Why A Tzaddik? Why Rebbe Nachman? Why Uman?

Why A Tzaddik? Why Rebbe Nachman? Why Uman?

Chances are you’ve been to Uman. If not, you certainly know someone who’s traveled to that now-famous Ukrainian town for Rosh HaShanah or another time of the year to pray at Rebbe Nachman’s gravesite. Maybe the prayers were for health, livelihood or children. Maybe they were prayers to find one’s soulmate, or to find oneself. Or maybe they were prayers for the will and the way to come closer to God.

What is it about Uman that attracts thousands upon thousands of people from literally all over the world every year?

The answer perhaps lies in a simple yet often misunderstood concept: the tzaddik. Outside of Chassidic circles, when asked, “What exactly is a tzaddik?” some might answer, “A saintly individual,” or, “A very good person,” or, “Someone very devout.” Yet this still doesn’t explain the force that propels not only lifelong chassidim, but Jews from all backgrounds and walks of life, to a place like Uman, where Rebbe Nachman chose to spend the final six months of his life.

Why a Tzaddik?               There is a common misconception that the idea of the tzaddik was introduced by the founders of the Chassidic movement. While certain aspects of the tzaddik’s role had their beginnings with the Baal Shem Tov and his followers, the concept of the extraordinarily righteous individual and his extraordinary greatness has always been a part of Judaism. From Moshe, Yehoshua, and the Judges onward, each generation has had its own tzaddikim—spiritual giants who lead, teach and guide the people in the ways of God. It would take an entire book to list what the Talmud, Midrash and Zohar have to say about the greatness of the tzaddikim (see a small sampling in the accompanying insert). However, just as our understanding of the Torah has diminished in the course of history, so too has our appreciation of the role of the tzaddik—ironically, just when we need him the most.

• Even for the sake of one tzaddik was the world created (Yoma 38b).
• The earth stands on one pillar: the tzaddik (Chagigah 12b).
• God decrees, and gives the tzaddik the power to nullify His decree. The tzaddik decrees, and God fulfills his decree (cf. Moed Katan 16b).
• In the Future, the angels will see the tzaddikim and exclaim, “Kadosh! (Holy!)”—just as they now exclaim before God (Bava Basra 75b).
• If the tzaddikim would so wish, they could create worlds (Sanhedrin 65b).
• Tzaddikim draw down and reveal God’s Divine Presence in the world (Shir HaShirim Rabbah 5:1).
• All blessings in this world come about in the merit of the tzaddik (Zohar I, 189a).
• Great are the tzaddikim, for even after their passing, their merits last for generation upon generation (Zohar I, 183a).
• Were it not for the prayers of the tzaddikim who have passed on, the world could not survive for even a single moment (Zohar III, 71a).

The tzaddik is one who attains such a level of self-mastery and spirituality that all his thoughts, feelings and actions—his very being—are in total consonance with God’s will. This gives him a uniquely close relationship with God. In essence, what distinguishes the tzaddik from anyone else is that he has an unparalleled mastery of the spiritual, giving him the ability to bridge the physical and spiritual worlds. Yet for all his spirituality, he is—and remains—a human being. This indeed is his strength. He is able to channel Torah spirituality into thisworld, and guide other human beings in the service of God. In this, the tzaddik is the one who bridges Heaven and earth.

Does this mean that the tzaddik is an intermediary? Yes and no. First of all, God forbid that anyone should think he needs a medium between the Almighty and himself; not from his side, and certainly not from God’s side. Each of us has a direct connection to the One Above. Furthermore, God forbid that anyone should think he needs, or can have, someone else to carry out some form of devotion on his behalf, absolving him of fulfilling his own religious duties. We are all able—indeed, required—to accept responsibility for our own lives and deeds, and to take practical steps to develop our own personal relationship with God.

And so, if the tzaddik is an intermediary, it is only in the functional sense. Like Moshe Rabbeinu, the tzaddik has the task of presenting the case of Klal Yisrael before the Divine Throne—a responsibility that he assumes with the greatest self-sacrifice. The outstanding Breslover sage, Reb Avraham Chazan, likens the tzaddik to a baal tefillah, a prayer leader (seeBi’ur HaLikutim 10:17). In a spiritual sense, he is one with the congregation and the congregation is one with him. Thus, even though we must pray on our own, we need a prayer leader to pray on our behalf. Like Moshe Rabbeinu, the tzaddik also teaches Torah to the people and communicates God’s will. But the rest—“Na’aseh v’nishmah – we will do and we will hear” (Exodus 24:7)—is up to us.

What makes the tzaddik qualified for this role? Because he has succeeded in conquering the physicality of this world, he is able to function as an agent or catalyst for bringing spirituality down into it. Through his efforts and attainments, the tzaddik knows what is necessary for each person to serve God in a true and proper manner. The average individual generally does not have a strong enough grasp of the spiritual to be able to perceive God’s will clearly and know how to serve Him in practice. He must therefore turn to someone on a higher level for guidance (more on this in Part III).

