Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says that the second half of the pasuk(in the land of canaanite that dwells in the plain, opposite gilgal, near elon moreh) refers to the route bnei yisrael should take when in eretz yisroel. Rashi is sayin that he is explaining for both Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Elazar. If so, do we say that when Rabbi Yehuda explained "mul hagilgal" to mean samuch legilgal and that elon moreh refers to shechem through a gzeira shava, he is now falling off those explanations and going like Rabbi Elazar ben Yaakov that Gilgal and Shechem are there as waypoints in leading the Jews on thei way in the land of Israel? If this is the case, then how does Rabbi Yehuda know that the mountains are near shechem?
Thank You for your time and consideration.
Elisha Yagudayev, flushing, united states
Sholom Rav,
Where does Rashi say that Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov is explaining Rebbi Yehudah?
Be'Virchas Kol Tuv ve'Chanukah Same'ach,
Eliezer Chrysler
Rashi Dibur Hamaskil: Rabbi Eliezer ben Yakov Omer Lo Ba HaKatuv says that Rabbi Elazar also (implying that Rebbi Yehuda as well) is relying on Rebbi Eliezer ben Yaakov's explanation of the Pasuk since when Rebbi Elazar asked his question, he was asking on himself as well and Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov is coming to answer the question and defend both Rebbi Yehuda and Rabbi Elazar. But then I'm back to my original question if that is then knocking out their previous explanations of the Pasuk.
Thank You and Chanukah Sameach
Sholom Rav,
Had Rashi meant to say what you suggest, he would have said that Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Elazar go according to Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov. What Rashi therefore means is that Rebbi Elazar (exclusively) follows Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov.
Besides, there is no reason why the Gemara needed to retract from its initial explanation of Rebbi Yehudah. Consequently, take the word 'also' with a pInch of salt.
Be'Virchas Kol Tuv,
Eliezer Chrysler