English translation — בחוקותי א

1.

In the concluding chapter of the Laws of Kings¹

the Rambam says: Let it not arise²

in the heart that in the days of the Messiah anything from the customary course of the world will be nullified,

or there will be .

a novelty in the work of creation,

but the world follows its customary course³,

and that which is said in Isaiah⁴

And the wolf shall dwell ..

a parable and a riddle ..

that Israel will dwell securely with the wicked of the nations⁵

who are likened to a wolf and a leopard,

as it is said⁶

wolf ..

and they will all return to the true religion,

and they will not rob nor destroy,

but will eat that which is permitted ..

as it is said⁷

and the lion ..

And likewise all such matters concerning the Messiah are parables.

And in the days of King Messiah, everyone will know to what thing it was a parable and what matter was hinted in them.

And then the Rambam continues⁸

"The Sages said⁹

there is no difference between etc.",

and as below section 8.

From the contradictions to the opinion of the Rambam mentioned above¹⁰

— that in the days of Mashiach, "nothing of the customary order of the world will be nullified ...

but the world will follow its customary course" — we apparently find the statement in Toras Kohanim¹¹

in our parshah on the verse¹²

"And the tree of the field will give its fruit" — "And from where that even barren trees are destined to produce fruit? The verse says: 'And the tree of the field will give its fruit'"; and similarly it is stated at the end of Tractate Kesubos: "Rav Chiya bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: All barren trees in the Land of Israel are destined to bear fruit, as it is said¹³

For the tree bears its fruit, the fig tree and the vine give their yield" — and this is indeed a matter of nullifying the customary order of the world¹⁴.

2.

Seemingly, one could answer*¹⁴,

that according to the opinion of the Rambam, these statements of Chazal mentioned above are also a "parable and riddle",

for example¹⁵

Tree of food means

(as Chazal¹⁶)

Torah scholars,

and by "barren trees" is meant — ignoramuses; and in the future also barren trees — ignoramuses — will produce fruits,

that is — they will become Torah scholars¹⁷

(or another interpretation similar¹⁸).

One cannot, however, learn it this way,

even the words of Tannaim and Amoraim

(MShA”B words of the prophets)

So they are only a parable,

is even more difficult in our case,

because

because]

The aforementioned maamar in Torah Ohr comes in continuation to several blessings whose content is specifically physical blessings,

including also the blessing of the verse*¹⁹

"And the land shall give its produce and the tree of the field shall give its fruit" — "not in the way it does now but in the way it did in the days of Adam the first ..

is sown and produces fruit on its day ..

is planted and produces fruit on its day ..

the tree is eaten",

That is, that the blessing is literal,

in actual physicality²⁰.

And likewise in Ketubot the statement is brought in the continuation²¹

to several maamarim²²

which must be interpreted literally,

For example²³

: "R. Chanina would fix the weights of... an accuser against Torah scholars..." — it is plausible that also the maamar

(All barren trees will in the future etc.)

means literally²⁴.

3.

And behold, on the aforementioned words of the Rambam there is the objection of the Ra'avad²⁵

from the verse

(in our parshah²⁶)

"And I will remove evil beasts from the land",

which is

(not a parable and riddle,

but)

a matter literally.

And the Radbaz immediately answers the Ra'avad's objection: And this is not an objection, just as the other verses are a metaphor, so too this is a metaphor

(And he continues)

But what is proper to believe in this is that the matters are also according to their simple meaning in the Land of Israel, as it is written²⁷

They shall not harm nor destroy in all My holy mountain, for the earth shall be full,

the known earth.

And likewise, "And I will remove evil beasts from the land,"

But in other lands of the world, the world proceeds in its customary way, and the verses are a metaphor, as it is written²⁸

And nation shall not lift up sword against nation, nor shall they learn war anymore, and in the Land of Israel²⁹

the simple meaning and the metaphor will be fulfilled.

And based on this, one can say,

at first glance,

that the dispute between the Rambam and the Ra'avad depends on the distinction between the two aforementioned statements of Chazal

(from Torat Kohanim and Masechet Ketubot)

regarding non-fruit-bearing trees:

In the Gemara it says "barren trees that are in the Land of Israel,"

but in Toras Kohanim it says "barren trees" simply,

and from the plain meaning of the language it implies that it is not speaking only about the barren trees of the Land of Israel,

but about all the barren trees of the entire world³⁰.

