It is possible to perform mountains upon mountains of laws on every point of every letter in the Torah, but only if one devotes himself to it entirely: Eruvin 21b-22a
The Talmud learning a "Derash" analysis, and then asking, "But what is the basic translation? [Pashteih diKra beMai Ketiv?]": Eruvin 23b
"Pilpul": Nedarim 38a; Temurah 16a
Asking why learn from one side, when the other side presents an equally logical argument [U'Mai Chazit]: Eruvin 37b; Megillah 17b, 18a; Temurah 12b
Arguing on the basis of an observed reality: Succah 53b
Eiruv Parshiyot - understanding verses of one section to refer to a different section: Sanhedrin 2b
Learning from the first appearance of an odd word, or only from additional appearances [Dorshin Techilot]: Sanhedrin 3b
Making analysis X, because Y isn't practical: Succah 35a
Choosing between using "Kelal/Perat" and "Ribuy/Miut": Eruvin 27b-28a; Succah 50b; Kiddushin 21b
Presenting two possible cases from which one could learn lessons for a third case, and then arguing back and forth as to which comparison to utilize ["O Kalach leDerech Zu"]: Menachot 51a; Sanhedrin 4b
How to handle two verses which prescribe details of fulfillment of a Mitzvah, of one verse's instruction seems to exclude the second's instruction, but the second verse's instruction allows for fulfillment of both that instruction and the first verse's instruction: Sotah 14b
Understanding a Torah passage to refer to males, specifically, if its language is masculine: Kiddushin 29b; Temurah 2b
Using a verse to indicate what a certain Hebrew word means, as opposed to proving the meaning from popular usage: Kiddushin 6a
Learning a law for a case involving a masculine term [Velad] from the Torah's use of an extra masculine identifier [Zachar], and a law for a case involving a female term [Temurah] from the Torah's use of an extra feminine identifier [Nekeivah]: Temurah 17b
Not learning for one case from another case which was, itself, learned from a third case [Lameid min haLameid]: Temurah 21b
Foregoing a Verse for Logic: Pesachim 21b, 25b; Ketuvot 22a; Kiddushin 35b; Sotah 7a
Stating that one could offer either logic or a verse as a rationale for an argument [Ee Ba'it Eima Kera, Ee Ba'it Eima Sevara]: Berachot 4b; Temurah 30b
Considering all species of fauna required for performance of Mitzvot, to be of the titles by which they were known when the Torah was given at Sinai: Succah 13a
A Law Spoken to Moshe at Sinai which is given a link to a verse: Yuma 71b; Succah 6a; Kiddushin 9a
"Dorshei Chamurot - Analysts of Knots of Laws": Berachot 24a; Pesachim 54a
Use of the phrase, "Analyzing a set of verses like a Knot": Kiddushin 22b [2x]
Bringing the same Law from two different Verse-Analyses [Mashmaut Dorshin]: Rosh HaShanah 20b, Yuma 60b, Bava Metzia 27a
Use of a Biblical "Zecher LeDavar [Mentioning]" of a rule, without Proof of the rule: Moed Katan 16a, 26b; Sotah 4a; Temurah 29b; Niddah 8b [2x]
Analyzing a word as it is written [Masoret], or as it is read [Mikra]: Pesachim 115b; Succah 6b, 9b, 32a, 45b; Kiddushin 18b; Makkot 7b-8a; Sanhedrin 3b-4b
A verse which is not directly relevant to the specific issue for which it is used, is a "hint [Remez]" and not a "proof": Niddah 8b
[Not] Learning two lessons from the same text: Berachot 15a; Eruvin 58a; Bava Kamma 3a
Above, where the verse specifically uses an odd word: Succah 2b
Considering grandchildren to be included in verses referring to children: Kiddushin 4a
Extrapolating Priority between Mitzvot based upon Scriptural juxtaposition: Kiddushin 29b
Asmachta - Association of a Non-Biblical Law with a Biblical Link: Eruvin 4b; Yuma 71b, 80b; Succah 6a, 28b; Pesachim 96b; Taanit 27a; Chagigah 4a; Bava Metzia 27b; Tos. Shabbot 114b #4
A verse which is repeated is repeated for some novel lesson which is thereby taught: Sotah 3a-b
Interpreting a verse based on the logical reason for its law [Doresh Taama deKera], as opposed to learning only what the verse makes explicit: Sotah 8a
"Gematria" Analyses
Gematria - Analysis of Words by Numerical Systems: Shabbat 70a, 145b, 149b; Eruvin 65a; Yuma 54a; Succah 28a, 45b; Megillah 15b; Moed Katan 17a, 19b, 28a; Nedarim 32a [2x], 32b [2x]; Makkot 23b-24a
A form of Gematria known as "ATBaH": Succah 52b
Performing a "Gematria" on a word using the form of the word as it is written, not as it is read: Megillah 15b
The "At Bash" form of Numerical Analysis: Shabbat 104a
"Kal VaChomer" - Learning More Obvious Lessons from Less Obvious Lessons
Deducing a Kal VaChomer on one's own, without a received tradition: Niddah 19b
Torah writing out something which could have been learned from a Kal VeChomer: Pesachim 16b; Kiddushin 4a, 4b
Using the Above explanation for an apparently extra text, where another explanation is possible: Kiddushin 4b
Punishment for a crime may not be deduced based on a Kal vaChomer: Makkot 5b, 14a, 17b; Temurah 9a
A Warning for a Prohibition [Azharah] can't come from a Kal VaChomer: Pesachim 24a; Makkot 5b, 17b
Learning a Kal VaChomer from a combination of cases, where each case compensates for a weakness in an argument which would have used it alone: Kiddushin 5a
