Greetings. How is it possible that R. Hiyya would have had tefillin sewn with linen when it is already explained that sewing them with sinew is a halacha le-Moshe mi-Sinai based on one of the tannaim?? If it were a halacha le-Moshe mi-Sinai to use only sinew and not linen, then surely R. Hiyya would have known that. Surely amoraim did not ascribe a halacha le-Moshe mi-Sinai if it were not based on fact. Tefillin construction itself is Torah le-Moshe mi-Sinai, and no one disputes that. Thank you.
David Goldman, USA
Dear David,
The Ritva here, because of your question, changes the Girsa from L'Tefilin D'vei Chavivi to L'Safrei D'vei Chavivi maning his Sefer Torah used Pishtan but not Tefilin. He also brings a Girsa L'Tili which also means books and is closer to the word Tefilin.
The Sefas Emes explains the original Girsa of Tefilin that R' Chiya's Tefilin had 3 stiches of Gid besides the Pishtan which is permitted by Tefilin and therefore is not in direct contradiction to the Halacha l'Moshe m'Sinai.Another answer: the Halacha of Gid is only by Parshiyos, but Batim can use Pishtan. Poras Yosef learns that Pishtan doesn't ruin Tefilin, only loses the detail of proper Gid, and so he had, besides his Tefilin with Gid a second pair with Pishtan to show that it remains Kosher. Tzofnas Paneach answers that Gid is required to make Tefilin, but if a tear occurs, R' Chiya holds that Pishtan can be used.
All the best,
Reuven Weiner
Sorry let me rephrase the question.
The gemara on 11b says that in order to go out of galus it has to be that the gmar din took place during when this kohen gadol was in charge. So my question is that over here in our mishna which kohen gadol was around when he had the gmar din, are we saying that he had a gmar din when the 1st kohen gadol was serving in the beis hamikdosh and then this first kohen became tamei and he had to step down and a temporary kohen took over, and when this original kohen became tahor he stepped back up and the chiddush of our mishna is that even though he had a gmar din during the time when this ORIGINAL kohen was in charge nevertheless he goes out of galus only when the temporary kohen dies.
Or does the mishna mean that before this rotzeach killed, the 1st kohen became tamei and had to step down and they appointment a new kohen and during this time when the temporary kohen was in charge beis din gave him a gmar din and the chiddush of the mishna is that now when this original kohen comes back he nevertheless goes out of galus only when the temporary kohen dies since he was the one who was in charge when this rotzeach had a gmar din?
Hope this makes more sense.
Benzi
The Rambam writes (Hilchos Rotzeach 7:9) according to the conclusion of the Gemara just before the Mishnah on 11b, that there could be 4 different kinds of Cohen Gadol, and any one of them that died sets the Rotzeach free. Any Cohen Gadol (either past or present) who was alive at the time of the Gmar Din, and later on dies, lets the Rotzeach go home.
Chodesh Tov
Dovid Bloom