Q&A: Law for the Messianic Era
Law for the Messianic Era
Question
You said that usually when people use the claim, “a mistaken student wrote it,” it is a way of disagreeing politely with someone whom the speaker sees as greater than himself, and not a factual claim. So I wanted to ask what you think about something I heard from someone who said that there is a similar thing regarding the expression “law for the Messianic era”: when a halakhic decisor says about certain matters that they are not relevant to us and will only become relevant after the coming of the Messiah, this is really an indirect and gentle way of saying — in a way that doesn’t sound “Reform” — that a certain commandment or certain Jewish law has already become obsolete and there is nothing for us to deal with in it aside from “study it and receive reward.”
Do you also think so? Personally, it sounds very strange to me, and I think that when the expression “law for the Messianic era” is used, it is said sincerely: the decisor who says it really thinks that when the Messiah comes, laws X and Y will return to their former force, and it is not a gentle way of saying that these commandments have already been sent to the “junk warehouse.” What that person said [I’ll keep his name to myself; I want to deal with what was said, not with the speaker….] seems somewhat puzzling to me.
That person said this to me בעקבות a Facebook exchange between me and him regarding the words of Rabbi Shmuel Nadel about the Temple sacrifices: that until the Messiah comes “and connects us to it,” we will not offer sacrifices even if it were halakhically possible for us to do so, because “we don’t know what sacrifices are, we have no grasp of it at all, etc.” Back then, you and I also had a short exchange about those remarks.
What is your opinion regarding this assertion of the person I quoted about the use of “law for the Messianic era”?
Answer
I actually agree that sometimes that is the intention. But one should understand that the difference between the two possibilities is not great. When people say “law for the Messianic era,” they mean to say that today it is not relevant, and they only add that perhaps in the days of the Messiah people will see and decide whether to apply it then (what is the point of deciding today what will be then). Or, put differently, perhaps this is a law for a utopian reality and not for our own times, and who knows — maybe that will be in the days of the Messiah (as stated, it is impossible to know today whether the utopia will be then, and what its nature will be). So in fact that is the meaning according to both sides you raised.
Discussion on Answer
I no longer remember the discussion. As for the sacrifices, I really do not long and yearn for that, and I hope that when the time comes there will be a discussion and they will consider abolishing or changing it. But as long as it has not been changed, there is a Torah-level obligation, and I do not see any way to escape it. The law of going to secular courts is “law for the Messianic era” (at least in Israel).
And are there laws that you see that way? I remember that when I asked you about Rabbi Shmuel Nadel’s view on sacrifices, you wrote to me that you disagreed with him, and that if we had the halakhic and practical ability to offer them, we would have to do so and not wait for the Messiah for that.