Think about it. Do we always know what to do? Are we always clear about what God wants from us? Can we know on our own what direction to take in avodat Hashem (service of God)? And what happens when we have estranged ourselves from God due to our misdeeds? The Sages tell us that even the Torah, the instrument that conveys God’s infinite wisdom to man, can actually mislead a person who tries to follow it without the benefit of true guidance and leadership! (Yoma 72b). Who can honestly say that he is wise enough to look into the Torah and grasp exactly what is required of him? The Talmud, Midrash and Shulchan Arukh stress the importance of receiving from a teacher so that one’s understanding of Torah will be correct (see Berakhot 47b). This especially applies to the Torah’s teachings on the subtleties of the soul and one’s service of God. The true tzaddik can take the most elevated aspects of Godliness and bring them down to a level at which the simplest person can relate to them. The tzaddik gives direction.

Why Rebbe Nachman?              How does Rebbe Nachman fit into all of this? Rebbe Nachman has always been different things to different people. To his followers, the Breslover chassidim, he is simply “the Rebbe,” their prime source of spiritual guidance and healer of their souls. Some know him as a master storyteller; his tales are counted among the great classics of Jewish literature and actually contain the deepest secrets of creation. To countless others, Rebbe Nachman is an outstanding Chassidic master, the great-grandson of the Baal Shem Tov. An ever-fresh source of inspiration, his lessons, conversations, parables and epigrams continue to electrify and inspire no less today as when he first taught them. Rebbe Nachman expresses the wisdom of the Torah in a totally original way, opening up entirely new vistas in every area of life. His optimistic message, “Serve God with simplicity and joy,” strikes a deep chord in many who have found themselves on the fringes of the Jewish people, as well as those born and raised in observant homes.

Born in 1772, Rebbe Nachman was only eighteen years old when he first began to attract a following. Many of his chassidim were outstanding scholars and kabbalists in their own right, some far older than he. Even as he undertook the mantle of communal and pastoral leadership, Rebbe Nachman continued to work diligently on his own spiritual growth, grappling with his own spiritual challenges. He sought to blaze a trail through the thick, dark forest that he foresaw the Jewish people would have to pass through before Mashiach’s arrival.

Rebbe Nachman was only thirty-eight years old when he passed away in 1810, but his influence remained potent. His teachings spread by word of mouth and, especially, through the printing of his writings. Today his ideas are studied by Jews and non-Jews, professionals and plain folk, Torah scholars and academicians. His works have been the subject of a growing body of literature, academic and popular, in English, Spanish, French, Russian, Yiddish, and of course, Hebrew.

Why Uman?                       The name of the Breslover chassidim comes from the town ofBreslov (Ukrainian: Bratzlav), where Rebbe Nachman spent most of the last eight years of his life. That being the case, where does Uman come in? Why did he want to be buried there in particular? Nobody can claim to know exactly what was in Rebbe Nachman’s mind. But if we transport ourselves back 200 years in time and take a look at what Uman stood for then, a coherent picture begins to emerge.

In a certain sense, Uman was a place of opposites. In 1768, forty-two years before Rebbe Nachman took up residence there, Uman was a garrison town under Polish rule. With the advance of an army of rebellious Haidemacks, thousands upon thousands of Jews from all the surrounding areas fled to the town for safety. When the Haidemacks arrived at the gates, the governor agreed to give them access—if they would agree to spare all the gentiles in exchange for the Jews. The Haidemacks entered, set up a cross, and offered the Jews a choice between conversion and death. Without exception the Jews chose death. In the space of three days some 20,000 were slain. Their martyrdom brought about a great sanctification of God’s Name.

Thirty-four years after the Haidemack massacre, Rebbe Nachman passed through Uman. He took special note of its cemetery, praising it in the most glowing terms. “How beautiful it would be to be buried in this cemetery,” he said. By that time, however, Uman had become notorious for a new kind of Jew, one whose outlook was almost diametrically opposed to that of the 20,000 martyrs. Paradoxically, Uman had become one of the first centers of theHaskalah (Enlightenment movement) inRussia.

Although the Haskalah first developed inGermany, it was now spreading eastward to what had been for centuries the bastion of Ashkenazi Jewry:Poland,Ukraine andRussia. This was a time of an unprecedented philosophical explosion in which many of the ideas that had previously defined man’s place in the world were shattered. Human reason waged war with faith. Leading intellectuals questioned the notion that man is subservient to God; they wanted to sever all links with the Divine.

Unlike today, there was no such thing as “Orthodox,” “Conservative” and “Reform”—one was either a Jew or not. Owing to outside hostility, most Jews had little choice but to live in their own closed communities. In the new political climate in Europe, though, equality was now being offered to all, even Jews. For the first time Jews could gain admission to non-Jewish society and culture. But the price was high: the talit, tefilin and tradition had to be discarded at the door.

