Messiah son of David from the Ten Tribes? (23 February, 2015, 4 Adar, 5775)
Contents:
1. Introduction: Two Messiahs?
2. MbJ from Joseph, MbD from Judah
3. An Opposite Opinion. MbJ from Judah, MbD from Joseph?
4. Lack of Conclusion but Possibilities
===============================
===============================
1. Introduction: Two Messiahs?
We have a number of articles on the subject of the Messiah.
See:
http://www.britam.org/ContentsSubject.html#Messiah
http://hebrewnations.com/articles/messiah/
These articles deal with the Messiah son of David and the Messiah son of Joseph.
Though our studies encompass all of Scripture we try to concentrate on the subject of the Lost Ten Tribes. Commentary concerning the Messiah or the two Messiahs helps us understand Prophecy. They also assist in placing our conclusions concerning the Lost Ten Tribes in perspective. They even add to our proofs in so far as the feasibility of what is attributed to them would conceivably apply to the leaders of only a limited number of known peoples, at least according to present knowledge and past track records.
In Rabbinical Tradition there are two messiahs, the Messiah son of David and the Messiah son of David and the Messiah son of Joseph..
It should be remembered however that believe in a future Messiah son of David is the main point. This is an Article of Faith. This is what is emphasized.
On the other hand, the whole concept of the Messiah son of Joseph (also known as Messiah son Ephraim and other titles) was not widely referred to until the last few centuries and is still not everywhere known about. The earliest mention of Messiah ben Joseph is in the Aramaic Translation of Yehonatan ben Uzzial (on Exodus 40:11) [ca. 100 BCE or earlier in parts] where he is recalled as belonging to the Tribe of Ephraim. The Messiah ben Joseph is briefly mentioned in the Talmud and again by Saadia Gaon (882-942 CE). In both places a connection with "Ephraim" or the Ten Tribes is not recalled.
===============================
===============================
2. MbJ from Joseph, MbD from Judah
We referred to Midrashim and various sources concerning the Messiah son of Joseph.
Some sources refer to the Messiah son of Joseph without relating him to the Lost Ten Tribes.
The Malbim (1809-1879) said that the Messiah son of Joseph would lead the Ten Tribes in the End Times. The Messiah son of David will emerge from Judah.
The Commentary of "Malbim" on Ezekiel 37:15
# a Messiah [i.e. Anointed Saviour] from the house of Joseph who will reign over the Ten Tribes. He will wage wars and all of Israel will be gathered together under his banner. [This will continue] until later on, a descendant of David will appear and he will reign over them.... #
# A transformation will take place. The Ten Tribes and the stick of Joseph will draw themselves closer unto the stick of Judah, and this too, will be through the agency of a Prophet and by miracles #.
# MALBIM on Micah 5;1: ".....It has already been clarified in Ezekiel 37, that in the End Time, the Ten Tribes will be the first to arouse themselves and over them will reign the Messiah [i.e. Anointed Saviour] Descendant of Joseph and they will accomplish great things. #
# The Tribe of Judah who are scattered amongst the nations [and are] weakly and few will attach themselves [unto the Ten Tribes]. They [i.e. the Tribe of Judah, the Jews] will be of secondary importance [at first] in the kingdom of the Anointed Descendant of Joseph. [This will continue] until later there will arise the Anointed Descendant of David in the Might of The LORD. At that time they will all [both Joseph and Judah] accept upon themselves the Kingship of the House of David. Then wars will cease for the Gentiles will request [guidance from] him [i.e. from the Messiah]... #
The above explanation would also appear to be consistent with that indicated (but not stated expressly) in different sources including that of the work "Kol HaTor" attributed to a disciple of Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna and said to reflect his views.
So too, the Hasidic work "Pri-Tsadik" holds a similar view, Rabbi Tsadok ha-Kohen Rabinowitz of Lublin (1823 - 1900, Poland):
# the main portion of the Assembly of Israel are the Ten Tribes. ... Yosef and the Remnant...The Messiah son of Yosef, through whom will there be a victory over the Peoples of the World.... The Messiah son of Joseph will prepare the way for the Messiah son of David who will come from Judah. # (Bamidbar, Book of Numbers, "BeHalotececa", ch.13), see TTs and Messiah ben Joseph.
Nevertheless, another opinion exists:
===============================
===============================
3. An Opposite Opinion. MbJ from Judah, MbD from Joseph?
Moshe Chaim Luzzatto also referred to as "Ramchal" (1707, Italy-1746, Acre, Israel) was a very important, yet controversial, scholar. Whatever he said had authority meaning it demands consideration. He was greatly admired by Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna, the Vilna Gaon (1720-1797) who was probably the most authoritative scholar of recent times.
Luzatto wrote:
Understand this, two tribes went to Judah, and ten to Ephraim. In the future the two [i.e. Judah] shall be gathered together by the Messiah son of Ephraim. They will be linked to him. They shall sing this song and begin the aliyah [going to the Land of Israel].
The remaining ten shall be brought in by the Messiah son of David. We then find each side interlocked with each other, as it is says and they shall be one in your hand (Ezekiel 37:17). Even so, the main aim of the aliyah [going to the Land of Israel] is not for the present, but for the future.Ma-Amar ha-Geulah [Essay on the Redemption].
We thus find the Messiah son of Joseph linked to Judah i.e. the Jews and Messiah son of David to the Ten Tribes.
This contradicts the opinion of the Malbim and what we ourselves considered to be indicated by other sources and even common sense.
===============================
===============================
4. Lack of Conclusion but Possibilities
What the above apparent contradiction in the sources means we cannot say.
It could be that one opinion is right and the other wrong.
Or both are right in different contexts.
We may return to this subject at a later date.
See Also: