The Nature of Rabbinic Authority: Part Three
Part 3: Rabbis and the Community Today – Plus ca change …?
In his Introduction to the Book of Ezekiel in The Living Nach, Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan (1934-1983) writes the following:-
The ‘love affair’ between G-D and Israel would reach new heights after the trauma of Destruction and Exile … A remnant … would survive and revitalise Judaism … The [Men of the] Great Assembly fostered the growth of halakha.
In a well-known story narrated in the Talmud (Gittin 56b), R’ Yochanan ben Zakkai was enabled to escape besieged Jerusalem in a coffin and met with the Roman emperor-elect Vespasian. Growing to appreciate R’ Yochanan’s wisdom and perspicacity, the new emperor declares to him: “request of me anything and I will grant it to you!”
Our Sages wonder why the great rabbi did not request the Roman siege on Jerusalem to be lifted. The answer the Talmud gives is that R’ Yochanan did not believe the emperor would fulfil such a huge request and that the Jews would be left with nothing.
However, reading between the lines, it is also possible that R’ Yochanan in his wisdom believed the Temple already to be doomed and that he was preparing for a Jewish renaissance beyond the Temple and even, if necessary, in exile.
R’ Yochanan’s actual request (ibid) was for the establishment of a yeshiva in the town of Yavneh where scholars of Torah would be able to study undisturbed. As a result of this epoch-changing event, generations of tanaitic scholars brought Torah scholarship to a new level, resulting in the redaction of the Mishna by R’ Yehuda haNasi in circa 200CE. This feat was followed by the even more stupendous achievement of the super-analytical amoraic scholars mainly in the Babylonian Torah centres which resulted in the Talmud Bavli redacted by R’ Ashi and Ravina circa 500 CE. Thus was launched the Golden Age of rabbinic scholarship which was to extend into the eras of the Saboraim, Geonim and medieval Rishonim such as the illustrious scholars Rambam, Ramban and Rashi.
All this was a far cry from the turbulent closing years of the Second Temple period when the dominant grouping of Torah-observant Jews known as Perushim (Pharisees) were beset by opposing and even hostile forces from within such as the reactionary, aristocratic Sadducees who denied the Oral Law as well as the ultra-nationalist, fanatical biryonim (Zealots) who were prepared to fight the Romans to the death. Ultimately neither sect was to endure.
We do not have to search too far to recognise contemporary parallels in the Jewish world. However, if we examine carefully some details in what has become a famous if tragic Talmudic story we shall be amazed as to how deep some of these parallels run.
Here is the story in full as narrated in Gittin 55b:-
A certain man who had a friend named Kamtsa and an enemy
named Bar Kamtsa made a banquet. He told his personal assistant
to invite Kamtsa but [by mistake] he invited Bar Kamtsa.
When the host arrived and found Bar Kamtsa already sitting there
he ordered him to leave.
Bar Kamtsa [trying to reason with him] said: “[I can now see there has been a mistake but] since I have come [don’t embarrass me but] let me stay and I shall reimburse you for what I eat and drink”. The host adamantly refused.
“I will give you the value of half the cost of the banquet!”
Again, the host refused.
“Then I shall pay for your entire banquet!” Yet again the host refused.
He grabbed hold of Bar Kamtsa’s arm and ejected him
from the banqueting-hall.
[Humiliated], Bar Kamtsa said [to himself]:
“Since there were Rabbis seated there
and they [all] failed to rebuke him [for the way he treated me]
it is evident that what he did was acceptable to them.
I shall go and bad-mouth the Rabbis in the royal palace.”
He went and told Caesar: “The Jews have instigated rebellion against you!”
Caesar replied: “Who says so?”
Bar Kamtsa said “Send a sacrifice and see whether they offer it!”
[Anyone, Jew or Gentile, was entitled to bring an olah-offering to the Temple]
Caesar sent a fine calf with Bar Kamtsa
On the way, Bar Kamtza made a blemish in the calf’s upper lip …
[inconspicuously] in a place where Jews consider it a blemish
but Gentiles don’t
The Rabbis considered offering it for the sake of peace with Rome
But R’ Zecharia ben Avkulas said to them:
“People will say blemished animals can [as of now] be offered on the Altar!”
The rabbis considered having Bar Kamtsa put to death [for treason and] so that he would not be able [again] to go and inform [on the Jews to Caesar]
R’ Zecharia said to them:
“But then people will say that someone who blemishes consecrated animals
must be put to death!”
R’ Yochanan said: The diffidence (anvetanuto) displayed by R’ Zecharia
ben Avkulas destroyed our Temple, burnt down our Sanctuary
and exiled us from our Land
The Gemara then goes on to tell of other incidents which occurred which contributed to the eventual Destruction and exile. We shall cite the most telling of them, pursuant to our theme (ibid 56a)
Three [rich] men had enough supplies [of grain, wood, wine, salt and oil]
to sustain [the residents of Jerusalem] for 21 years. But there were biryonim. The rabbis had said to them “let’s go out and make peace overtures
to the Romans” The biryonim would not allow them to do so, saying to the Rabbis “let’s wage war against them!”
The Rabbis said to them “It won’t be successful.” Whereupon they [the biryonim] arose and burned down those [vast] storehouses … and there was a famine [in the city]
Questions arise out of these extraordinary narratives. Who was Bar Kamtsa? Why were the Rabbis swayed by just one of their number against trying him for the crime of treason of which he certainly appears to be guilty? Why had they originally been silent when Bar Kamtsa was shamed, thus bringing about the whole turn of events? And in the second narrative, why were the Sages so timorous in their response to the biryonim?
