Rava -> Rabba, or Rava -> Rav Yosef

Really quick thought on today’s daf:

On Bava Metzia 35a:

וְאִם

After explaining this mishna from tractate Shevuot, the Gemara analyzes its connection to the statement of Rav Huna: But if

אִיתָא לִדְרַב הוּנָא כֵּיוָן דְּמִשְׁתְּבַע מִלְוֶה שֶׁאֵינָהּ בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ, הֵיכִי מָצֵי מַפֵּיק לַהּ? אָמַר רָבָא: שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁנִּשְׂרְפָה.

the statement of Rav Huna is so, once the creditor takes an oath that the collateral is not in his possession, how can he produce it thereafter? Rava said: The mishna is referring to a case where there are witnesses that the collateral was burned. Therefore, the creditor need not take an oath that it is not in his possession.

Is this really Rava, though. My problem with this being Rava is that this is followed up by Rav Yosef and then by Abaye. And we typically have Rabba before Rav Yosef, his contemporary, and then Abaye. Masoret Hashas makes the emendation:

and indeed, Artscroll notes Masoret Hashas, giving the reasoning that typically Abaye precedes Rava and follows Rabba.

However, this is off the mark. Looking at the manuscripts, there is indeed an error, but a different one. Even in the Venice printing, it is Rav Yosef, not Rava:

And indeed, so too in manuscripts:

What might have caused this mistake? Unknown, but I can think of two factors. Say you have Rav Yos’ in short as in Munich 95. Might that יו be confused for an א that makes a whole name?

Also, the next name that appears is אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, so if we imagine that Rav Yosef is arguing, the scribe might tap another figure. Meanwhile, the gemara is really saying that Rav Yosef is revising his earlier statement, or the gemara is revising the statement on Rav Yosef’s behalf.

Changing the name changes the dynamic. If it is Rabba, then there is Rabba and Rav Yosef, followed by Abaye, their student. And it is teacher and student, and it is Rabba who almost always wins over Rav Yosef. It is it Rav Yosef, then there are only two who are operating here.

I think ultimately, that wouldn’t have effected halacha anyway, since the first position is one that is attacked (or, as we have it in reality, revised). And Abaye is a student but also later, though batrai might only kick in if both parties are fourth-generation Amoraim or later. And then we have the even later Rav Ashi weigh in. So, here it doesn’t matter.