[Avodah] Chazon Ish on treifot

[Micha Berger]

In the thread by this post's title, along with numberous others (see links
as-of 2010 at <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol27/v27n134.shtml#09>), we
discussed the CI's position that the 2 millennia of Torah (from Avraham
to the mishnah) have special halachic power, and therefore the list of
tereifos set then can't be changed.

Among the questions raised was what this meant for people born during
those 2 millennia but lived past the compilation of the mishnah. Would
they be tannaim until the end of that era, and then tannaitic authority
ends regardless of who is still alive? How precise of a line do these
eras have?

Well, this Y-mi appears relevent.

The misnhah Kesuvos 1:7 discusses the case where she says "mukas eitz ani"
and he says "lo, ki ele derusas ish at!" Rabban Bamliel and R' Eliezer
hold we believe her WRT her kesuvah. Rabbi Yehoshua says "lo mipiha anu
chayim" unless she can bring some ra'yah.

In the Y-mi (1:9, vilna daf 7a), R' Yaaqov bar Acha besheim R' Yoshiyah says:
    Halakhah keRabban Gamliel ukeRabbi Eliezer,
    mishum shenayim sharabu al echad.

R' Yosi doesn't like this phrasing -- if it's halakhah, why mention 2
vs 1, and if it's because of 2 vs 1, why mention halakhah? I'm not sure
what R' Yosi's problem is. I had two possibilities:
1- He didn't like the redundancy, or
2- If we say "halakhah ke-" we're saying their shitah is inherently
stronger, not something like azlinan basar ruba.

Anyway, the gemara answers:
    Mei'atah
    In yisvor Rabbi Yochanan keR' Yehoshua,
    ein halakhah keR' Gamliel ukeR' Eliezezer,
    ela R' Yehoshua.

Because the majority is only 2 vs 1, all it would take is one tanna to
make the sides equal. R' Yaaqov bar Acha in the name of R' Yoshiyah is
saying that if they were equal in number, R' Yehoshua's shitah would
have been more compelling.

Now on to my opening thought.

Who is the R' Yochanan in question who could have changed the tide?

If the double wording is R' Yoshiyah's, then we are speaking of someone
earlier than R' Yoshiyah. Otherwise, why wouldn't he have just added his
own vote to tie up the sides? R' Yochanan could be R' Yochanan ben Nuri, a
contemporary of R' Yoshiyah's rebbe, R' Yishmael (as well as of R' Aqiva).

However, one is left asking why the lashon asid of "im yisvor"?

If the doubled language is R' Yaaqov bar Acha's, then we don't have that
problem; he's an amora and not a bar pelugta of anyone in the mishnah. But
R' Yochanan bar Nafcha (Reish Laqish's rebbe, brother-in-law, and friend)
was still alive when RYbA lived. Someone who was alive before the close
of the mishnah -- R' Yochanan was 15 when Rebbe was niftar and lived
around a century (180ce - 280ce is suggested in Hebrew wiki).

It would be interesting if RYBA was saying that R' Yochanan could still
"vote" as a tanna even though the two millenia that gave tannaim their
authority had ended decades before!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I long to accomplish a great and noble task,
micha at aishdas.org        but it is my chief duty to accomplish small
http://www.aishdas.org   tasks as if they were great and noble.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              - Helen Keller