tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9926230.post8908529539217709724..comments2024-03-26T01:57:54.726-04:00Comments on On The Contrary: Hillel Praises; Shammai AppraisesADDeRabbihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11749876612695930184noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9926230.post-83068348344693653152013-05-23T11:16:43.470-04:002013-05-23T11:16:43.470-04:00It's not just the idea that Hillel and Shammai...It's not just the idea that Hillel and Shammai's machloqesin were limited to those three. I would like to see how you address "shelo shimshu es rabosam" -- that the number of machloqesin between batei Hillel and Shammai is due to their being incomplete students. Which seems to imply that had they been good students, the ideological differences between the teachers would not have caused the plethora of disputes.<br /><br />This doesn't touch your core thesis. I'm just saying the ideological split was in how the students saw their teachers, not the teachers themselves. Everything you write after that would be true -- of the schools.micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9926230.post-73558372273009433232013-05-23T07:17:35.150-04:002013-05-23T07:17:35.150-04:00Micha - I know that there is a tendency to limit t...Micha - I know that there is a tendency to limit the differences between Hillel and Shammai to the three cases where they explicitly argue, but that is an oversimplification.<br />My contention here is that later Amoraim projected certain key differences onto the figures of Hillel and Shammai, specifically through the stories they told about them. The Gemara in Shabbat is one such story, but if you prefer the Maharal's approach there, that their differences were not fundamental, then the sugya in Beitza should explain it better. There the Gemara states with regard to Hillel that "mida acheret hayta bo" - there was a real difference in their respective demeanors, not necessarily just rooted in their respective roles (which should not have bearing on how one fulfills the mitzva of Zekhirat Shabbat. <br />I agree that the respective schools institutionalized these differences of demeanor - that is the reason for putting the two beraitot together in Beitza - but that does not mean that there were no real differences. ADDeRabbihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11140799140529618997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9926230.post-51379592382889288902013-05-21T13:18:18.813-04:002013-05-21T13:18:18.813-04:00Well, now, this is an interesting post. I do belie...Well, now, this is an interesting post. I do believe Hillel and Shammai were prototypes. In every shul and community you will find Hillels and you will find Shammais.<br /><br />I also think, and wonder if you have ever noted this yourself, that Rav Meir and Rav Shimon are marked by the same two extremes. R. Meir is nearly always the machmir, and R. Shimon nearly always the maikel.<br /><br />It is even more interesting when you bring it down to the amoraim, because then the difference is not so much in psak, as it is in method of learning. Abbaye and Rava, for example. Abbaye is much more prone to change the girsah of a mishna to avoid a conflict. ("Tani X") Rava will not change the girsah ("Lo Tani x") but will come up with what is, to my mind, a convoluted way of reading the mishna to make the words square. I must say also that, ever since I started learning more critically years ago, I feel Abbaye's thinking is usually much more straightforward and logical than Rava's. Quite possibly this is related to his willingless to change the text when he faces a problem, though it doesnt have to be.<br /><br />DF Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05501405143555051485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9926230.post-89354250847983061072013-05-14T10:49:43.595-04:002013-05-14T10:49:43.595-04:00"Hillel and Shammai are perhaps the most famo..."Hillel and Shammai are perhaps the most famous pair of rabbinic rivals in the Talmud."<br /><br />Not really. The schools they founded disagreed a lot. But Hillel and Shammai did not that often. And since one of the things blamed for the sudden explosion in the number of disputes to their not sufficiently apprenticing under their respective mentors. IOW, not an ideological difference between Hillel and Shammai themselves, but in how the teachers were perceived by students who should have known them better than they did.<br /><br />The Maharal on Avos explains that Hillel was the nasi, and therefore his job was chesed. Shammai was the av beid din. The students, had they really known their teachers, would have seen that the difference was in role, not in actual approach. But they didn't.<br /><br />What you write here fits that model -- the president praises and builds up society (naso es rosh, nesi'im -- we can pull from the parashah for this idea), whereas the chief justice has to objectively appraise. And then the schools diverged along these lines, for the reason offered by the Maharal.micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.com