Birthright” in Sefer Berashit (Genesis), was the Oral Torah itself. We see this in Esav rejecting the Birthright through his predilection for hunting, rather than either slaughtering in a kosher manner, up close, personal, and impossible to detach oneself from the act of killing. Time and time again, when the Torah calls someone a “Mighty” or “skillful” hunter “before Ha’Shem,” it is doing so sarcastically, as the figure is always portrayed negatively (e.g. Berashit 10:9 and 25:27). In the case of Jacob and Esav, this hunting is contrasted with being civilized, living in tents, rather than engaging in the cycle of predation like beasts in the fields and forests.
To highlight this, let us specifically consider how Rashi demonstrates the rightness or yasharut of Esav being denied his birthright. Esav said: “Look, I am going to die, so of what use to me is a birthright?”[7] Rashi explains that “Esav said he would die “through” the birthright, “if so, what is there in it that I would want?” To Rashi, Esav was not tricked at all. For this reason, he explains we should not read “with cleverness” (במרמה) but “with wisdom” (בחכמה).[8] Jacob explained to Esav that the birthright was the “sacrificial service.” Esau is regarded as “this evil one” who “is not worthy that he should bring offering to the Holy One, Blessed be Hu.”[9]
He is called unworthy because he is called evil. He could only be called evil because of his behavior. Jacob thus explains to Esav that the birthright includes “several prohibitions and punishments and death penalties [which] are associated with it,” specifically in cases of “those who have performed the Temple service after having drunk wine,” or proudly adorning himself with long hair while performing Temple services.[10] This caused Esav, who both had long hair and drank profusely, to exclaim “I am going to die through [it]! If so, what is there in it that I would want?”[11]
This is not enough for Rashi. Not only does Esau reject the birthright, he “belittled” (ויבז) it.76 The parallels Rashi is drawing to Christian theology and its Paulean rejection of the Torah as “death” are obvious.[12] Esau is not only a term for Christendom, he is the prototypical Christian and a metaphor for Christianity. He is presented with the Torah and not only rejects it, like the other nations, but actively belittles it, associating it with “death” just as the Paulean epistles would after him. We see then, from these examples, the genius in Rashi’s opening words. He has not misspoken when he says that Bereshit prefaced the rest of the Torah to provide a satisfying explanation that Ha’Shem does what is yashar b’einav.
A Refined Military and Commander
Similarly, we see in the story of Gideon in Shofetim (Judges 6), and his selection of the most refined soldiers, they are not tested in combat, nor in acts of mental fortitude, such as what we see during “Hell Week” in the BUD/S training for Navy Seals. Instead, they are judged by how they drink from a stream. The refined were suitable as elite soldiers in this Divinely-ordained army. Those who drink like unrefined beasts were rejected.
Interestingly, the Qur’an thus terms Gideon (Talut) as being the first true “King” of the Children of Israel. But we all know that the first “King” was Sha’ul, right? You know, the guy who made King David a refugee in Gaza, while he built his Gidud; the guy who hunted this righteous, future King incessantly; who summoned the Spirit of Prophet Samuel, compelling him to communicate with the “Ghost Mistress” of Endor (Ba`alat ‘Ov be`Eyn Dor).
Sh’muel had already died some time back (in Sh’muel Alef 25:1), but the summoning took place in chapter 28, indicating a lengthy spiritual vacuum, wherein Sha’ul had tried everything else – after being “ghosted” by Ha’Shem, Who refused to answer him. In Kabbalah, summoning a spirit within the period approximating the first 11 months following the death of their physical bodies, is regarded as permissible, because such spirits can communicate with ease. After ascension to the Angelic realms of B’riyah, or Gan `Eden – “Raising of the Spirit of Dead,” L’Illui Nishmat (לעלוי נשמת) – compelling a spirit to return to the plane of the physical world of `Asiyah is considered cruel to the spirit, as they communicate only with great difficulty at that point.[13]
Raising of the Spirits of the Dead
In Jewish belief, once a person dies, there is no obvious way for them to accrue merit anymore through doing the Mitzvot themselves. Mitzvot done by those who they influenced, such as children, students, family, friends, however, still bring them merit. Thus, if one is trapped in the realm of Yetzirah, for a prolonged period of time in our reckoning from this realm.
