Is Rabbinic Biography Maskilish?
On Gittin 22a, transitioning to Gittin 22b, we have Rabbi Eleazar explains that the anonymous Chachamim of the Mishnah refer to Rabbi Eleazar.
וַחֲכָמִים מַכְשִׁירִין: מַאן חֲכָמִים? אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר:
The mishna taught that the Rabbis deem valid bills of divorce that were written on erased paper or on unfinished leather. The Gemara asks: Who are these Rabbis? The amora Rabbi Elazar said:
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הִיא, דְּאָמַר: עֵדֵי מְסִירָה כָּרְתִי.It is the opinion of the tanna Rabbi Elazar, who says: Witnesses of the transmission of the bill of divorce effect the divorce. Since the witnesses read the bill of divorce before it is transmitted in their presence, they may be relied upon to confirm the contents of the bill of divorce in court. Therefore, even if it was written on erased paper, there is no possibility that it would be forged, as the witnesses read what was written before it is given.
How can Rabbi Eleazar say it is Rabbi Eleazar? The translation above already provides the answer, that there is a difference between the fifth-generation Tanna, Rabbi Eleazar ben Shamua, and the second and third-generation Amora of Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Eleazar ben Pedat.
Rav Hershel Schachter, in his Gittin shiur on this gemara, explains it in this way, at around the 84:20-85:36 mark. He says:
I remember once, I was learning bechavrusa with someone; my neighbor was a young rabbi in Brooklyn who had semicha from Rav Moshe Feinstein; so we were learning Kesubos together. So he had a kasha on what we were learning, there was a kasha Rabbi Eleazar on Rabbi Eleazar. So I said, please show me where (??). So one was Rabbi Eleazar in the Mishnah, and one was Rabbi Eleazar in the Gemara. I said, "this is a Tanna! This is Rabbi Eleazar ben Shamua. And this, Rabbi Eleazar [is] Rabbi Eleazar the Amora, this is ben Pedas." He that this this was ... maskilish. If it's the Mishnah, it a Tanna, a different person, not the same. It's a Rashi later, Rashi says who the different Rabbi Eleazars are.
The Amora is Rabbi Eleazar ben Pedas, the talmid of Rabbi Yochanan. ... And Rabbi Eleazar the Tanna is a different person, so you can't ask a kasha one on the other.
So there you have it. Some folks would deem discussion of who’s who, and harnessing knowledge of Tannaim and Amoraim, as maskilish. Rav Shachter doesn’t consider it so, at least on this basic level, to know the difference between the Tanna and the Amora.
(In fact, he often makes use of knowledge of Amoraim in discussing gemaras. Not to the extent that I do, but it feels like more than what I remember from learning in shiur in person.)
BTW, do a search for רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הִיא, דְּאָמַר: עֵדֵי מְסִירָה כָּרְתִי and you’ll find that this pattern repeats with other Amoraim, such as Rabba, saying it.
Also, on our daf in Gittin, the temptation for a scribe would be to transform the Tanna into Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus. Adding the yud would make it seem that Rabbi Eleazar isn’t talking about himself.
Indeed, while most correctly have Rabbi Eleazar, one manuscript manage Rabbi Eliezer. Kind of… Vatican 130 had it for the Tanna (twice), but then someone rubbed out each of the yuds. The two red underlines are the two Tannaim. And see how there is space for the yud, but a smudge instead.
You’d have to compare all instances of רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הִיא, דְּאָמַר: עֵדֵי מְסִירָה כָּרְתִי, but I think they are all Eleazar in our printed text. In each instance, we should also check the manuscripts. But it also makes sense for fifth-generation Tanna, Rabbi Meir, to have a fifth-generation Tanna disputant, Rabbi Eleazar, rather than a third generation Rabbi Eliezer.