Faced with this existential threat to Judaism, the religious leaders of the day fought valiantly to innovate ways to preserve Torah observance against the tide of assimilation. For many Jews, however, the promise of full equality proved too enticing, and they pursued it with all their might. During this time Rebbe Nachman made a chilling statement to his followers: “We are now at the end of the Jewish people, their outer limit. This is the point where the boundary of the Jewish people ends…When the Jewish people reach this point, they are very far from God” (Tzaddik #92).

The maskilim in Uman were led by a clique of three men. Rebbe Nachman was the only Chassidic leader who was able to establish a dialogue with these men, and they themselves invited him to move to Uman. For years he turned them down; it was not yet time. But when he finally came to Uman to die, he spent hours with these men, playing chess and talking with them, much to the wonderment of his followers. He would speak with them about every subject under the sun…except Torah. Yet one of these maskilim, Hirsh Ber, said that each conversation with the Rebbe seemed as if he were telling him, “There is a God.” After the Rebbe’s death, Hirsh Ber confided to Reb Noson, “You think you’ve lost the Rebbe? We are the ones who lost the Rebbe! If the Rebbe had lived, we would have repented completely…” (Until the Mashiach, p. 206).

source: http://breslov.org/why-a-tzaddik-why-rebbe-nachman-why-uman/

Faithful Imagination

New Videos

Faithful Imagination

by Meir Elkabas

Source:

Christian Kabbalist Johan Kemper (1670–1716)

"Kemper major works, most notably a three-volume commentary on the Zohar titled Mateh Mosheh and a kabbalistic commentary on the Gospels, “Me’irat ‘enayim” (unpublished manuscript). He also embarked on a project of translating the Gospels into Hebrew, although only a translation of Matthew was completed."

Johan Kemper (1670–1716) was a Hebrew teacher, whose tenure at Uppsala University lasted from 1697 to 1716. He was Swedenborg's probable Hebrew tutor.

Kemper, formerly known as Moses ben Aaron of Cracow, was a convert to Lutheranism from Judaism. During his time at Uppsala, he wrote his three-volume work on the Zohar entitled Matteh Mosche (The Staff of Moses). In it, he attempted to show that the Zohar contained the Nicene Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

This belief also drove him to make a literal translation of the Gospel of Matthew into Hebrew and to write a kabbalistic commentary on it.


The movement was influenced by a desire to interpret aspects of Christianity even more mystically than current Christian Mystics. Greek Neoplatonic documents came into Europe from Constantinople in the reign of Mehmet II. Neoplatonism had been prevalent in Christian Europe and had entered into Scholasticism since the translation of Greek and Hebrew texts in Spain in the 13th century. The Renaissance trend was a relatively short-lived phenomenon, ending by 1750.

After the 18th century, Kabbalah became blended with European occultism, some of which had a religious basis; but the main thrust of Christian Kabbalah was by then dead. A few attempts have been made to revive it in recent decades, particularly in relation to the Neoplatonism of the first two chapters of the Gospel of John, but it has not entered into mainstream Christianity.

Messianic Christians are reviving it's practice believing it gives proof of the Trinity.

(Johan Kemper; d. 1716), Sabbatian kabbalist; after hisconversion to Christianity, lector in Hebrew at the University of Uppsala. Little is known about Mosheh ben Aharon’s early activity. It is certain that he was active in one of the groups linked to Yehudah Ḥasid, which around 1695 began to prepare to immigrate to Palestine in order to await Shabetai Tsevi’s second coming in Jerusalem.

Mosheh ben Aharon was attracted to the preaching of the Sabbatian prophet Tsadok ben Shemaryah of Grodno, a former brandy distiller who appeared around 1694, traveled through Eastern and Central Europe, and foretold redemption in the year 1695. Following the failure of this prophecy, Mosheh became receptive to the Christian message that Sabbatian expectations should be abandoned because the messiah had already come.

It seems that even before his conversion, Mosheh ben Aharon had had some contacts with Christian scholars, notably with orientalists Johann Christian Wagenseil and Laurentius Normannus. Toward the end of 1696, he converted to the Augsburg Confession in Schweinfurt and accepted the name of Johan Christian Jakob Kemper. In the same year, he published an account of his baptism and of the movement surrounding Tsadok of Grodno, and started teaching Hebrew at a German university, most likely in Altdorf. The following year he moved to Sweden and taught Hebrew and rabbinics at Uppsala, where he remained until his death.

During his tenure at Uppsala, Kemper wrote his major works, most notably a three-volume commentary on the Zohar titled Mateh Mosheh and a kabbalistic commentary on the Gospels, “Me’irat ‘enayim” (unpublished manuscript). He also embarked on a project of translating the Gospels into Hebrew, although only a translation of Matthew was completed.

The prime aim of Kemper’s works was to demonstrate the truth of Christianity on the basis of Jewish sources. Although the main focus is on kabbalistic speculation, his work is unusual in its attempt to find Christian elements in halakhah as well, and in the observance of traditional Jewish customs and rituals. According to Kemper, the truth of Christianity can be fully appreciated against its Jewish background. Thus he holds that the entire Jewish tradition contains intimations of Christianity that are impenetrable to the majority of Jews.