For this reason, we may perform Mitzvot for the “Raising” of the Dead from Yetzirah, to B’riyah. This may be done for person who passed away, even if we do not know them personally. When doing such works, the Hebrew name of the departed is typically mentioned alongside these acts, or printed in, or placed with relevant consumables – with the exception of saying Qaddish.
It is said that the Sages of the Talmud were of such a spiritual caliber that they were able to “raise the dead.” In fact, Rabbi Aqiva was well-known for “raising the dead” in this way. By taking son of a man, whose ghost the rabbi met one day, under his wing and making him a great Torah scholar, Rabbi Aqiva elevated the father’s spiritual station as the progenitor of so great a Tzaddiq as he became.
The story is relayed that Rabbi Aqiva was walking in a cemetery and came across a naked man who was dark as coal and carrying a huge load of sticks on his head. Assuming that he was alive, Rabbi Aqiva asked how he had gotten into the situation of needing to do such difficult work, and offered to go to any means necessary to redeem him.
The man asked Rabbi Aqiva to get out of his way. “What’s the story here,” asked Rabbi Aqiva.
“I’m actually dead”, the man replied, “and every day they send me to cut down trees.”
“What was your job when you were alive”, Rabbi Aqiva asked.
“I was a tax collector”, the man replied, “and I would favor the wealthy and oppress the poor.”
Rabbi Aqiva asked him, “Haven’t you heard anything from those appointed to punish you about how you might be relieved?”
“I did hear from [those appointed over me] one impossible thing,” he replied. “They told me the only way to get out of this situation is if I had a son who stood up in the minyan and declared ‘Barkhu et Hashem Ha’Mevorakh,’ and they answer after him, ‘Yehei Shmei Rabah Mevorakh.’ If that were to happen, I would immediately be released from this punishment. I didn’t have a son, but I left behind a pregnant wife. I don’t know if she gave birth to a son. If she did give birth to a son, who would possibly teach this son Torah, since nobody in the world liked me?”
Immediately, Rabbi Aqiva decided that he would go search and see if the man did in fact have a son who he could teach Torah and teach to lead prayers. He thus asked the man who was being punished, “What’s your name?” and the man answered that his name too was, “Aqiva.”
He asked him, “What’s your wife’s name?”, and he answered “Shoshbinah.”
He asked “Where are you from?”, and the man responded, “Ludkiah.” Immediately, Rabbi Aqiva went through great difficulty to find the man’s family. When he made it to the town, he asked about the man. “May that man’s bones erode!” the people responded.
He asked about the man’s wife. “May her memory be wiped out for all time!” they said.
He asked about the child. They responded, “He isn’t even circumcised!”
So, Rabbi Aqiva immediately circumcised the boy, the same day that he found him. He then set a book in front of the boy, but the boy couldn’t seem to learn anything at all. Then, seeing little recourse, Rabbi Aqiva fasted for 40 days on behalf of the child. Then, the Heavenly Voice of the Bat Qol rang out, asking, “You’re fasting on behalf of this child?”
Rabbi Aqiva responded, “Master of the Universe, have I not prepared him before you?” Immediately, Ha’Shem opened up the boy’s heart, and he was able to learn Torah, the Shema` – the Jewish declaration of faith, utilized in the original, most ancient form of “Selah” – called “Salah” or “Salat” in Arabic – and Birkat Ha’Mazon (the blessing after meals). Rabbi Aqiva then stood him up in front of the community to recite Barkhu, and they recited, “Barukh Ha’Shem Ha’Mevorakh.”
Immediately, the boy’s father was released from his punishment. Then, the boy’s father came to Rabbi Aqiva in a dream, saying to him, “May it be the Will of the Divine that you rest for all time in Gan `Eden, for you saved me from the punishment of Gehennom.”
