It Isn't Mari bar Isak
First, a quick link, to my Pesach column from last year:
On to the daf yomi post.
If I recall correctly, to โcousinโ is an archaic verb meaning to claim to be a long-lost relative, perhaps deceiving them in the process. There is a story in yesterdayโs daf, going into todayโs, where someone claims (perhaps here correctly) that he is Mari bar Isakโs brother. Thus, the story begins (Bava Metzia 39b):
ืึธืจึดื ืึผึทืจ ืึดืืกึทืง ืึฒืชึธื ืึตืืึผ ืึทืึธื ืึดืึผึตื ืืึนืึธืึตื. ืึฒืึทืจ ืึตืืึผ: ืคึผึฐืืึนื ืึดื. ืึฒืึทืจ ืึตืืึผ: ืึธื ืึธืึทืขึฐื ึธื ืึธืึฐ.
ยง The Gemara relates: Mari bar Isak, who was a wealthy and powerful man, had a brother whom he did not previously know, come to him from Bei แธคozai, which was distant from central Babylonia. His brother said to him: Divide the property that you inherited from our father and give half to me, as I am your brother. Mari said to him: I do not know who you are.
While this is how the story begins in the Vilna and Venice printing, I think all other sources have an alternative. Thus, Mari bar Isak or else it was Chana / Huna bar Isak. Since the name only appears once at the beginning of the tale, it doesnโt have a check and can ready vary.
A quick search across Talmud shows only four instances of bar Isak.
Now, the problem with it being Mari bar Isak is that, from the other three instances, it is in sixth-generation, interacting with Rav Ashi and Mar Zutra. Meanwhile, this case comes before third-generation Rav Chisda! We would need to say that there is a Mari bar Isak I and Mari bar Isak II. This seems unlikely. Rather, it was Huna / Chana bar Isak, and that was lost in transmission, and mapped to the more famous Mari bar Isak.
I donโt think it is a bleed over from ืืืืจื ืื, but thatโs a remote possibility - that it was Huna, or maybe Chana, and the ืืืืจื turned to ืืจื.
Another interesting thing occurs in the transition from 39b to 40a. Third-generation, or we might say second- and third-generation Rav Chisda, since heโs a student-colleague of second-generation Rav Huna, and an older contemporary to Rabba bar Rav Hunaโฆ Anyway, in the process of bolstering his psak halacha, he points to a Mishnah. The end of 39b:
ืึฐืกืึนืฃ ืึฒืชืึน ืกึธืึฒืึดื ืึผึทืึฒืืึผืึผ ืืึผื. ืึฒืึทืจ ืึตืืึผ: ืึดืคึฐืืึนื ืึดื ื ึธืึตื ืึดืคึผึทืจึฐืึผึตืืกึตื ืึผืืึผืกึฐืชึผึธื ึดื ืึผึดืฉืึฐืชึทื. ืึฒืึทืจ ืึตืืึผ: ืฉืึทืคึผึดืืจ ืงึธืึธืึทืจ ืึธืึฐ, ืึผึดืชึฐื ึทื: ืึดื ึผึดืืึท ืึผึธื ึดืื ืึผึฐืืึนืึดืื ืึผืงึฐืึทื ึผึดืื, ืึฐืึดืฉืึฐืึผึดืืืึผ ืึผึฐืืึนืึดืื ืึถืช ืึทื ึผึฐืึธืกึดืื โ ืึดืฉืึฐืึผึดืืืึผ ืึธืึถืึฐืฆึทืข.
Ultimately, witnesses came and testified that the person from Bei แธคozai was his brother. At that point, the brother said to Mari bar Isak: Divide and give me half of the orchards and the gardens that you planted since the death of our father as well. Rav แธคisda said to Mari bar Isak: He spoke well to you, as we learned in a mishna (Bava Batra 143b): If one died and left adult and minor sons, and the adult sons enhanced the property, they enhanced the property, and the profit goes to the middle, i.e., it is divided between the adult sons and the minor sons.
leads into the start of 40a:
ืึฐืึตื ืึธืึทืจ ืจึทืึผึธื: ืึดืฉืึฐืึผึดืืืึผ ืึธืึถืึฐืฆึทืข. ืึธืึทืจ ืึตืืึผ ืึทืึผึธืึตื: ืึดื ืึผึธืึตื? ืึธืชึธื, ืึผึฐืืึนืึดืื ืึผึทืึผึตื ืงึฐืึทื ึผึดืื ืึธืึฐืขึดื ืึฐืงึธื ืึธืึฒืึดื, ืึธืึธื ืึดื ืึธืึทืข ืึผึฐืึตืืึดืื?
