by Rabbi David Novak, Rabbi Ephraim Halivni and Recommended by UTJ
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are that of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of the Union for Traditional Judaism, unless otherwise indicated.
Commemoration of the Second Yahrzeit of Rabbi David Halivni Z”L
Recorded July 14, 2024
Please see source texts below. 0:00 Introduction 4:01 Dr. Elana Stein Hain: “Mekorot u’Mesorot Hullin”
19:03 Rabbi David Novak: “Rav Halivni and Practical Halakhah”
32:35 Rabbi Ephraim Halivni: “The Prohibition for a Mourner to Study Torah”
48:55 Baruch Weiss, Esq.: “Personal Anecdotes About My Father”
1:07:04 Closing
Babylonian Talmud Chullin 11a beginning “מנא הא מילתא דאמור רבנן זיל בתר רובא מנלן from where do we derive the principal that we act based on the majority of instances?”
Rab Halivni in Mekorot U’Mesorot on Chullin (page 268-269)
נוטה אני להניח, שהדרשות שלהאמוראים נסדרו עוד בזמן האמוראים ,והפרכות והקושיות רק בזמן הסתם, ותהיה מכאן ראיה שהאמוראים לא הקפידו לדרוש דרשה חדשה כשיש כבר דרשה קודמת, גם במקרה כמו כאן כשהדרשה אינה מבוססת על ייתור לשון. והנה אצל רב אשי אנו מוצאים שיש לו פרכא על דרשתו (“ודלמא היכא דאפשר אפשר”), ואפשר שהוא שאל זאת כדי להצדיק את הדרשות הקודמות; אבל הסתמאים טעמם שונה. הם ניסו להסביר למה אמורא זה לא קיבל את דרשתה אמורא חברו, ולא הצליחו למצוא פרכא אלא ביחס לשלושת האמוראים הראשונים. עניין זה לא ברור, וראה מ”ש לקמן, יד,ע”א וצריך עיון גדול.
Babylonian Talmud Yoma 85b beginning “מִנַּיִין לְפִקּוּחַ נֶפֶשׁ שֶׁדּוֹחֶה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת from where do we derive that saving a life overrides the laws of Shabbat?” including Samuel’s statement “אִי הֲוַאי הָתָם, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא דִּידִי עֲדִיפָא מִדִּידְהוּ: ״וְחַי בָּהֶם״ — וְלֹא שֶׁיָּמוּת בָּהֶם If I had been there, I would have said my explanation is better than theirs – ‘and live by them” and not die by them” and Rava’s statement “לְכוּלְּהוּ אִית לְהוּ פִּירְכָא, בַּר מִדִּשְׁמוּאֵל דְּלֵית לֵיהּ פִּירְכָא all of the explanations (of the Tanaim) have something that could upend them except for (the Amora) Samuel.”
Babylonian Talmud Chagigah 10a where the Mishnah notes that the biblical evidence for undoing an oath are thin and the Talmud discusses many possible supports for the concept.
Babylonian Talmud Megillah 7a where the Talmud discusses several supports for the idea that the book of Esther was written with divine inspiration including Samuel’s statement “אִי הֲוַאי הָתָם, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא מִלְּתָא דַּעֲדִיפָא מִכּוּלְּהוּ if I were there I would have said something better” and Rava saying “לְכוּלְּהוּ אִית לְהוּ פִּירְכָא, לְבַר מִדִּשְׁמוּאֵל דְּלֵית לֵיהּ פִּירְכָא all of the explanations (of the Tanaim) have something that could upend them except for (the Amora) Samuel.”
Rabbi David Novak: “Rav Halivni and Practical Halakhah”
Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 5a – Rabbi Yehudah says that when Rav went to Babylonia he could render decisions on matters of ritual law (e.g. Kashruth) and civil matters, but could not determine whether a first born animal had a blemish that would render it unfit for sacrifice and therefore could be eaten.
Rabbi Ephraim Halivni: “The Prohibition for a Mourner to Study Torah”
UTJ relies on your support to promote an open-minded approach to Torah rooted in classical sources and informed by modern scholarship. Please consider making a generous donation to support our efforts.
The UTJ recommends these articles either based on general interest, because they were produced by UTJ, or because they refer to the UTJ or Viewpoints contributors.