And the difference between them is: according to the Toras Kohanim, in the future there will be a change in the custom of the world,

but according to the Gemara, in the world in general

(in the diaspora)

there will be no change from the custom of the world,

only in the Land of Israel will there be a special conduct.

And the Raavad accepts according to the method of the Toras Kohanim that "non-fruit trees

(ordinary)

are destined to produce fruit",

from this it is proven,

that there will be nullification of the custom of the world,

(which at first glance,

one can learn that also this verse means allegorically

as above,

(as above),

but he rejects this)

— since from the exposition of the Toras Kohanim on the verse — Rabbi Yehuda says He removes them from the world, Rabbi Shimon says He causes them to be restrained so they do not harm

(and especially since they deviate from the language of the verse "from the land" and say "from the world")

— it is proven that it means literally]

But the Rambam takes it

(according to the opinion of the Radbaz)

like the language of the Gemara,

that this speaks only regarding barren trees in the Land of Israel,

and therefore it is "fitting to believe ..

that the words are also according to their simple meaning in the Land of Israel ..

but in other lands of the world, it follows its custom."

4.

But the explanation of the Radbaz is seemingly not understood,

and especially to explain according to this the opinion of the Rambam:

a)

Since the Rambam says plainly that in the days of Mashiach it will not be nullified

"anything from the custom of the world" — it is understood that this also includes Eretz Yisrael,

because if in Eretz Yisrael there will be these miracles in physicality, then this

(also)

nullification of the custom of the world³¹.

b)

In the time of ben Koziva,

that "he imagined

(Rabbi Akiva)

and all the sages of his generation that he is the king mashiach"³²

— "imagined" to such an extent that they went to war

(literally: pikuach nefesh)

according to his command.

(From which the Rambam³³

proves that the king mashiach must

not perform signs and wonders,

and that even in his days the world will follow its natural course,

and as below section ten)

— the miracles

were not also not in the land of Israel.

Therefore it is reasonable to say,

that according to the Rambam, in the future also in the land of Israel the world will follow its natural course.

5.

In the book Avodas HaKodesh³⁴

he explains,

that "the world follows its custom" means that the Almighty will not in the future create things outside of nature: all matters in creation will be "according to their nature and root as they were at the beginning of their existence and creation"³⁵.

Therefore there is no contradiction from the aforementioned exposition of the Toras Kohanim that "the tree is destined to be planted and produce fruits on the same day" and from several of our Sages, of blessed memory, and the like — because with this there will not be a novelty that is not within the category of nature,

since at the beginning of creation the natural custom was that it "produces fruits on the same day"³⁶.

Based on this, one can say also regarding the two matters in our parshah — "and I will remove evil beasts from the land" and "barren trees will produce fruits" — that according to the Rambam this means no nullification of something from its custom of the world,

because such was the situation at the beginning of creation before the sin of the Tree of Knowledge — then all trees were fruit-bearing and no animals were harmful³⁷

Only through the sin of the Tree of Knowledge,

when the Almighty said "And thorn

and thistle it shall bring forth for you etc."³⁸,

a part of the trees became barren trees³⁹

and in a part of the animals there became a natural tendency to harm³⁷.

However, since in the days of Mashiach the world will come to the state in which it stood before the sin of the Tree of Knowledge⁴⁰,

this is the nature and "custom of the world" at that time⁴¹.

6.

And one can connect this with another change

(main)

between the language of the Torat Kohanim and the language of the Gemara regarding barren trees: in the Torat Kohanim the language is "barren trees are destined to produce fruits",

but in the Gemara the language is "that they will bear fruits".

"they make fruits"

(as in Toras Kohanim)

it means,

that the barren trees will produce fruits in the same manner as all the fruit trees are "making fruits"; but according to the Gemara this is in the manner of "they will bear",

which does not indicate a regular growth of a tree,

rather they are "bearing" a thing that is essentially not related to them

(that is in our parshah)

"and the tree of the field will give its fruit",

which indicates a regular giving of the trees of the field; and the Gemara learns it from the doubling and change of language in the verse "for the tree bears its fruit, the fig tree and the vine give their strength",

and as Rashi explains: "since it is written 'the fig tree and the vine give their strength,' a fruit tree is already stated, why [does] the verse [say] 'for the tree bears its fruit'? Even barren trees will bear fruit".

