Powered by WebAds

Saturday, March 04, 2006

Return and Redemption II

During Shabbat, I had a chance to delve further into the sugya I have been debating with Jak Black.

Just a few more points for my side:

1. Jak has so far claimed that I am not learning Rashi properly (implying several times that my learning skills are severely lacking). Well, sorry Jak, but the Maharsha, your main source of support says that Rashi learns the sugya as I suggest. I guess the maharsha should have learned with you first so that he would know what a "hava amina" is.

2. I have re-learned the Yad-Rama and am convinced that he learns that sugya as I suggest. The sugya he has is the same as in the Vilna edition but the way he explains the drash of the psukim leaves little room for doubt.

3. So far I have only quoted the Turei Even in order to show how the seeming contradictions in the Rambam can be explained. I failed to mention that after he explains that the Rambam in hilchot teshuva probably learns like the Maharsha (this does not take into account the Rabmam in hilchot melachim), he then goes on to explain that he rejects this position out of hand and basically says there is no way that the teshuva of klal Israel can in any way hold up the geula.

4. The Margalios HaYam explicitly changes the girsa of the bavli to be in accordance with the Yerushalmi and the Tanchuma (this is also in accordance with several manuscripts of the Bavli that we have). All reason point to the fact that the girsa in the Bavli is mistaken. Since the whole structure Jak has build on top of the maharsha depends on the probably incorrect girsa in the Bavli - the leg he is standing on is getting thinner by the moment.