halacha and history

Avodah
1

I saw several things over shabbat that seem to go against known history

1) *Question:* Who was the Kohen Gadol at the time of
Chanukah--Mattisyahu--or his father Yochanan
*Answer:* The Sefer *Shalal Rav* (p. 147-148) presents a Machlokes
Rishonim on this very point.

Obviously neither were kohen gadol at the time of chanukah. Josephus
describes the various successions of the kohen gadol eg alcimus etc. In
fact Mattisyahu lived in Modiin and not in Jerusalem. It is not clear who
Yochanan is but in any case lived before the story of Chanukah. Some claim
that he is the Yochanan who lived 80 years and became a sadducee which
would make the story even more amazing, In fact it is not clear that the
Maccabees came from the "right" branch of priests to be kohen gadol

2) From the daf yomi at the beginning of Gittin there arises the question
of the boundaries of Israel. Tahbetz (3:4) claims that Ezra conquered
(nichbash) the Golan while it is not clear if the portion of Jordan was
conquered by Ezra,

However it is clear that Ezra (or Nechemia) had no army to conquer anyone.
They had enough trouble with their immediate neighbors and succeeded only
because of Nechemia's connection to the Persian kings. Persia would
obviously not allow the Jews to conquer a far away land. It is fairly clear
that at the time of Ezra/Nechemia the Jews lived in the immediate vicinity
of Jerusalem.

2

An additional question

*Question:* When did the Chashmonaim win the war--on the 24th or the 25th
of Kislev--if on the 25th--should not we begin to light on the 26th?

*Answer: *There is a major dispute on this point. The Meiri (Shabbos 21B)
writes that the victory occurred on the 24th, and the Neiros were lit on
the 25th. The Pri Chadash brings that it is the opinion of the Rambam that
the victory occurred on the 25th, and that we begin lighting on the night
of the 25th (rather than on the night of the 26th after the victory)
because Chazal established the night of the 25th for future generations to
specifically remember the miracle of the victory in war which had occurred
on that day. The Har Tzvi (by HaRav Tzvi Pesach Frank, Zt’l) has a fuller
discussion of this disagreement in his Sefer on Chanukah, Chapter 2. The
Har Tzvi actually brings one authority who used a new Menorah on the second
night so that he could make a *Shehechiyanu* on the second night, as
well--making a Shehechiyanu on the first night (the 25th) for the miracle
of the war, and the Shehechiyanu on the new Menorah on the second night
(the 26th)--to also include the miracle of the oil on that night. >>

Actually the war was won many years later. Furthermore it seems that they
entered Jerusalem earlier and waited until 25 Kislev to rededicate the
mikdash. The 25th was picked because thats when the Greeks entered the
Temple and also when Chaggai dedicated the second Temple.

3

I saw several things over shabbat that seem to go against known history

1) *Question:* Who was the Kohen Gadol at the time of Chanukah--Mattisyahu--or his father Yochanan
*Answer:*The Sefer /Shalal Rav/ (p. 147-148) presents a Machlokes Rishonim on this very point.

Obviously neither were kohen gadol at the time of chanukah. Josephus describes the various successions of the kohen gadol eg alcimus etc. In fact Mattisyahu lived in Modiin and not in Jerusalem. It is not clear who Yochanan is but in any case lived before the story of Chanukah. Some claim that he is the Yochanan who lived 80 years and became a sadducee which would make the story even more amazing, In fact it is not clear that the Maccabees came from the "right" branch of priests to be kohen gadol

Chazal didn't have any problem condemning him for taking both the kehuna and the melucha. I doubt they would have been silent had they not come from the right branch of priests to be kohen gadol.

2) From the daf yomi at the beginning of Gittin there arises the question of the boundaries of Israel. Tahbetz (3:4) claims that Ezra conquered (nichbash) the Golan while it is not clear if the portion of Jordan was conquered by Ezra,

However it is clear that Ezra (or Nechemia) had no army to conquer anyone. They had enough trouble with their immediate neighbors and succeeded only because of Nechemia's connection to the Persian kings. Persia would obviously not allow the Jews to conquer a far away land. It is fairly clear that at the time of Ezra/Nechemia the Jews lived in the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem.