D.

E.

The verse emphasizes and a)

separates the "tree"

(barren trees)

from fig tree and vine

("fruit tree"),

b)

that by "fruit tree" it is in the manner of "they give their strength",

a giving and c)

according to their nature and power

("they give their strength")

and d)

by barren trees it is in the manner of "bears",

as if it is bearing a second thing,

not through regular growth⁴²].

And according to the above it can be said,

that the difference between Torah and Gemara is connected to the dispute that is found in Bereishis Rabbah⁴³

— whether at the beginning of creation barren trees

(their opinion)

had fruits,

or not⁴⁴

The Tosefta is discussing according to the opinion of Reish Lakish

(in Bereishit Rabbah),

that he learns from "a tree producing fruit"

(that)

even barren trees produced fruit"; and according to this, that which "barren trees will in the future produce fruit" is not a change or innovation in the act of Creation,

but it is a return and awakening of the nature of this tree

which was in it at the beginning of Creation,

(And this comes in continuation to the previous discourses in Toras Kohanim on the verse "and the tree of the field will give its fruit",

"not in the way that it does now but in the way that it did in the days of Adam the first ..

a tree of fruit making fruit according to its kind⁴⁵

teaches that on the same day that it is planted, on that same day it makes fruit".

And likewise the matter of "the tree is destined to be eaten" that it will be as it was in the days of Adam the first,

as we learn this from the verse⁴⁵

"a tree of fruit").

But the Gemara holds like the opinion⁴⁶

that at the beginning of creation, non-fruit trees were not bearing fruit.

It comes out that that which they will bear fruit in the future,

is a change of novelty.

And therefore this is in a manner of "they will cause to bear",

"bore its fruit",

not in a regular and natural manner.

7.

But if you look carefully, one cannot learn it this way,

because:

a)

The aforementioned explanation in Toras Kohanim

(that by barren trees the change will be able to be

(and will be)

in the future because it was so at the beginning of creation)

— is not smooth:

By the previous matters of the verse,

it states in Toras Kohanim explicitly that this is "in the manner that it did in the days of Adam the first" and we learn it from the expressions of the verses in the days of Adam the first

(in Maaseh Bereishis)

; but regarding non-fruit trees it does not state in Toras Kohanim "in the manner that it did in the days of Adam the first"

(and the like),

and that which non-fruit trees are destined to produce fruit we learn from the verse in our parshah

(as will be discussed elsewhere with G-d's help)

"and the tree of the field will give its fruit".

b)

Even if we learn that the statement "in the manner that it did in the days of Adam the first" also applies to non-fruit trees⁴⁷

and the view of Toras Kohanim is like the view of Rebbe Pinchas that it was so also at the beginning of creation — it is not entirely smooth: the view of Rebbe Pinchas is,

that from the perspective of creation itself

(from the perspective of the command of the Holy One, blessed be He)

there should have been non-fruit trees,

only the earth changed from the command and non-fruit trees produced fruit

(and after the sin the change became nullified).

It comes out,

that the custom of the world

(in its essence)

is the opposite⁴⁸,

that there should be non-fruit trees.

3)

And in any case: it is generally difficult to learn the view of the Rambam in such a way,

because from the content and continuation of his words it is proven that he denies not only a novelty in Maaseh Bereishis,

namely he denies a thing which never existed in Maaseh Bereishis,

rather he denies the nullification of "a thing from the customary course of the world"⁴⁹

(only — "the world follows its customary course"),

And it is obvious that the matters

(changes)

mentioned above are not "the customary course of the world";

The explanation of "the way of the world" is how the world conducts itself in practice consistently — it makes no difference when this consistent conduct was created — whether at the very beginning of creation or later

; after it was fixed in the nature of fruitless trees that they should not produce fruits and that the wild animals should be harmful and the trees and animals conduct themselves thus for thousands of years without change — this is "the way of the world."

And if there is a change,

they conduct themselves contrary to this their conduct,

this is an abrogation of a thing from its way of the world.

