[Avodah] Zekhiras Yetzi'as Mitzrayim in Yemos haMashiach

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 12:53:52PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: >Are you sure that "*nobody*" disputes it?

: The mishna presents it as an undisputed statement; if you think there's
: some machlokes about it, it's up to you to name the person who disputes
: it.

The mishnah doesn't discuss it. Did you read my following sentences
before writing this reply to the first one?

: >The sugya is on Berakhos 12b.
: >It opens with R' Yehudah bar Chavivi explaining why there is a derabbanan
: >to say Parashas Tzitzis as the third paragraph of Shema. After some
: >discussion of his statement, R' Elazar ben Azaryah raises his uncertainty
: >about applying this derabbanan at night.

: No.  The mishna is not a continuation of the previous gemara!  REbA
: was a tanna, RYbCh was an amora.  REbA's question does not follow or
: arise in any sense from RYbCh's memra.

Okay, so I took liberties with the flow. Still, ReBA is certainly only
discussing when is zechiras y"M, not the rest of shema. The mishnah
opens that you do, there is a machloqes as to whether it's because 
"lema'an tizkor".

And as already noted by RDECohen, both sides of the machloqes
presume that it's perfectly possible that ZYM wouldn't continue after
mashiach. Otherwise, why would the Chakhamim waste a derashah to exclude
a non-possibility which is kefirah?

The gemara presents the beraisa as a continuation of the previous sugya,
yes.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The trick is learning to be passionate in one's
micha at aishdas.org        ideals, but compassionate to one's peers.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507