Truth - Objective vs Protecting the System

The issue of the infallibility of Rabbis comes up repeatedly. The question is it meant as being literaly true or is it primarily to protect the system. Do we really have to believe that their words are aloways objectivelky true and they are never mistaken?

The Totah says Lo sasor. Which is explained that their words are to be followed whether they are right or wrong. Similalarly we are told to follow the majority. There is also the law of rebellious elder who is killed if he teaches against the majority even thgough he knows the majority is wrong. On the other hand there is the clear acknowledgement that the Sanhedrin can err in their rulings. 

Rav Chaim Voloshner (Ruach Chaim 1:4): … It is prohibited for a student to accept the words of his teacher if he has questions about them. Furthermore sometimes the truth is with the student and not the teacher. Avos (1:4), One should sit in the dust at the feet of one’s teachers and drink with unquenchable thirst what they say. The word for sitting - avek - can also mean struggle or warfare. That is because this is an obligatory struggle. The holy rabbis who have composed the books we study have in fact given us permission to struggle and to fight over their words and to answer the difficulties they raise. Therefore, we have the right to question what they say and not to blindly accept their words - but one must love the truth…. Since ascertaining the truth is the prime concern - we must be very careful not to be conceited and egotistical in the discussions and to imagine that we are as great as the teacher or author with whom we are disagreeing. We should be aware in our hearts that we might simply be misunderstanding their words. Therefore we must always be very humble. We must have the attitude, ‘I am not worthy to argue but this is Torah and I must know the correct answer’. Furthermore, the Mishna states that the struggle is conditional on being ‘in the dust at their feet’ which means we must be humble and submissive and figuratively sit on the ground before them in these discussions. 

Menoras HaMeor (2:34): We are obligated to believe all that our Sages said in medrashim and agada - in the same way we believe in the Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu. If we see something which appears to be exaggerated or unnatural, we should attribute this to our inadequate minds and not to a problem with what the Sages said. Therefore, someone who ridicules anything that our Sages stated is deserving of the punishment of being boiled in manure…. We learn from a number of gemoras that the Sages and the righteous ones - who are the source of the medrashim - even their conversations with others need to be studied and surely their words of instruction and reproof. All their words are the words of the living G d and nothing is without meaning. Everything which is written in their name must be believed as being true. One cannot ridicule them or even view them as ridiculous - and one who ridicules them will be punished. Therefore, it is necessary to be careful not to speak against the Sages or their words. Instead, one should study them to the degree his mind permits. This idea is taught in Avos (2:10): “One should warm himself by the fire of the Sages but be careful of their coals not to be burned. That is because their bite is that of the fox and their sting is that of the scorpion and their hiss is that of a poisonous snake and all their words are like the coals of fire.“ In other words, one should draw close to the wise in order to learn from them but if one gets too close, he will be burned. Similarly, a person who gets too close and comes to ridicule their words will lose the benefit of learning and his love will change to hatred and he will lose the attainments he had hoped to obtain…

Pesachim (94b): The Jewish sages assert that the sun travels underneath the sky during the day and above the sky at night. The sages of the nations of the world say that during the day the sun travels under the sky and at night under the ground. R’ Yehuda Hanassi said: Their view seems more correct than ours since during the day the wells are cold but at night they are hot….

Rav Tzadok (Sefer HaZichronos  #3 Yichud HaShem): It is already well established for all Jews the words of our Sages and all those who are sanctified with kabalistic wisdom, what the Kabbalistic matter of the Chariot refers to. Consequently there is no need to justify it against the words of our early scholars who understood it in terms of philosophy and science and metaphysics. The rejection of this early naturalistic view has already been done by the sages throughout the generations. They questioned this approach because if it were truly valid than that means that more had been revealed to the lowly of the nations of the world and to anyone who looked at their philosophy books than had been revealed to the greatest prophets by means of only allusions and riddles. There is no need to talk about this at length to right minded Jews now that the accepted views of Kabbalistic knowledge have become widespread. Whoever denies the Kabbalistic view is a heretic as is explained concerning the mitzva of lo sasur. The Bach (# 5) says that anyone who ridicules our Sages and rejects Kabbala - which is the source and foundation of Torah and all fear of G d – there is no worse form of ridiculing the words of our great Sages and he is deserving of nidoi.

