Rabba vs. Rav Yosef, part one (article summary)

Here is a summary of my recent article, which looks into the decisive principle (kelal hora’ah) that in a dispute between Rabba and Rav Yosef, we rule like Rabba, except for a short list of cases. It is now available via flipdocs, HTML, paid Substack. Or click on the image to make it larger.

Here is an outline of the ideas in the article.

1. Introduce Rabba and Rav Yosef and their respective attributes, as listed in the accession story to the leadership of Pumbedita academy. Rabba is an Uprooted or Mountains. Rav Yosef is a Sinai. Rabba presided first, for 22.5 years, then Rav Yosef for 2 years.

2. What about when they argue? Actually, Rav Yosef once discussed how to act when two Sages dispute and their isn’t one who prevailed based on the discussion. In Biblical, stringently. In Rabbinic, act leniently.

3. But maybe Rabba had greater influence over those 22 years? Should we consider Rav Yosef a batrai? (I strongly doubt it.)

4. In Kiddushin 9a, they rule that shiray - silk cloths - don’t require appraisal, which is effectively like Rabba over Rav Yosef. Tosafot wonder why bother saying this if there is a general rule — we always rule like Rabba over Rav Yosef!

5. Where does this general rule exist? There’s one in Gittin 74b and another in Bava Batra (in two sugyot). We focus this week on Gittin 74b.

6. The gemara there tries to align Rabba with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and Rav Yosef with the Rabbanan. Rejecting this alignment, the gemara exclaims:
   
   וְתִיסְבְּרָא?! וְהָא קַיְימָא לַן הִילְכְתָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַבָּה; וּבְהָא—אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל!
   
   The idea is that for Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, it says וּבְהָא, in this instance. However, for Rabba, there is no such restriction of beha.

7. I have two responses to this. First, (as Tosafot note elsewhere,) there are manuscripts which do have beha. Here is one such example:
   

   

   The underlining is mine. In this Oxford 368 manuscript, the scribe originally wrote beha and then crossed it out. This may either be a “correction” based on other texts, or else the original thing he wrote was dittography, influenced by the later beha.
   
   Here’s another manuscript that has a beha for Rabba, Vatican 140.

   

8. My second objection is that maybe it is Rava, not Rabba. And we’d rule like Rava since he is of the later generation. To prove this point, look above at Vatican 140. The scribe wrote Rava but erased the top line of the aleph, turning it into a heh.
   
   More than this, throughout Shas, whether they agree or disagree, Rabba always precedes Rav Yosef. In this sugya, Rav Yosef is listed first. Following what Rosh says elsewhere about Abaye / Rabba / Rava, I would say that this means that this is strong evidence that it is Rava in this sugya. So there is no general rule like Rav Yosef.
   

9. Since Rabba and Rav Yosef argue so frequently, or a principle extrapolated from Rabba’s opinion is a component in some larger halachic theory, if I am correct, this might mean rewriting large swaths of Shulchan Aruch.