Thursday, May 03, 2012


Prime Ministers and Moshiach

by Dov bar Leib at Mystical Paths

The Radak says that the foolish shepherd in Zecharia 11 and 13 would be the gilgul of Herod the Great.  (Former?) Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's autobiography about himself is titled"The Shepherd".

Both Herod and Sharon were great builders, of this there can be no question. And both were reasonably suspect as to whether they were Jews or not. Herod was an Edomite slave who was forcibly converted by his Chashmonaic master either before or right after Pompeii moved in to Jerusalem with his Roman legions. Sharon's mother's conversion was so suspicious that the Chief Rabbinate in 1948 refused to give her a Teudat Zehut which said that she was a Jew. Curiously the word for foolish in Zecharia 11 is the word "Evil". So in both cases, Herod and Sharon, chances are that they were not even Jews. One could make a reasonable case that Sharon was the gilgul of Herod.

The Medrash Sefer Eliyahu says that the last leader of the Erev Rav at the end of the four kingdoms would be a man named TRMLO, the precise spelling of the name in the medrash is where the O is written as an Aleph. It is actually spelled Tav, Reish, Mem, Lamed, Aleph in the medrash.

The Zohar in VaYeira 119 says that Mashiach ben Yosef would appear in the Land of the Galilee in the 66th year after crossing over the threshold of the 6th Millennium. It first says that the final redemption would commence with the Vav in HaShem's name because Ya'akov's name is spelled full with a Vav the only time in the entire Chumshei Torah in the verse. I will remember by covenant with Ya'akov with a Vav. The Zohar then intimates that the Redemption cannot begin b'itah until 2/3rds of the way through the 6th Millennium, the year 5666 on the 7th day of Pesach – which is when the Rebbe Rashab, 5th Lubavitcher Rebbe, first instituted Seudat HaMashiach in the year 1906.

Then it says that in the 60th year after crossing over the threshold of the 6th millennium there would be a final Peqidah of the daughter of Ya'akov. Rav Mordechai Glazierson has said for at least 30 years that the threshold was the year 5700, the first century mark after the year 5666. At the very end of the year 5760 began the final Peqidah of Israel called the Al Aksa Intifada.

It must be remembered that the word peqidah is not always positive because it refers to taking accounts of assets and liabilities, doing a final din v'cheshbon. So then the Zohar says in the merit of the letter Vav wait 6 years plus a half a year to bring the Rachamim of Nisan into the equation, and there would be a full zechira of the daughter of Ya'akov.

In the year 5766.5 Israeli Prime Minister Olmert had ascended the throne as PM replacing Sharon who had suffered his debilitating stroke on the 5th of Tevet 5766. His plan, hitkansut, was to destroy Judea and Samaria unilaterally just as his predecessor had destroyed Gaza. Miraculously the 2nd Lebanon War began basically on the 17th of Tamuz and because of the bombing of the Galilee including Haifa, all unilateral plans to destroy recognized yishuvim were thrown into the garbage. That was the extent of the appearance of Moshiach ben Yosef in the Galilee in the year 5766. Then for some mysterious reason the Zohar says to wait 6 more years until 5772.5.

The Zohar does not explain why it says that another 6 year cycle would be required, and frankly to keep peace amongst Torah observant Jews, I will not bring back old sewage from 7 years ago about who did what that empowered Sharon to carry out his "evil", foolish plan. Yet, it has something to do with that. Gog W. Bush was set to be the kinder gentler Gog, but frankly we blew it. End of discussion about this matter.

The Zohar then says wait another 6 years until 72 1/2.

Ok, so who is Netanyahu? It must be understood that Mashiach ben Yosef will have a Yud Key Vav in his name like Yehoshua bin Nun and Yehonatan ben Shaul who came before him. Yet, here are two problems.

1. Yehonatan was the son of Sha'ul from the tribe of Binyamin not Ephraim.

2. The Yud Key Vav has to be in the first name of Moshiach ben Ephraim, not the last name of Moshiach ben Ephraim, because unlike Mashiach ben David the anointment of ben Yosef is matrilinear not patrilinear (as it is with ben David).