(It has absolutely no place to say,

that the nature of fruitless trees has not changed,

or in this time they are trees producing fruits,

but rather a cause external to them

(the decree from the One Above)

actually

causes no fruits to grow on them

(and likewise regarding animals)

; rather the explanation is that after the sin of the Tree of Knowledge their previous nature was nullified

in this time they are by their nature fruitless trees

(and — predatory animals)).

Ch.

One will understand this with an introduction of additional explanation in the view of the Rambam:

That which the Rambam assumes that in the days of Mashiach the world follows its natural course.

Is,

at first glance,

because he holds like the opinion that he brings⁵³

that "there is no difference between this world and the days of Mashiach except subjugation to the kingdoms alone",

the view of Shmuel in the Gemara⁵⁴.

are known the questions that the Lechem Mishneh⁵⁵

asks on this: one finds that the Rambam rules halachically in contradiction to this:

(a)

In the Gemara it states⁵⁴

: And Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said Rabbi Yochanan said: All the prophets, all of them, did not prophesy except for the days of Mashiach, but regarding the World to Come, "No eye has seen a God besides You"⁵⁶.

And it differs from Shmuel, for Shmuel said: There is no difference between this world and the days of Mashiach except subjugation to the kingdoms alone, etc.

And the Rambam rules

like R' Chiya bar Abba

(who disagrees with Shmuel)

: "The sages said: All the prophets, all of them, prophesied only for the days of Mashiach, but the World to Come—'No eye has seen, O God, besides You.'"

(b)

The Mishnah says

: A man may not go out with a sword, nor with a bow, etc., and if he went out, he is liable for a sin-offering.

Rabbi Eliezer says: They are ornaments for him,

And the sages say: They are only for disgrace, as it is said

And they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks,

Nation shall not lift up sword against nation

And they shall no longer learn war

(And if they are ornaments, they will not be nullified in the future — Rashi).

And in the Gemara there are two opinions: According to one opinion, Rabbi Eliezer holds that weapons are nullified in the days of Mashiach, "and it differs from Shmuel..

it supports Rabbi Chiya bar Abba",

and according to a second opinion, Rabbi Eliezer holds that they are not nullified in the days of Mashiach,,

that is, Shmuel and it differs from Rabbi Chiya bar Abba".

But the opinion of the Sages is that according to everyone, weapons are nullified in the days of Mashiach,

and therefore if he went out with a sword etc. — he is liable for a sin-offering.

And the Rambam rules⁵⁹

like the Sages,

who hold according to all opinions not like Shmuel,

as above.

9.

So the explanation in this: at first glance,

as the Rambam says that in the days of the Messiah, nothing will be abolished from the custom of the world and there will not be any innovation in the work of creation — it is, after all, a principle of the thirteen principles⁶⁰

that there will be the resurrection of the dead⁶¹

(which is an abolition of the custom of the world and an innovation in the work of creation)?

It is well according to the opinions⁶²

that the world of resurrection is the World to Come

(and the purpose

The completeness of the reward is for souls in bodies)

— is the resurrection of the dead.

A separate matter,

not a "part" of the days of the Messiah;

But according to the opinion of the Rambam⁶³,

that the World to Come means the world of souls

(without bodies),

and the world of resurrection is not the ultimate completeness of the reward,

rather the resurrection of the dead will be in the time and period of the days of the Messiah before the soul comes to the World to Come — it follows,

that according to the opinion of the Rambam there will be a renewal in the work of creation

(the resurrection of the dead)

in the days of the Messiah.

So how can one say that in the days of the Messiah nothing will be changed from its customary way of the world?

One must say,

that according to the Rambam these are two separate matters and — at separate times: there is the matter and time of the days of the Messiah which is connected with the coming of the Messiah,

and there is an additional separate matter and time,

which will be added after the period of the beginning of the days of the Messiah.

There will be added conduct,

things which the Most High will do at that time,

including also matters of change of the order of the world*<sup>63</sup>.

This will be in a time of great abundance<sup>64</sup>

in the days of the Messiah itself<sup>65</sup>.

Yud.

