[Avodah] two fictional sects

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 05:41:32PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
>> But that's the idiom, not the concept. These people left their maqom
>>  and are told to do what their families have been doing for generations.

> I'm confused by the referent.  Which people?

I am saying the Benei Baishanim, after they left Beis She'an to go from
being the Baishanim to the Benei Baishanim, no longer were following
the minhag hamaqom of Beis She'an. R' Yochanan tells them they must
continue minhag haBaishanim, just as Ashkenazim in EY must continue minhag
qitniyos, and says it's because of "shema beni mussar avikha..." Minhag
avos carrying their old locale's minhag hamaqom through to the next
generation.

A similar case is in the Y-mi Peschim 4:1 26a. R' [Ab]ba said that
Benei Maisha excepted upon themselves not to cast their nets in
the Mediterranian. They then settle Israel's west coast, and so
they ask Rebbe if they could continue fishing, or if they were bound
by this too? Rebbe answers:Mikivan shenahagu bahen avoseikhem be'isur.
al tishnu minhag avoseikhem. (Reish Laqish then asks why it isn't
assur because of lo sisgodedu, but R' Yochanan answers him.)

Had their new location had a contradicting minhag hamaqom, I presume
that would win out.

...
> But I don't know of any mechanism which enables me to require my kids to
> adopt a practice without their consent...

In which case, how can someone be born Jewish?

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 05:52:12PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> And while I can't tell which Rashi you're referring to, I don't see any
>> of the 3 Rashi's on Abayei's quote as referring to the recipients of the
>> letter in particular. The letter itself gives no motive, the "zimnin
>> degazru" isn't "dezimnin degazru", and all Rashi does is describe the
>> possible gezeira -- that the people wouldn't be allowed to learn, and
>> the calendar algorithm would be forgotten.

> Rashi d"h "degazri hamachus gezeira".  Rashi explains what sort of gezeira
> is meant, and how it could lead to problems with the calendar.  And he does
> so *in the second person*.  This clearly shows that these words are part of
> the letter, not commentary on it.   As for the language, Hebrew and Aramaic
> are often used interchangeably within the same sentence in the gemara.

He describes the effects of some future gezeira on the people in that
country. It obviously doesn't refer to the letter's generation in
particular according to either of us. Nothing about second person.

As for switching language... Not usual for a quote. Yes, redacted
text can have such things.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 11th day, which is
micha at aishdas.org        1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            strict justice?