Study of Torah in general and Gemara in particular

If you search the site, you will find many references to these questions. Search for "Why study Torah" or "The meaning of studying Gemara" and so on.

Hello, thank you very much and sorry for the delay. Maybe you have already answered this but I still haven't been able to understand. For example, each Rabbi defines the prohibition of theft differently, so we can say that these are aspects of what the will of God forbade theft. Although what exactly is the interest that our rabbis forbade, in which cases is there more semblance and in which less, I still can't understand how it is aspects of the will of God or of His wisdom, is it because He commanded us to listen to the sages that it is called aspects of the will of God? And so on with other things, how do the Rishonim break their heads in the language of the rabbinate penetrate the will of God into my bones? Here I am not dealing with breaking my head over the very will of God, after all I know a mental minority and even if I dwell on them in a dilemma that does not enter my understanding in the language of the rabbinate – There is no point in that as far as I am concerned.

Also, did I not understand what was meant by formulating my approach? Which method did I connect with the most, even though in practice I would act differently according to what was ruled in the Shulchan Arba’ah/Rama’ah because we accepted its rulings against us? Or is there a Babylonian and a Jerusalemite, and yet another that connects more with the Jerusalemite’s belief that I would act like a Babylonian because we accepted it against us?
Also, is the meaning of the “methods of the sages of the ages” the medium through which we clarify His desires expressed in the Torah. This is the meaning of tradition; is it because they are probably right, or because He told us to rule according to the sages “as far as they are concerned” and in any case their methods are His desires and somehow this is also His wisdom. If a Gentile philosopher were to define the concept of "theft" differently, would I agree with that more? It seems that there is no merit to tradition, since the fact that there are so many methods shows that these are their own beliefs.

I think I've stated this before. I really think that clarifying the laws of the rabbis is not Torah study but rather Halacha study. Simply clarifying in order to know what to do. Torah study that is adherence to one's will is only clarifying the laws of the Torah (which also includes clarifying the methods of the first and last generations regarding this Halacha from the Torah). But theft is a Torah prohibition and therefore there is value in clarifying it. If you feel that the wisdom of a Gentile will benefit you in this - by all means.

The wisdom of previous generations is because there is truth in their words. They are closer to the source (Mount Sinai), and tradition mediates this to me. This does not mean that they are necessarily right, but it is likely that the truer clarification comes through clarifying the methods of previous generations.

I have written more than once that in my opinion, according to the law, there is no obligation to act like a Sh”a or a Rama”a. You must formulate a position and act according to it. Sh”a and a Rama”a are a custom (the testimony), and in a custom one follows it only when you do not have your own position (you are in doubt). In Yerushalmi they wrote about this: “If you do not know the most beautiful of women, go out at the heels of the flock and pasture your kids at the shepherds' lodgings”. Only if you do not know yourself – then go out at the heels of the flock.

Thank you very much, food for thought. I really appreciate the reply and its speed.