Kemper sought both to make kabbalistic speculation available to Gospel scholars and to convince Jews of the truth of Christianity. Unstated Sabbatian motifs (such as the doctrine of the tripartite division of the godhead) served for him as a bridge between the two religions. His translation of the Gospels from Syriac was intended as a missionary aid but contains many heretical Jewish elements that deviate from Christian doctrine. Similarly, his Hebrew commentary to Matthew (translated into Latin by Anders Norrelius) contains many Sabbatian doctrines that were most likely not recognizable as such to his Christian readers. 

Tempted By A Tiny Spark Of Light 

Question: How is it possible that someone could use Kabbalah and the Torah egoistically? Can someone who doesn't possess a spiritual screen and the force of bestowal draw the force of the Upper Light for his own sake? Isn't there is a whole system of worlds and restrictions to prevent us from receiving the Light egoistically?

Dr. Laitman's Answer: If you pick up

 the Torah and wish to receive power from it, you will get it since you are reading the primary source related to the spiritual world. It was written by a person who was in the process of attaining the Upper World. If you use it individually, in order to fill your egoism, for the sake of your own purposes, then you are using only a miniscule amount of the force it contains.

Even still, we do see how much more egoistical it makes people when the place of the "mistress" is taken by the "handmaid." A person not only doesn't receive correction from it, he becomes even worse! He thinks that now he owns this world and the future one, and that he deserves a reward; he feels proud before others and considers himself a chosen one, who is above them.

It is the Torah who is doing this to him; it becomes a deadly narcotic for such person. If, however, he wishes to use the Torah correctly, he does so in the group that builds itself as a common soul, as written about when receiving the Torah: as one man with one heart. This is the kind of engagement for which the Torah is given; otherwise, we are warned: In it there will be the place of your (spiritual) death!

The Daily Page - 3rd March 2010

How Yeshua’s Reference to Balaam Applies to Paul

DID PAUL INVENT CHRISTIANITY?

 

"The doctrine that the earth is neither the center of the universe nor immovable, but moves even with a daily rotation, is absurd, and both philosophically and theologically false, and at the least an error of faith."

--Catholic Church's decision against Galileo Galilei

Note, these Church Fathers are the very ones to canonize the letters of Paul into the New Testament Bible. Peter gives a warning about these letters in 2Pe 3:16  Indeed, he speaks about these things in all his letters. They contain some things that are hard to understand, things which the uninstructed and unstable distort, to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 

This is not an attack on Paul, it only asks reasonable questions to be viewed in light of Torah and the words of Moshe (Moses) Balaam was a Prophet in the Hebrew Scriptures who was changed from an enemy to a friend by an angelic vision on a Road. Paul was an enemy changed to a friend. Has the Church distorted Paul as justification? 

Therefore, Balaam was the ultimate embodiment of extraordinarily keen mental powers and perception on the side of impurity, and he was the counterbalancing mirror image of holy wisdom, as our Sages, of blessed memory, said on the verse, " 'There never arose a prophet among the Jews like Moses’ (Deuteronomy 34: 10) – ‘among the Jews’ there did not arise; but among the [gentile] nations there did arise a prophet like Moses, and this was Balaam” (Sifri, 34; Zohar II, 21b). [Now, Balaam] produced this lust-poisoned air in Midian, as it is written, “These were the very women [of Midian] who were involved in corrupting the Children of Israel by the word of Balaam” (Numbers 31: 16) – specifically, “his words,” through the words that were the external manifestation of his mind and thoughts.

Nosson of Breslov, Rebbe (2009-09-01). Kitzur Likutey Moharan (Abridged Likutey Moharan) Vol. 1 (Kindle Locations 3443-3448). Breslov Research Institute. Kindle Edition.

How Jesus’s Reference to Balaam Applies to Paul

If we dig a little deeper into the eating of idol-meat issue, we find Jesus mentions Balaam in Revelation 2:14.

Jesus says the source of this heretical idol meat doctrine is a “teaching of Balaam.” Jesus says Balaam taught one can eat meat sacrificed to idols, among other things. Why is Jesus mentioning Balaam, a figure from the era of Moses? Evidently because Balaam is a figure who resembles the one who in the New Testament era teaches eating meat sacrificed to idols is permissible. What do we know about Balaam that would help us identify who was the Balaam-type figure in the New Testament church?

The Biblical story of Balaam in the book of Numbers does not reveal the precise nature of the teachings of Balaam. Jesus alone tells us that Balaam taught the Israelites they could eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. (Rev. 2:14.) Thus, with these additional facts, let’s make a synopsis of the story of Balaam. Then we can see whether anyone appears similar in the New Testament era.

Balaam was a Prophet in the Hebrew Scriptures who was changed from an enemy to a friend by an angelic vision on a Road.

Revelation 2:14: “But I have a few things against thee, because thou

hast there some that hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to

cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things

sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication.” (ASV)

Balaam, after properly serving the Lord for a time, changed back into being an enemy.

