"Não há qualquer possibilidade de existência de uma diretriz que não possa ser cumprida justamente pelo descumprimento",
From "A Alma Imoral", Nilton Bonder
אָמַר רַבִּי אַחָא בַּר חֲנִינָא: גָּלוּי וְיָדוּעַ לִפְנֵי מִי שֶׁאָמַר וְהָיָה הָעוֹלָם שֶׁאֵין בְּדוֹרוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי מֵאִיר כְּמוֹתוֹ, וּמִפְּנֵי מָה לֹא קָבְעוּ הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ? שֶׁלֹּא יָכְלוּ חֲבֵירָיו לַעֲמוֹד עַל סוֹף דַּעְתּוֹ. שֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר עַל טָמֵא טָהוֹר וּמַרְאֶה לוֹ פָּנִים, עַל טָהוֹר טָמֵא וּמַרְאֶה לוֹ פָּנִים.
On the topic of Rabbi Meir and his Torah study, the Gemara cites an additional statement. Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina said: It is revealed and known before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that in the generation of Rabbi Meir there was no one of the Sages who is his equal. Why then didn’t the Sages establish the halakha in accordance with his opinion? It is because his colleagues were unable to ascertain the profundity of his opinion. He was so brilliant that he could present a cogent argument for any position, even if it was not consistent with the prevalent halakha. As he would state with regard to a ritually impure item that it is pure, and display justification for that ruling, and likewise he would state with regard to a ritually pure item that it is impure, and display justification for that ruling. The Sages were unable to distinguish between the statements that were halakha and those that were not.
תָּנָא: תַּלְמִיד וָתִיק הָיָה בְּיַבְנֶה שֶׁהָיָה מְטַהֵר אֶת הַשֶּׁרֶץ בְּמֵאָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים טְעָמִים.
It was taught in a baraita: There was a distinguished disciple at Yavne who could with his incisive intellect purify the creeping animal, explicitly deemed ritually impure by the Torah, adducing one hundred and fifty reasons in support of his argument.
Maarit Aiin
אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁאָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן — אֲפִילּוּ בְּחַדְרֵי חֲדָרִים אָסוּר.
Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Wherever the Sages prohibited an action due to the appearance of prohibition, even in the innermost chambers, where no one will see it, it is prohibited. When prohibiting an action, the Sages did not distinguish between different circumstances. They prohibited performing the action in all cases.
(כב) וְנִכְבְּשָׁ֨ה הָאָ֜רֶץ לִפְנֵ֤י ה' וְאַחַ֣ר תָּשֻׁ֔בוּ וִהְיִיתֶ֧ם נְקִיִּ֛ם מֵה' וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְ֠הָיְתָ֠ה הָאָ֨רֶץ הַזֹּ֥את לָכֶ֛ם לַאֲחֻזָּ֖ה לִפְנֵ֥י ה'׃
(22) and the land has been subdued, at the instance of the LORD, and then you return—you shall be clear before the LORD and before Israel; and this land shall be your holding under the LORD.
'O "errado" assumira a dimensão do "certo". '
From "A Alma Imoral", Nilton Bonder
Pikuach Nefesh
עֻבָּרָה שֶׁהֵרִיחָה, מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתָהּ עַד שֶׁתָּשִׁיב נַפְשָׁהּ. חוֹלֶה מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּי בְקִיאִין. וְאִם אֵין שָׁם בְּקִיאִין, מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ, עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר דָּי:
With regard to a pregnant woman who smelled food and was overcome by a craving to eat it, one feeds her until she recovers, as failure to do so could lead to a life-threatening situation. If a person is ill and requires food due to potential danger, one feeds him according to the advice of medical experts who determine that he indeed requires food. And if there are no experts there, one feeds him according to his own instructions, until he says that he has eaten enough and needs no more.
תַּנְיָא, רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: תִּינוֹק בֶּן יוֹמוֹ חַי — מְחַלְּלִין עָלָיו אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, דָּוִד מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵת — אֵין מְחַלְּלִין עָלָיו אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. תִּינוֹק בֶּן יוֹמוֹ חַי מְחַלְּלִין עָלָיו אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, אָמְרָה תּוֹרָה: חַלֵּל עָלָיו שַׁבָּת אַחַת, כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּשְׁמוֹר שַׁבָּתוֹת הַרְבֵּה. דָּוִד מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵת אֵין מְחַלְּלִין עָלָיו, כֵּיוָן שֶׁמֵּת אָדָם בָּטֵל מִן הַמִּצְוֹת. וְהַיְינוּ דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: ״בַּמֵּתִים חׇפְשִׁי״ — כֵּיוָן שֶׁמֵּת אָדָם, נַעֲשָׂה חׇפְשִׁי מִן הַמִּצְוֹת.
Incidental to the Gemara’s discussion of corpses, it cites that which was taught in a baraita: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: For a living day-old baby, one desecrates Shabbat to save his life. Yet for the deceased David, king of Israel, one does not desecrate Shabbat. For a day-old baby we desecrate Shabbat because the Torah says: Desecrate one Shabbat for him so that he can observe many Shabbatot. But for the deceased David, king of Israel, one does not desecrate Shabbat, as once a person dies he is idle from mitzvot. And this is what Rabbi Yoḥanan said with regard to the verse: “Set apart among the dead [bametim ḥofshi], like the slain that lie in the grave, whom You remember no more” (Psalms 88:6). Once a person dies, he becomes free [ḥofshi] from the mitzvot.