[Avodah] ee itmar hachi itmar

[Micha Berger]

On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:55:35AM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
:> That's my understanding. That they didn't take it for granted that
:> maamarim reached Bavel intact, and if something didn't make sense,
:> it was considered indication that perhaps it was repeated incorrectly.

: The 2 cases on shabbat 44 are a statement from Zeiri and then a statement from
: R. Yehuda in the name of Rav, both Babylonian amoraim.

You're correct, although it's possible R' Zeira was being quoted post-aliyah.

I think my basic answer holds. I just need to add that once they built a
system that was more reliant on sevara than quote, it spilled over into
other areas.

The Y-mi is altogether more precise in quoting. Sometimes entire segments
are repeated because not only will they make sure to quote the shitah verbatum,
they'll preserve the entire exchange. The system in Y-mi calls for such
precision and attention to detail.

The system in Bavel never developed to be as precise in quotes, which would
end up impacting all quote.

: shortly afterwards on 45a the gemara quotes a statement from R Cahana
: and R. Ashi
: to Rav - and I didnt see any comments on the the order of the generations

Academics would cite cases like this to prove that the shaqla vetarya
in shas is a pedagogical tool and not a claim of historicity. I'm not
sure what the "frum" answer is, but there doesn't seem to be anything
heretical about that one.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Feeling grateful  to or appreciative of  someone
micha at aishdas.org        or something in your life actually attracts more
http://www.aishdas.org   of the things that you appreciate and value into
Fax: (270) 514-1507      your life.         - Christiane Northrup, M.D.