Hello kollel!
Two questions on the daf
1) why is daniel not considered a navi? Perhaps the visions and the writing on the wall isn't enough, since there were others who had nevuah, but aren't in the list since their nevuah wasn't for future generations. But isn't Daniel prophecy of the weeks one of the main sources that people have used to try to figure out when the mashiach is coming? That would seem a prophecy for future generations.
2) Gemara says that yitro had a bris when he joins the Jewish people. But since we know two things 1) that he was from Miriam/bnei ketuba that already had the basic bris from Avraham and 2) that the Jews didn't do bris in the desert bc there was no healing wind, isn't this quite a strong ramah that there's a separate part of the full bris ie priah, which must have been what he came for? He wouldn't have had that from midian and even if for some reason he has missed having it, it couldn't have been done in the desert bc of the lack of wind.
Thank you!
Josh
Shalom Josh,
Great to hear from you!
1. You are quite right to question why Daniel is not considered a Navi. Seemingly, his various visions should qualify him as such. But it is possible that he was classified as having just Ruach ha'Kodesh rather than actual prophecy. See for example Ramban on Bamidbar 22:23.
2. Some explain that although Daniel achieved a certain superior status, nevertheless he himself was not instructed to impart his messages to Yisrael, and this is the reason why the Gemara counts him as not being a Navi. See, for example, Rashi on Megilah 3a (DH d'Inhu Niviei) and Shenei Luchos ha'Bris (Torah Shebechsav, Chukas, Torah Ohr 41).
3. You are making a very good point about the passages in Daniel which provide calculations of the dates in the far future. While it is true that we study and analyze his words, nevertheless he was not actually told to go and say over his message to the Jewish people in the formal sense that another typical prophet would have been. Therefore, even though we learn to this day from the material that he transmitted to us, still that is not enough to make him an official prophet.
4. In a similar -- but perhaps more bold -- line of thought, the Tosfos ha'Rosh (Megilah 3a DH v'Ihu Lav Navi) writes that Daniel was indeed a prophet who was divinely granted knowledge of everything; just unlike other prophets he was not sent to chastise and rebuke the Jewish people.
5. Interestingly, others explain what appears to be yet a different reason why Daniel was not considered a prophet. That is, because Daniel is described as communicating via an angel, e.g. Gavriel, as opposed to a more direct channel of communication with Hash-m. See the Ramban (Bereishis 18:1) and Sha'arei Orah (Third and Fourth Gates, Seventh and Eight Sefirah 58).
6. By the way, I see there are at least three places where the Rambam discusses this. First, he cites (Guide for the Perplexed, Part 2 41:1) Daniel as an example of what a person actually feels during an experience of divine communication. Secondly, the Shelah ha'Kadosh (Shenei Luchos ha'Bris, Torah Shebechsav, Chukas, Torah Ohr 40) cites another passage elsewhere in the Guide (chapter 45, section 2). There, the Rambam writes, as the Gemara stated, that Daniel was not a prophet. Yet elsewhere, curiously, the Rambam (Hilchos Yesodei ha'Torah 1:9) seems to refer to Daniel as a prophet.
7. I see on 94a that Rav says Yisro passed a sharp sword over his flesh, which Rashi (DH Cherev Chadah) explains to mean that Yisro circumcised himself and thereby converted to join the Jewish people. I believe this is the passage on which you are basing your second question.
8. Yisro was from Midian, but one could question whether he already had a Bris by virtue of the fact that Midian was one of the sons of Keturah. For example, some opinions state that the six sons of Keturah were obligated to perform circumcision, but their offspring were not (Rashi in Sanhedrin 59b DH l'Rabos; also Ritva ad loc.).
9. Moreoever, it is plausible that even if the offpsring of Bnei Keturah were in fact obligated to perform circumcision, as other Rishonim maintain (e.g. Rambam in Hilchos Melachim 10:8; Raavad on Avodah Zarah 27a; the Ran Sanhedrin 59b), that does not guarantee us that they all fulfilled it.
10. By the way, there is yet another view, that of the Tosfos ha'Rosh (Sanhedrin ibid.). He believes that the offpsring of Bnei Keturah were in fact obliged to perform Bris Milah, but only until Matan Torah and not afterward.
11. I am wondering whether it is plausible that whatever circumcision procedure that Yisro performed on himself was actually done in Midian before he came to the desert. In that case he would not be subject to the danger. On the other hand, it seems clear that Yisro would have heard from Moshe many of the details of Hash-m's salvation of the Jewish people only after he arrived in the desert, as Rashi explains on Shemos 18:8.
Yasher Koach for your insightful analysis and comments! May you continue to attain greatness in Torah and Yiras Shamayim!
Warmly,
Yishai Rasowsky