[Avodah] Prophet - mashgiach or godol hador?

[David Riceman]

From: "Daniel Eidensohn" <yadmoshe at 012.net.il>

> I was simply noticing how the Rambam describes the prophet and his type 
> of perfection. He notes for example if a person has the imaginative 
> faculty stimulated he is a political leader. If the intellectual faculty 
> is stimulated he is a philosopher. Only if both are stimulated he is 
> prophet. This  implies that the prototypical political leader is not a 
> prophet and a prophet is not likely to be a politcal leader.

What the Rambam describes is the personality of someone who is on the path 
of becoming a prophet.  However,  your expressed interest was not in his 
personality but in his assigned role when he is not being prophetic.  I 
think the Rambam would maintain he doesn't have one.  I agree that the 
Rambam would doubt that a prophet would want a political role, but "b'makom 
she'ain anashim hadal lihyos ish " (which is presumably why the Rambam 
himself took such a role in Egypt).

> While you can point to the fact that Shmuel was apparently a king and 
> judge in addition to being a prophet - I don't know of any other prophet 
> aside from Moshe serving these multiple roles.

Read the Rambam's list of rashei sanhedrin in the introduction to the 
Mishneh Torah.   The prophets I see there include Yehoshua, Shmuel, Eliyahu, 
Elisha, Zechariah, Hoshea, Amos, Yeshayahu, Micha, Yoel, Nahum, Havakuk, 
Tzefania, Yirmiah.  You can disagree with the historicity of the account, as 
you do below, but if you're trying to understand the Rambam's opinion that 
disagreeement is irrelevant.

>  The possible sole exception is that the Anshei Knesses HaGedolah had 
> prophets as members. However we really don't know what this body was and 
> what role these prophets served. I am not aware of any sources which state 
> they served as judges or poskim. If you have such sources have I would 
> appreciate hearing about them.

See the source cited above.

>>><RDE> A specific example is that the Rambam does not allow the 
>>>involvement of ruach hakodesh in the Sanhedrin while the Ramban does.
>>
>> <me>Where is this Ramban?
>
> <RDE>Ramban(Devarim 17:11): Left and Right.  <snip> That is because G‑d’s
> spirit is
> on those who serve in His Temple and He does not desert His pious ones. 
> G‑d always protects them from error and mistake.

I think you're conflating two concepts.  The Rambam prohibits someone from 
reasoning "I know that halacha is X because God told me so".  He does, 
however, list two lesser forms of ruah hakodesh (in MN II:45, which I cited 
previously) which are not strong enough to support such a claim.  I don't 
think the Rambam would prohibit the use of such ruah hakodesh in 
deliberation (indeed, how could he since it's involuntary?), nor do I see 
any evidence that the Ramban is asserting any more ruah hakodesh than that.

>> <me>Other than the SHAUBTMH I don't know of anyone who says this. Are 
>> there explicit sources?
>
> <RDE>The Minchas Chinuch cites Tosfos both in Sanhedrin and Yevamos.

Tosafos seem hesitant: they examne the possibility but they don't declare 
that one is necessarily so obliged.

David Riceman