Chapter 2 · פרק ב

However, the principal parts of the dialectic, from which all the sugyot are built, throughout the entire Talmud — are seven:

statement (meimra), question, answer, contradiction, proof, difficulty, and resolution.

And this is their explanation:

Statement (meimra) — this is when a speaker states a statement.

Question — when one person seeks from another the knowledge of some matter.

Answer — when the respondent replies to the questioner concerning his question.

Contradiction — when a statement that has been made is annulled and denied altogether.

Proof — when something is brought from which the truth of one of the statements that were made, or of the opinions that were held, becomes clear.

Difficulty — when one shows there to be, in one of the statements or one of the opinions, something that is not true or something that is not fitting.

Resolution — when the difficulty is removed from the statement, or the opinion, against which it was raised.

Now each one of these parts divides further into other parts, and they will be explained further on, with the help of Heaven.

What you need to know is this: all of this dialectic is founded upon primary foundations that exist in the nature of our intellect,

in accordance with which it conducts itself in understanding a statement that is stated and in accepting one of the opinions or denying them;

for it is upon these foundations that all the difficulties and resolutions, the proofs and oppositions, and likewise all the other parts distinguished within it, are built.

For example, when they said (Berachot 4) [ed. Berachot 15a], "'One who recites' [the Shema without making it audible to his ear, has fulfilled his obligation] — after the fact, yes; from the outset, no" (דיעבד — אין, לכתחלה — לא):

now this is founded on what is conceived in our intellect from this wording — that the intention of the one who said it was to speak of one who has already recited;

and the opposite of this (Chullin 2): "all may slaughter" — [that is, permitted] from the outset, because the nature of the language so indicates to us.

Likewise, when they raised the difficulty in the Talmud (Pesachim 4) [ed. Pesachim 4b], "This 'all are believed' [concerning the removal of leaven] — it should have said (מבעי לה) 'all the houses are presumed to have been searched,'"

this difficulty was founded on the fact that the nature of the language — this wording of "all are believed" — indicates that the ruling mentioned there depends on all being believed concerning the search;

whereas according to what the Talmud wishes to establish there, it does not truly depend on that, but rather on the presumption regarding the houses being that they have been searched,

and nature indicates to us that when we wish to state this matter, we would state it only in wording such as this: "all the houses are presumed to have been searched."

Likewise all the difficulties, every one of them, and all the resolutions, and all the other parts of analytical argument — when you truly investigate them, you will find them founded on foundations like these:

matters engraved in the nature of intellectual understanding, which the human intellect affirms as necessary of its own accord, without needing any study for this at all.

However, the operations of the intellect in its intellection are three:

The first — the conception of matters and the understanding of statements and lines of reasoning (sevarot) as they are.

The second — the derivation of their conclusions.

The third — accepting them or denying them.

And in all of them it proceeds and conducts itself according to the foundations engraved in it by nature, as we have mentioned and as you will further see below, with God's help.

And now let us explain them in their particulars, each and every one by itself.