Nichbash needn't mean conquered militarily. Taken over with permission of the Persian emperor would suffice.

Lisa

4

I saw several things over shabbat that seem to go against known history

1) *Question:* Who was the Kohen Gadol at the time of
Chanukah--Mattisyahu--or his father Yochanan
*Answer:* The Sefer *Shalal Rav* (p. 147-148) presents a Machlokes
Rishonim on this very point.

Obviously neither were kohen gadol at the time of chanukah. Josephus
describes the various successions of the kohen gadol eg alcimus etc. In
fact Mattisyahu lived in Modiin and not in Jerusalem.

Eli Turkel

1. Could it be that Yochanan "kohen gadol" doesn't mean "High Priest" but
rather "a great priest"?

2. Could it be that Josephus' list of Kohanim Gedolim is incomplete and
inaccurate? Highly likely, I'd say.

3. Could it be that Matisyahu became Kohen Gadol -- or Acting Kohen Gadol
-- only for a short while, just the time it took to purify the BHM'K and
maybe for a short time thereafter? And if so, the fact that he formerly
lived in Modi'in is irrelevant, because when he purified the BHM'K (and acted
as Kohen Gadol) he was necessarily in Jerusalem.

--Toby Katz
t613k@aol.com
..

5

From the daf yomi at the beginning of Gittin there arises the question of
the boundaries of Israel. Tahbetz (3:4) claims that Ezra conquered
(nichbash) the Golan while it is not clear if the portion of Jordan was
conquered by Ezra,

However it is clear that Ezra (or Nechemia) had no army to conquer anyone.

...

Nichbash needn't mean conquered militarily. Taken over with permission of
the Persian emperor would suffice.

Given all the enemies that Ezra and Nechemia had as described in Tanach it
would seem odd that king would give permission to take over the Golan many
days travel away.

6

Well, if it seems odd...

Lisa

7

Mattitiyahu didn't purify the Mikdash. He was dead before we were able to take it back. It was Yehudah who did that. Also, "Mattitiyahu ben Yochanan Kohen Gadol" doesn't mean "Mattitiyahu ben Yochanan, Kohen Gadol". It means "Mattitiyahu -- ben Yochanan Kohen Gadol".

The name Onias, by which several of the High Priests of the time were known, is the Greek transliteration of Chonyo, which is a short form of Yochanan. Like Rick and Richard. Jason, the Hellenist High Priest, was the successor to his brother Onias III, who is probably the Yochanan Kohen Gadol who was the father of Mattitiyahu.

Lisa

8

: 1) *Question:* Who was the Kohen Gadol at the time of
: Chanukah--Mattisyahu--or his father Yochanan

: *Answer:* The Sefer *Shalal Rav* (p. 147-148) presents a Machlokes
: Rishonim on this very point.
:
: Obviously neither were kohen gadol at the time of chanukah. Josephus
: describes the various successions of the kohen gadol eg alcimus etc...

There was no real kohein gadol. Jason (Yeishua) bought the position for 60
kikar, with another 80 kikar in pledges. He couldn't pay up the pledges,
so Menileus (Choniov) was able to buy it out from under him. Menilaus
also over-promised, and Antiochus ended up appointing Jason's brother,
Lizimakeus (Jewish name unknown). Limzimakeus tried to steal the money
from qodshim, but he was caught at it and killed by Y-mim. So Menilaus
retained the title of high priest.

Meanwhile, runmor reaches Y-m that Antiochus died in battle in Egypt.
It wasn't true, but on that rumor, Jason rounded up an army to depose
Menileus. Malshinim told Achashveirosh that the rumor of his death
was celebrated.ASo, he attacked Y-m. The Misyavnim turned Fifth Column,
and opened the gates for him.

And so his suppression begins.

But none of these people were kohanim gedolim, doing the role al pi
halakhah. Jason -- as his name change indicates -- was himself from
among the Misyavnim.

