Indecision

People are impressed with decisive leaders. We like to know that the people in charge have a clear idea of what to do. Unfortunately, that’s not always possible. Sometimes we’re caught between Scylla and Charybdis (I’m also on the Odyssey bandwagon.), or as David Hamelech described it: MIN HAMEITZAR (‘out of the narrow straights’). There is no good or definitive solution to the conundrum.

Then what do we do? Well, actually, this week’s Torah reading answers that very question: If a case is too baffling for you to decide, be it a controversy over homicide, civil law, or assault—matters of dispute in your courts—you shall promptly repair to the place that the ETERNAL your God will have chosen (Devarim 17:9).

In other words, go to Yerushalayim, and the great scholars and leaders there will tell you what to do. Then your obligation is clear: You shall do precisely as they instruct you…do not deviate right or left (verses 10 & 11).

Sounds fine to me. There’s a problem, and the Torah provides a clear solution to said problem. Well, maybe.

This system seems to work well when we have the Great Court sitting in proximity to the Beit Hamikdash. Then the Sanhedrin votes and we get a solution to the issue. Sadly, we have not had a Sanhedrin since the Romans closed down the final incarnation of the Great Court in T’veria in 425 CE. What do we do now?

Before we go on, I must interject a caveat. There are many authorities who claim that the main topic introduced by our verse isn’t exactly the problem of reaching a definitive conclusion to a Halachic problem. Instead, we’re setting up the conditions under which a rebellious scholar would be executed. We’re not finding a definitive answer as much as forcing all authorities to be on the same page when a ruling is issued.

In that case, we’re not necessarily saying that every problem has a clear cut solution. Instead, we’re saying that when there is an ultimate Torah authority in existence, everyone must follow that ruling. It’s okay to express another opinion, but the majority decision must be followed.

Okay, all of this is cool. But what do we do when there is no Sanhedrin, no ultimate authority, no Supreme Court? I was recently in a store which had a sign which read: All arguments are resolved with Rock, Paper, Scissors! Fine, but I think that we can do better.

 Rav Hirsch describes the role of the Supreme Court as: the highest ultimate authority on whose shoulders rests the responsibility for the authentic tradition and interpretation of the Torah, as well as making all arrangements for its being kept correctly.

But what happens when the issue isn’t one of ‘authentic tradition’? Like when the problem is something which never existed before like electricity or steam power. 

Well, let’s go back to the verse: If a case is too baffling. The Hebrew is Ki YIPALE MIMCHA DAVAR. Let’s translate it as: If a matter is too wondrous for you. What happens when the issue looks like a miracle because it’s a new phenomenon, like electricity. Remember: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic (Arthur C. Clark)

Then we need a true genius to unravel these unforeseen wonders. Thank God, we’re Jews and every Jewish grandchild is a genius. So, now the problem is: Which genius to listen to?

Well, thank God, again, that question has been answered, too. Beit Hillel and Beit Shamai argued for generations and finally the Gemara concluded: When there is an argument between Beit Hillel and Beit Shamai, the ruling follows Beit Hillel. That is indeed true, but there are 24 exceptions to that rule (18 cases in Shabbat 13b and 6 cases in Eduyot) which I will now ignore.

So, why do we follow Beit Hillel? The simple answer is that they were the majority during the Sanhedrin period. I’d love to state: Because they were lenient. However, the famous answer is: They were NOCHIN and ALUVIN, and they would always teach Beit Shamai’s opinion before recording their own (Eiruvin 13b).

What is NOCHIN and ALUVIN? NOCHIN seems to mean ‘nice’ or ‘pleasant’. Seems NOACH is related to rest, then, perhaps, ‘laid back’. And ALUVIN? Standard translation: ‘patient’. Others render it ‘forbearing’. They were easy going and not combative.

The Talmudic explanation goes on to say that they gave the other side’s opinion before their own because they were modest and considerate. Rav Sacks explains: They sought truth, not victory. That is why they listened to the views of their opponents, and indeed taught them before they taught their own traditions.  

My wife Rivka and I recently visited the Pennsylvania State Capitol Building and there is a mural (painted by Violet Oakley) in the Supreme Court chamber which declares that the word ‘law’ is an acronym for ‘love and wisdom’. I think that’s cool, and, perhaps, a Jewish idea, too.

We insist that our POSKIM (Halachic authorities) must be a combination of genius and nice, just like Hillel. 

I’ve been blessed to have encountered a number of great Poskim in my life (Reb Yosef Eliyahu Henkin, Reb Moshe Feinstein, Reb Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Reb Pinchas Scheinberg, Reb Mordechai Eliyahu) and they were all uniformly kind and caring individuals. Reb Moshe was especially nice. When a close friend who had been Reb Moshe’s driver for a number of years introduced me to Reb Moshe, he told me what an honor it was to meet me, because I was a CHAVER of his former driver.

A POSEK must embody love and kindness for every Jew. If you encounter someone who doesn’t personify empathy and love for every Jew, he may be a great scholar but look elsewhere for the POSEK HaDOR, because that individual doesn’t embody the greatness of Hillel. There are three rules for a great POSEK (after the necessary great knowledge): Be nice, Be kind, Care! Decisive is good, too.