Netanyahu has the Yud Key Vav in his last name. So what is he, the great pretender??

The key, the solution to the problem, has to do with the combination of both problems. As Dovid of Israel Rising has said, Binyamin Netanyahu is the gilgul of Sha'ul HaMelekh himself and has all the same issues such as listening to the popular views of his followers rather than HaShem. But he definitely is not from the Erev Rav.

So Sha'ul is back for a final tikkun, and oh what a tikkun awaits him. We see from Sefer Shmuel Aleph that after G-d has relented on giving Sha'ul a dynastic reign, while still allowing him to keep lifetime rule (this is all in Chapter 13 of Shmuel Aleph before the command of Mechiyat Amalek), where do we find Sha'ul hanging out in chapter 14 with the army of Israel??? Migron!

Then his son Yonatan (also written Yehonatan when speaking about his chavivut with David) decides to by his lonesome along with his armor bearer to take on the entire Philistine garrison at Michmash. (I can see the entire battlefield from my 2nd floor porch in Kochav Ya'akov.) Miraculously Yehonatan is victorious. He and his armor bearer scatter the entire Philistine garrison!!!

Yet, there is a problem. The dynastic promise to Shaul had already ended in chapter 13 so that Yehonatan would never be a king. Along comes chapter 15. Shaul messes up again big time and fails to destroy Amalek allowing Agag to live while his wife shapeshifts and becomes one of the bleeting sheep. They have offspring, and Amalek continues. At this point Shmuel HaNavi says that G-d is so furious that not only has Shaul lost his dynastic claim to Israel's throne but Sha'ul just ended his own term in office right then and there. pretty harsh stuff for an anointed king of HaShem.

So Sha'ul (Netanyahu?) needs a big tikkun. And it has to do with both Migron and guy sitting in an American jail for over 26 years whose first name is both Yonatan and Yehonatan, thanks to Rav Mordechai Eliyahu... May we see yeshu'ot very soon. When Shilo (Gift to him) comes...   Keep in mind that the names Yehonatan and Netanyahu both mean Yahu gives (a gift). 

In case of Binyamin, G-d gives Binyamin to whom??  That seems to be the million dollar question.  There was a time when I thought that it would be Mashiach ben David.  But the story goes that Yehudah when going down to Egypt was only able to bring Binyamin with him if he swore to his father that if Binyamin is taken prisoner by Tzafnat Paneach, he would take Binyamin's place in perpetual slavery or prison.  This was Yehudah's full teshuvah for selling Yosef into slavery.  After all it was his idea.  Yehudah took full responsibility for the crime of kidnapping his brother Yosef and selling him into slavery.  So this was a full teshuvah, that he would go into slavery rather than his Yosef's full blood brother Binyamin going into slavery.

But alas, the silver cup was found in Binyamin's sack and Yehudah was forced to keep his Areivut (Guarantorship) agreement with his father and with G-d Himself.  So in the great merit of Yehudah's great teshuvah for mechirat Yosef, Yehudah was told just like you fully repented with your areivut, and therefore brought down Binyamin as a gift to his brother Yosef in Egypt, so at the End of Days I (HaShem) will give Binyamin as a gift to you or in the third person Shai lo (gift to him). 

So we get the name I (Yahu) will give (natan) Binyamin to Mashiach ben David (Binyamin Natan Yahu).  Alas, Binyamin is playing the role of Shaul HaMelekh, unable to take a firm stand against the world about the dispensation of Migron itself.  So from stage right, Yehonatan must enter the picture.......for Yehonatan was the link between Shaul and David of old.

