Who is Mar Shmuel?
In yesterday’s daf (Kiddushin 66), we came across Mar Shmuel:
אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מְנָא אָמֵינָא לַהּ, דְּהָהוּא סַמְיָא דַּהֲוָה מְסַדַּר מַתְנְיָיתָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּמָר שְׁמוּאֵל. יוֹמָא חַד נְגַהּ לֵיהּ וְלָא הֲוָה קָאָתֵי. שַׁדַּר שְׁלִיחָא אַבָּתְרֵיהּ. אַדְּאָזֵיל שְׁלִיחַ בַּחֲדָא אוֹרְחָא, אֲתָא אִיהוּ בַּחֲדָא. כִּי אֲתָא שָׁלִיחַ, אָמַר: אִשְׁתּוֹ זִינְּתָה. אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּמָר שְׁמוּאֵל, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִי מְהֵימַן לָךְ – זִיל אַפְּקַהּ, וְאִי לָא – לָא תַּפֵּיק.
Abaye said: From where do I say this claim of mine? It happened that there was a certain blind man who would review mishnayot before Mar Shmuel. One day the blind man was late for him and was not arriving. Mar Shmuel sent a messenger after him to assist him. While the messenger was going to the blind man’s house by one way, the blind man arrived at the house of study by a different route, and therefore the messenger missed him and reached his house. When the messenger came back, he said that he had been to the blind man’s house and saw that his wife committed adultery. The blind man came before Mar Shmuel to inquire whether he must pay heed to this testimony. Mar Shmuel said to him: If this messenger is trusted by you, go and divorce her, but if not, do not divorce her.
מַאי לָאו אִי מְהֵימַן עֲלָךְ דְּלָאו גַּזְלָנָא הוּא? וְרָבָא: אִי מְהֵימַן לָךְ כְּבֵי תְרֵי – זִיל אַפְּקַהּ, וְאִי לָא – לָא תַּפְּקַהּ.
Abaye comments: What, is it not correct to say that this means that if he is trusted by you that he is not a thief but is a valid witness, you must rely on him? This would prove that a single witness can testify in a case of this kind. And Rava explains that Mar Shmuel meant: If he is trusted by you like two witnesses, go and divorce her, but if not, do not divorce her. Consequently, Rava maintains that this episode affords no proof.
Mar Shmuel could be a reference to either:
Shmuel, a first-generation Amora
Mar Shmuel Mar, a fifth-generation Amora and student of Rava. “Mar” indicates a connection to the exilarch.
Thus, when we see Mar Shmuel, it pays to disambiguate. In this instance, an incident in which Mar Shmuel rules is being brought by Abaye as evidence against Rava, so it is rather unlikely that it would refer to Rava’s student. Rather, it almost certainly refers to Shmuel.
If you examine instances in which the first-generation Amora is referred to as Mar Shmuel as opposed to just plain Shmuel, you will see that it tends to occur when a named Amora is speaking about him in direct speech. So, if it just amar Rav Yehuda amar Shmuel, that is just a regular citation so Shmuel won’t get the title. But here, Abaye is speaking, and he wants to refer to Shmuel with respect. Now, Shmuel never received rabbinic ordination, so Abaye won’t refer to him as Rabbi Shmuel. But talking about him without a title is how Abaye would talk to a colleague. Therefore, Mar is a term of respect without asserting that Shmuel was ordained.