Chasam Sofer (Y.D. 2:356): R’ Hillel who is quoted in Sanhedrin (99a) as rejecting salvation through Moshiach but asserted [according to Rashi] that G d Himself would directly save the Jews. Rashi is without a doubt correct that R’ Hillel was not rejecting the fact of salvation but only the agency of Moshiach… Furthermore, it is obvious that we don’t accept his view. In fact someone today who asserted that there will be no Moshiach because he accepts R’ Hillel’s view is denying the principle of the Torah to follow the majority position. Since the overwhelming majority of sages have rejected this view no one has the right to go against that majority and insist on accepting the sole dissenting view of R’ Hillel. This is no different that the case of R’ Eliezer who ruled in for his community that it permitted on Shabbos to cut wood to make charcoal to make iron for a milah knife in order to do bris mila on Shabbos. Since the majority of Torah scholars rejected this view, anyone who performs these actions on Shabbos before witnesses and with a warning is liable to capital punishment and he cannot claim that he is following the authority of R’ Eliezer. This that it teaches in Eduyos “Why are the minority views taught” is in fact obviously dealing with a different issue which there is no need to go into here. Nevertheless even though Salvation and the coming of Moshiach are themselves not foundation principles that determine Judaism but a person who doesn’t accept them is rejecting the foundation principle of belief in the Torah and the words of the prophets.

Bava Metzia (59b): Concerning the Oven of Aknai… R’ Eliezer presented all possible explanations for his position but his colleagues did not accept them. He then said to them: If the halacha is in accord with my position then the carob tree will support me. Immediately the carob tree uprooted itself and moved either 100 amos or 400 amos. They said to him that the movement of the carob tree was not a relevant proof. He then said to them: If the halacha is in accord with my position than the river will support me. Immediately the river flowed backwards. They said to him that the river was not a relevant proof. Again he said: If the halacha is in accord with my position then the walls of the yeshiva will show support. Immediately the walls of the yeshiva started to fall down. R’ Yehoshua rebuked the walls: If Torah scholars are arguing with each other concerning halacha what is it your concern? Consequently the walls did not fall out of respect for R’ Yehoshua but they did not return to their original position out of respect for R’ Eliezer and they remain in this intermediary position. Again he said: If the halacha is in accord with my position then let Heaven offer support. A Heavenly Voice immediately called out: Why are you arguing with R’ Eliezer since the halacha is always in accord with his views? R’ Yehoshua stood up and said: Torah is not in Heaven! What did he mean by that? R’ Yermiyahu said: Since the Torah has already been given at Sinai we do not pay attention even to a Heavenly Voice concerning halacha - the Torah itself says that halacha is determined by the vote of the majority. R’ Nossan met Eliyahu later and asked him what was G d doing during this debate? Eliyahu replied: He smiled and said “My children have defeated Me, My children have defeated Me.” That day that R’ Eliezer was outvoted they brought all that R’ Eliezer had declared ritually pure and burned it. They also voted to ostracize him…

Emes L'Yakov (Emor Vayikra 21:02) The Torah and halacha works from the viewpoint of the human intellect even though it is not objectively true. The Torah has given us rules for interpretation and deciding halacha. We are not to decide except on the evidence we see and we are to follow the majority view even though the minority view might be the correct one. The gemora Eiruvin says there was a dispute on an issue for three years between Beis |Hillel and Beis Shammai until finally a Bas Kol proclaimed the halacha was according to Beis Hillel even though both views were the word of G-d This seems to be different than other disputes and it established a general rule to follow the view of Beis Hillel over that of Beis Shammai even though Beis Shammai seemed superior. This seems to mean we follow what seems to be common sense of Beis Hillel and not the apparent greater brilliance of Beis Shammai which more likely to be objectively true. A clear example of this is found in Kesubos(17a) regarding praising a new bride. Beis Hillel says always say positive things even if they might not be true while Beis Shammai says you must say only truthful praise. This is a general rule even concerning purchases. You need to be concerned how the purchaser views it, not how it is objectively. In Kabbala seforim we are told that while we normally follow the view of Beis Hillel in Messianic times we will switch to Beis Shammai. That means only in the present world do we judge the truth according to how most people see it but in the future we will only follow objective truth.

 Devarim (17:11): According to the Torah which I will teach you and the laws which they will tell you, don’t turn from that which they say right or left. And the man who deliberately performs and act and [thereby] does not listen to the cohen who serves the L-rd your G-d or to the judge and performs an act  - shall die and you should destroy the evil from Israel. and all the people should hear and fear and not transgress further

Rashi (Devarim 17:11): Even if they tell you that “right” is “left” and “left” is “right” and surely if they tell you that “right” is “right” and “left” is “left”.

Sifri (Devarim 154:11): Right and left -  Even if it appears in your eyes that “right” is “left” and that “left” is “right” – you should obey them.

