11 January 2006
Experiencing Some Frustration With The Stam(maim)
Today, while going over the רשב"ם (Rashbam) and the תוספות (Tosafot) on Pesahim 101b & 102a, I began to not only get a better sense of the סוגיא (pericope) in the Talmud, but I also saw how those Rishonim saw what was going on in the Talmud. Both of the aforementioned were trying to deal with not only different גרסאות (manuscript versions of the text), but also what an important term meant (in this case it was דברים שטעונים ברכה לאחריהם במקומן), both of which affect the understanding of determining Jewish practice - in this case, how we deal with saying blessings over food when changing places (oh, yeah, and another thing - the gemarra interchanges freely the ideas of changing one's place of eating with leaving one's place of eating and returning, which is ever so frustrating, as it seems that these are two separate concepts (from the Tannaim, and perhaps early Amoraim), which the בעלי התלמוד (editors of the Talmud) conflate(!)).
When looking at the two aforementioned rishonim, I became increasingly frustrated with the specific way that the gemarra dealt with the earlier texts by retrojecting concepts that appeared after the texts with which they were dealing.
However, after expressing my frustration with my rebbe, Rabbi Katz, he then said to me that, yes, indeed, it can be quite frustrating, but it can also be quite exciting. At this point in the day/night, I have forgotten exactly how that can be exciting/frustrating with how the stam(maim) with the earlier texts, and how the rishonim deal with all of that.
Okay, I need to go to bed now - I'm tired. לילה טוב.
(Oh yeah, BTW, the stam(maim) is(/are) represented in the pictures by the purple and 'peach' highlighting, while the blue-green highlighting represents the tannaitic texts (although on top of 101b, the way it scanned, it mixes some of my blue highlighting (amoraic) with that of my green highlighting (tannaitic), which comes out weird in these scannings).)
Posted by Drew_Kaplan