Re: Learning Properly
Question
I dont understand why you need to be agressive in your responses; I am just trying to ask a question. However, just to prove my follow up question was not baseless I have copied and pasted you 2 responses here: "It's hard to address your question when you have not mentioned a Gemara somewhere or a Pasuk in the Torah.... All your arguments are baseless. You ask, "where is the thinking?" Well, did you prove that there is such a requirement? "When does a leearner get to break down a Sugya...?" What if never? You can't build an argument based on a feeling that something should be a certain way. Open the Good Book and present some backing to your statements. Of course there isn't any.... Then after I quoted you 2 (of the many that I could have) sources for the role of sevara you responded: "You prove that Pilpul, Lehavin Davar Mitoch Davar (a deeper level of analysis) is a good thing, I'll grant you that. But I never disputed that. I merely said that "PRIOR" to studying in that way, one must first go through Sha"s. Ligmor VeHadar Lisvor, first you must learn through, and only then may you get into the Sevara, the reasons and the depth." Your contradictions are clear. In your 1st response you told me there was no basis form my claim that analyzation had a role in learning and in your 2nd you told me you never disputed that. This is what prompted my response, thus making your final statement to me ("If you didn't understand that, how can you analyze a Sugya?") misguided and disrespectful. Thank you for adressing my questions. Joey
Answer
Answered by Aaron AbadiOy vey! I made two points. Number one that the Gemaras & Sefarim all say "Ligmor Vehadar Lisvor (learn and then go into depth). And number two, that you built a question on a feeling, without even feeling the need to backup what you wrote. Then you brought a proof to a point that I technically was not disputing and if you follow the posts here, you'll see that I have nothing against learning in depth, as long as it is in the proper time. If you want to even begin a discussion on this topic, first you must give a solid explanation why we are not to follow the Gemara and all the others that clearly require us to first study Sha"s and only then learn in depth. If you cannot address that intelligently, then kindly don't waste everyone's time. That was my entire point to you. You have an opinion. You see things in a certain light. Yet you do not feel the need to look into the Torah, and say "what does the Torah want from me." Your whole question is based on your insight. That is exactly what is wrong with studying in depth prior to learning Sha"s. I don't expect you to understand. AA