Comprehensive Vocab- Talmud Fall 2013 Flashcards
חכ”א
חכמים אומרים
ב”ה\ב”ש
בית הלל\בית שמאי
איקלעו (איקלע)
he came (to) (they came [to])
טפי
more/more so/even more
נמנע
refrain
ממילא
of itself, “automatically”
אתמר \ איתמר
It was stated
-Introduces an amoraic
statement or topic of
discussion
למ”ד
למאן דאמר
פירקא
study session
כי תניא ההיא
When that was taught (it was in reference to...) -Resolves a difficulty or rejects a proof by limiting the scope of the tannaitic source under discussion.
רמינהו
(And) pit them (against each other) (i.e., note the contradiction between them) -Points out an apparent contradiction between two sources (one already cited, one about to be cited) of equal authority
מאי קרא
What is the verse?
-What is the scriptural source
for the halakha or aggada
that has just been stated?
שרי
permitted מתר
ת”ש
תא שמע
קשיין אהדדי
They contradict each other!
-Points out that two sources
just cited appear to
contradict each other.
דתניא
As it is taught
-Introduces a tannaitic source being brought as a support.
אחד… ואחד…
… and … are the same/have the same rule
ל”ק
לא קשיא
תיובתא
[this is] a refutaton -Indicates that an amoraic statement/view has been conclusively refuted (usually based on a tannaitic source); the discussion is thereby closed.
מאן דהוא
someone
אעפ”כ
אף על פי כן
עדיף
better, superior, preferable
שמעתא
teaching
תפשוט מינה
derive from it
כוותיה
like him
כ… דמי
it is like…
אמר לך ר פלוני
Rabbi Ploni would/could say to you -Provides an argument or response that a rabbi could have made to a challenge (but didn’t make himself)
(תשמיש (המטה
sex
מכלל
it implies
מאי לאו א\ל
Is it not [referring] to...? -Proposes a particular interpretation of/assumption about a passage or statement just cited. The response is usually לא, no - the assumption is not correct
למיפק
to go out (יוצא)
תניא נמי הכי
PROOF
It is also taught thus -Introduces a tannaitic source that corroborates something that has just been stated or concluded.
מיהו
however
חד אמר… וחד אמר
One says… and one (the other) says…
-This phrase is used for a debate
between two rabbis, when it is not
known which one held which view
הכי גרסינן
We read thus
-Used by Rashi and Rishonim
to indicate a preferred
version of the Talmud text
לא שנו אלא… אבל
They only taught... but... -An amora limits the scope of a tannaitic source: this source only applies to the following circumstances (but under other circumstances a different rule would apply)
ובלבד ש…
provided that,,,/but only if…
אע”פ
אף על פי
מילתא
thing/word
ת”ר
תנו רבנן
ההוא מיבעי ליה ל…
That is needed by him for…
-Responds to/resolves a suggestion that a biblical
expression is unusual or superfluous.
איידי ד…
since
הכי נמי
here too
תנא דידן
our tanna, i.e., the anonymous tanna of the mishnah under discussion
דלמא
maybe/perhaps
ואילך
and onwards
מר… ומר…
One master (rabbi)… and/while the (other) master…
-A formula to present an explanation of
a controversy between two authorities.
שמע מינה #
Derive from it # (of legal conclusions)
-Indicates that a certain number of conclusions -
which will then been enumerated - can be drawn
from the source or case just cited.
לימא כתנאי
Shall we say this is like the tannaim? -Based on this citation of scripture, wouldn’t a certain conclusion be obvious? Therefore, the text must be teaching something additional.
פלוני היינו אלמוני
(The view of) Ploni is the same as the (view of) Almoni! -A problem - two tannaim in one source have made separate statements that appear to be the same or have the same practical import (one or the other is thus redundant).
אי נמי
or else, alternatively
-Introduces another alternative of whatever just
appeared - another answer, another explanation,
another source, etc.
ואמרי לה
and some say it -Gives an alternate version of who transmitted a tradition, or sometimes of the content of the tradition itself.
למאן דאמר
according to the one who says
נמצא
lit.: it was found - i.e., it turned out
תיקו
Let it stand (sometimes taken to be an abbreviation for תשבי יתרץ קושיות ובעיות)
-Leaves a question/topic of
discussion unresolved
אין
yes
לכתחילה
from the outset/ to begin with
ה”ג
הכי גרסינן
עד כאן לא קאמר… אלא
Ploni only said... [what he said]... up to this point, but... -Limits the scope of a halakhah or controversy - what Ploni said only applies in that case/specific scenario, but in a different case/scenario, he might/would say something different.
תיובתא דפלוני תיובתא
This refutation of Ploni is a (conclusive) refutation -The conclusion of a challenge to the position of an amora - the challenge (usually from a tannaitic source) is valid and the amora refuted.