We know from our sources that overwhelming sin’at chinam (baseless hatred) was rife at this time.. But the Talmud (Shabbat 119a) gives other reasons too for the Destruction. They buried their faces in the ground and did not admonish. The great and the small were considered equal. Torah scholars were demeaned.
Everything points to one conclusion. The Rabbis, though members of the dominant Perushim grouping, did not feel they could lead because they were not empowered to do so.
It would appear that Bar Kamtsa was a Sadducee. The Rabbis, lacking as they were in empowerment and in confidence, were only too willing to be persuaded that Bar Kamtsa’s aim, as a Sadducee, in informing against them to the Caesar was ‘merely’ to regain sectarian control over the Temple. It would not even have occurred to them that it would lead to a fateful Roman besiegement. R’ Zecharia instilled into his colleagues an apprehension that the masses would misinterpret it if the Rabbis dared to be so ‘intolerant’ as to try Bar Kamtsa for betrayal. They would accuse the Rabbis of extremist over-reaction, declaring that Bar Kamtsa’s only crime was the blemishing of a sacred animal! And while, for hora’at sha’a (the emergency situation) the Rabbis could have been permitted to offer an animal with such a minor blemish to preserve the peace, they couldn’t bring themselves to do that either for fear the public would claim it to have set a precedent and they would no longer be able to enforce the halakhot regarding fitness of olah offerings.
That is why the Talmud asserts that the diffidence of R’ Zecharia destroyed the Temple. The Talmud is not being ironic. It is making the bold and honest observation that this was not the time for faint-heartedness and indecisiveness and that the failure of rabbinic leaders to lead decisively led inexorably to the Destruction.
Our sobering task is to read between the lines and glimpse the reasons for this inaction. In doing so we see that the blame for the refusal of the Rabbis to act here as well as for their reluctance to intervene at the banquet cannot just be laid at their door. The masses too were responsible. They failed to empower their leaders to lead and, as a consequence, only served to strengthen the fatally damaging secessionist-movements both on the ‘left’ and on the ‘right’.
**************
When we look at the Jewish world today we glimpse two very different scenarios both of which have their echoes in the two contrasting eras we showcased above.
In the Torah world, yeshivot and seminaries, kollelim and batei midrash are pre-eminent. More Jews are engaged in Torah learning than at any previous juncture in history. Books of halakhot, each more detailed than the last, guide the Torah Jew’s every action. Online sites displaying Torah erudition as well as questions and answers to ever-burgeoning contemporary halachic issues number in their thousands. Students of Torah find themselves a Rav and heed his psak. While qualitatively we cannot realistically compare the Torah world today with the golden eras of rabbinic scholarship of ancient Yavneh and the Babylonian academies, there is no doubt that Torah scholarship is held in just as much esteem in Lakewood today as it was in Sura fifteen hundred years ago!
However, in mainstream, acculturated contemporary Jewish communities in the Western world where in-depth Torah learning is not a supreme value or even a value at all, a scenario presents itself which is remarkably similar in so many ways to the closing era of the Second Temple. We are witnessing a crisis of confidence in and by Rabbinic leadership which has been brought about because Rabbis are not empowered to lead and therefore are deficient in their leadership. Rabbis are demeaned and as a consequence they sometimes bury their faces in the ground and fail to admonish, just like the Talmud says regarding the time of the Second Destruction. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
We inhabit a pre-messianic era described by the Mishna (Sota 9:15) as a generation with the “face of a dog”. R’ Yisrael Salanter (1810-1883) presciently explains this phrase as follows: A dog runs ahead of its master but habitually looks backwards to see if its master is following. In the generation before Mashiakh there will be rabbis who will appear to lead but in actuality compulsively and repeatedly check with their constituents in a dog-like manner to ensure that the views they are about to propound curry favour with their “masters”.
In these acculturated circles, while secular scholarship is idolised, while the medical, legal and technological professions are respected and experts in these fields are acknowledged as such, rabbinic scholarship is held in contempt and every Adam, Josh and Sarah (no personal references intended) consider themselves qualified to take issue on any and every Jewish topic with their rabbi.
No wonder there are so many contemporary mainstream rabbis who are telling their adolescent children in all seriousness (usually the children don’t need telling) that being a rabbi today really isn’t a job for a nice Jewish boy!
******************
As I endeavoured to show in Part 1 of this essay, the roots of this toxic anti-Rabbinic authority (what the Torah terms “stiff-necked”) streak among Jews go back to the beginnings of our national history and in particular to the golden-calf episode.
In this connection, Ramban, kabbalistic scholar that he was, makes a remarkable observation: The form of a calf (or ox) was one of the four faces of the Merkava (Chariot), the unique mystical vision accorded to the prophet Ezekiel. The ox symbolises the Divine attribute of Judgement. In fashioning the calf, it was as though the Bnei Yisrael were attempting to grasp hold of the throne of Judgement or as it were, attempting to judge their judges.
The Talmud (Sanhedrin 102a) declares that a residue of the sin of the golden-calf continues to permeate Am Yisrael in all generations. Perhaps the more profound meaning of this is that the Jewish trait of believing we can teach our teachers will never entirely be eradicated until Mashiakh comes..
Yet it isn’t the only way. As I observe in The Cosmic Diamond: “Am Yisrael empowered Moses 36 days before his death to lead and inspire them to new heights while he still could, whereupon he produced the unparalleled sublimity of Sefer Devarim … We are not a generation like Moses’ generation, nor do we have leaders of the calibre of a Moses. But if our generation empowers its rabbis to lead instead of attempting to act as their puppeteers we may be pleasantly surprised at the heightened calibre of rabbinic leadership that suddenly comes our way!” (p. 181).
After all, nobody should want to be stuck in a pre-Messianic time-warp forever!