The Nature of Rabbinic law: Part Two
G-D vs the Rabbis: Who’s right? Who wins?
Sefer Devarim, perorated by Moses by Divine inspiration and comprising the final book of the Torah by Divine edict, contains a full two hundred (out of the 613) mitsvot which are either entirely new or are outgrowths of previous mitsvot. One of the most supremely challenging of them is the mitsva listed by the 13th-century author of Sefer haChinukh as no. 496.
If you cannot reach a decision in a criminal case, a civil case, a ritual case or in any case of dispute within your borders, arise and go up to the place G-D will select. Approach the Kohanim [for ritual matters] or the judges [for criminal and civil matters] who will exist at that time. Inquire of them and they will declare to you a legal decision. Do as they instruct you … observe to carry out what they teach you. Keep the Torah as they interpret it for you and follow the laws they legislate for you, not straying … to the right or left! (Deut 17:8-11)
Lest Am Yisrael imagine they are only to follow G-D’s law, comes this mitsva to affirm unmistakeably that the Rabbis’ authoritative interpretations are also part of Torah, with full Divine approval.
As if this weren’t enough, the Midrash Sifrei, famously redacted by Rashi, adds the pithy comment on the seemingly redundant words “right or left”:
[You must follow them] even if they tell you right is left and left is right! How much more so when they tell you right is right and left is left.
Had the Sifrei not added the “how much more so” clause, it would have been perplexing enough. But this second observation adds to the perplexity. To obey the rabbinic judges when they tell you that right is left (or, as we would say in English, “black is white”) is not only counter-intuitive but appears to place the Rabbis on a pedestal as being infallibly correct – right even when they are wrong!
Is this really what the Torah and the Sifrei are saying?
In order to find out, let us cite an even more extraordinary Talmudic passage, unique in the entire corpus of Talmudic literature, regarding the ritual status of what is called the Aknai Oven:-
…On that day, R’ Eliezer advanced all the [halachic] arguments in the world [to defend his lenient ruling regarding the oven], but the Rabbis didn’t accept his arguments.
[Eventually R’ Eliezer resorted to quasi-Kabbalistic powers. H]e said: “If the halacha is as I say, this carob-tree will prove it”. Immediately the carob-tree was uprooted from its place…. The Rabbis said: “we don’t learn out halachot from a carob-tree being uprooted from its spot!” Undeterred he said to them “…let this stream prove it!” Immediately the stream flowed backwards. The Rabbis said: we don’t learn halachot from streams flowing backwards!” He persisted and said to them “… let the walls of this study-hall prove it!” Immediately the walls of the study-hall leaned and were about to fall. R’ Yehoshua (one of the other Rabbis) said to the walls: “What gave you the right to mix in on discussions between advanced Torah scholars?” [Consequently], the walls did not topple out of respect to R’ Yehoshua but neither did they right themselves out of respect to R’ Eliezer
Finally, R’ Eliezer said to the Rabbis: If the halacha is as I say, let Heaven prove it!” Whereupon a bat kol [Heavenly voice] proclaimed [to the Rabbis]: “Why do you argue with R’ Eliezer whose opinion in halacha is invariably correct?”
R’ Yehoshua stood up to his full height and declared [to the bat kol] Lo va-Shamayim hi! “It [the Torah] is not [any longer] in Heaven” (Deut 30:12) [having been given to man at Mount Sinai} … You (addressing G-D through the bat kol) already wrote at Mount Sinai in the Torah: “According to the majority shall the matter be decided!” (Ex 23:2) [and we are the majority!] (Bava Metsi’a 59a/b)
Had the Gemara left it at that, we would be excused for thinking that in the same way as Catholicism affirms papal infallibility, rabbinic sages, provided they are in the majority, are always right. After all, doesn’t R’ Eliezer silence a heavenly voice emanating from G-D Himself?
But this in itself is enough to make a person of faith tremble? Man is man and G-D is G-D. How can a mere mortal, even if he is a rabbinic sage, wave his hand at G-D, as it were, and tell Him He is wrong?
Let us see the sequel:-
R’ Natan once met Eliahu haNavi [perhaps in a dream]. He asked Eliahu:
“What was G-D doing at that moment [when R’ Yehoshua rejected the bat kol]?
Eliahu replied” “He was smiling and he said
Nitskhuni banai! Nitskhuni banai
“My children have triumphed over Me! My children have triumphed over Me!”
The picture is starting to become clearer.
The appearance of the bat kol was a Heavenly test. Of this we are now assured. G-D in His heaven is not wrathful that a sage dared to wag his finger at His messenger. He rejoices that this sage and the other rabbis opposing R’ Eliezer passed the test He set for them.
Does this mean that the Rabbis were right and R’ Eliezer was wrong?
If so, the bat kol, representative of G-D, would r.l. be a liar. After all, didn’t She say that R’ Eliezer’s halachic view is always correct? And “G-D is not a man that He should lie” (Num. 23:19).
Let us peruse the revealing words of the Sefer haChinukh
Chalila (perish the thought) that man can defeat G-D [in argument] … In the controversy between R’ Eliezer and his colleagues, the truth lay with R’ Eliezer as the bat kol asserted. Yet even so … they [his colleagues] could not fathom the full depth of his thought and would not acknowledge his words even after the bat kol; and they brought proof from a law firmly stated in the Torah commanding us to follow the majority – whether they speak truth or even err!
In other words: to answer the questions implicit in the title of this essay, G-D was right, but the Rabbis won, by Divine assent!
G-D is always right! Only He is infallible. However, He has allowed the rabbis full jurisdiction, according to the law of the Torah, to hand down decisions and for them to be followed implicitly, even though it is possible – if extremely unlikely – that they will err.
Rabbis are not infallible, The Torah (Lev 4:13-21) outlines the procedure to be followed when Torah judges misjudge, and a great slice of the Talmudic tractate Horayot deals with what to do when a Sanhedrin makes an error of judgement. “It is impossible for flesh and blood not to err” (Rambam: Introduction to Commentary on the Mishna).
Yet the Torah, in unmistakeable terms, has told us what we must do – heed them even if we’re sure they’re saying right is left and left is right!
Pirkei Avot is replete with exhortations to scholars to be extremely careful when judging or even to avoid judgement altogether. But the reality is: from Sinai 2448 all the way to Sydney 5786, the halacha has continued to need interpretation and halachic questions have needed Rabbinic answers.
If we are faithful, educated lay Jews appreciative of the halachic process we shall be grateful that we can cast our halachic burden on the Rabbis and the responsibility is all theirs. If we don’t always like their answers we can roll our eyes all we like – but we have to follow their directive nevertheless!
Next Blog:
Part Three – Rabbis and the Community Today – Plus ca change?