ב”ד
בית דין
אלא מעתה
But from now -A challenge - if what has just been said/proposed is right, the following problematic conclusion would follow
בשלמא … אלא …
This is reasonable... but... -An attack/challenge - one side or position can be understood because..., but the other side or position has the following problem
א”י
ארץ ישראל
איכא בינייהו
There is (this difference) between them. -Resolves an apparent redundancy between two views by presenting a scenario in which there is a practical/halakhic difference between them
שאני
It is different -Resolves a challenge, difficulty, or apparent contradiction between sources/cases
אפי
אפילו
כיצד
how/how so?
(כללו של דבר (כללא דמילתא
The rule of the matter is -Formulates a general principle that is operating in the case(s) previously presented.
דילמא
maybe/perhaps
תנא קמא
the first tanna - i.e., the “author” of an anonymous statement which opens a mishnah or beraitta
בין… בין
whether… or…
במה דברים אומרים
Regarding what are the(se) words said?
-Used (usually in/in reference to tannaitic sources) to limit the scope of a previous statement or ruling to a
specific scenario or set of circumstances
איכא דמתני לה\להא א…
There are those who teach it (in reference) to... -There are those who say that the previous amoraic statement applies to the following case/tannaitic source, rather than in reference to the case/source mentioned earlier.
הן הן
these (are)…
אזדא\אזלא)ר פלוני לטעמיה)
R. Ploni (goes) [according to] his (own)
reason/principle; Ploni is consistent with his view (elsewhere)
-The rule just stated by an amora is
consistent with the underlying
principle of another halakha that he
has stated elsewhere (and which will
now be cited here).
מעשה ו…
(There was) a case…/It happened once that…
בזיון
disgrace, disrespect
בעלמא
in general
יחידאה
individual/ lone (view)
ר”ל
רצונו לומר
ה”נ
הכי נמי
א”נ
אי נמי
מאן דאמר
the one who said
היכי
how
ע”כ
עד כאן
נפיק מינה
What is derived from it (is)… (Literally:
What comes out from it)
-The practical/halakhic difference it makes is…
Explains a case or scenario in which the
difference between two viewpoints or
explanations (or, in our case, two different
circumstances) would result in a practical
difference/result.
תסתיים
Conclude/clarify -When the gemara has cited a dispute in which it is not known which person took which position, this term introduces an attempt to prove that one of the authorities may reasonably associated with one of the positions (and the other with the other position).
לא שנא… לא שנא…
There is no difference between … and…
ע”ג
על גבי
verb + הדר
do (verb) again/repeatedly
כי היכי
just as
מכאן ואילך
from here/now on
מעיקרא
from the outset
אמר מר
The master has stated -Introduces a quotation from a (usually tannaitic) source already cited, in order to comment on it
דאי לא תימא הכי
For if you do not say this/so -Supports an argument or explantion by suggesting that if it is not accepted, the other possible alternative cannot be true
שמא
lest
כל שכן
all the moreso
מנין\מניין
From where (is it derived)? -Seeks (usually) the scriptural source of a statement under discussion.
ליכא ל… +(verb)
there is no [basis] to (verb_, it is not possible to (verb)
(ממאי… (דלמא
From what (what is your proof)...? (Perhaps...) -Introduces a challenge questioning the assumptions underlying something that has just been said - perhaps there is another plausible explanation...
ואימא
Say…!
-Proposes a change, in a text or in interpretation; can be a challenge to/rejection of a proposal, or a resolution to a question.
מנו
who is he/it?
אטו
is it/is that to say… (?!)
-Introduces a rhetorical question
(usually one of astonishment)
ותניא אידך
And another (beraitta) is taught -Introduces a second tannaitic source that (usually...) contradicts one that has just been cited.
תנו רבנן
Our rabbis taught -Introduces a tannaitic source (usually one that begins with an anonymous statement), to begin a discussion on it.
חמיו\ חמותו
his father-in-law/mother-in-law
ביהכ”נ
בית הכנסת
אף על פי כן
even so/nevertheless
קשיא
It is difficult -When appearing after a challenge/at the end of a sugya, this means the difficulty that has been raised remains unresolved
עד ש (+verb)
until
הלכך
therefore
מי איכא
is there (such a thing/view)?
אע”ג
אף על גב
גבו
within
איני והא
Is that so?! But…!
-Introduces a contradiction/challenge to what has just
been said or cited.
שכיב
died
תא שמע
Come and hear
-Introduces a source that will
be used to try to answer the
larger question on the table
כ”ש
כל שכן
יצא ידי …
fulfilled the obligation/mitzvah of…
ממשמע שנאמר… איני יודע
From the implication of what is said (in scripture)... do I not know... -Based on this citation of scripture, wouldn’t a certain conclusion be obvious? Therefore, the text must be teaching something additional.