Rabbi Aqiva responded with a verse from the Tehillim (Psalms), “God’s name is forever, God’s memory passes from generation to generation.” Therefore, the custom developed for someone who doesn’t have a father or mother to say Barkhu or Qaddish on Motzei Shabbat – when the souls of those in Gehennom – a “state” in Yetzirah – who have been in temporary reprieve for Shabbat, are returning to Gehennom.
This is one of two meanings for the concept of “raising the dead” in Judaism. This is not a physical reanimation of a corpse (though this certainly became a folk believe in Ashkenazi communities), but the elevating of the dead in the realm of Yetzirah.[14]
The second meaning of this phrase is that one may “Raise the Dead” by summoning them, and consulting them, or otherwise helping them “crossover” – so to speak (if one was so included to employ common New Age vernacular relevant to the matter). This summoning itself, when and where permissible, should be done for the benefit of the spirit, who may then impart knowledge relevant to the summoner, for their aid. It should not, however, be done as “King” Sha’ul had the “Ghost Mistress” of Endor do it – for parasitic leeching of information from spirits who have already elevated, passed on, and are at peace in the Garden of Paradise (Pardes).
This is what “Raising the Dead” means in Jewish magic and mysticism. This meaning and knowledge was clearly “lost in translation” when Christianity appropriated our scriptures, ideas, customs and attempted to do the same with our esoteric concepts.
Should spirits choose to communicate of their own volition, after ascension, that is another matter altogether. Forced necromancy of ascended spirits, however, has traditionally (and rightly), been viewed as impermissible. Yet here, “King” Sha’ul was doing just that, and seemed to see no problem with making an exception for consulting a necromancer to force the spirit of a holy prophet to answer his demands for information, when he had previously executed such shamanic occultists (28:3).
For his part, as I noted in “Jewish and Islamic Magic: Forbidden and Permissible Ritual Methods“, Sh’muel was not particularly amused, and was so upset with having been forcibly returned to the physical plane, that his fury caused the seasoned necromancer to fall to the ground (Sh’muel Alef 28:3–25).
Observing such a character sketch of Sha’ul, it is easy to see what the Midrashic function of the pre–written, orated Qur’an[15] (prior to the establishment of “Islam” as a separate religion from Arabian Diaspora “Sabian” Essene sects[16]), was in nominating Talut as the first King of the Children of Israel, rather than Sha’ul.
A Nation with No King
It is clear that the Tanakh is denigrating “King” Sha’ul, throughout its portrayal of the man. So why was this man appointed to serve as the first King of the Children of Israel – the Qur’anic Midrash notwithstanding?
First, we must understand that the Creator, in the Tanakh, does not seem to want the Children of Israel to have a king like the goyyim. Again, referring the reader back to the concept that the Torah was returning us to a Primordial state of surrender to the Natural Law and Natural Order of things, we should consider the fact that Indigenous societies have not typically had anything approaching monarchial rule.
But the Children of Israel persisted, much as so many did in the wilderness, not content with Manna, but instead insisting on the poison flesh of quail (Sh’mot/Exodus 16), which brought about the death of the ungrateful who consumed it (Bamidbar/Numbers 11:31–33)[17].
When the Children of Israel finally insists upon a human king, Sh’muel rebuked them for saying, “No! But a king shall reign over us: when the Ha’Shem Elohenu was your King” (12:12).
If You Meet the Messiah on The Road…
While in both Jerusalem, and later on the same trip, the Gaza Strip, I met one Rabbi `Oseh ben David, who taught the following instructive lesson on the subject. Rabbi `Oseh seemingly employed the Buddhist maxim attributed to Zen Master Linji (d. 866 CE), the founder of the Rinzai sect: “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.” The whole saying is: “If you meet a Buddha, kill the Buddha. If you meet the Spirit, kill the Spirit” (Vietnamese “Phùng Phật Sát Phật, Phùng Ma Sát Ma”).
Rabbi `Oseh, however, gave the Zen maxim a Kabbalistic spin. In the same way as the Buddhist koan, the phrasing of the maxim is counter–intuitive and commands you to think outside of the proverbial box, if you hope to understand it.