Yerushalmi (Horios 1:1): You might think that you must obey the [Sanhedrin or Rabbinic authorities] even when they tell you that “right” is “left”  and that “left” is “right” – but the Torah says that you are to follow after them “right and left”. Thus it is only when they tell you that “right” is “right” and “left” is “left” that you should obey them. 

Torah Temima (Devarim 17:11.62):  Don’t turn right or left … Even if your view and reasoning inclines the opposite of the view of the Sanhedrin and their reasoning. That is because it is well known that in all matters – people’s views and reasoning differ. This is mentioned in Berachos (58a), “When you see a crowd of Jews you should say the beracha, Blessed is He who discerns secrets. That is because the views of men are not the same.” We see that even in one halacha that there are strongly divergent views – some will declare it to be impure while others say it is pure, some say it is prohibited while others permit it. So even when it is obvious in your eyes that the truth is with you - since you know how to distinguish between right and left – nevertheless you should listen to the Sanhedrin in their ruling and reasoning. It is clear from this that you are only obligated to obey them concerning right and left only if seems that they are wrong. But if you in fact know that they are wrong e.g., they are permitting eating forbidden fats or allowing a marriage between prohibited partners – then it is prohibited to listen to them. This is stated explicitly in the Yerushalmi (Horios) that I mention in the previous drasha… However this understanding is contradicted by the Ramban who writes, “Even if you think in your heart that they are in error and it is obvious to you as your right and left – you should still follow what they say. Don’t be bothered by the fact that you are eating prohibited fats or that you will be executing a person you view as innocent – but you should say that is what G d has commanded me to do… according to their understanding the Torah was given to me – even if they err.” These words seem to teach that even if the Sanhedrin permits something which is absolutely forbidden by the Torah that you are obligated to obey them! However the words of the Yerushalmi (Horios) that I cited in the previous section explicitly refute such an understanding. Furthermore commonsense rejects this entirely… Therefore we are forced to explain that the intent of the Ramban is what we have written. It must be in a case where it is not definitely prohibited fats… but it merely seems to be that way based on their deduction and reasoning which you view as mistaken…

Michtav M’Eliyahu (1:75): The Talmudic sages (Chazal) have told us to obey the words of gedolim – even if they tell us that left is right. This expression isn’t meant to imply that we must obey them even when they have actually erred. But rather that we must listen to them even when we - with our lowly understanding – think that we definitely have observed that they have erred.  That is because our senses are totally nothing as if they were the dust of the earth compared to the clarity of their intellect and the Heavenly support they have. Thus our belief that they have erred has no practical consequences since there is a rule that a beis din cannot nullify the ruling of another beis din unless it is greater in wisdom and number. Even without this rule it is clear that what we think is awareness or experience is only a figment of our imagination and unstable moods. This superiority is Daas Torah within the framework of emunas chachom (faith in our sages).

Abarbanel (Devarim 17:11):… Rashi wrote that even if the Sanhedrin tells you right is left or left is right and surely if they tell you right is right and left is left [you must obey them]. That means that what is stated in the Sifre that even if they tell you that right are left… means that this is merely the perception and understanding of the one asking the question to the Sanhedrin but not according to what the actual truth is. That is because the right of the Sanhedrin is always right and the left is always left. [i.e., they are infallible]. This is the correct understanding because the Sifre that Rashi cites actually says, “Even if it seems in your eyes that right is left… you must obey them.” The Ramban agrees with this explanation. However the Ran [Derashos HaRan #11] disagrees and says that left and right are to be understood literally and thus the Sanhedrin must be obeyed even if they err…. He also explains that even though a person is harmed by doing something against the Torah – but if this is done because of the mistaken ruling of Sanhedrin then the reward of listening to them compensates for the harm… G d forbid to say that that is the meaning of our Sages. The Torah does not rely on an illusion that one is spiritually pure when in fact he is impure or that something is permitted when in reality it is prohibited or that harm is permitted. Because the Torah is concerned with righteousness and G d is the G d of Truth and His Torah is True.