And based on this it is understood what at the beginning of chapter twelve,

when the Rambam writes "Let it not arise in the heart that in the days of the Messiah anything of the order of the world will be nullified",

he brings for this no proof and evidence,

as he brings in the previous chapter<sup>66</sup>

for this that the Messiah need not prove any sign and wonder

— And this is his language: And do not let it enter your mind that the king mashiach needs to perform signs and wonders

And create new things in the world or revive the dead and the like of these things,

the matter is not so⁶⁷

for Rabbi Akiva was a great sage of the sages of the Mishnah and he was the arms-bearer⁶⁸

of Ben Koziva the king and he would say about him that he is the king mashiach⁶⁹,

And he and all the sages of his generation imagined that he is the king mashiach,

until he was killed because of our sins*⁶⁹,

since he was killed it became known to them that he is not.

And the sages did not ask him for a sign or a wonder:

Although these two chapters discuss two separate subjects: In chapter 11 about the king Mashiach himself — what he will do and — the manner of his coming: And in chapter 12 — about the state of the world in the days of Mashiach — he discusses, however, in chapter 12 about the state of the world and how it is connected with the coming of Mashiach,

And consequently, the proof in chapter 11 regarding the King Messiah is also valid regarding what he speaks about in chapter 12 concerning the state of the world in the days of the Messiah, which is connected with his coming,

and from them — that the world follows its natural course

— because if the definition of "the days of the Messiah" were the nullification of the natural course of the world and a novelty in the act of Creation,

it would turn out,

that this is the essence of the Messiah — his coming brings with it that there should be a nullification of the natural course of the world and a novelty in the act of Creation,

and then one would have to accept,

that "the Messiah must perform signs and wonders and renew things in the world",

and consequently, this is the criterion and test of his truth that he is the Messiah

(since his novelty consists in this,

as above)

And since the Rambam compels

(from Rabbi Akiva and all the sages of his generation in relation to Ben Koziva)

that Mashiach does not need to make any sign and wonder,

therefore

it is understood and proven that the coming of Mashiach does not bring with it nullification of the natural order of the world⁷⁰.

11.

And based on this it is understandable,

that what the Rambam elaborates in chapter 12 regarding the state of the world in the days of Mashiach — that is all regarding the matter and time in the days of Mashiach which is connected with King Mashiach and his coming.

That is: earlier — in chapter 11 the Rambam explains⁷¹

what is the essence of King Mashiach — "the King Mashiach is destined to stand and restore the kingdom of David to its former state, to the first government, and build the Temple, and gather the dispersed of Israel, and all the laws will return etc." He will bring perfection in the commandments and laws of the Torah⁷².

Afterwards — in chapter 12 the Rambam speaks about how the state of the world will be in accordance with this,

as he concludes⁷³

that Jews

will be “free for Torah and its wisdom ..

And at that time there will be neither famine nor war etc. and the entire world will have no occupation except to know God alone, and therefore Israel will be great sages etc.” —

(And the main⁷⁴)

fulfillment of the commandments and laws of the Torah is in a world that follows its natural course.

12.

According to the above, one will also understand the opinion of the Rambam regarding the connection of the various verses and sayings of Chazal about the promises etc. for the future:

The promises and prophecies which speak about Moshiach himself,

what he will do and what will come out in the world through his coming — the Rambam teaches that they are not a matter of nullifying the way of the world.

And therefore he interprets the verse "And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb etc.",

which is stated in continuation of "And a shoot shall go forth from the stem of Jesse etc."⁷⁵,

that it is "a parable and riddle".

on the contrary he brings out "and in the days of King Messiah everyone will know for what thing it was a parable" — because he comes

(mainly)

to explain that in this verse which comes in continuation of "and a shoot will emerge etc." the matter of Messiah is explained,

that Israel will

not have any confusions from the nations of the world and consequently "they will be free for Torah and its wisdom" etc.⁷⁶]

However, the verses and the sayings of our Rabbis, of blessed memory, which do not speak in the context of Mashiach and his coming,

but rather about prophecies and promises that will be in the future to come,

including the aforementioned: "And I will remove evil beasts from the land" and the aforementioned saying of our Rabbis, of blessed memory, that barren trees are destined to produce fruits — the Rambam indeed explains that they are not a parable but according to their simple meaning,

and this will be in a later period

(a period within the days of Mashiach itself)⁷⁷.

13.

