Further discussion - Shabbos 068: Munbaz

2005-07-13 Thread Mordecai Kornfeld
x-mailing-list: [email protected]
(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_

 THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST

  brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
 Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 [REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]


Shabbos 068: Munbaz

Barry Epstein asked:

>> The question came up as to who Munbaz was and how he can argue with
>> Rabbi Akiva.  In the Artscroll Niddah I, daf 11a, note 6, their are 2
>> opinions. Rashi says he was a Hasmonean king and the son of Queen
>> Helene. The Maharsha, however, cites a midrash that said he was a
>> gentile king who converted to Judaism. The question still at large is
>> how he can argue with Rabbi Akiva and what status he has. <<

The Kollel replied:

>> According to the historians, none of the Hasmonean kings had a son
>> called Munbaz, which lends credence to the Medrash cited by the Maharsha
>> (and corroborated by the Seider ha'Doros). I'm not so sure however, that
>> Rashi didn't mean that too.  <<




Sam Kosofsky responded:
Rebbe,
 
I am not sure that the Munbaz referred to in our Gemara is the same as the
Munbaz who, together with his mother Queen Helena, contributed important
things to the Bais Hamikdash.  I don't think that Munbaz was a Tanna.  He
and his mother were gerim. He was not a melech Yisrael.  He was king of a
country called Adiabene.  I think Rabbi Akiva lived most of his life after
the churban Bais Hamikdash and he was young when it was destroyed.  He
didn't become a talmud chacham until after he was 40.  It doesn't seem like
he would have had this discussion with the Munbaz who was king of Adiabene.  
 
It seems to me that I asked this 7 and 1/2 years ago and you gave me a
similar answer.
 
B'kavod,
 
Sam Kosofsky
 
--
The Kollel replies:

You are correct, Sam; we see that you brought this up at the last cycle and
Rabbi Kornfeld confirmed what you write above. 

According to Seder ha'Doros this is the only instance that the Tana Munbaz
is mentioned.  And it dawned upon me that King Munbaz must have lived some
two hundred years before R. Akiva, ruling out completely the possibility
that the Tana was the king. 

I apologize for the mistake.

Kol Tuv
Eliezer Chrysler.


Barry Epstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> responded:

My Artscroll English gemara on Niddah has a note that says that Rashi holds
that King Munbaz was the son of Queen Helene.
-

The Kollel replies:

The source for the Artscroll note is Rashi to Bava Basra 11a DH Munbaz.
Rashi writes that King Munbaz was the son of Hilni "from the children of
the Chashmona'im." (Perhaps even if he was a Ger, he had familial ties to
the Chashmona'im.)

M. Kornfeld


___
Daf-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.shemayisrael.co.il/mailman/listinfo/daf-discuss_shemayisrael.co.il


Further discussion - Shabbos 068: Munbaz

2005-07-12 Thread Mordecai Kornfeld
x-mailing-list: [email protected]
(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_

 THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST

  brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
 Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 [REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]


Shabbos 068: Munbaz

Barry Epstein asked:
 
>> The question still at large is how can Munbaz argue with Rabbi Akiva and
>> what status he has.  It doesn't seem like he is a Tanna yet that is all
>> that can generally argue with Rabbi Akiva.  One can say a king can argue
>> with anyone but we don't see a lot of king-Tanna arguments in the Gemara. << 

The Kollel replied:

>> As a matter of fact, there is no hard and fast rule forbidding an
>> Acharon to disagree with a Rishon. Once the Mishnah was completed,
>> subsequent generations (Amora'im) could no longer argue with Tana'im,
>> and the same applies to the generations  (the Rabanan Sevura'i and later
>> eras) that followed the completion of Shas.   But after that, it is
>> accepted that the Acharonim were/are not on a level to argue with the
>> Rishonim, but there is no hard and fast rule forbidding it (which
>> explains why there are numerous cases where they do in fact do so).  <<


Joe S Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> comments:

Just an addition to your comment "As a matter of fact, there is no hard and
fast rule forbidding an Acharon to disagree with a Rishon."

Rabbi Yaakov Weinberg ZAL (The second Rosh Yeshiva of Ner Yisroel) said
that although there there is no hard and fast rule forbidding an Acharon to
disagree with a Rishon, However, not just anyone may do so! One must either
be a godol with solid proofs and a massive amount of humility which
precludes any Haughtiness and thoughts of "*I* can argue on him" from
entering into his thought process. Otherwise who would want to be so
foolish as to even entertain the thought that one can argue on a Rishon. 

While we do have Gedolim that argued on Rishonim, Such as the Vilna Goan
and very few others, I am not aware of any contemporary GODOL that argued
on the Rishonim. 

Having said this I saw in a sefer recently (and I can not remember who
wrote it, but it is not contemporary author) that said while it is true we
can not argue on a rishon, but the Torah lnds itself to many
interpretations and as such one may give a different interpetaion of a
posuk, as long as it does not change any halacha AND it fits within
accepted Jewish Hashkofa. 

--
The Kollel replies:

Thank you for your valid comments, which is really what I had in mind when
I wrote "there is no hard and fast rule" (rather than "it is permitted"),
and the reason that I did not elaborate was purely a matter of time. I seem
to recall having seen what I wrote in the Aruch ha'Shulchan, many years ago.

The Chazon Ish often disputed the Rishonim, and as for your final comment,
virtually every commentary on the Chumash argues with Rishonim when it
comes to interpreting Pesukim (since, as you wrote, it does not affect the
Halachah). R. Kornfeld (Sh'lita) cites a Tos. Yom-Tov in Nazir (5:5), who
even justifies the Rambam explaining a Mishnah differently than the Gemara,
using the same reasoning.

Kol Tuv
Eliezer Chrysler. 


___
Daf-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.shemayisrael.co.il/mailman/listinfo/daf-discuss_shemayisrael.co.il