This inspired prophet is deemed to be an enemy of God because he taught it was permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols and to commit fornication. This part of the story was omitted in Moses’ account. Jesus alone reveals this.

Who else is a prophet of God who was changed from an enemy to a friend by an angelic-type vision on a Road, but then later taught it was permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols? Who likewise taught an act of fornication condemned by Jesus (i.e., remarriage after divorce if certain circumstances were lacking) was perfectly permissible?

Who likewise is interpreted by most Paulinists as saying fornication is no longer strictly prohibited and no longer leads to spiritual death but instead the propriety of fornication is examined solely based on its expediency?

On those key points, Balaam identically matches Paul. Jesus is putting a thin veil over the fact He is talking about Paul. Jesus reveals His purpose by referring to Balaam in Revelation 2:14

.

By citing the example of Balaam, Jesus reminds us that a true prophet who is turned from evil to good then could turn back and completely apostasize. Jesus’ citation to Balaam in this context destroys our assumptions that Paul could never apostasize. By referencing Balaam, Jesus is telling us, at the very least, that Paul could turn and apostasize after his Road to Damascus experience. Paul could be just like Balaam who did so after his Road to Moab experience.

Is Revelation 2:14 A Type of Parable?

Did Jesus mention the "teaching of Balaam" as a parable to identify Paul?

It appears Revelation 2:14 is a type of parable. Jesus identifies the false teaching as the "teaching of Balaam." Yet Balaam is dead. Someone in the apostolic era is like Balaam. To know whom Jesus meant, one has to find someone who matches Balaam's historically-known qualities.

Furthermore, we have a second reason to believe a parable is intended in Revelation 2:14. At the end of Revelation chapter 2, Jesus says: "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches." (Rev. 2:29.) This is Jesus' standard catch-phrase when He wanted you to know there are symbolic meanings in His words.

Let's next try to identify who was the Balaam-like figure in the New Testament apostolic era by studying the life of the original Balaam.

Balaam Was Changed to A True Prophet By A Vision on A Road

In the book of Numbers (written by Moses), Balaam begins as a soothsayer intent on accepting money from Moab's King Balak. He was offered payment to travel to Moab to curse Israel. As such, he begins as an enemy of the true God.

God then appeared to Balaam and told him not to curse Israel. (Numbers 22:5-12.) King Balak then called on Balaam again to come to Moab. However, God appeared to Balaam and allowed him to go on condition Balaam did only what HaShem told him to do. (Numbers 22:20.) Apparently after starting on his trip, Balaam decided to still curse Israel. On route to Moab, Balaam (on a donkey) and his two companions are stopped on a road by an unseen angel of HaShem. (Some commentators think Numbers 22:35 proves this was actually Jesus, an eternal angel) Then the famous incident takes place where Balaam's donkey talks back to him. The donkey complains that Balaam is goading him by smiting him with his staff: "What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?" (Numbers 22:28.) At first Balaam cannot see the angel which is blocking the donkey. (Numbers 22:25-27.) Balaam is in a sense blinded. However, then God "opened the eyes of Balaam" and he could see the angel. (Numbers 22:31-33.)

Balaam then confesses to the angel that he sinned. (Numbers 22:34.) He offers to go home. The angel tells Balaam to continue onto Moab, but repeats the command that Balaam must only bless the Israelites. (Numbers 22:35.) Then Balaam proceeded to Moab. (Numbers 22:36.)

Next when Balaam arrived in Moab, he warned King Balak that he could only do what HaShem allowed him to say. (Numbers 22:36-38.) Balaam's famous oracles of blessings over Israel then followed. (Numbers 23:1-29.)

While giving the blessing, God through Moses says Balaam was directly led by the Spirit of God. Balaam simultaneously turned away from his prior practice of using omens. Moses writes in Numbers 24:1-2:

(1) And when Balaam saw that it pleased HaShem to bless Israel, he went not, as at the other times, to meet with enchantments, but he set his face toward the wilderness. (2) And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel dwelling according to their tribes; and the Spirit of God came upon him. [Then Balaam blesses Israel.]

Thus Balaam had become a true prophet whom Moses reveals was having true communications from HaShem. Balaam is indwelt by the Spirit of God and repeats precisely what God wants him to say. God wants us to know through Moses that Balaam begins as a truly inspired prophet of God Almighty. The last we see of Balaam in action, he is acting as a good prophet. His words of blessings end up as part of standard synagogue services to this very day, known as the Mah Tovu.

How Balaam Fell: His Idol Meat & Fornication Teaching

Then something negative happens that Moses only cryptically revealed. In Numbers 31:16, Moses writes: "Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against HaShem in the matter of Peor, and so the plague was among the congregation of HaShem." Balaam had counseled the Israelites that they could sin in some unspecified manner. This cryptic statement is the only explanation why later in Numbers 31:8 that the Israelites, during their slaying of the Midianites, also kill Balaam.