He first spoke his rendering of the maxim in Arabic, as there were primarily Arabic-speaking Sufis from the Jam`at al-Fitrah present. “Izha qabalt al-Masih fi-t-Tariq, aqtalhu” (إذا قابلت المسيح في الطريق ، اقتله). He then turned to myself and other Jewish congregants present, who had come with me as immersion, or “Gonzo” journalists (this was the only way our entry to Gaza was permitted), from the now defunct Counter Current News. Rabbi `Oseh then repeated: “Im tifgeshu et ha’Mashiach b’derekh, laharugo” (אם תפגשו את המשיח בדרך, להרוגו) – and finally in English: “If you meet the Messiah on the road, the path, kill him.”[18]
`Oseh said to his students, “Worship no human being, nor physical body or form. Do not worship by prostrating on your faces, nor by falling down and lowering your intellect and reason to the feet of any alleged incarnation of the Divine.
“In the East it is said ‘If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.’ So too do I tell you that ‘If you meet the Messiah on the road, the path, kill him.”
Astonished, and whispering amongst themselves, they asked him what he meant. Were they to kill the Messiah?
`Oseh said, “Who would come to you and tell you ‘I am the Messiah, follow me! Abandon your reason and obey! Such a person has come to spread a cult of their ego and narcissism! The Buddha is within you, and all around you. Yet one who has not realized what might be called in that tradition, their ‘Buddha Nature’ still needs the guidance of a Buddha, no? But who is that man who says ‘I am the Buddha, and you are not?’ That man cannot be remedied. He is here to mislead and guide those who are psychologically suffering to their own ruin.
`Oseh continued, “And if you, on your own path to Enlightenment and ‘Buddhahood’, should happen to ‘meet’ within yourself an identity that says ‘Look! You are the Buddha! Go and tell the world to follow you!’ Then this too is an imposter who must be confronted and killed within yourself, and on your personal path!
“What you call ‘Messiah’ they call the ‘Buddha’ and if you look at a man and see it in them, it is because they are reflecting something pure within you that you should seek to embody. That is your higher self, and it is within each of you and speaking to you through these words today. But it is not separate from you, it is within each of you just as each of you are within the Mind of the Creator.
“All who are born will perish [rot and decay]. All who are born and die are incapable of being worshipped. Worship instead the Creator which is Every–Living and is neither born nor dies. Realize as well, that all are living expressions of the Creator’s thoughts, within the Universal Mind. I and the Creator are One just as you and I are One. There is no separation. No division. Trust no one who divides and sets themselves as lord over you. Let reason be your guide in all things, for reason was the first of creation, and the power by which all of the Universe sprang into being.”
From: The Way of `Oseh The UNAUTHORIZED Teachings of `Oseh Ben David (2020)
There is No Messiah… and You are It!
Reflect on the above phrase for a moment: “There is No Messiah… and You are It!”
What does it mean to you? On the surface, it would seem to be saying, there is no Messiah. But then, seemingly paradoxically, it says that you are It. Not “him” but “Hu” – “It”. It may be a male, it may be a female, but one thing is for sure, it is as much in you as it was in the Persian King Cyrus the Great – as we hear from the Prophet Yeshayahu (Isaiah) that Cyrus was also the Messiah of Ha’Shem (45:1), because of his righteousness as a leader, and role in liberating the Jewish people.
Indeed, the Tanakh uses the word Mashiach in reference to any officially anointed leader, a full 168 times, about an array of individuals. The Torah tells us that we are to be a Melekhet Kohenim (Kingdom of Priests) and a Goy Qodesh (Holy Nation) (Sh’mot/Exodus 19:5-6).
We are all supposed to socio-religiously “evolve” into a Holy Nation of Kohenim. Indeed, it is mathematically arguable that Kohen ancestry would have been distributed and disseminated throughout the millennia to such an extent that it is statistically impossible for there to be pure lineages of such today, which have not also spread throughout all of `Am Yisrael. To be sure, a long list of families have taken such a surname, when such became the practice of the nations, over the past few centuries. But this does not mean that there was not similar ancestry amongst others, if one goes back far enough. Indeed, the Torah seems to be telling us that such intermixing would in fact be the case. Might this not then have been the reason why the priestly class were not originally given a portion of land, when regions of Eretz Yisrael were partitioned for the Twelve Tribes?[19]
In this are signs for those who reflect.
