Zvachim Daf 36 - sacrificed - Rabbi Yehuda incompetent method of thought
incompetent method of thought
Stated in the Mishna, on a EA;
"Slaughtered to let the blood or tomorrow or Lhucian Aimoriu Rabbi Yehuda rule out smart Machshiarin"
Over a page, the Talmud discusses the method of Rabbi Judah. Among other things, discusses his view original Talmud. At first, she brings as the multiplication prohibitions, not leaving and will not allow. This is rejected, both because it is a source of Jewish Thought expense, and because oil baraita clearly means that Rabbi Judah relies on Sabra, that any rule, even thought it rejects. Therefore, the Gemara concludes that Sabra is the basis of the method of Rabbi Yehuda.
Although the words of the Vilna Gaon, Vilna Gaon in his commentary on the sub-dens, meaning that he understood Shlmsknat issue remains able to see the verse that deals with the source remains. In his opinion, setting the Gemara later - according Derby crowns Terms of Judea, is a statement that allows us to see the question of the origin of Rabbi Yehuda intractable issues.
How was this conclusion Gaon, hanging the origin of Rabbi Yehuda controversial method further conditions page?
If we look into the issue further, it seems that those "conditions according Derby crowns Judah, were divided over whether Rabbi Yehuda rejects external sin in thought to blood. To know one Tanna Rabbi Judah does rule out such a sin, while knowing his friend - not. Second opinion proves the claim by the fact that Rabbi Yehuda believes even though the person is not only calculated, but actually did put the blood of the sin offering outside in, not the victim was disqualified.
Add (DH Ahacha) wondered about this evidence - finally, the man who threw some of the blood outside or eat a tiny bit did not rule out the victim, and to sacrifice what kosher was not. And yet, a man who thought to get some blood or eat a tiny bit Outside invalidate the entire offering.
Can be explained, this question itself divided into two conditions. First Tanna said that as in other thoughts, thought rejects the victim, even in places forgotten by the act was not enough for this. But opinion was that since the second sage Rabbi Yehuda does not learn from a verse, but believed that computer to do something wrong - rule out, then resume his method can not be wrong to think about things that do not disqualify themselves.
Should from now - according to the study is the first Tanna from Sabra, hence Dyke Gaon we can not but say that Tanna learned from the verses cited above.
Moreover, in the words of the first Tanna also sits Koshiitah of the Talmud, where we thought Accountant Lhucian wrong. After all, explicitly stated -
"Rabbi Yehuda says something bad jam here ... sin entered the dummy forward unacceptable."
The question of whether the source of Rabbi Judah in verse or Sabra, can be very significant for understanding the method. Sabra and it raised the Gemara assumes that unacceptable because we see you think like he did. Already clear why where doing not ruled out any thought of not Atpsul. But Tanna learner from the verse does not understand that the trash. In his opinion, thought itself is relating, not because we see her actions.
Rabbi Baruch Weintraub