Rabbinic tradition tries to fill in the missing information. It attributed to Balaam the lapse of Israel into the immorality we find in Numbers 25:1-9. [2]

Jesus, however, gives us an inspired message on what was missing in the Biblical account. Jesus says Balaam misled the Israelites by teaching them they can eat meat sacrificed to idols and they can commit fornication. Jesus is the only inspired source of this information. Jesus says:

But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there some that hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication. (Rev. 2:14, ASV.)

The Rabbinic tradition in Judaism supports what Jesus said, but only in general terms.

So Who is Balaam in the New Testament Era?

[2] Morris Jastrow Jr., "Balaam," Encyclopedia of Judaism (online at http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=161&letter=B&search=balaam.) If we look at Numbers 25:2, we will see the Israelites were invited to the sacrifices to idols, and ate the idol meat. (Numbers 25:2, "for they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods; and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods.")

So Who is Balaam in the New Testament Era?

The prophet Balaam was a person whose life mirrors apostle Paul's life to an extraordinary degree. Absent Jesus telling us that Balaam taught it was permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols, we would never have known how virtually identical are the two lives. Yet when Jesus filled in the missing detail, it made the parallel between Balaam and Paul become extraordinarily uncanny.

In particular, Balaam's Road to Moab experience has many striking parallels to Paul's Road to Damascus experience. In fact, how it affects both Paul and Balaam is identical. Balaam is on his road with the wrong intent to curse God's people. This is true for Paul too, aiming to imprison God's people. (Acts 22:5.) Balaam is on the road with two companions. Paul likewise has companions with him. (Acts 22:9.)

Next, Balaam is given a message by the angel that converts his way to the true God. Likewise, Paul gets a message from Jesus that converts his way to the true God. (Acts 22:8.) Both Balaam and Paul follow God for a time. Both apostasize when they teach it is permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols.

There is another odd parallel between Balaam and Paul. After Balaam strikes his donkey to make him move, Balaam's donkey asks: "What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?" (Numbers 22:28.) The donkey in effect asks Why are you persecuting me? Balaam then learns that an angel of God was itself stopping the donkey from moving. Balaam learns it is hard for the donkey to keep on kicking (moving ahead) against the goads of God's angel. It is hard to keep on kicking against divine goads.

Now compare this to Paul and his vision. Paul is likewise confronted by Jesus with a similar question: "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" (Acts 22:7.) And most telling, Jesus adds in the "Hebrew" tongue: "it is hard for thee to kick against the goad." (Acts 26:14.)

When Jesus spoke to Paul on the road in the Book of Acts, He was speaking in a manner that would allow us to invoke the memory of the story of Balaam. In Acts, Jesus laid the seeds for us to later identify Paul as the apostolic era Balaam. To repeat, first Jesus asks Paul why Paul is persecuting Jesus. The donkey asked Balaam the same question. He asked why was Balaam persecuting him. Second, Jesus said to Paul that it is hard for Paul to keep moving forward against God's goads. Likewise, Balaam's donkey was up against the goads of God's angel. Jesus' words in the vision experience with Paul were well chosen to invoke a precise parallel to the story of Balaam. Thus, we could never miss the point in Revelation 2:14. We thereby could identify the NT Balaam.

What Does It all Mean?

Paulinists apparently sense a problem if Balaam's story were ever told in detail. They always identify Balaam as merely a false teacher or someone who prophesied for money. But this misses Jesus' point.

Balaam is precisely the example, unique in Hebrew Scriptures, of an enemy converted by a vision on a road, turned into a true spokesperson of God, but who later apostasizes by saying it is permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Balaam precisely matches Paul in an uncanny way despite millennia separating them.

Thus, in Paul's vision experience, God laid the groundwork for a comparison to events two millennia earlier. What an amazing God we have! Jesus specifically made sure the encounter with Paul would have all the earmarks of the Balaam encounter:

• It would be on a road.

• There would be a divine vision.

• Jesus would ask why is Paul persecuting Him.

• Jesus would let Paul know it is hard to go up against the goads of God.

• The experience would turn Paul around to be a true spokesperson of God for a time.

• Finally, Paul would fall like Balaam did by teaching it was permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols.

Of course, to understand this, you have to have ears to hear. (Rev. 2:29.)

In other words, God set in motion what happened on the Road to Moab, just as He did on the Road to Damascus. Paul apparently indeed had the experience he claims. That's why Jesus could cite the teaching of Balaam as repeating itself in the apostolic era. Yet, to cement the similarity, Jesus had to give us a crucial new similarity between Balaam and Paul. By disclosing Balaam's idol meat teaching, Jesus in Revelation 2:14 suddenly made appear an extraordinary parallel between Paul and Balaam that otherwise remained hidden.

