[Avodah] Women and Tallis

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:40 AM, I asked:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 02:08:26AM +0100, Allan Engel wrote:
>: IIRC the Brisker view is to be chosheish for the Ba'al Hamaor who holds that
>: techeiles is me'aqev.

> This doesn't really put my perplexity to rest any. We have no less need
> to explain how the Baal Hamor could disagree with a mishnah.

Well, RAE pointed me off-list to a source, who in turn gives a mar'eh
maqom for the BhM of Shabbos, Rif pg 11b.

The gemara concludes that this mishnah is one tzad of a beraisa which
has a machloqes. The mishnah says einah me'aqeves like Chakhamim against
Rebbe (Menachos 38a). And so most rishonim hold the mishnah stands --
halakhah keRebbe mechaveiro, velo meikhaveirav. HOWEVER, it turns out
that the Chakhamim is R' Yitzchaq (38b). So, we're back to "halakhah
keRebbe meichaveiro", at least according to the BhM.

The BhM brings another raayah from the Hlakhos Gedolos, which omits our
mishnah.

I would think the question becomes whether R' Yitzchaq's opinion became
accepted by the Chakhamim too late for them to overrule Rebbe.

Meanwhile, the Ramban (Milkhemes Hashem on Shabbos) argues against the
BhM bringing a number of arguments. Among the Ramban's proofs is that
wearing a tallis without tekheiles is commonplace. The word he uses is
"latzeis betallis", and the "latzeis" might be a reference to melekhes
hotza'ah. Otherwise, why the mention of yetzi'ah rather than the more
natural "lilvosh"?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             What we do for ourselves dies with us.
micha at aishdas.org        What we do for others and the world,
http://www.aishdas.org   remains and is immortal.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Albert Pine