Texts
Explore
Community
Donate
Log in
Sign up
Site Language
עברית
English
Svara
Halakhic Principles
Sources
A
Similarly,
Rava said: The reward for
learning the halakhic
traditions
of the
amora’im
is
for
the logical
analysis, as the primary reward for studying Talmud was not given for knowing the halakhic conclusions, but for the logical reasoning that led to those conclusions.
Berakhot 6b:13
Ameimar says: The
halakha
is that
letters are acquired by
merely
transferring
the document to the buyer,
in accordance with
the opinion of
Rabbi
Yehuda HaNasi.
Rav Ashi said to Ameimar:
Is your ruling based on
a tradition or
on your own
logical reasoning?
Ameimar
said to him:
It is based on
a tradition. Rav Ashi said: It also
stands to
reason
that the contents of a promissory note are acquired through transferring,
as letters,
i.e., the contents of a promissory note,
are words,
i.e…
Bava Batra 77a:1
Abaye continued:
And removal of ashes
from
the inner altar precedes the removal of ashes from five
of the seven
lamps
of the candelabrum.
What is the reason
for this?
Abaye said: I learned
this
through tradition;
however,
I do not know the rationale
behind it.
And Rava said:
The reason is
in accordance with
the statement of
Reish Lakish, as Reish Lakish said: One may not forego
performance
of
any of
the mitzvot
in order to perform another mitzva.
Yoma 33a:12
Abaye said to him: Is that to say
that
anyone who does not know this
halakha
of Rabbi Yitzḥak is not a great man? Granted,
with regard to
a matter that depends on reasoning, it is well,
as it is possible to say that an individual who does not know a
halakha
that can be inferred by logical reasoning cannot be considered a reliable authority. However,
this
halakha
is a tradition, and
it is possible that Rabbi Evyatar simply
did not hear
this
tradition.
Gittin 6b:10
With regard to the aforementioned verse from Ecclesiastes,
Rava said: If you see a student whose studies are
as
difficult for him as iron,
this is
due to his teacher, who does not show him a friendly countenance,
but is overly strict with him. This practice inhibits the student’s learning,
as it is stated: “And it has not whetted the surface [
panim
]”
(Ecclesiastes 10:10). As explained previously,
panim
can also mean countenance.
Taanit 8a:4
The Gemara continues: It is stated:
“And the Lord spoke unto Moses, face to face”
(Exodus 33:11).
Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Moses: Moses, you and I will show cheerful faces in
the study of
halakha
to those who come to study.
Some say
that
the Holy One, Blessed be He, told Moses: Just as I showed you a cheerful face, so too you will show Israel a cheerful face and restore the tent to its place
in the camp.
Berakhot 63b:7
The Gemara comments:
Granted, there is no difficulty between
the accounts in the two sources with regard to
service and service,
as it can be suggested as follows: Rabbi Meir
initially came
to study
before Rabbi Akiva, and since he was unable to comprehend
the teachings
in accordance with his
opinion,
he came before Rabbi Yishmael and studied the tradition, and again came before Rabbi Akiva and studied logical
analysis. After studying the basic principles from Rabbi Yishmael, he was able to understand the more complex teachings of Rabbi Akiva.
Eruvin 13a:14
§ It is taught in the mishna: If one read the Megilla
while he is dozing off, he has fulfilled his
obligation. The Gemara asks:
What are the circumstances of
the case of
dozing off? Rav Ashi said:
It is referring to a situation in which one is
asleep yet not
fully
asleep, awake yet not
fully
awake. If someone calls him he answers. And he is
in a mental state in which
he does not know
how
to provide
an answer that requires logical
reasoning, but when people remind him
about something that has happened,
he remembers
it.
Megillah 18b:9
Although the practical difference between these two positions is clear, the Gemara seeks to determine:
With regard to what do they disagree?
What is the basis of their argument? The Gemara answers:
If you wish, say
that they disagree over the interpretation of
a verse; if you wish, say
instead that they disagree on a point of
logic.
If you say
that they disagree on a point of
logic,
then the argument relates to the redemption recited after
Shema
, whose focus is the exodus from Egypt, the first redemption…
Berakhot 4b:7-10
The Gemara asks:
Why do I
need to derive this from
the verse? It is
based on
logic: He rendered her forbidden and he rendered her permitted. Rather, where this verse is necessary, is
in order
to
derive the
halakha
that Rav Huna said
that
Rav said, as Rav Huna said
that
Rav said: From where in the Torah
is it derived that
a father is deemed credible to render his daughter forbidden?
It is derived
as it is stated: “I gave my daughter to the man [
la’ish
]”
(Deuteronomy 22:16)…
Ketubot 22a:7
Rav Ḥisda said to the Sages
who were studying with him:
I wish to say something to you, but I am afraid that
then
you will leave me and go.
