5783/2023

Rabbinic Authority – Lo Tasur

On the one hand, Chazal present Rabbinic authority in very strong terms. Chazal interpret Devarim 17:11, the command of Lo Tasur, do not deviate from the Rabbis’ instructions, as the source of Rabbinic authority.  The Gemara (Shabbat 23a) goes as far as to say that this Pasuk is the basis for reciting a Berachah on Mitzvot of Rabbinic origin (such as Chanukah lighting). The Gemara famously queries “Heichan Tzivanu,” “how can we describe Hashem as commanding Rabbinic Mitzvot?” The Gemara answers that Hashem commanded us in the Lo Tasur directive to adhere to the Rabbis’ words. Whenever we have a Halachic question, we must go to the Beit HaMikdash, and the Sanhedrin provide instruction. We may not deviate from their teaching, neither left nor right. Thus, we may describe Hashem as commanding Rabbinic Mitzvot since He commanded us to follow the Rabbanim.  Rashi, citing the Sifri, states that you must follow what they say even if you think it is wrong. So, in Rashi’s famous words, we must follow Chazal even if they tell us the right is left, or the left is right. Ramban, in turn, writes that the Mishnah in Rosh HaShanah (2:9) is a dramatic example of when we must follow the Rabbis even if they tell us right is left or left is right.  The Mishnah relates: “Mishnah: There was an incident in which two witnesses came to testify about the new moon, and they said: We saw the waning moon in the morning in the east, and that same day we saw the new moon in the evening in the west. Rabi Yochanan ben Nuri said: They are false witnesses, as it is impossible to see the new moon so soon after the last sighting of the waning moon. However, when they arrived in Yavne, Rabban Gamliel accepted them as witnesses without concern. And there was another incident in which two witnesses came and said: We saw the new moon at its anticipated time, i.e., on the night of the thirtieth day of the previous month; however, on the following night, i.e., the start of the thirty-first, which is often the determinant of a full, thirty-day month, it was not seen. And nevertheless Rabban Gamliel accepted their testimony and established the New Moon on the thirtieth day. “Rabi Dosa ben Hurkinas disagreed and said: They are false witnesses; how can witnesses testify that a woman gave birth and the next day her belly is between her teeth, i.e., she is obviously still pregnant? If the new moon was already visible at its anticipated time, how could it not be seen a day later? Rabi Yehoshua said to him: I see the logic of your statement; the New Moon must be established a day later. Upon hearing that Rabi Yehoshua had challenged his ruling, Rabban Gamliel sent a message to him: I decree against you that you must appear before me with your staff and with your money on the day on which Yom Kippur occurs according to your calculation; according to my calculation, that day is the eleventh of Tishrei, the day after Yom Kippur. “Rabi Akiva went and found Rabi Yehoshua distressed that the head of the Great Sanhedrin was forcing him to desecrate the day that he maintained was Yom Kippur. In an attempt to console him, Rabi Akiva said to Rabi Yehoshua: I can learn from a verse that everything that Rabban Gamliel did in sanctifying the month is done, i.e., it is valid. As it is stated: “These are the appointed seasons of the Lord, sacred convocations, which you shall proclaim in their season” (VaYikra 23:4). This verse indicates that whether you have proclaimed them at their proper time or whether you have declared them not at their proper time, I have only these Festivals as established by the representatives of the Jewish people. “Rabi Yehoshua then came to Rabi Dosa ben Hurkinas, who said to him: If we come to debate and question the rulings of the court of Rabban Gamliel, we must debate and question the rulings of every court that has stood from the days of Moses until now. As it is stated: “Then Moses went up, and Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, and seventy of the Elders of Israel” (Shemot 24:9). But why were the names of these seventy Elders not specified? Rather, this comes to teach that every set of three judges that stands as a court over the Jewish people has the same status as the court of Moses. Since it is not revealed who sat on that court, apparently it is enough that they were official judges in a Jewish court. When Rabi Yehoshua heard that even Rabi Dosa ben Hurkinas maintained that they must submit to Rabban Gamliel’s decision, he took his staff and his money in his hand, and went to Yavne to Rabban Gamliel on the day on which Yom Kippur occurred according to his own calculation. Upon seeing him, Rabban Gamliel stood up and kissed him on his head. He said to him: Come in peace, my teacher and my student. You are my teacher in wisdom, as Rabi Yehoshua was wiser than anyone else in his generation, and you are my student, as you accepted my statement, despite your disagreement.” These sources indicate that we should not and may not challenge a Rabbi’s Halachic ruling. 

