1,988
edits
Klalei HaTalmud: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Talmudic Phraseology: Tavrah, Naaseh, and Kedi Nesava
MordechaiD (talk | contribs) |
MordechaiD (talk | contribs) (→Talmudic Phraseology: Tavrah, Naaseh, and Kedi Nesava) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
== Talmudic Phraseology == | == Talmudic Phraseology == | ||
# Sometimes, the Gemara will use the same phrase in different places but refer to totally different concepts, while, other times, it will use different phrases in different places to refer to the same concept.<ref>Numerous Rishonim cited in Halichot Olam 3:8, Yad Malachi Klalei HaTalmud 374</ref> | # Sometimes, the Gemara will use the same phrase in different places but refer to totally different concepts, while, other times, it will use different phrases in different places to refer to the same concept.<ref>Numerous Rishonim cited in Halichot Olam 3:8, Yad Malachi Klalei HaTalmud 374</ref> | ||
# Sometimes, two parts of a Tannaitic statement, such as in a Mishnah or Baraita, will have contradictory implications, i.e. the Reisha will imply that changing a parameter will result in -X, while the Seifah says that the Halacha is -X only with a different parameter, implying that changing the second parameter already results in X, without the first parameter (see Kiddushin 5b and Bava Kamma 48b). There are a number of possible means of resolving the difficulty, of varying levels of plausibility. | |||
## "Na'aseh KeMi She..." (נעשה כמי ש...) - The first half if the main point, and the second is just detailing how the middle case is essentially the same as the case two parameter changes away. (Kiddusin 5b) According to the some, this is only a viable resolution when both parameters and results are functions of the same driving Halacha/logic.<ref>Tosafot Chullin 16a s.v. Amar Ribbi Elazar, Halichot Olam 3:2:14 and Klalei HaGemara ad loc.</ref> | |||
## "Tavra, Mi Sheshana Zo Lo Shanah Zo" (תברא, מי ששנה זו לא זנה זו) - Split the statement, the one who said this one didn't say the other one. Meaning, it's a Machaloket Tannaim and each half of the statement should be attributed to a different Tanna.<ref>Halichot Olam 3:2:16</ref> (Bava Kamma 47b and Bava Kamma 48b) Albeit a difficult resolution, this one is better than "Na'aseh..." as it doesn't force us to reinterpret the words of the Tannaim to say something they didn't actually say, so if it or a better answer is available, we will avoid resolving the issue with "Na'aseh..."<ref>Tosafot Bava Kamma 48b s.v. Eimah Seifah, Shitah Mekubetzet Bava Kamma 48b at the end quoting Shitah, Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 632). See also the Rosh's answer in the Shita ad loc. and Devash LeFi (Taf, 40)</ref> | |||
## "Kedi Nesavah" (כדי נסבה) - Really, the first half is the main point, but the second one mentions it for nothing, in haste.<ref>Halichot Olam 3:2:13</ref> Since the first half mentioned the parameter, then we'll mention the inverse, as well.<ref>Halichot Olam 3:2:13</ref> (Bava Kamma 48b).<ref>This may be the strongest argument, as it maintains the singularity of authorship of the Mishnah, which may be a value depending on a Machaloket Amoraim in Beitzah.</ref> | |||
== Names and Titles of Tannaim and Amoraim == | == Names and Titles of Tannaim and Amoraim == | ||
