Question: Two questions occurred to me:
1) Why does Tosafos reject the view that kaddish was made in Aramaic to fool the angels because of their jealousy in favor of the view that is was to enable the Am Haratzim to understand the kaddish? Why can't both reasons be correct? There must be a deeper reason why they
are mutually exclusive according to Tosafos...
2) Why does the gemara have to spend time explaining the positions of Rebbe and Rav Nosson about the ashmoros? (May ta'am). It doesn't usually ask may ta'am for every position on every issue.
Thanks.
David Goldman
1) Your point is a good one. It seems, though, that the reasons themselves do not have to be mutually exclusive. However, Tosfos had other reasons to reject the reason of arousing the jealousy of the angels (as Tosfos says, we have many beautiful prayers that were not translated into Aramaic).
You may still be bothered by the progression of Tosfos' words. Once he rejects the Machzor Vitri's explanation of the phrase "Yehei Sh'mei," why does he also have to reject the reason of arousing the jealousy of the angels? The VILNA GA'ON explains that if the word "Sh'mei" ("His name") is really Hebrew and means "Shem Kah" ("the name of Yud-Hei"), as the Machzor Vitri asserts, then the reason that we do not want to arouse the jealousy of the angels makes sense, because an extra word or two in Hebrew is not going to arouse their jealousy. According to the reason that we want the ignorant people to understand the Kaddish, then if even one word is not in a language that they understand, then we have not accomplished our purpose.
Once Tosfos rejects that explanation of "Sh'mei" and concludes that the word "Sh'mei" is Aramaic (thus making the entire Kaddish in Aramaic), then it makes sense to say that Kaddish was instituted in Aramaic for the ignorant people to understand.
2) The Gemara spends time explaining the reasons behind the positions of Rebbi and Rebbi Nasan because it knew the reasons for their opinions. Besides, the Gemara usually does ask for the reasons behind every position on every issue, when the reason is not dependent on logic but has a source elsewhere in Torah, or when the reasons are not self-evident.