: Some claim
: that he is the Yochanan who lived 80 years and became a sadducee which
: would make the story even more amazing,

: In fact it is not clear that the
: Maccabees came from the "right" branch of priests to be kohen gadol

Saying that the ban on mishmar Yehoyariv was still in force would
rule out both Yochanan and Matisyahu, unless they usurped the title.
The Hasmoneans did, but our mesorah is that the Maccabees merited
the miraculous assistance they received.

The bigger problem would be that is Taanis 27a-b means the family did
not return from Bavel, how are we discussing them being in Modiin?

Taanis 29a lists a number of things in common between churban bayis
rishon and churban bayis sheini: it was erev 9beAv, Sunday, the
year after shemitah, mishmar Yehoyariv, and the leviim were singing,
standing on the duchan. Notice this implies Yehoyariv was back in
EY.

Eirachin 12b says that if Yehoyariv would return, they would be folded
into Yedayah.

Which I think would imply that Yochanan and Matisyahu were considered
part of Yedayah, and only their cousins who remained in Bavel would
not be pulled out of galus for the appointment.

Otherwise, tzarikh iyun. But it has nothing to do with which were more
plausibly KG -- the problem is equal either way.

BTW, R Dovid Cohen (of Flatbush) linked the machloqes about how to parse
Matisyahu ben Yochanan Kohein Gadol, whether it's
    Matisyanu ben Yochanan-Kohein-Gadol (Yochanan was the KG)
or
    Matisyanu-ben-Yochanan Kohein Gadol (Matisyahu was the KG)
to the machloqes about how eidim sign a shetar. Should it be
    ne'um Re'uvein ben Yisrael eid
or
    ne'um Re'uvein eid ben Yisrael

Since we hold the former, we consider the "ben" to be more binding
than titles. So, if the author of Al haNisim holds like we do, it's
Matisyahu who is being called the KG.

From http://torahmusings.com/2006/01/yohanan-high-priest

by RGS:

   ...
   There are three positions on the identity of the famous Yohanan the
   High Priest:

   1. The Rambam (Introduction to Commentary to the Mishnah) and Roke'ah
   (Hilkhos Hanukah) are of the view that he was the son of Matisyahu,
   of Hanukah fame, evidently named after his own grandfather.

   2. Sefer Yuhasin (1:16) and Seder Ha-Doros (2:Yohanan Kohen Gadol)
   state that Yohanan the High Priest was Matisyahu's father and is the
   one mentioned in the "Al Ha-Nissim."

   3. Later scholars, including Doros Ha-Rishonim (part 2 p. 442) and
   Toledos Tanna'im Ve-Amora'im (vol. 2 p. 688), are of the view that
   Yohanan the High Priest was the grandson of Matisyahu and the son
   of Shimon.
   ...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

9

Choniov?

Lisa

10

In Avodah V33n160, RnLL wrote:

The name Onias, by which several of the High Priests of the time were

known, is the Greek transliteration of Chonyo, which is a short form of
Yochanan. Like Rick and Richard. Jason, the Hellenist High Priest, was
the successor to his brother Onias III, who is probably the Yochanan Kohen
Gadol who was the father of Mattitiyahu. <
and

Mattitiyahu was the son of the Kohen Gadol. He could have been the Kohen

Gadol himself. <
I know this thought isn't as simple as taking "ben" literally, but couldn't
Matisyahu have been described as a "ben Yochanan" in the sense of being a
worthy successor as leader to a Yochanan Kohen Gadol (if not also a
descendant, a connotation of "ben", yet not a son)?

11

: I know this thought isn't as simple as taking "ben" literally, but couldn't
: Matisyahu have been described as a "ben Yochanan" in the sense of being a
: worthy successor as leader to a Yochanan Kohen Gadol (if not also a
: descendant, a connotation of "ben", yet not a son)?

Well, *the* YKG, who becomes the poster child for not trusting oneself
until the day of death, might not be the best complement.