Based on the above, one will also understand the difference between the statement in Torat Kohanim and the dictum in Ketubot:

The Gemara in Ketubot: "All barren trees in Eretz Yisrael are destined to bear fruit,"

which shows that this is not a natural matter,

but a special matter,

and specifically in Eretz Yisrael,

speaks about the first period,

that then — according to the opinion of this one in Ketubot — there will be a wonder

(miracle)

in Eretz Yisrael,

In Torat Kohanim where it states simply "even barren trees are destined to produce fruits",

that thus will be the nature of the trees — and in the entire world,

it speaks about the second period in the days of Mashiach,

that then there will be a change of wonder in the act of Creation,

consequently the nature will become

(also)

of the barren tree to produce fruit.

14.

And based on this it is understood that there is no contradiction from the words of the Rambam that "there is nothing between this world and the days of Moshiach except subjugation to the kingdoms alone",

which refers to the first period of the days of Moshiach,

to his ruling that "all the prophets, all of them

(not)

prophesied

(except)

for the days of Moshiach etc." — which refers to the later period in the days of Moshiach.

And it is also understood his ruling that one who carries out [an object] from a vessel on Shabbat is liable to bring a sin-offering,

because the verse "and they shall beat their swords into plowshares",

which speaks about the state in the world that will be in the future,

the Rambam learns literally,

and not merely as a parable — and this will be in the later period of the days of Moshiach.

And since vessels of weaponry are nullified in that period

(at least)

of the redemption⁷⁸,

it is

A proof that vessels,

are not ornaments.

Do.

According to the above, another matter is answered:

In the aforementioned Gemara

(All the prophets prophesied only for the days of Mashiach etc.)

is brought in continuation to this: And Rabbi Chiyya said etc. All the prophets, all of them, prophesied only for penitents,

But completely righteous people — "No eye has seen, O God, besides You."

And it differs from Rabbi Abahu, for Rabbi Abahu said: The place where penitents stand

completely righteous people do not stand.

And since in the Gemara both statements of R. Chiya bar Abba in the name of R. Yochanan are brought in continuation one to the other — it implies that they are related to each other.

D.

H.

: According to his approach that "All the prophets, all of them, prophesied only for the days of Mashiach etc.",

one must also say that "All the prophets, all of them, prophesied only for penitents etc." — not like Rabbi Abahu

(and not like Shmuel).

One finds, however, that the Rambam,

although he says "The Sages said: All the prophets, all of them, prophesied only for the days of the Messiah

etc."

(as above, sec. 8),

he rules⁸¹

: "The Sages said: In the place where penitents stand, even completely righteous people cannot stand."

And according to the above, it is understood.

Because that which Reish Lakish holds that completely righteous are greater than baalei teshuvah — this is according to his view that at the beginning of the days of Mashiach there will be nullification of the natural order, and about this "all the prophets prophesied";

But according to the view of the Rambam that at the beginning of the days of Mashiach the world follows its natural course — then this does not compel that the righteous are greater than baalei teshuvah⁸².

16.

After all the above, however, it is still not explained: since the definition of the days of Mashiach

(which comes subsequent to the arrival of Mashiach)

is

(according to the Rambam)

connected with that the world follows its customary course — why is it necessary that in the days of Mashiach itself there should be another period when then there will be nullification of the customary course of the world?

And

(—and mainly)

what is the wondrous cause,

which will create and bring about a wondrous novelty — the conduct of the second period?

One will understand this with the introduction that the Rambam writes in his Iggeret Techiyat HaMeitim⁸³,

that that which he explained the future promises

(and the wolf shall dwell with the lamb and the like)

that they are *a parable and riddle* — "in this our speech

Decided⁸⁴

etc. "that they are of the parable",

And it can be that they will be fulfilled literally⁸⁵.

And superficially: according to what was explained above

(section 11-12)

Is it then necessary to learn that the promises that speak in relation to Moshiach and his coming are not a nullification of the nature of the world — because the definition of Moshiach is to act in this world as it is "conducted according to its nature" specifically

(as above)?

17.

And one must say the explanation in this:

It is known what the Gemara⁸⁶

says regarding the contradiction of the verses "It is written⁸⁷

And behold with the clouds of heaven like a son of man he came and it is written⁸⁸

Poor and riding on a donkey,

If they merit: with the clouds of heaven; if they do not merit: poor riding on a donkey"

(And similarly the Gemara⁸⁹ answers

the contradictions in other verses and the like).

From this is understood regarding other matters of the days of Moshiach,

that when Jews are in a state of "they merited",

all matters will then be in a completely different manner,

a miraculous manner⁹⁰.