What did he wish to tell them? He wanted to say that
anyone who learns Torah from one teacher
alone
never sees a sign of blessing.
When the students heard this, they
did
in fact
leave him and went
to learn
from Rava.
Rav Ḥisda
said to them: That matter
applies only with regard to
reasoning,
i.e…
Avodah Zarah 19a:19
The Gemara answers:
When Rav says
his statement, he is referring to not every student, but only those
such as Rav Kahana and Rav Asi, who needed
to learn
the
halakhic
traditions of Rav, but they did not need
to learn
the reasoning of Rav,
as they were capable of conducting their own analysis.
Sanhedrin 36b:1
R. Joshua b. Levi said: With regard to the
’aggadta
, he who writes it down has no share in the world to come, he who expounds it is cursed, while he who listens to it receives no reward.
R. Ḥinnena b. Papa taught:
The Lord spoke with you face to face
—
face
implies two,
to face
also implies two, thus providing four expressions of ‘face’ [alluding to] Scripture, Mishnah,
halakoth
and
’aggadoth;
an awestruck face for Scripture, a neutral face for Mishnah, a friendly face for
Shas
and a smiling face for
’aggadta
.
Tractate Soferim 16:2
On the topic of the steady decline of the generations,
Abaye said: And we,
as far as our capabilities are concerned,
are like a peg in the wall with regard to
Torah
study.
Just as a peg enters a wall with difficulty, our studies penetrate our minds only with difficulty.
Rava said: And we are like a finger in wax [
kira
] with regard to logical reasoning.
A finger is not easily pushed into wax, and it extracts nothing from the wax.
Rav Ashi said: We are like a finger in a pit with regard to forgetfulness…
Eruvin 53a:19
Rabbi Abbahu says:
Rav’s statement is discussing a case of
one who says: My
monetary
valuation is
incumbent
upon me
to donate. If the
priest came to collect movable property from him
to pay the vow, it must be evaluated
by three
experts, and if he came to collect
land
it must be evaluated
by ten. Rav Aḥa of Difti said to Ravina: Granted, to take out
property
from consecration
by redeeming it
we require
a panel of
three
experts, because if an error is made in the calculation…
Sanhedrin 15a:3-4
With regard to studying Torah in the
sukka
, the Gemara asks:
Is that so? Didn’t Rava say: Studying Bible and studying Mishna
are undertaken
in the
sukka
;
however,
analyzing
the Mishna must be undertaken
outside the
sukka
.
This indicates that one should not analyze Torah in the
sukka
. The Gemara answers: It is
not difficult. This
baraita
, where it was taught that one studies in the
sukka
, is
with regard to extensive study,
i.e., broad study and memorization…
Sukkah 28b:10-29a:1
Rav Kahana said
about this:
When I was eighteen years old and
had already
learned the entire Talmud, and
yet
I did not know that a verse does not depart from its literal meaning until now.
The Gemara asks:
What is
Rav Kahana
teaching us
with that statement? The Gemara answers: He comes to teach
that a person should
first
learn and then understand
the rationale.
Shabbat 63a:15
§ The mishna teaches:
And one of
the judges
knew that they erred, or
if he was
a student and
he is
qualified to issue
halakhic
rulings.
The Gemara asks:
Why do I
need
two
cases? As a student qualified to issue halakhic rulings is the equivalent of one of the judges, why did the
tanna
mention both?
Rava said: It was necessary
to state both, as it may
enter your mind to say
that
this statement
that he is liable applies specifically to one who is
learned and analytical…
Horayot 2b:2-3
The Gemara returns to the matter at hand:
Apparently,
Rabbi Akiva
learned
the
halakhot
of gathering cucumbers through sorcery
from Rabbi Eliezer,
not from Rabbi Yehoshua. The Gemara answers:
He learned it from Rabbi Eliezer but he did not understand it. Later he learned it from Rabbi Yehoshua, and
Rabbi Yehoshua
explained it to him.
Sanhedrin 68a:11
Rava
also
taught: What is
the meaning of that
which is written: “And besides being wise, Koheleth also taught the people knowledge; and he weighed, and sought out, and set in order many proverbs”
(Ecclesiastes 12:9). Rava interpreted homiletically:
He taught the people knowledge,
meaning
he taught it with the accentuation marks
in the Torah,
and
he
explained
each matter
by means of
something
similar to it.
Eruvin 21b:22
Related
ראו גם
Human Knowledge
Discernment
Learning
Prophecy
Sheets
דפי מקורות
Related Sheets
We use cookies to give you the best experience possible on our site. Click OK to continue using Sefaria.
Learn More
.
OK
אנחנו משתמשים ב"עוגיות" כדי לתת למשתמשים את חוויית השימוש הטובה ביותר.
קראו עוד בנושא
לחצו כאן לאישור