דְּאִי מִכְּלָלָא, לְעוֹלָם ״אַהֲבָה רַבָּה״ הֲווֹ אָמְרִי. וְכִי מְטָא זְמַן ״יוֹצֵר אוֹר״ הֲווֹ אָמְרִי לֵיהּ. וּמַאי ״בְּרָכוֹת אֵין מְעַכְּבוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ״ — סֵדֶר בְּרָכוֹת.
The Gemara answers: If this conclusion were based on an inference, one could say that actually they recited: An abounding love, and when the time to recite: Who creates light arrived, they would recite it. In that case, what is the meaning of: Failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other? Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish meant that failure to recite the correct order of the blessings does not prevent one from fulfilling his obligation. Even if one recites: An abounding love before: Who creates light, he fulfills his obligation. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish did not refer to a case where only one of the blessings was recited. Consequently, one cannot infer from his statement his opinion regarding the identity of the single blessing.
הִקְדִּים בְּרָכָה שְׁנִיָּה לִבְרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה בֵּין בַּיּוֹם בֵּין בַּלַּיְלָה בֵּין לְפָנֶיהָ בֵּין לְאַחֲרֶיהָ יָצָא לְפִי שֶׁאֵין סֵדֶר בַּבְּרָכוֹת. בְּשַׁחֲרִית פָּתַח יוֹצֵר אוֹר וְסִיֵּם מַעֲרִיב עֲרָבִים לֹא יָצָא. פָּתַח בְּמַעֲרִיב עֲרָבִים וְסִיֵּם בְּיוֹצֵר אוֹר יָצָא. וּבָעֶרֶב פָּתַח בְּמַעֲרִיב עֲרָבִים וְסִיֵּם בְּיוֹצֵר אוֹר לֹא יָצָא. פָּתַח בְּיוֹצֵר אוֹר וְסִיֵּם בְּמַעֲרִיב עֲרָבִים יָצָא. שֶׁכָּל הַבְּרָכוֹת הוֹלְכוֹת אַחַר חֲתִימָתָן:
If one has recited the second blessing before the first, either in the Morning or in the Evening Service, and whether the blessings thus transposed are those recited before or after the Shema, he has fulfilled his duty; for no order has been statutorily fixed for the blessings. If, in the morning service, one began the first blessing with the formula, "Who createst light" and concluded it with the formula, "Who bringest on the evening twilight," he has not fulfilled his duty. But if one began with the formula, "who bringest on the evening twilight" and concluded with the formula, "who createst light" he has fulfilled his duty. Thus too, in the evening service, if one began with the formula, "who bringest on the evening twilight" and concluded with the formula, "who createst light" he has not fulfilled his duty; but if one began with the formula, "who createst light" and concluded with the formula, "who bringest on the evening twilight" he has fulfilled his duty; for the essential element in all Blessings is the Conclusion.
World of the Sages: Abundant and everlasting love (JPost. 12/5/2005)
The version of the talmudic passage that was before many codifiers presented an earlier tradition, supporting the opinion of the Rabbis that ahavat olam should be said. Consequently, these halachists ruled that ahavat olam should be said. This is the accepted ruling in the Sephardi rite and the practice in hassidic communities (Rif, 11th century, Morocco, and others). As in the version of the talmudic discussion that we have before us, others saw the earlier tradition as supporting the view of Samuel, and hence they preferred the alternative formulation - ahava rabba (quoted in Rashba).
The version of the talmudic passage that was before many codifiers presented an earlier tradition, supporting the opinion of the Rabbis that ahavat olam should be said. Consequently, these halachists ruled that ahavat olam should be said. This is the accepted ruling in the Sephardi rite and the practice in hassidic communities (Rif, 11th century, Morocco, and others). As in the version of the talmudic discussion that we have before us, others saw the earlier tradition as supporting the view of Samuel, and hence they preferred the alternative formulation - ahava rabba (quoted in Rashba).
Take a listen to this contemporary rendition of Ahavat Olam.