Also, he became a tzeduqi before passing the baton. Which means it has
to be someone who lived during or after after the Tzadoq who was the
student of Antignos ish Socho. (A 2nd Tzadoq in the same conversation.)
It doesn't leave us much room to place him well before Matisyahu.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

12

Due to the number of Kohanim Gedolim named Yochanan, it's possible that some YKGs weren't the same person as other YKGs.

For example, we know that Yochanan Hyrcanus became a Tzeduki, and he was the grandson of Matitiyahu (and great grandson of another YKG).

Lisa

13

: Actually the war was won many years later. Furthermore it seems that they
: entered Jerusalem earlier and waited until 25 Kislev to rededicate the
: mikdash. The 25th was picked because thats when the Greeks entered the
: Temple and also when Chaggai dedicated the second Temple.

... based on the belief that Zekhariah (contemporary to Chagai) said
this was the date of the dedication of the final BHMQ. Which may explain
the choice of navi for the hafatarah of Shabbos Chanukah.

(See R Menchaem Liebtag's take at
<http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/chanuka/2chanpac.htm&gt; although I
found that hunting for a thesis I was exposed to in HS. So I know
it's not RML's chiddush.)

Which, if qidsha leshaata qidsha le'asid lavo, is already fulfilled.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

14

R' Micha Berger told the stories of several people who purchased the
position of Kohen Gadol, and then wrote:

But none of these people were kohanim gedolim, doing the
role al pi halakhah.

I thought that this is a binary status: either one *is* a kohen gadol, or
he *isn't*. Are you saying that they were kohen gadol but didn't deserve
the position? Or are you saying that their violations caused them to lose
the title (sort of like how a regular kohen who married a divorcee is no
longer allowed the privileges of kehuna).

Akiva Miller

15

:> But none of these people were kohanim gedolim, doing the
:> role al pi halakhah.
:
: I thought that this is a binary status: either one *is* a kohen gadol, or
: he *isn't*. Are you saying that they were kohen gadol but didn't deserve
: the position? Or are you saying that their violations caused them to lose
: the title (sort of like how a regular kohen who married a divorcee is no
: longer allowed the privileges of kehuna).

I am saykng that Josephus could likely list the high priests who served
while the Miyavnim had control of the BHMQ and were using it as a temple
to some G-d - Zeus amalgam deity.

During that era, while people like Jason and Menileus called themselves
"kohein gadol" those loyal to Torah might have appoimted someone to be our
real KG even though he had no tahor BHMQ to serve in. I was suggesting
that this was Matisyahu's role, amd why Al haNisim calls him KG even
though he wasn't on the list of succession.

But it is entirely my own guesswork, a variation of the idea that AhM
means "a great kohein" rather than the title "Kohein Gadol".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

16

<<1. Could it be that Yochanan "kohen gadol" doesn't mean "High Priest"
but
rather "a great priest"?

2. Could it be that Josephus' list of Kohanim Gedolim is incomplete and
inaccurate? Highly likely, I'd say.

3. Could it be that Matisyahu became Kohen Gadol -- or Acting Kohen Gadol
-- only for a short while, just the time it took to purify the BHM'K and
maybe for a short time thereafter? And if so, the fact that he formerly
lived in Modi'in is irrelevant, because when he purified the BHM'K (and
acted
as Kohen Gadol) he was necessarily in Jerusalem. >>

1. Would indeed solve many problems if one is willing to make that
translation

2. Am not sure it is highly likely but at least a reasonable possibility

3. I don't think that Mattisyahu was alive by time they conqurered
Jerusalem.
Even Yehuda didnt become high priest

17

We know there had to be backup KGs from Yoma. The succession of KGs described in Ezra/Nechemia makes it pretty likely that this was often the son of the serving KG, but it didn't have to be. So you could have a KG who didn't serve.

Lisa

18

<We know there had to be backup KGs from Yoma. The succession of KGs
described in Ezra/Nechemia makes it pretty likely that this was often
the son of the serving KG, but it didn't have to be. So you could have
a KG who didn't serve.>

     The mishna in Yoma does not call for a backup KG, but for a
backup *to* the
KG, ready to serve if necessary, but who did not become a KG unless
actually pressed into service.

EMT