nationsFor more description of the silver cup in Binyamin's sack, I refer to Netanyahu's own book, "A Place Amongst the Nations: Israel and the World" p. 47 footnote:  “Lt. Col. John Henry Patterson (the slayer of the Ghost and the Darkness lions in Kenya) was a remarkable non-Jewish Zionist.  A British officer, he commanded the first Jewish fighting units in centuries (since the Bar-Kochba revolt in Eretz Yisrael) - The Zion Mule Corps,  founded by Joseph Trumpeldor, which participated in the Gallipoli campaign.  (Trumpeldor was a Jewish former officer in the Russian Army who had lost his arm in the Russo- Japanese War and died a hero's death in 1920 defending the Galilee community of Tel Hai against Arab marauders.  He was the kind of Jewish fighter that Patterson hoped to see emerge in this 20th Century.)  Patterson went on to command the Jewish Legion, founded by Jabotinsky.  Soldier and intellectual, he collaborated with my father (Bentzion Netanyahu) in America at the outbreak of World War II, when my father came to the United States as a member of Jabotinsky's delegation to campaign for the establishment of a Jewish State.  Such was the friendship between them that my parents decided to call their first-born son Yonatan, the Jon in honor of Patterson and the Nathan in honor of my esteemed grandfather.  Now and then, on special occasions, my family brings out a silver cup with the inscription:  "To my darling godson, Jonathan, from your godfather, John Henry Patterson."”

Well, well, well, so the G-d fearing slayer of the demonically possessed lions of Tzavo spent the rest of his life trying to bring the world closer together (shlaimut ha'Olam).  But rather than building bridges in East Africa, he realized that the only way to bring Peace to the World was to bring a soldier/ redeemer to Zion.  (He forfeited the rest of his entire career in the British Army to accomplish this task!)  The first one was named Yosef, but he also died in the Galilee.  Then he set his sights on the Netanyahu family, the first born son Yonatan, to whom he gave a silver cup.  But alas through the hidden workings of Divine Providence, that kiddush cup is now in Binyamin's sack.

…May we see the end of this story with the complete Geulah now!  If not, G-d forbid, to be continued in further articles.


  1. Is there any evidence in the tanack in support of reincarnation ?

  2. PM Netanyahu was at a cabinet shabbat getaway in Tzfat last year and was give the Levi aliyah

  3. I already responded to the Levy Aliyah contention before. I specifically mentioned in the article that the Meshichut of ben Yosef is matrilinear not patrilinear. In addition this applies in many ways to all the Bnai Rachel. We learn that MBEphraim will surely be a descendant of Yehoshua bin Nun. Yet, Yehoshua was only blessed with daughters, implying that the anointment of MB Ephraim would come through one of his daughters. Also we learn all the laws of inheritance for women from the daughters of Tzelophchad from the tribe of Menashe, another indicator that the passage of what would normally be a patriliear right which would normally be passed from father to son, in the case of Bnai Rachel would be passed on through the daughters. Finally oh finally we have Esther HaMalkah from the Tribe of Binyamin itself. Koresh previously had started the process of the return of Jews to Judea under the leadership of Zerubavel. It was stopped by Esther's wicked husband, Achashveirosh. Any progress on building the 2nd Temple came to a complete halt. Yet, it was Esther's son Dariyavush (Darius) who was called Mashiach HaShem because he oversaw the completion of the 2nd Temple during his reign 70 years after the 1st Temple had been destroyed. So from all these three examples we see that the anointment of the sons of Rachel as opposed to the sons of Leah and the maidservants is matrilieal not patrilinear.

