12

There was fighting among the Chashmonaim, and one group besieged the other in Jerusalem, passing animals over the wall for the korban tamid, but eventually passing a pig.

This story is recounted (in greater detail than I've supplied) in three places in the Talmud Bavli:

  • at the end of Sota, 49:2;
  • Bava Kama 82:2, at the end of chapter "M'ruba"; and
  • M'nachos 64:2.

The Chidushe Agados (of the Maharsha, in the back of the standard shas), explains the g'mara. He says

  • in Sota, "The entire report is explained at the end of 'M'ruba'";
  • in "M'ruba" (Bava Kama), "See Chidushe Agados at the end of Sota"; and
  • in M'nachos, "It's explained at the end of Sota and in 'M'ruba'".

Um. (And the mahadura basra of the Maharsha, printed in the back of the standard shas, has nothing further.)

Is there an edition of Chidushe Agados in which he actually explains this g'mara, an edition which didn't make it into the standard shas?

If not, then, presumably, he erred, thinking he had written his chidushim in Chidushe Agados, but never doing so. (Or is there some other explanation for this state of affairs?) Did he write them elsewhere? — e.g., is a manuscript explanation of his for this g'mara available? Or perhaps one of his students wrote an explanation of this g'mara, quoting the Maharsha?

  • Have you checked an uncensored Gemoro? – Avrohom Yitzchok Jul 1 '12 at 17:07
  • 1
    This is an interesting question. The commentaries on the Maharsha (Horaas Shaah, Machaneh Efraim, etc.) don't deal with this. – b a Jul 1 '12 at 17:54
  • @AvrohomYitzchok nope. – msh210 Jul 1 '12 at 20:57
  • @msh210 Checked Oz VeHodor without success. – Avrohom Yitzchok Jul 2 '12 at 14:08
8

The Maharsha discusses the pig story in Chidushei Agadot at the end of Sotah, as advertised, but the comment is applied not to the portion of the Gemara on 49b where the story is told, but to the portion of the Mishna on 49a that that portion of Gemara comments on.

Here is the text of the relevant comment in the Maharsha:

בפולמוס של טיטוס כו' פרש"י שהביא הורקנוס אאריסטובלוס אחיו כו' עכ"ל אבל התוס' פרק מרובה דחו זה דטיטוס בשעת חורבן היה כדאמרי' פ' הניזקין ומלכות בית חשמונאי קדמו טובא כדאמרינן פרק קמא דע"ז וי"ל דמעיקרא גזרו ולא קבלו כו' עכ"ל ע"ש ונראה עוד בזה שזה המעשה דבני בית חשמונאי שהביאו פולמוס של רומים על ירושלים היה התחלת וגרם החורבן שעברו הרומים הברית שהיה להן עם ישראל כדאיתא פ"ק דע"ז וכמ"ש בספר בן גוריון שע"י מריבת אלו אחי' בית חשמונאי באו חיל רומים על ירושלים וכבשוה והוא הרמז דלקמן בברייתא שנעץ החזיר צפרניו בחומה ונזדעזעה כו' שהחזיר מיער שהוא עשו יהיה שולט בחומת ירושלים ויזדעזע כל א"י על ידו ומש"ה מייתי הך עובדא דאחי' בית חשמונאי אפולמוס של טיטוס שהיה סוף החורבן ג"כ ע"י הרומים כחו של עשו וק"ל (פ' מרובה ע"ש):‏

The Chidushei Agadot text available for the end of Chapter Meruba of Bava Kama doesn't appear to address this story. Maybe that section of whatever manuscript our version was based on got lost.


Thanks to DoubleAA for discovering the location of the Maharsha's comment and reporting it in a comment on the question here.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .