[Avodah] The plot against the Nasi

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:06:02PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
: Micha Berger wrote:
:> In any case, I have a problem attributing multi-generational rivalry to
:> the extent that one implies it compromised the search for an objective
:> halakhah. Too "historical school" for my tastes.

: See Horayos 14a "bnei adam shebikshu la'akor kvodcha ukvod beis avicha".

That's the same sugya as where we began. RLR cited 13b.

As I said, it's when it gets "to the extent that one implies it
compromised the search for an objective halakhah" that the idea just
doesn't sit comfortably with me. There is a difference between citing
"Acheirim" or "Yeish Omerim" and not citing the opinion at all.

And again, I'm speaking about what doesn't fit my tastes; I'm not saying
it's wrong -- just that I would be happier with a different resolution.

And so I was only suggesting that I would be happier with a different
explanation for RLR's observation that:
> It is probably due to this that R' Nosson although quoted by name in
> hundreds of Brysos, is very rarely mentioned in Mishnayos, which were
> edited by Rabbon Shimon ben Gamliel's son, R Yehudah Hanossi.

Even including "yeish omerim", which Bar Ilan
<http://www.responsa.co.il> tells me doesn't appear in mishnayos
nor tosefta at all. (Y"A appears 6 times in their text of the mishnah
including citations, all meaning "11", and none in the Tosefta. The full
text produced no hits.)

So, I would suggest that R' Noson simply didn't pasqen as much as other
tannaim.

R' Meir is also the stam mishnah because he was the compiler of the
manuscript that Rebbe strarted from, so his relationship to all this is
far more complex.

Aside from being the stam mishnah, Bar Ilan found "Meir" 208 times in
the mishnah. Searching for "Noson" would require going through occurances
and ruling out the verb "nasan", so I lack the time. Going up one
generation in the shalsheles to R' Aqiva (both "Aqiva" and "Aqivah") I
got only 166 hits. He is quoted by name frequently.

R' Meir's version of the mishnah were probably a talmid's attempt to
organize the medrashei halakhah of /his/ rebbe, R' Aqiva. Devei R' Aqiva
produced:
    * Shemos: Mekhilta deRabbi Shim'on bar Yochai
    * Vayiqra: Sifra (Sifra deVei Rav, Toras Kohanim)
    * Bamidbar: Sifrei Zuta
    * Devarim: Sifrei


The other beis medrash, R' Yishma'el's produced:
    * Shemos: Mekhila (a/k/a Mekhilta deRabbi Yeshima'el)
    * Bamidbar: Sifrei
    * Devarim: Mekhilta Devarim

Notice that this means that our Sifrei comes from two differen sources,
Bamidbar and Devarim come from devei R' Yishma'el and devei R' Aqiva,
respectively.

I think this whole tangent is important, because it relates to R'
Aqiva's 19 middos shehaTorah nidreshes bahem, and R' Yishma'el's 13
(which also accomodate "diberah Torah belashon benei Adam" in a way
R' Aqiva does not).

All of which being... Frequently named or not, R' Meir is a HUGE piece
of how the mishnah even exists! And perhaps that's why Rebbe didn't
lemaaseh follow the kelal given in Horiyos.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Mussar is like oil put in water,
micha at aishdas.org        eventually it will rise to the top.
http://www.aishdas.org                    - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507