A Kal VaChomer can't begin by being stringent on the Chomer part and then adding a leniency to it: Pesachim 27b; Succah 36b
A Kal VaChomer can't be learned from a Law Spoken to Moshe at Sinai: Shabbat 132a
A Kal VaChomer from a Biblical case to a Rabbinic case: Niddah 7b
A Kal VaChomer can't teach a greater stringency from the lenient side to the stringent side, than the literal rule applicable to the stringent case ["Dayo"]: Bava Metzia 41b
A Kal VaChomer which is "Pericha" - weak, due to a question against it: Kiddushin 4b [2x], 16b; Sotah 7a; Makkot 14a
Using a Kal VaChomer where there is a method of analysis which will draw an opposing conclusion: Kiddushin 14a
Using a Kal VaChomer when one already has a Mishnaic source for a ruling: Niddah 6a
A "Hi haNotenet (Hu haNotenet)" - Turning a Kal vaChomer around, so that it could actually teach a lesson opposite to the one for which it was originally brought - Makkot 2b; Sotah 7a
An irrefutable Kal vaChomer [she'ein alav teshuvah]: Berachot 23b
"Kelal UPerat", "Perat UKelal" = Principles followed by Specifications, or Vice Versa, in the Torah
How this principle interacts with the principle that there are Out-of-Order Sections of the Torah: Pesachim 6b
Learning Kelal UPerat and Perat UKelal where the Kelal and Perat are far apart in the Torah: Pesachim 6b
Example of Kelal UPerat: Makkot 13b, 14a
Example of Kelal UPerat UKelal: Eruvin 27b-28a; Succah 50b; Kiddushin 21b, 24b
When there is a Kelal, then a Perat, and then a Kelal, does the second Kelal add to the Perat, with the initial Kelal meant to include cases not excluded by the Perat and latter Kelal, or is the initial Kelal the one which sets the tone: Eruvin 28a
"Ribuy/Miut" - Extra words including/excluding Cases from a Rule
Example of Miut/Ribuy/Miut: Succah 50b; Kiddushin 21b, 37a
Examples of Ribuy/Miut/Ribuy: Eruvin 27b-28a
Examples of "Ribuy Achar Ribuy" - an Extra 'Inclusion' in a Verse following another Extra 'Inclusion': Pesachim 23a
Examples of "Miut Achar Miut" - an Extra 'Exclusion' in a Verse following another Extra 'Exclusion': Megillah 23b; Makkot 9b; Menachot 67a
"Binyan Av"
For a Sin Offering to come before a Burnt Offering: Pesachim 59a
For the structure of the Rosh HaShanah prayers: Rosh HaShanah 32a
For the structure of the Rosh HaShanah blasts of the Horn: Rosh HaShanah 34a
For defining the term "Ed [witness]" as one witness or as a set of two witnesses: Sotah 2a-b
"HaTzad HaShaveh - Meh Matzinu" = Learning from Non-Equivalent Cases, where there is Common Ground
Examples: Shabbat 132b; Kiddushin 5b [2x], 21a; Bava Kamma 6a-b; Bava Metzia 4a; Makkot 4b, 19a; Temurah 21a
Questioning the ability to use "haTzad haShaveh" if the teaching cases have aspects which are more strict than the cases for which the lesson is learned: Makkot 4b
"Gezairah Shavah" = Use of Similar [Odd] Phraseology in Separate Sections of the Torah
Requiring a tradition to use a Gezairah Shavah: Niddah 19b; Rashi Shabbat 97a "Ve'Ela", Tos. Shabbat 97a #1
Whether a Gezairah Shavah or a Hekesh (see later) has precedence: Rosh HaShanah 34a
Dividing cases which are "Mufneh" - Free for analytic borrowing - from both instances and from only one instance: Shabbat 131a
Examples of Cases involving "Mufneh" - Freedom of the words for analysis:Shabbat 131a; Rosh HaShanah 7a, 8b, 9b; Chagigah 9a; Yevamot 104a
Use of the term "Gezeirah Shavah" to refer to a rabbinic equation of concepts, rather than a biblical linkage of verses: Beitzah 12b
"Hekesh" - Linkage of Verses
Whether a Warning for a prohibition can come from a Hekesh: Pesachim 24a
On issues of Rabbinic origin, Hekesh is used leniently if given the option: Shabbat 83b
Whether a Gezairah Shavah or a Hekesh has precedence: Rosh HaShanah 34a
Determining which Hekesh to make, or whether one may make one at all, based on similarity of the subject words [veShav haKohen/uVa haKohen]: Eruvin 51a; Succah 43a; Makkot 13b; Menachot 45b
Whether a linkage may be done halfway: Nedarim 7a
Whether the subject which learns from another subject [Lamed] via a Hekesh may also then teach a lesson regarding that teaching subject [Milamed], in issues of Sanctified Offerings and in other issues: Makkot 19a-b
Analysis of Adjacent Texts [Semuchin]
Source of the power to make such an analysis: Berachot 10a
Examples: Berachot 21b; Pesachim 28b; Succah 40b; Taanit 26b; Moed Katan 28a [2x]; Sotah 2a; Makkot 23a
Analyzing adjacent paragraphs in the Torah: Kiddushin 20a
Distinguishing between Semuchin in the first four books of the Torah and in Devarim: Berachot 21b
"Ba Lidon biDavar heChadash" - A text which was dealing with one topic, and then strayed to teach a novelty
Example: Temurah 13b
"Machria" - A 3rd, Compromising Opinion
This method only works if the Machria is a true Compromise, and isn't simply expressing a 3rd opinion: Pesachim 13a, Tos. Pesachim 21a #1
Where the Machria is from a later generation: Rashi Pesachim 21a
"Davar SheHayah BeKelal VeYatza" - An Item which left its group to be mentioned individually
