"כי אם בתורת ה' חפצו"
א"ר אין אדם לומד תורה, אלא ממקום שלבו חפץ, שנאמר (תהלים א, ב) "כי אם בתורת ה' חפצו"
לוי ור"ש ברבי יתבי קמיה דרבי וקא פסקי סידרא סליק ספרא.
לוי אמר לייתו [לן] משלי.
ר"ש ברבי אמר לייתו [לן] תילים.
כפייה ללוי ואייתו תילים.
כי מטו הכא "כי אם בתורת ה' חפצו" פריש רבי ואמר אין אדם לומד תורה, אלא ממקום שלבו חפץ.
אמר לוי רבי נתת לנו רשות לעמוד.
§ “But his delight is in the Torah of the Lord” (Psalms 1:2). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: A person can learn Torah only from a place in the Torah that his heart desires, as it is stated: But his delight is in the Torah of the Lord, i.e., his delight is in the part of the Torah that he wishes to study. The Gemara relates: Levi and Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, were sitting before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and they were learning the Torah portion. When they finished the book that they were learning and were ready to begin a new subject, Levi said: Let them bring us the book of Proverbs; and Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, said: Let them bring us the book of Psalms. He compelled Levi to acquiesce, and they brought a book of Psalms. When they arrived here, at the verse: “But his delight is in the Torah of the Lord,” Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi explained the verse and said: A person can learn Torah only from a place in the Torah that his heart desires. Levi said: My teacher, you have given us, i.e., me, permission to rise and leave, as I wish to study Proverbs, not Psalms.
The place that a person's heart desires - the teacher should only teach the mesechet that the student requests from him because if there is a different masechet that he wants to learn, only what he wants will retain.
לעולם ישלש אדם שנותיו. שליש במקרא, שליש במשנה, שליש בתלמוד.
מי יודע כמה חיי לא צריכא ליומי
A person should always divide his years into three parts, as follows: A third for Bible, a third for Mishna, and a third for Talmud. The Gemara asks: How can a person divide his life this way? Who knows the length of his life, so that he can calculate how long a third will be? The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary for one’s days.
ליומי - ימי השבוע:
Divide the days of the week
לא צריכא ליומי - פירש בקונטרס ימי השבת כלומר שני ימים מקרא ושני ימים משנה ושני ימים גמרא ולא נהירא דא"כ אכתי הוה מצי למיפרך מי ידע כמה חיי? ונ"ל לפרש בכל יום ויום עצמו ישלש על כן תיקן בסדר רב עמרם גאון כמו שאנו נוהגים בכל יום קודם פסוקי דזמרה לומר מקרא ומשנה וגמרא. ור"ת פי' שאנו סומכין אהא דאמרינן בסנהדרין (דף כד.) בבל בלולה במקרא במשנה ובגמרא דגמרת בבל בלול מכולם:
מאי בבל א"ר יוחנן בלולה במקרא, בלולה במשנה, בלולה בתלמוד.
The Gemara asks: What is the homiletic interpretation of the word Babylonia? Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It means mixed with Bible, mixed with Mishna, and mixed with Talmud.
... אבל כל אחד כפי מה שצריך ומועיל יותר ואומר רבינו נר״ו שאין זה אלא בתחלת תלמודו של אדם, אבל כשהאדם עומד על תלמודו ודאי צריך שיתן רוב זמנו בתלמוד ושישלים פרשיותיו עם הצבור בכל שבת, ויעיין מעט בנביאים וכתובים לפעמים.
... but each person should do what he needs and what he will gain from the most. Rabbeinu N"RV says this is only in the beginning of a person's learning, but when a person can learn Talmud, he must give most of his time for Talmud and finish the parsha with the tzibur every shabbat and learn some Nevi'im and Ketuvim sometimes.
