Regarding Glosses (emphases mine)

[ymarkov]

"Rabad of Posquières" by R' Yitzhak Twerski z"l, page 155:

"For the sake of further characterization of this group of hassagot by means of comparison and contrast, mention should be made of the annotations (hagahot) of R. Moses Isserles on the Shulhan Aruk. Professor Louis Ginzberg, comparing the influence of the Mishneh Torah and the Shulhan Aruk as affected by the criticism of Rabad and Isserles respectively, has maintained that Rabad’s blunt criticism destroyed confidence in Maimonides, while Isserles’ annotations actually supplemented Karo’s code extensively, with the result that it was accepted in its corrected form. While Rabad’s critique is undoubtedly more personal than that of Isserles and stylistically harsher, it is perfectly clear that Rabad did not aim solely at sabotaging the Mishneh Torah. He did much to bolster it. As a matter of fact, together with such works as the Hagahot Maimuniyot of Franco-German provenance — which are an accurate counterpart of Isserles’ Hagahot — Rabad’s annotations may even be said to have helped supplement the Mishneh Torah, give it some local color, and bring it up-to-date. With regard to the “some-say” category of annotations in particular, there seems to be a basic difference between Rabad and Isserles; although the latter’s criticism may at first glance seem less obtrusive and more constructive, its effect was actually more damaging. For, while Isserles usually employs the “some-say” device to indicate the proper practice, prevalent custom, or most tenable theory over and against the view of Karo, Rabad uses it to present theoretical alternatives to Maimonides’ statements, to recall the other side of a standard controversy without deciding between them. Sometimes, to be sure, such an annotation intimates the proper course of action, but for the most part these hassagot are neutral. Consequently, Rabad’s strictures could often remain as companions to Maimonides’ statements, while Isserles’ annotations were designed to supersede Karo’s conclusions. They usually conclude reticently “and this is the custom” or “such is the common practice” — and custom played a key role in Isserles’ concepts of law — meaning in effect that Karo’s formulations, “holding fast to original authorities and material reasons,” were worthless. It is true that Isserles’ annotations merged formally with Karo’s text, but often only to repudiate it; Rabad’s “some-say” comments, on the other hand, are neither as exclusive nor as conclusive."

---

"Anti-Maimonidean Demons" by R' Yosef (Jose) Faur, p. 6:

"A telling detail of the anti-Maimonidean brand of scholarship is the aggressive style characterizing their writings. It attained a level of invective unprecedented in Jewish literary history. The strictures are designated hasagot (singular hasaga) meaning to “seize” a victim in hot pursuit (see Exod. 15:9, Deut. 28:45, Ps. 7:6). A more benign nomenclature is haggaha, “emendation”—a term referring to a scroll of the Torah that is “ritually void” ( pasul ); such a text may not be kept unless properly “amended.” Thus, the strategy of fault-finding, disinformation, and intimidation accepted as standard norms of “Rabbinic discourse” (both past and present)."

Comments

[malenkiy-scot.livejournal.com]

In one of the papers (I think it is "The Legal Thinking of the Tosafot") Faur writes about the importance of minchagim to the Ashkenazim, even when they contradict the Talmud. If we accept that (which I do) there was no way to make the SA palatable to them without "destroying" some parts.

[ymarkov.livejournal.com]

Which really makes R' Karo something of a tragic figure, doesn't it? He tried to unify practice via a virtual beit din, claiming in the introduction to the SA that he paskened with Rif, Rambam and Rosh - but had he really done that, he'd've ended up reproducing 99% of the Mishne Tora (rather than the about 50%), since Rambam only had a few objections to Rif's psak. So he bent over backwards mightily to incorporate Rosh's ideas - and failed to win real acceptance of his code, anyway.

[malenkiy-scot.livejournal.com]

lechaim

[ymarkov.livejournal.com]

Already?! OK...