Bas Kol, Part Two
Where do we go from here? For nearly 2500 (yes, two thousand five hundred) years, the system has not changed. If anything, it's become worse!
Here is the Bas Kol Story:
The Gemara relates the following episode. There was a dispute between R' Eliezer and the chachamim, regarding taharos (what is considered spiritually pure or impure). R' Eliezer ruled that the matter under discussion was tahor, pure, while the majority opinion was that it was tamei (impure). Even though R' Eliezer brought many proofs that the halacha follows his view, nevertheless the chachamim did not accept them. He then proceeded to alter the course of nature to convince the Sages. He said 'Let this carob tree, water canal and the walls of the Beis Medrash (study hall) prove I am right.' Immediately the carob tree was uprooted one hundred amos (cubits), (some say four hundred cubits). The water began to flow backwards, and the walls of the Beis Medrash began to lean. All this did not faze the Rabbis, and they responded that one cannot prove that he is correct from supernatural phenomena. For since R' Eliezer was a tzaddik, his request would have been fulfilled even if he was wrong. Finally, R' Eliezer said 'Let the Heavens prove that I am right.' A Bas Kol (Heavenly echo) then proclaimed 'Why are you arguing with R' Eliezer? The halacha always follows his opinion.' R' Eliezer had apparently proved his case. Yet, the Chachamim stood their ground. R' Yehoshua declared 'It (the Torah) is not in Heaven (Devarim 30:12). We do not listen to a Bas Kol because at Har Sinai we received the Torah and it is written, "According to the majority the matter shall be decided." (Shemos 23:2). Therefore the Rabbis who were the majority ruled that it is tamei and the halacha follows their opinion.
The Gemara concludes that Eliyahu Hanavi told R' Nassan that when R' Yehoshua ignored the Bas Kol, Hashem laughed and said: "My children were victorious over Me." The Chinuch explains that in truth, R' Eliezer was right, as the Bas Kol had demonstrated. However, since the chachamim were in and the majority and they did not agree with R' Eliezer's reasoning, the Torah's own clause dictated their right to override the truth. Thus the truth was defeated.
When the Gemara tells this story, and when we read it, it glorifies the power of the Jewish people, specifically the Rabbis, the dictate Halacha, while at the same time saying God has no place dictating Halacha. Again - the quote of "Lo Bashamayim He" - It [the Torah] is not in heaven, is taken out of context. As I mentioned in a previous post, when read in context, this possuk means that Torah is accessible to all, not in heaven, not far away. Everyone can learn, to the best of their ability. It has nothing to do with God not being allowed to dictate Halacha! In fact, if God does not dictate Halacha, WHO DOES?!?! Didn't God WRITE the Torah? Is he not the one who said "Anochi Hashem Elokecha," as well as the rest of the 613 Mitzvos? Further, if we all say the Chachamim were Divinely inspired - how much more Divine Inspiration can one ask for than a Bas Kol booming down from Heaven declaring the halacha is like Rabbi Eliezer?!
Karl Marx, in his 1843 book, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, said a very famous quote, one shunned and ridiculed by many religious people of all walks: "Religion is the opium of the people," though this quote is commonly translated as: "Religion is the opiate of the masses." This has been the excuse in Orthodox Judaism for centuries now! Let the rabbis do the deciding and thinking for us and we will follow like robots. As long as the rabbis say it is correct or incorrect, we just follow instructions and take the thinking entirely out of the process. Don't believe me? Check out this link, where I got an ok translation of the Rabbi Eliezer story mentioned above:
http://www.shemayisrael.co.il/parsha/kollel/archives/shoftim61.htm
But I don't think the original, earlier Chachamim had this in mind. I really believe that just as they changed the system established by the Nevi'im, a generation far greater their own, we also need to change the system. Orthodox Judaism, Torah Judaism, is not meant, and never was meant to be a burden. It was meant to be a moral way of life that God himself established for us at Har Sinai. And when times changed, the Torah, which is true Emes, should have been able to adapt to new times. I don't mean that the Torah itself should have changed, chas veshalom. I do mean that so much of the oral law needed, and still needs, to change!
In the 18th century, the Jews in Europe were emancipated. They were finally allowed to live and prosper in certain regions in Europe, especially Germany and France. Things were changing. But the Rabbinic leadership steadfastly refused to change anything, to allow people to live in the real world. They insisted people stay in the oppressive ghettos and live as they had always lived. Along came Moses Mendelssohn, a frum Jew from the day he was born to the day he died, and said changes were necessary. He scoffed at, and still is considered today in the Orthodox world to be the father of Reform Judaism. Frankly, I think if Mendelssohn had seen the Reform Movement, he'd have decried it as not Judaism in any way. But he planted the idea for a need for reform. The Rabbinic leadership of the time said absolutely not. Many Orthodox Jews and Rabbis today love to use him as the prime example of why there should be no changes. After all, you can see how wrong he was because he has no Jewish descendants! Of nine grandchildren, according to Aish.com, eight were baptized as Christians.
