One
of the first things that is used as a basis for rabbinical authority
is that we should always follow the majority. However, the Torah
tells us the opposite!
Exodus
Chapter 23
2
Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear
witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert
justice;
(This
has two separate statements:
- do not follow a majority to do evil
- do not tend / sway after the majority in a dispute , to steer /incline (opinions).
The
rabbinic derivation of b) is “always sway after the majority”!
In
the famous Talmudic story of the Oven of Akhnai, (TB
Baba Metzia 59a-b)
, the Rabbis pervert the meaning of this verse and say “After the
majority must one incline” – precisely the opposite of what the
Torah says (do not tend after the majority in a dispute to
incline)!!
From
here the Rabbis twisted the verse, removed the negative command, and
made it a positive command to follow the majority. Well, if every
“Do not” turned into a “Do” in the Torah, you have an orgy
of violence and idolatry.
The
Torah has a very logical basis in its Law – whereas the rabbinic
interpretation is fallacious – ie the logical fallacy of following
the majority.
http://logical-critical-thinking.com/logical-fallacy/appeal-to-popularity-a-fallacy-of-the-majority/
http://logical-critical-thinking.com/logical-fallacy/appeal-to-popularity-a-fallacy-of-the-majority/
http://logical-critical-thinking.com/logical-fallacy/appeal-to-popularity-a-fallacy-of-the-majority/
Indeed,
Rashi, the most revered of Rabbinic commentators reads this verse
according to its plain and simple meaning – ie that one should
stand by the truth of a matter and not be swayed by the majority! He
inadvertently contradicts the dictum of the sages!
The
Ohr HaChaim commentary by Rabbi Chaim Ben Attar – himself an
Orthodox Kabbalist rabbi – understands the verse in its most
literal sense, ie that one should never give in to numbers, even a
Judge should not sway his opinion or be pressured by a majority of
other judges!
Not
so in the thought of the Talmudic rabbis. In the same story of
Akhnai, another misappropriation of a Biblical verse is made by rabbi
Joshua, in this Talmudic fable.
Whereas
the Torah in Deut 30 says the following:
10
if thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep His
commandments and His statutes which are written in this book of
the law; if thou turn unto the LORD thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul
11
For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not too
hard for thee, neither is it far off.
12
It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say:
'Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, and make us
to hear it, that we may do it?'
13
Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say: 'Who shall go
over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it,
that we may do it?'
14
But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart,
that thou mayest do it.
The
rabbis claim simply “it is not in heaven”, ie decision making is
on earth and not in heaven. The context of the verses in Deuteronomy
30 are regarding the relative ease of keeping the commandments (which
are written in this book of the law;)
Whilst
there is some sophistication (or sophistry) to the rabbinic
re-reading of the verse, it is not in keeping with the meaning of the
verse. Furthermore, the only requirement in the Torah is to keep the
written laws, since there is in fact no Oral Law.
The
rabbinic claim for “Not in Heaven” is that after the giving of
the Torah, there are no further appeals to God , but that judgments
are made by a voting system of earthly rabbis.
This
is problematic for a number of reasons.
Ex:
28
29
And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the
breastplate of judgment upon his heart, when he goeth in unto the
holy place, for a memorial before the LORD continually.
30
And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the
Thummim; and they shall be upon Aaron's heart, when he goeth in
before the LORD; and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of
Israel upon his heart before the LORD continually.
This
is a prescriptive law for resolving issues of judgment for all of
Israel, for all time – it is quite a “heavenly” affair, and not
one based on any Greek style democratic votes.
2 Chronicles Chapter 19
1
And Jehoshaphat the king of Judah returned to his house in peace to
Jerusalem. {S} 2 And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer
went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat: 'Shouldest thou
help the wicked, and love them that hate the LORD? for this thing
wrath is upon thee from before the LORD. 3 Nevertheless there
are good things found in thee, in that thou hast put away the
Asheroth out of the land, and hast set thy heart to seek God.' 4
And Jehoshaphat dwelt at Jerusalem; and he went out again among the
people from Beer-sheba to the hill-country of Ephraim, and brought
them back unto the LORD, the God of their fathers. 5 And he
set judges in the land throughout all the fortified cities of Judah,
city by city, 6 and said to the judges: 'Consider what ye do;
for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD; and [He is] with you in
giving judgment. 7 Now therefore let the fear of the LORD be
upon you; take heed and do it; for there is no iniquity with the LORD
our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of bribes.' 8
Moreover in Jerusalem did Jehoshaphat set of the Levites and the
priests, and of the heads of the fathers' houses of Israel, for the
judgment of the LORD, and for controversies. And they returned to
Jerusalem. 9 And he charged them, saying: 'Thus shall ye do in
the fear of the LORD, faithfully, and with a whole heart. 10
And whensoever any controversy shall come to you from your brethren
that dwell in their cities, between blood and blood, between law and
commandment, statutes and ordinances, ye shall warn them, that they
be not guilty towards the LORD, and so wrath come upon you and upon
your brethren; thus shall ye do, and ye shall not be guilty. 11
And, behold, Amariah the chief priest is over
you in all matters of the LORD; and
Zebadiah the son of Ishmael, the ruler of the house of Judah, in all
the king's matters; also the officers of the Levites before
you. Deal courageously, and the LORD be with the good.
V.11
shows how the Priest, just like Aaron, would inquire of God for
divine (religious/spiritual) matters, and Zebadiah would judge for
crown or national/legal matters.