Just as Jesus said Elijah was John the Baptist, "if you are willing to receive it" (Matt. 11:14), Jesus is saying the teaching of Balaam that deceives Christians is the teaching of Paul, "if you are willing to receive it." [4]

Paul's teaching, which he explains in Romans 14:14-23 and 1 Corinthians 8:4-13, is that eating food sacrificed to idols is not wrong. Totally contrary to Moses. Had Paul apostatized by this point? For his teaching to the Colossians is in complete harmony with Moses and Torah. Like Balaam, Paul spoke true to the Colossians. When did he turn away from HaShem, is Jesus saying the teaching of Balaam that deceives Christians is the teaching of Paul, "if you are willing to receive it."


Jesus commends the church at Ephesus for discerning the lying apostles. Rev. 2:1,2.

Paul was the apostle to Ephesus. Eph.1:1.?

 

Christianity reached the non-Jewish world through the person of Paul. Paul traveled the length and breadth of the Mediterranean, teaching the gentile world about Jesus. Paul founded many churches throughout the Roman Empire. The churches which Paul established were predominantly gentile.  The Christian scriptures end their narrative at this point. They leave the reader at the historical point where there are two churches; the Jewish church of James, and the gentile church of Paul.

 History tells us that the Jewish church of James did not survive as a separate entity. By the time Christianity became the established religion of the Roman Empire, there were almost no Jewish Christians left. The few Jewish Christians which still existed, were persecuted as heretics by the gentile  church. All of Christianity as it exists today, was transmitted through the body of the gentile church. The books of Christian scripture were products of the gentile church. They may have included in these books, material which came from the Jewish Christians. But the gentile church was the editor of this material. It was the gentile church who determined the contents of the Christian scriptures, and who transmitted these texts to the future generations.

 In order to be convinced that the gentile church is truly transmitting the original message of Jesus, one must determine that Paul’s teachings conformed with the teachings of Jesus. The gentile church only learned of Jesus through the teachings of Paul. If Paul’s teachings were not synonymous with the teachings of Jesus, then the gentile church does not possess the original message of Jesus. 

 To determine Paul’s connection to Jesus, we will turn to the books of Christian scripture. It is clear that the editors of these books were strongly motivated to present Paul as one who is faithfully transmitting the original message of Jesus. Yet even these biased writers, were not able to do so.

 The Christian scriptures describe the basis of Paul’s mission in the following manner. Paul never saw Jesus in real life. Neither did Paul learn of Jesus’s teachings through the disciples of Jesus. Paul emphatically states (in the 1st and 2nd chapters of Galatians) that no living person was involved in transmitting Jesus’s message to him. Paul only learned of the teachings of Jesus through a series of visions. In these visions, Jesus appeared to him and imparted his teachings. Paul’s entire message was the product of these visions.

 The only way we can verify the truth of Paul’s claim, is by determining the reaction of Jesus’s disciples to Paul’s message. These men who lived with Jesus and heard him teach, could compare the teachings that they heard, to the prophecy of Paul. How did the Jewish following of James react to Paul’s claim to prophecy?

   Paul makes the claim (Galatians 2:9) that the leaders of the Jerusalem Church acknowledged the fact that he was appointed (by the dead Jesus) as a messenger to the gentiles. But Paul was lying. James and the Jerusalem Church never acknowledged the validity of Paul’s visions. It is the Christian scriptures themselves who contradict Paul’s claim.

 The 15th chapter of the book of Acts, describes how the leadership of the Jerusalem Church disregarded Paul’s claim to prophecy. Paul had come to Jerusalem. He had been preaching to the gentiles that they are not required to practice the law of Moses. Some members of the Jerusalem Church disagreed with Paul. They felt that in order for a gentile to join their following, he should be required to observe the law of Moses. This question was brought before the leadership of the Jerusalem Church. The elders of the church discussed the question, and James handed down his decision. His judgment was that the gentiles were not obligated to observe the entirety of the law of Moses as a prerequisite to joining the Christian community. But he stipulated that the gentiles were obligated to observe certain dietary laws, and to avoid immorality.

 If Paul was telling us the truth when he claimed that the leadership of the Jerusalem Church acknowledged him as a true prophet, then this story makes no sense. Here we have Paul, who was personally appointed by the dead Jesus as his emissary to the gentile world. Whatever Paul taught was personally revealed to him in these prophetic visions. One of the central teachings of Paul was that the gentile world is not bound by the law of Moses. Yet when the leaders of the Jerusalem Church are in doubt as to what Jesus would have said concerning the gentiles, they discuss the question, and look to James for guidance. If there was any truth to Paul’s claim, that these leaders acknowledged the truth of his prophecy, then they should have simply asked him “what did Jesus tell you?” The fact that they considered the question, and the method that they used to resolve the question, clearly tells  us that these men did not believe that Jesus had ever spoken to Paul. The author of the book of Acts, his bias notwithstanding, could not hide this simple fact.

 The difference between the gentile church founded by Paul, and the Jerusalem Church founded by Jesus, was not limited to the question of the authenticity of Paul’s prophecy. These two institutions espoused two totally different philosophies. The central teaching of Pauline Christianity is, that faith in the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus, is the only valid method through which atonement for sin can be achieved. The entire philosophy of Paul, revolves around this one teaching. 

