Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:57:16 -0700
x-mailing-list: daf-disc...@shemayisrael.com
(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.) _________________________________________________________________
THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
d...@dafyomi.co.il
[REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]
________________________________________________________________
Bava Metzia 061: Which is a better reason 'Ani Mavchin' or 'Al Menas Ken'?
alex lebovits asked:
Rava on 61B explains why the Torah mentions Yetzias Mitzrayim in 3 places.
1. By Ribis
2. By Mishkolos
3. By Tzitzis
1. Why does Rashi give Mareh MKomos for only the first 2.
2. I looked up these 1st two places in the Chumash and found that Rashi gives
the reason of our Gemorah of Ani Mavchin plus another reason of Al Menas
Keyn.
Now, by Ribis he mentions our Gemorah as the main reason and as a Davar Achar
he also mentions Al Menas Keyn .
Yet by Mishkolos, he mentions Al Menas Keyn as the main reason and our
Gemorah only as the Davar Acher.
I thought that looking up the 3rd location by Tzitzis will help solve the
issue. But when I looked there, Rashi seems to learn this case different from
Ribis and different also from Mishkolos!
Is Rashi Meduyak?!
Kol Tuv
Alex Lebovits, Toronto, Canada
----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:
1. I would suggest that Rashi omits the Mar'eh Makom by Tzitzis, because he
assumes that everybody knows it by heart.
2. It seems to me that Rashi in Chumash is giving two independent explanations,
one in accordance with the Gemara in Bava Metzia, the other, based on Midrashim
(as most Rashi's are), in connection with the Pesukim where each one is written.
In the Pasuk of Ribis, Rashi connects his alternative explanation with the
Pasuk that follows (i.e. "Laseis Lachem Es Eretz Kena'an ... "). You will see
that his alternative explanation and the following two Rashi's follow the same
pattern. That explains why he cites his alternative explanation second.
Whereas in the Pasuk of Mishkolos, his alternative explanation refers
exclusively to the Lav of Mishkolos that is written before 'Yetzi'as
Mitzrayim', so he places it first.
In other words, the order of Rashi's two answers in both places is a matter of
juxtaposition, not of priority. So as you see, Rashi is, as always, very
Meduyak!
In Parshas Tzitzis, Rashi mentions the second reason, in keeping with the
alternative explanation by Ribis and Mishkolos. I don't understand your final
statement, but I do see that Rashi fails to cite our Gemara's explanation
there, and I agree that this does seem strange.
Be'Virchas Kol Tuv,
Eliezer Chrysler
>>><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><<<
The *D*AFYOMI *A*DVANCEMENT *F*ORUM, brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Write to us at d...@dafyomi.co.il or visit us at http://www.dafyomi.co.il
Fax(US): (206) 2020-DAF; Fax(Isr): (02) 591-6024; Tel(Isr): (02) 651-5004
_______________________________________________ Daf-discuss mailing list Daf-discuss@shemayisrael.co.il http://shemayisrael.co.il/mailman/listinfo/daf-discuss_shemayisrael.co.il