Questioning Rabbinic Authority

Berachot (55a) seems to take a different stance and strongly encourages questioning Rabbinic authority in sharp contrast with the above sources. The Gemara relates: “When the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Moses: Go say to Bezalel, “Make a tabernacle, an ark, and vessels” (see Shemot 31:7–11), Moses went and reversed the order and told Bezalel: “Make an ark, and vessels, and a tabernacle” (see Shemot 25–26). He said to Moses: Moses, our teacher, the standard practice throughout the world is that a person builds a house and only afterward places the vessels in the house, and you say to me: Make an ark, and vessels, and a tabernacle. If I do so in the order you have commanded, the vessels that I make, where shall I put them? Perhaps God told you the following: “Make a tabernacle, ark, and vessels” (see Shemot 36). Moses said to Bezalel: Perhaps you were in God’s shadow, and you knew precisely what He said. You intuited God’s commands just as He stated them, as if you were there.” Why didn't Betzalel listen even though he thought he was wrong? What is the difference between the Kiddush HaChodesh case and the Keilim of the Mishkan situation? We answer that the student must voice his opinion. Then the teacher must honestly consider it, review his approach, and even be willing to retract his answer (as exemplified by Moshe Rabbeinu). Then, if the Rebbe maintains his view upon review, the Talmid must follow it (as illustrated by Rabban Gamliel and Rabi Yehoshua). 

Two Reasons to Follow Rabbinic Authority

Ramban presents two reasons we must follow the Chachamim even if we think they are wrong. One reason is that if everyone interpreted the Torah as they pleased, pandemonium would ensue, and “there will be many Torot.” Ramban then stunningly presents the second reason: Hashem intervenes and prevents the Chachamim in error. Thus, even if we think they are mistaken, they are correct. A stunning Mishnah (Yadayim 4:3) supports the Ramban’s bold assertion: “On that day they said: what is the law applying to Ammon and Moab in the seventh year? Rabi Tarfon decreed tithe for the poor. And Rabi Elazar ben Azariah decreed second tithe. Rabi Ishmael said: Elazar ben Azariah, you must produce your proof because you are expressing the stricter view and whoever expresses a stricter view has the burden to produce the proof. Rabi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Ishmael, my brother, I have not deviated from the sequence of years, Tarfon, my brother, has deviated from it and the burden is upon him to produce the proof. Rabi Tarfon answered: Egypt is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Egypt must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabi Elazar ben Azariah answered: Babylon is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Babylon must give second tithe in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give second tithe in the seventh year. Rabi Tarfon said: on Egypt which is near, they imposed tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel might be supported by it during the seventh year; so on Ammon and Moab which are near, we should impose tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel may be supported by it during the seventh year. Rabi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Behold, you are like one who would benefit them with gain, yet you are really as one who causes them to perish. Would you rob the heavens so that dew or rain should not descend? As it is said, "Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you: How have we robbed You? In tithes and heave-offerings" (Malachi 3:8). Rabi Joshua said: Behold, I shall be as one who replies on behalf of Tarfon, my brother, but not in accordance with the substance of his arguments. The law regarding Egypt is a new act and the law regarding Babylon is an old act, and the law which is being argued before us is a new act. A new act should be argued from [another] new act, but a new act should not be argued from an old act. The law regarding Egypt is the act of the elders and the law regarding Babylon is the act of the prophets, and the law which is being argued before us is the act of the elders. Let one act of the elders be argued from [another] act of the elders, but let not an act of the elders be argued from an act of the prophets. The votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab should give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. And when Rabi Yose ben Durmaskit visited Rabi Eliezer in Lod he said to him: what new thing did you have in the house of study today? He said to him: their votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabi Eliezer wept and said: "The counsel of the Lord is with them that fear him: and his covenant, to make them know it" (Tehillim 25:14). Go and tell them: Don't worry about your voting. I received a tradition from Rabi Yochanan ben Zakkai who heard it from his teacher, and his teacher from his teacher, and so back to a Halachah given to Moses from Sinai, that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year.”

Rabbinic Infallibility?

Our Mishnah does not mean that Rabbis cannot err. The Mishnah in Eduyot (1:12-14) records three cases where Beit Hillel conceded to the view of Beit Shamai. In our times, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik and Rav Ovadia Yosef occasionally changed their opinions about certain Halachic matters over time. In addition, no one Rabbinic authority is ever followed in all cases. As great and influential as the Rambam was, we do not follow his every opinion. Sephardic Jews do not follow Rav Yosef Karo’s rulings in every instance, and Ashkenazic Jews do not always follow the Rama. In modern times, some decisions of Rav Moshe Feinstein are not well-accepted, such as his ruling forbidding the use of timers on Shabbat (see my The Power of Shabbos: Shabbat and Electricity in the Twenty-First Century pp. 178-179).  However, when a Rabbinic consensus supports a view and emerges as the universally accepted practice among Orthodox Jews, we, following Ramban, assume Hashem has influenced this outcome. The Chatam Sofer (cited in Chut HaMeshulash, page 97) told his son, the Ketav Sofer, that a consensus view among fully observant Jews is an expression of divine influence. The Aruch HaShulchan (Orach Chaim 345:18) describes the Halachic consensus regarding relying on community eruvin as if a Bat Kol rang out in favor of this view. Rav Asher Weiss (Teshuvot Minchat Asher 1:30) similarly describes the Halachic consensus regarding the prohibition of turning on electric appliances on Shabbat as if a Bat Kol called out in favor of this view.   

Conclusion

Nowadays, if a Rabbi issues a Halachic ruling that seems incorrect, we must challenge him. If the Rabbi insists he is correct, we should consult a Rabbi of higher stature. If the consensus view agrees the original Rabbi is accurate, we apply the rule of following the consensus even if they tell you right is left and left is right.