Evangelical Christianity is founded upon this basic teaching of Paul. If you were to ask an Evangelical Christian to sum up his belief system in one sentence, he would respond with this point. That faith in Jesus is the only redemption from sin. In fact the entire concept of the messiah-ship of Jesus is basically limited to this one point. Jesus is the messiah of Evangelical Christians, only because they believe that his death provided atonement for sin.

  But the Jerusalem Church which was established by Jesus, and which was guided by his disciples, did not believe in this teaching of Paul. They did not believe that faith in Jesus could effectively atone for their sins. This is demonstrated by the testimony of the Christian scriptures. The 21st chapter in the book of Acts reports that the normal activities of the members of the Jerusalem Church included the offering of animals for the explicit purpose of the expiation of sin. The book of Acts describes how four members of the Jerusalem Church had taken a Nazirite vow. This means that they had voluntarily brought themselves into a situation where they would be required (by the law of Moses) to bring an animal as a sin offering. It is clear that these people saw in the temple offerings a valid method for the expiation of sin. If they believed as Paul did, that Jesus died for their sins once and for all, then there would be no point in bringing a sin offering in  the temple. The fact that the Jerusalem Church still participated in the temple offerings after Jesus had died, tells us that they did not see in Jesus’s death an all atoning sacrifice. These people were not Evangelical Christians.

The Christian scriptures provides both the theological and the historical justification to the accusation that Christianity has failed in the transmission of its own message. The Christian scriptures tell us that the disciples of Jesus never believed the fundamental teaching of Evangelical Christianity.
These people who lived with Jesus and heard him preach did not believe, that with the death of Jesus, the world is redeemed of its sins. The Christian scriptures also tell us, at which historical point the break in the transmission occurred. These books tell us that Paul, the father of modern Christianity, had no connection to Jesus. Christianity is an edifice erected upon the testimony of one man. All of Christianity stands upon Paul’s word that Jesus appeared to him. The only people that were qualified to verify Paul’s claim, contradicted him to his face. This emerges from the pages of the very books which Christianity regards as true witnesses to its claims. 

Read more at  https://natzrim.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-traditional-jewish-response-to.html

Balaam was a prophet in the Hebrew Scriptures who was changed from an enemy to a friend by an angelic vision on a Road.

Sources:
[1] http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/

[2] http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2395-balaam

[3] http://jewtoo.org/

[4] Mat 11:14  Indeed, if you are willing to accept it, he is Eliyahu, whose coming was predicted.

See:

Errors, Contradictions and Falsehoods in the New Testament

Jesu commends the church at Ephesus for discerning the lying apostles. Rev. 2:1,2.
Paul was the apostle to Ephesus. Eph.1:1. @ http://acquiescere9.wordpress.com/2013/12/02/errors-contradictions-and-falsehoods-in-the-new-testament/

http://noahide-ancient-path.co.uk/index.php/christianity-2/idolatry-2/2013/08/errors-in-the-new-testament/

Is there any biblical justification for idolatry?  
More reading: http://jewtoo.org/idolotry.html

Under no circumstances are we allowed to bow before idols or worship other gods!

_________________________________________________________________________________

See:  Gilgul/Gilgul neshamot/Gilgulei Ha Neshamot
See:  Tzadik/Zadik/Sadiq 
See more on reincarnation here and here.

Courtesy of Aish.com

Note:  Historically the focus on the 'body' of Torah, while ignoring its 'soul' has been the cause of a lot of problems. Serious Torah study means learning the mystical dimensions, otherwise it is just simple history, moral lessons and pleasantries for children.


Change one thing and you change everything. Improve one thing and everything improves.) Rebbe Nachman writes:
Before returning, a person does not yet have being. It is as if he does not yet exist in the  world. Indeed, he would be better off had he not been created (Eruvin 13b). But when he prepares to purify himself and return…he will then exist in the world—i.e., “I am prepared to be.”





ONE WORD, MANY DEEDS
"In order to understand God's word, we had to dissect God's deeds into ten components - the Ten Sefirot. In order to be properly applied, God's singular will had to be diversified into 613 different applications, so that every aspect of human life could be illuminated by His lamp. Study may be understood in the verse in Psalms: "God spoke once, but we heard twice."

But, when it comes to prayer, we proclaim daily as one of the fundamentals of faith: "I believe, with a full belief, that only to God Himself is it appropriate to pray" (Ani Maamin Proclamation). Our prayers must be directed to the all-encompassing Almighty, not to parts, pieces, manifestations, or messengers.

The reason why in our study we see differentiation and plurality of the divine within our world is due to our fragmented, finite comprehension. But when we come to pray and we submit ourselves to God, we turn our attention away from the fragmentation and towards God as the absolute, all-encompassing root of creation.

We become aware that at the center-point is One, and only One."

... if a person is completely out of track and is worshipping demi-gods or other humans instead of God, then it is our duty to enlighten him and set him on a right track."