This
destroys the rabbinic myths of “majority”; of voting system and
Sanhedrin; of “not in heaven”.
The
use of Inquiring or seeking of God is used throughout the Torah and
Scriptures.
The
most vulgar claim in the story of Akhnai is the false prophetic claim
"my children have bested Me". The storywriter is alleging
that God admits defeat to the wisdom of the majority of the sages.
Something unheard of in the Torah. Some prophets would ask mercy of
God to annul a harsh decree, but none would arrogate to themselves
the power to “out vote” God!
Why
then, did Moses get punished when he tapped the rock twice, if he was
allowed to upstage God?
And
why was Israel not forced to follow the 10 spies who gave a bad
report on Israel? Do they not have the power to change Heavenly law?
A
rabbinic analysis bringing all the arguments in concise article:
Claims for a Sanhedrin
Maimonides
teaches in his Mishneh Torah – a summary of the Talmudic Law, that
the Sanhedrin was the foundation of the Oral Law.
Delegation
to lower judges – Ex 18:
21
Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as
fear God, men of truth, hating unjust gain; and place such over them,
to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and
rulers of tens.
22
And let them judge the people at all seasons; and it shall be, that
every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter
they shall judge themselves; so shall they make it easier for thee
and bear the burden with thee.
These
were not , and could not have been courts comprising of 3 or more
judges, but were individual judges.
Numbers
11:
16
And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Gather unto Me seventy men of the
elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people,
and officers over them; and bring them unto the tent of meeting, that
they may stand there with thee.
17
And I will come down and speak with thee there; and I will take of
the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they
shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not
thyself alone.
If
these 70 were to act as a single court or “Sanhedrin”, this would
only halve the workload of Moses by. If they act as individual
Judges, akin to Moses, then the workload of Moses will be reduced by
70 fold - or that there are now 71 Judges that individually judge
cases. Logically, there is little benefit to having a court of 70
elders who judge cases as one court.
This
is proven in Exodus 18 , v.22 and 26
26
And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they
brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves.
If
this was a 70 person Sanhedrin, why would they not deal with the
hard cases? After all, this is precisely what the “Sanhedrin “
of the Talmud and mIshna was supposed to do! A Sanhedrin that is
unable to deal with hard cases is no Sanhedrin at all!
Judges
2:
18
And when the LORD raised them up judges, then the LORD was with the
judge, and saved them out of the hand of their enemies all the days
of the judge; for it repented the LORD because of their groaning by
reason of them that oppressed them and crushed them.
19
But it came to pass, when the judge was dead, that they turned back,
and dealt more corruptly than their fathers, in following other gods
to serve them, and to worship them; they left nothing undone of their
practices, nor of their stubborn way.
These
were individual judges, otherwise the death of a single judge in a
“Sanhedrin” of 70 would not alter people’s behaviour, as there
would still be a majority of them left.
Judges
3:
9
And when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised
up a saviour to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel
the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.
10
And the spirit of the LORD came upon him, and he judged Israel; and
he went out to war, and the LORD delivered Cushan-rishathaim king of
Aram into his hand; and his hand prevailed against Cushan-rishathaim.
Othniel
was a single judge, he was not voting in a democratic institution to
follow a majority!
Judges
4:
4
Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, she judged Israel
at that time.
5
And she sat under the palm-tree of Deborah between Ramah and Beth-el
in the hill-country of Ephraim; and the children of Israel came up to
her for judgment
Again,
Deborah was a single Judge, not a Sanhedrin. People came to her for
judgement. (Mishpat = Judgement is derived from Shophet = Judge).
Now,
if the Torah does nor prescribe a Sanhedrin, whence the
establishment in late Second Temple period by the same name?
“The
earliest record of a Sanhedrin is by Josephus who wrote of a
political Sanhedrin convened by the Romans
in 57 B.C.E. Hellenistic sources generally depict the Sanhedrin as a
political and judicial council headed by the country’s ruler.”
As
the name suggests, the institution was of Greco-Roman origin, hence
Greek: συνέδριον, (synedrion).
At
some stage during the conflict between the Pharisees and the
Sadducees, it became politically expedient to “create” a
religious institution with which to outvote the opposition. If
something as important as a Sanhedrin was really mandated in the
Torah, why is there no reference to it (the references cited actually
disprove the claims for a Sanhedrin) and why is there not a Hebrew
name for it?
There
are similar claims for the Knesset Hagedolah, or the Men of the Great
Assembly, which allegedly had 120 members. This figure is derived
from a list of names given in Nehemiah ch.10, which names some 85
signatories of leaders of Israel, to adhere to the Torah law. In
addition, it mentions other signatories:
29
And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters,
the singers, the Nethinim, and all they that had separated themselves
from the peoples of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their
sons, and their daughters, every one that had knowledge and
understanding;
These
additional people would number in the thousands. Many of them had
intermarried and had just recently returned to the fold. So was the
Great Assembly made up of thousands of people, including the
Nethinim.
Interestingly,
Neh. 7 states:
60
All the Nethinim, and the children of Solomon's servants, were three
hundred ninety and two. 61 And these were they that went up
from Tel-melah, Tel-harsha, Cherub, Addon, and Immer; but they
could not tell their fathers' houses, nor their seed, whether they
were of Israel:
Nehemiah
is saying clearly that Patrilineal descent determines someone’s
Jewishness, in contradistinction to the matrilineal claim of the
rabbis! Was this also a teaching of the Knesset HaGedolah?
No comments:
Post a Comment