Rabbi Moshe Taragin, https://etzion.org.il/en/dividing-ones-time-torah-study
The gemara in Kiddushin was never suggesting an equal time slice for all three, nor was it addressing the respective values of different segments. Rather, it was underscoring the incorporated nature of the three. According to Rabeinu Tam nothing highlights this integration more aptly than the study of Talmud Bavli which weaves the three together in the course of its logical development. By studying this segment a person admits the integration of the three units. Even if practically no pesukim are recited or no mishnayot studied, a person has avowed this integration - which from the beginning was the entire purpose of the gemara's statement in Kiddushin.
(כא) הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר:
בֶּן חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים לַמִּקְרָא,
בֶּן עֶשֶׂר לַמִּשְׁנָה,
בֶּן שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לַמִּצְוֹת,
בֶּן חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לַתַּלְמוּד,
בֶּן שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה לַחֻפָּה
(21) He [Yehudah ben Teima] used to say: Five years [is the age] for [the study of] Scripture, Ten [is the age] for [the study of] Mishnah, Thirteen [is the age] for [observing] commandments, Fifteen [is the age] for [the study of] Talmud, Eighteen [is the age] for the [wedding] canopy, Twenty [is the age] for pursuit
Deuteronomy 27,9. “Moses and the priests, members of the tribe of Levi, addressed all the Israelites, saying: ‘on this day you have become a nation for the Lord your G’d.’” Rashi, understands the word היום, “this day,” as a reminder to the people that each and every day should be viewed by each one of us as a new opportunity to become a servant of the Lord, or to deepen that commitment. In fact, each breath we draw presents us with new opportunities to do so. It is as if the call from Sinai, several thousand years ago, still rings in our ears, and we are invited to respond to it. This is why Moses continues in verse 10 with the words: ושמעת בקול ה' אלוקיך ועשית את מצותיו ואת חקותיו אשר אנכי מצוך היום, “you shall hearken to the voice of the Lord your G’d, and perform His commandments and His statutes which I command you this day. The thrust of the verse is that the commandments are to be as if you had heard them on this day for the first time. You should feel as if you had heard them at Mount Sinai.
Professor Robert Cover, THE SUPREME COURT 1982 TERM, http://www.depauw.edu/site/humanimalia/issue%2017/pdfs/The%20Supreme%20Court%201982%20Term%20--%20Foreword_%20Nomos%20and%20Narrative.pdf
No set of legal institutions or prescriptions exists apart from the narratives that locate it and give it meaning. For every constitution there is an epic, for each decalogue a scripture. Once understood in the context of the narratives that give it meaning, law becomes not merely a system of rules to be observed, but a world in which we live.
מדרבה ורב יוסף,
דרב יוסף סיני,
ורבה עוקר הרים.
אצטריכא להו שעתא.
שלחו להתם סיני ועוקר הרים,
איזה מהם קודם?
שלחו להו סיני קודם,
שהכל צריכין למרי חטיא.
This may be derived from an incident involving Rabba and Rav Yosef, as Rav Yosef was Sinai, extremely erudite, and Rabba was one who uproots mountains, extremely sharp. The moment arrived when they were needed; one of them was to be chosen as head of the yeshiva. They sent the following question there, to the Sages of Eretz Yisrael: Which takes precedence, Sinai or one who uproots mountains? They sent to them in response: Sinai takes precedence, for everyone needs the owner of the wheat, one who is expert in the sources.
Yitzchak Blau, Breadth, Depth and Choosing a Rosh Yeshiva, https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-1-breadth-depth-and-choosing-rosh-yeshiva
Rav Kook (Ein Ayah on Berakhot) frames the question differently. He suggests that the Sinai is able to teach the masses but the oker harim cannot because the common Jews find his abstract reasoning incomprehensible. Nevertheless, both impact on the entire population. The Sinai is able to impact directly by teaching the masses, as they understand his more straightforward approach to the material. The oker harim teaches the learned and the scholarly, who then in turn succeed in giving over some of his teaching to the broader populace. When the Rabbis decided that "All need the master of the wheat," they indicated a preference for the teacher with the ability to speak to the common Jew without the help of an intermediary.