  4. So you may ask how about Ephraim himself?? If the anointment (Meshichut) of ben Ephraim has to be matrilinier, how could he receive anointment from his father? The answer is that he did not receive anointment from his father Yosef. He received it from his grandfather Ya'akov who blessed Ephraim and Menashe. The difference between the Meshichut of Yosef and his son Ephraim is that Ephraim would be a king in Eretz Yisrael (b'kerev haAretz) while his father Yosef was only a 2nd to the King in Chutz LaAretz. So the Meshichut had to come from Ephraim's mother, Osnat Bat Potiphora. Now everyone knows that Potiphar was a saris (a eunich) of Paro. So he obviously was not the father. So it turns out that Osnat's father was Shechem who raped Dinah. Now even though Shechem was a non-Jew, we can begin to see why the Bnai Ephraim inherited the city of Shekhem in their inheritance. So in this case the Meshichut of Ephraim through Osnat came from her mother Dinah who had received her X of Meshichut from Ya'akov Avinu, who blessed Ephraim to be a king in Eretz Yisrael. The conflict over EY between the Bnai Ephraim and the Bnai Yehudah is another host of blog posts which can be discussed later. So from whom did Ya'akov receive this X of Meshichut? from his mother Rivkah who received this X from her father Bethuel. Now this is where one has to deeply understand something about the Torah. Usually the Torah sticks with the patriliear descent of who begot whom? Bereishit is filled with the patrilinear descent of the various nations, progenitors in the pre-Flood world, and even the ten generations between Noach and Avraham. It is all patrilinear. The exceptions are notable. Na,amah daughter of Lamech is mentioned according to Rashi because she became Noach's wife who entered the ark with her husband Noach. It is noteworthy also that Noach married a daughter from the line of Kayin not Sheith. Again after the mention of Na'amah the lack of daughters whose names are in the Torah is almost deafening. Finally near the end of the ten generations leading to Avraham, we get the mention of another woman, Milkah, the feminine side of Malkhut (kingship). The verses at the end of Bereishit 11 beg the question. We learn that Terach begot Avram, Nachor, and Haran. And Haran begot Lot. Then we learn that Avram took for himself a wife named Sarai and that Nachor took himself a wife named Milkah. Now this Milkah's father was Haran who also begot Yiskah (Jessica) and as we just learned also begot Lot. Rashi identifies Yiskah as being another name for Sarai, and it becomes obvious later on when Avram insists on calling Sarai his sister, and the Torah itself calls Lot his brother. The fact that both Sarai and Lot were his sister-in-law and brother-in-law were besides the point. Neither Avram nor the Torah were lying. So here is the question. If it were so important for the Torah to tell us that Milkah was the wife of Nachor and mother (later on) of Bethuel who was the father of Rivkah, why doesn't the Torah tell us who was the wife of Haran??? Haran was a full fledged brother of Nachor (and of course Avram). Surely if it is important to know his brother's wife and the mother of Nachor's children, then why should we not know the name of the mother of Sarai and Lot?? Yet, again the Torah is silent. We do not know Yiskah's/Sarai's mother. Yet we do know Bethuel's mother is Milkah. And we know it because Milkah is the feminine side of Malkhut who passes on the Meshichut of Mashiach ben Ephraim in Eretz Yisrael as opposed to Ephraim's father's Malkhut outside of EY. So whether it is from Rachel to Yosef and Binyamin or from Osnat to Ephraim and Menashe, the Meshichut is all matrilinear.

  5. Moshiach ben Yosef already has the yud key vav - in the name Yosef.
    As ''ben Yosef'' is part of his name.

  6. so nice to hear from you, Dov.

  7. Sharon's autobiography is entitled "Warrior", not "The Shepherd".

  8. Actually you are partially correct. "The Shepherd" was an authorized biography called HaRo'eh that was done at the very end of his life that was written to absolve him of all of his guilty conscience. It was never translated from Hebrew into English. So after Shabbat I will do a Google search for the book in Hebrew. Here is a link in English from right after his stroke on the 5th of Tevet 5766.

    It was obviously not a best seller. I remember the front cover very well with him holding a lamb from his farm in his arms. When it was on sale on line in 2006, I had a link to it from my previous post "Travail of the Shepherd" on the sidebar of my blog at The book was obviously a bust because no one on either the right or the left was willing to buy its premise. It was definitely an authorized biography though done at the very end of his life. The author had free range to come on his farm and interview him.

    good night for now. Shabbat Shalom

  9. Ah, you better link to that posted link on Ariel Sharon pretty soon. They are threatening to close down by the end of May because of a lack of money. It is obviously a "progressive" website as they call themselves, and like liberal talk show hosts, progressive websites often die from a lack of financial support. No one buys their bull hockey just as no one bought "The Shepherd" because it was a liberal puff piece on Ariel Sharon.

  10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.


Welcome to Mystical Paths comments. Have your say here, but please keep the tone reasonably civil and avoid lashon hara. Due to past commenting problems, all comments are moderated (this may take a few hours.)

Your comments are governed by our Terms of Use, Privacy, and Comments policies. We reserve the right to delete or edit your comments for any reason, or use them in a future article. That said, YOU are responsible for YOUR comments - not us.

Related Posts with Thumbnails