It states that the third Beis HaMikdash is "built and perfected, it will be revealed and come from heaven"⁹²,

and in other places it states⁹³

(and so the Rambam rules⁹⁴)

— that Moshiach builds the Mikdash;

This depends on the two aforementioned manners in the redemption,

that if "they merit" it is "will be revealed and come from heaven",

but if they do not merit, the building will be by human hand⁹⁵

(by Moshiach⁹⁶)].

And that which the Rambam rules in Sefer HaYad,

Sefer Halachot Halachot,

that there will not be any nullification of a thing from its custom

of the world — it is because the matter of Mashiach and His coming and the redemption in general — is a halachah,

a clear and decided halachah.

And so is also the manner in this,

that it is not dependent on the manner of the deed of human beings

(but not so the redemption in the manner of coming with the clouds of heaven and the like — which is dependent on this that among Jews there is a state of "they merited" — which is not clear and decided,

because everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of Heaven⁹⁷

and free will is given to every person etc.⁹⁸),

And therefore the Rambam describes the redemption in this manner, as it is a halacha,

must be

(independent of the situation of the Jews).

18.

More deeply: That which the Rambam describes the redemption in a manner that there will not be any nullification of the natural order is

(not because the Rambam describes the redemption that it will come in a manner of "they did not merit," G-d forbid,

but rather)

because the Rambam teaches,

that that which Chazal say that when there is a situation of "they merited" there will be many elevations with a miraculous conduct etc.,

is this an additional matter upon the essence of the definition of Mashiach.

That is: from the aspect of the definition of Mashiach and his coming — the order is that "the world follows its customary course",

because the function of the coming of Mashiach in halachah is — that through him will be the completeness of the fulfillment of the commandments and laws of the Torah

(which is connected with a world that "follows its customary course").

Only when Jews are in a superior state of "they merited",

there will be an additional matter,

When the Almighty will show miracles etc. in order to demonstrate the increased endearment and superiority of Jews.

And likewise regarding the aforementioned mediation in the building of the future Temple: the explanation of this is

(Not that the "He will be revealed and come from heaven" contradicts "Messiah builds the Temple",

but)

— that from the perspective of the halachic framework, the matter of building the Holy Temple is an obligatory commandment upon Jews,

and as it is written, "And they shall make Me a Sanctuary"⁹⁹

and therefore the Rambam rules that the Messiah — through whom "all the laws return¹⁰⁰

in his days as they were previously" and they count a king

(and afterwards)

builds the Holy Temple¹⁰¹

— the King Messiah will carry out the commandment of building the Holy Temple;

And the state of "they merited" brings about an addition,

that in this "lower Temple" the "upper Temple" shall come and be "clothed",

"He will come and be revealed from heaven"¹⁰²].

19.

And based on this, the necessity for the second period in the days of Moshiach is understood — because after the arrival of Moshiach

(in whatever manner it may be),

since Jews will then not have any "oppressor and nullifier"¹⁰³

that "do not allow them to engage in Torah and mitzvos properly"¹⁰⁴,

And on the contrary — one will be "free for Torah and its wisdom"¹⁰³

until that even "the entire world's occupation"

(all

the nations)

will be "to know G‑d only and therefore Israel will be great sages etc. as the waters cover the sea"¹⁰⁵

— and if this is the perfection of the state of "they merited" — then this will bring with it necessarily the

(second)

period

(in the days of Mashiach itself),

when there will be nullification of the natural order,

the miraculous conduct

(including the fundamental matter — as the language of the Rambam¹⁰⁶

— the resurrection of the dead).

And therefore: in the book Yad,

where the Rambam explains the definition of Mashiach

And his coming according to halacha — he explains how the state of the world will be in a

(time and)

manner of "the world follows its custom"

(in accordance with the essence and definition of Mashiach)

But in the Epistle of the Resurrection of the Dead he adds

(explanation in the Book of the Hand)

that "this statement of ours is not definitive" — because when there is a situation of "they merited" while still in exile,

there will be in actuality — immediately at the beginning of the redemption — the special conduct from above,

the conduct of nullifying the custom of the world and as in the days of your exodus from the land of Egypt I will show you wonders¹⁰⁷.

(From sichos of the month of Nissan 5733)