"Look!" they love to exclaim. "He was wrong and the proof is that he has no Jewish descendants!"
I say: "Look! He was right! Look what happened when the leadership rigidly and completely refused to adapt the system to new ways of life! He was right and the proof is that he has no Jewish descendants!" And at the end of the day, have we not adapted to living in the culture in which we live? We live in comfortable homes, many in expensive neighborhoods, or at least the more expensive neighborhoods in any given city (which goes back to the needing to be rich to be frum point I made in an earlier post), most have two cars, several children, go to a gym, play sports, go to movies, coffee shops, and ice cream parlors, we have restaurants, many of them, in every major Jewish community, some even rivaling traif restaurants in quality, as told to me by friends who have eaten in fancy traif restaurants. We have pizza shops, candy stores, bagel shops (ok, that's mostly Jewish anyway!:), huge kosher only supermarkets, and great schools with secular education programs that are often at the top of the best of list in many states!
Next: Bas Kol - Conlusion.
5 comments:
Asking these kinds of questions does not mean that you are an Apikores. All it means is that you are honest about your thoughts and express them publicly. You are an intellectually honest person.
Lo BaShamyim He has been a subject of discussion in recent years that has been debated by Orthodox Jewish theologians. How far does one go with this concept? Dr. Eliezer Berkovits makes the radical claim (backed up by sources which he quotes) that we go pretty far, much further than contemporary Poskim would allow. He believes, with some justification the the Shulchan Aruch should never have been written. It is supposed to be the repository of all Halacha as interpreted by Rishonim based on their conclusions of rabbinic Judaism, redacted in the Talmud. But that law is called Torah SheBal Peh. It was meant to be transmitted orally.
Of course we all know the argument of Eis Laasos… that the time had come in the Mishnaic era where there was much confusion. Rabbinic edicts and explanations were so many and so complex that many arguments ensued as to what was really said. So the rabbis themselves determined that it must be written down or Judaism and all its practices would be lost. From that moment, of course every subsequent generation needed to elucidate sand clarify what the past generation wrote as well as create new law for new conditions. This tradition carries on to the present day.
Dr. Berkovitz maintains that this is a perversion of God’s intent to keep Oral Law unwritten. He says that Lo BaShamyim He means that it is given to man to decide at any given moment in history. Relying on written text grants it an illigitmate aura of authority that God intended only the Torah SheB’Ksav to have. He claim that the TSBP should have remained unwritten and that the codification of it in Halacha while perhaps necessary for the time, has in effect nullified its dynamic stays… i.e. the abilty to adapt more to the times. Now every Psak is measured against what the Rama and Mechaber Paskined in the Shulchan Aruch. And that, says Dr. Berkovitz negates Lo BaShamyim He.
I believe that almost every other Orthodox theologian argues that he is wrong and that this resembles Conservative doctrine. Dr. Berkovits would probably answer, So what? They’re probably right. They just aren’t knowledgeable enough to make the right decisions (or some similar argument).
There is also the D’Oraiso of Lo Sasur. This means listening to our Rabbinic leadership. That entails listening to the those who wrote the Shulchan Aruch. Then there is the question of Niskatnu HaDoros. Since we are peons compared to earlier generations we cannot argue with them. That usually does not extend to generations past the Rishonim. The question there is how far to go with that? And that is of course one of my own major issues.
To Quote the Moody Blues its a question of Balance.Both peshatim imo are right in lo bashamayim hi. Too much innovation will kill the Mesora too little well you know the problem there. Intersting take on Mendelson's children and grand kids etc. Also think those who are real good at pesak work off Rishonim and ealier. Since they are acharonim they can argue.
Very thoughtful and profound sentiments and thoughts.
You're bound to be on enforcer's list.
I can live with that...
One of the problems I have with the written Oral Torah, is that almost all of Chazal had no idea that their teachings were going to be written down. They specifically believed, in fact, that they never would be written down. And they themselves never reviewed the text that claimed to put their words into writing. So even assuming that they did say all those words, who's to say that if they had been shown a draft of the Talmud they would not have wanted to clarify or even change some of their wording knowing that it would be taken with as much force as the written Torah for the following thousands of years.
Post a Comment