[1] Green, Arthur. Tormented Master: A Life of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav. University of Alabama Press (1979).
[2] Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings 12:5
[3] Bavli Talmud, tractate Rosh Hashanah 31a and tractate Sanhedrin 97a.
[4] Pirke De Rabbi Eliezer, Gerald Friedlander, Sepher-Hermon Press, New York, 1981, p. 141.
[5] Zohar (1:117a) and Zohar Vayera 119a
[6] Quinn, Daniel (1995). Ishmael. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group.
[7] Berashit 25.32
[8] Artscroll 299
[9] Artscroll 280
[10] Sanhedrin 22b
[11] Artscroll 280-1
[12] e.g. “Once, when there was no Law, I was alive; but when the Commandment came, sin came to life, and I died. The Commandment was meant to lead me to life, but it turned out to mean death for me” (Romans 7:9,10)
[13] “The ancient art of calling up the spirits of the dead for divinatory purposes was well known in Biblical and Talmudic times. Though forbidden by the Law of Moses, Saul resorted to this means to consult with his deceased mentor, Samuel, through the medium of the famous witch of Endor. Talmudic strictures were hardly more effectual, for Rab, one of the leading authorities, among others, questioned the dead. Similarly in the Middle Ages, while the rabbis maintained the traditional doctrinal opposition (striking, besides, a note of compassion at times: ‘The dead speak only with great difficulty, therefore it is forbidden to force them by incantations and other means to reveal the future’), the sources disclose that various methods were known and employed. However, judging from the comparatively few references, this mode of divination played only a minor role in Jewish magic, due to the consistently condemnatory judgment of the leaders of Jewish thought, and the deeply ingrained sentiment of mingled fear and respect and affection for the dead.
“Medieval writers repeated the meager traditional lore. We read that the deceased may be interrogated only during the first twelve months after death, when their bodies remain intact in the grave while their souls ascend and descend. The ghost, when called upon by name, rises feet first from the grave. On the Sabbath, however, when the spirits of dead and living celebrate the day of rest, the necromancer too must perforce call it a holiday. And finally, it is noted that ‘the questioner hears, but sees nothing, the questioned sees, but hears nothing, and others present neither see nor hear.’” Trachtenberg, Joshua. Jewish Magic and Superstition. University of Pennsylvania Press (1939; 2004) p. 223-4; Blau, 53; S. Ḥas. B 1132;—Ginzberg, Legends, VI, 237; San. 65b and Rashi; Rashi on I Sam. 28: 12; Pa‘aneaḥ Raza on Lev. 19:30, p. 91b; Lev. R. ch. 26; cf. also Nishmat Ḥayim, III, 7.
[14] Machzor Vitry, Laws of Shabbat, 102. Machzor Vitry is an 11th–century prayer book that incorporates legal rulings, composed by Rabbi Simcha of Vitry, a French scholar and disciple of Rashi.
[15] Naziri, Micah Ben David (Mikhah Ben David). The Qur’an as Midrash: Islamic Origins and the Sacred Writings of Judaism. New Dawn Publications (2010).
[16] Naziri, Micah Ben David (Mikhah Ben David). People of the Book: What the Religions Named in the Qur’an Can Tell Us About the Earliest Understanding of “Islam”. New Dawn Publications (2012).
[17] The passage in (Bamidbar/Numbers 11:31–33) says that large numbers of people died almost immediately after eating the quail.
[18] Ben David, Oseh (Author), M.B.D. Taw’ami (Translator). The Way of `Oseh The UNAUTHORIZED Teachings of `Oseh Ben David. New Dawn Publications (2020).
[19] It must be noted that all Kohanim belong to the tribe of Levi – they are just a select group within the tribe of Levi.