Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] › Reply To: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot]
Halevi, where do you see Rashi deviating from the pashut teitch of the machlokes?
Rebbe yossi says even if the navi makes the sun stand still in the sky, don’t listen to him to do avodah zara.
rebbe akiva says “chas veshalom that Hakadosh baruch hu would make the sun stop for ovrei retzono”
If we’re talking only about how it looks to a viewer, why would rebbe Akiva reject that Hashem would do it – according to you, even rebbe yossi never said He would.
As for your diyuk in the lashon of the braysoh, the fact that the “Torah” gave AZ power is no different than the “Torah” “giving” permission for things; the same way the beginning of the maamar is that the Torah understood the depths of how AZ works… it’s Hashem who made the Torah eithe way.
Look at Rashi on the pasuk; he comes laafukei your diyuk between Hashem/Torah on the word memshalah. Rashi on the pasuk writes that the miracle will happen either in the sky אות), or the land (מופת) and that אעפ”כ, לא תשמע לו, וא”ת מפני מה
נותן לו הקב”ה ממשלה לעשות אות, כי מנסה ה….
The rambaN on the pasuk is somewhat mashma that the miracles done by a false navi have a limit. We already saw nissim that was huge by yetzias mirzrayim and we heard directly from Hashem not to worship other gods, so we shouldn’t look at the false navis osos umofsim.
But Rashi clears up any confusion about the existence of such miracles.
On to the “chas veshalom” thing – it’s not my main argument. And i agree partially with your example of rebbe shimon; i also think that the nisyonos of bias hamoshiach are unique, as stated by the above.
And i didn’t read the gemara backwards – rebbe yochanan is quoted first, but that doesn’t mean that the maskanah is not like him. He is an amora and halacha k’basra, we follow amoraim because they knew what the tannaim said and still said their statements. I’m sorry if i presented it as if the gemara sequentially went with rebbe yochanan – you’re correct that it did not, but that would only he significant if we’re talking about shitos of other amoraim, where sequence shows us the maskanah.