And likewise, Rabba says: They enhanced the property, and the profit goes to the middle. Abaye said to him: Are these matters comparable? There, in the case that the adult and minor brothers were together, the adults are aware that the minors exist and forgo payment for their effort on behalf of their younger brothers. Here, in the case of Mari bar Isak, was the older brother aware of the existence of the younger brother so that he could forgo payment for his labor?
Rashi already recognizes the issue. We donโt bolster a Mishnah, a Tannaitic source, with โand this random Amora also says the same thing. Also, Rabba (bar Nachmani) is Rav Chisdaโs student, so Rav Chisda wouldnโt cite him to prove his point.
ืืื ืืืจ ืจืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืืฆืข - ืื ืืจืกืื ื ืฉืืื ืื ืืฉืื ืืืจื ืืืืื ืืืจื ืืืืืจืืื ืกืืืข ืืืฉื ื ืืขืื ืจืื ืชืืืืืื ืืจื ืืกืื ืืื ืืืืื ืืืจ ืจื ืืกืื ืฉืืขืชื ืืฉืืื ืืื ืืจืก ืืื ืืื ืืืจ ืจื ืืจืกืื ื ืฉืืื ืจืื ืฉื ืจื ืืกืื ืืฉืื ืืืืื ืื"ื ืืืื ืืชืจื (ืืฃ ืงืื:) ืื ืฉื ื ืืื ืฉืฉืืื ื ืืกืื ืืืืช ื ืืกืื ืืื ืฉืืื ืืืืช ืขืฆืื ืฉื ืืืื ืืฉืืืื ืืขืฆืื ืืืจื ืจื ืืกืื ืืื ืืจื ืืื ืืืืืจ ืืืืช ืื ืืืื ืฉืืขืชื ืืื ืืคืืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืืช ืืืจืื ืฉื ืืฉืืืืื ืื ืืื ืืฉืชื ืคืจืืก ืืฉืืืื ืืืืฆืข:
Therefore, cross out those words. Alternatively, says Rashi, change ืจืื to ืจื by removing the ื, and this is Rav Chisdaโs teacher. Since there is a position in Bava Batra that restricts the application of this law, Rav Chisda can add that his teacher Rav said to apply it in this case.
Tosafot, meanwhile, would preserve the โRabbaโ reading:
ืืื ืืืจ ืจืื ืืจืก - ืจืฉ"ื ืืจืก ืืื ืืืจ ืจื ืืคืืื ืื"ื ืืค' ืื ืฉืืช (ื"ื ืืฃ ืงืื: ืืฉื ื"ื ืื) ื ืืกืื ืฉืฉืืื ืืืืช ืขืฆืื ืฉื ืืืื ืืฉืื ืืขืฆืื ืืงืืืจ ืืืคื' ืฉืืื ืืืืช ืืจืื ืฉื ืืฉืืืืื ืื ืืื ืืฉืชื ืคืจืืืกื ืืฉืืืื ืืืืฆืข ืืืื ืชืืื ืฉืืืืง ืจืื ืขื ืจื ืืืชื ืจืื ืงืืืจ ืืื ืืืืชื ืืชื ืืืืชืื ืืจื ืื ืจืื ืืืจืก ืจืื ืืื ืืกืคืจ ืจ"ืช ืืื ืืืืจื ืจื ืืกืื ืืื ืฉืืื' ืืืื ืฉืืขืฉื ืืืืฆื ืืื ืื ืืคื ื ืจืื ืืคืกืง ืืืฉืืืื ืืืืฆืข ืืื ืจื ืืกืื ืืืืืื ืืืืจื ืืฉืื ืงืืฉืืช ืืืื ืื"ื ืืืื ืืจืื ืื ืืื ืื' ืืื ืืฉืฉ ืจืื ืืงืืฉืืืชืื ืืื ืืืฉืืืื ืืืืฆืข:
And especially Rabbeinu Tam, whose guiding principle is to preserve and defend existing texts, against the onslaught of those who would emend them to fix problems. Rather than Rav Chisda says โand so said Rabbaโ, it is the gemara itself who notes that Rabba held this. And the reason for mentioning this is that Abaye argues, not with Rav Chisda but with Rabba.
Looking at manuscripts, I see something interesting.
(1) One manuscript, Escorial, has ืจืืืฉืืืื, without a space. We could imagine that from that compression, of Rav - Hishbicha, it was interpreted as Rabba. Related, just say it is an accidental gemination of the heh.
(2) Vilna and Venice printings have Rabba. So too Hamburg 165.
(3) Vatican 115a rubs it out, but what was rubbed out had Rava, rather than Rabba. We might note that Rava works well, perhaps better, for a student of Rav Chisda and someone Abaye argues with.
(4) A few others donโt rub it out, but have Rava. We have Florence 8-9 and Munich 95.
(5) Finally, there is Vatican 117, which has Rav, conforming to a Rashi reading. This is similar to Escorial, discussed above.
