It concerns me that R' Aschi wouldn't answer that he held that Tefillin can even be worn at night. Yes, he believed that it is in the realm of halakha ve-ein morim ken, and he may have indeed been concerned about his tefillin (even if the Gemarah seems to say he didn't seem concerned, which is what tipped Ravinah off, perhaps he was only a little concerned, so he was telling the truth.) But why would he not say it in a straightforward manner?
Yonatan M., Toronto, Canada
"Halachah v'Ein Morin Kein" is a principle mentioned often in Shas. It means that although a certain ruling is the Halachah, one is not allowed to teach it explicitly. Accordingly, there is no reason to think that Rav Ashi had any other motive for evading the issue. In other words, Rav Ashi declined to answer the question directly because it was forbidden to do so, and not because he was concerned about his Tefilin.
Kol Tuv,
Eliezer Chrysler
On the contrary, when the expression is used in the rest of shas, it is said in a straightforward manner. Besides, the gemarah says that a conversation within - and about - a sugya is not to be taken alibah dehilkhetah, not to be assumed as psak. So Rav Aschi really didn't have to worry about his response, particularly if he would eventually say it is halakha ve-ein morim ken, and the meandering form of this conversation is therefore unusual....
Yonatan M.
Shalom Rav,
I do not understand your point. In the words of the Gemara, Ravina realized that Rav Ashi maintains "Halachah v'Ein Morin Kein." If Ravina arrived at that conclusion, then that is what Rav Ashi maintains. What reason should there be to assume that this is not what Rav Ashi maintains?
Kol Tuv,
Eliezer Chrysler
Hello again;
I am not suggesting that it is not halakha ve-ein morim ken. All I am pointing out is that Rav Aschi answered in an unusual roundabout way. This makes me wonder if the psak of H.V.M.K. is arrived at out of doubt (i.e. without being able to establish the exact reason for Rav Ashi's behaviour, it is fairly assumed.)
Kol Tuv, YM
If Rav Ashi maintains Halachah v'Ein Morin Ken regarding Tefilin, it means that he holds 'Laylah Zman Tefilin' mid'Oraisa, but that he did not want to issue the ruling publicly because there are those who hold Laylah Lav Zman Tefilin.
The episode with Ravina in no way contradicts that. Consequently, I don't fully understand what you are trying to say. In any event, Halachah v'Ein Morin Ken is no different here than everywhere else in Shas.
B'Virkas Kol Tuv,
Eliezer Chrysler
Back when I was learning this sugya (I have since made a siyum ha-shas), I thought it was strange that Rav Ashi would answer that it was to guard the tefillin, if that wasn't his real reason. Even if he suspected that his answer would be taken as the halakha (i.e. he sensed that the conversation was heading aliba de-hilkhata), and he didn't want to be moreh that way, does halakha V.M.K. go as far as allowing one to deviate from the truth...?
J. Milevsky