Ramban (Devarim 17:11): Left and Right.  Rashi explains that even if the Sanhedrin tell you that right is left or left is right – [you must obey them]. Meaning that even if you are certain that the Sanhedrin has erred and it is as obvious to you as the difference between your right and left – you still must comply with their understanding of the Torah. In other words you can’t argue, “How can I eat that  which is prohibited by the Torah or how can I execute this person when I know he has not transgressed?” Rather your attitude must be, “The absolute obedience to the rulings of the Sanhedrin is what G d has commanded me and I must observe the mitzvos exactly as the Sanhedrin (which is in G d’s presence in the Temple) says. The Torah was given to me according to their understanding – even if they err.”  This is what happened when R’ Yehoshua had a dispute with the Sanhedrin as to what day was Yom Kippur. R’ Gamliel the head of the Sanhedrin ordered R’ Yehoshua to appear before him on the day that he thought was Yom Kippur (Rosh HaShanna 25a). The necessity for this mitzva is very great. That is because the Torah was given to us in writing and it is known that people don’t think identically in all matters. Therefore it would be natural for disputes over what the Torah means to continually multiply and it would end up that there would be many Torahs instead of one. That is why this verse tells you that one must obey the Sanhedrin which convenes in G d’s presence in the Temple – in everything they say concerning the understanding of the Torah. There is no difference in the requirement to obey whether this Torah understanding is part of the Tradition which goes back what G d told Moshe or what their understanding of the meaning or intent of a Torah verse.  This requirement to accept their Torah understanding is because the Torah was in fact given to us according to their understanding. Therefore they must be obeyed even if their view contrasts with your understanding as left contrasts with right and surely if you agree with their understanding. That is because G d’s spirit is on those who serve in His Temple and He does not desert His pious ones. G d always protects them from error and mistake. The Sifri (Shoftim 154) says that you must obey them even if appears that they have reversed right with left and left with right. 

Kuzari (3:41): Do not add to that which the members of the Sanhedrin have agreed to since they have special Divine assistance. In addition since their number is very great, it is illogical that they would agree to something which is against the Torah. Furthermore it is not expected that they would err since their wisdom is very great. Some of them have wisdom by what they were taught, others because they have natural brilliance, and some of developed it through their own efforts. According to our Tradition, the Sanhedrin mastered all the knowledge and wisdom that is available to man.

Rabbeinu Bachye (Devarim 17:9): And bring your halachic questions to the judge who is in your days… Your final authority is the judge who is in your days and therefore Yiftach in his generation has the same authority as Shmuel in his generation. That is the meaning of the expression “who is in your days.” Even if he doesn’t have as much wisdom as judges in previous generations – you still must listen to him. Even if he tells you that right is left and that left is right and surely if he tells you that right is right and left is left. The Ramban wrote, “the need for this mitzvah is great. That is because the Torah was given in written form and that there is a great diversity of opinions about new issues that arise. That leads to great disputes and consequently the Torah would become many Torahs. Therefore the Torah legislated for us that we must obey the Sanhedrin, which stands before G d in the Temple in all that they tell us in regards to the understanding of the Torah. Furthermore that we must view all that they say as if it were told us by Moshe as a messenger of G d. That is because the Torah was given based on their understanding. Consequently even if it appears in your eyes that their view is the opposite of your understanding just as the reversal of right and left - we must obey them. And surely we are to view that they are the possessors of truth and that ruach hakodesh rests on them to always determine the truth.

Riva (Devarim 17:11): Don’t deviate from what they tell you left or right – Rashi explains, “You must obey them even if they tell you right is left and left is right and surely if they tell you right is right and left is left.”  This is an astounding statement. Are we really required to listen to a rabbi who tells you that something that is impure is pure or that something which is prohibited really permitted?! The answer is that this command does not concern Torah obligations but rather Rabbinic decrees. Thus “the right that is really left” is referring to decrees such as not doing the Torah mitzva of blowing shofar because of the concern of profaning Shabbos. The meaning of “the left that is really right” is referring to decrees such as prohibiting marriage to someone who is permitted by the Torah.

Sefer HaIkkarim (3:23): Since it is possible that there will be a dispute amongst the sages regarding a matter which has not been received by Tradition but has been generated by one of the 13 Hermeneutic Principles or someone other intellectual method – therefore the Divine Wisdom decided in order for G d’s Torah to be perfect and devoid of disputes to the degree possible – the principle of decision making was given to every generation i.e., to the majority of sages. That is why the Torah says, “follow after the majority” (Shemos 23:2) and “Do deviate from what they tell you right or left” (Devarim 17:11). Our Rabbis have commented that means that if even if they tell you that right is left and left is right. The Rabbis’ intent was that every man values his thoughts and understanding more than that of others - to the degree that we find that many fools, women and ignoramuses who insist that the sages are mistaken and their understanding is superior. Thus this verse is saying that even if it appears that the sages are saying the opposite of the truth - right is left and left is right – you should never disobey their words but accept that the final decision is always based on the view of the majority of sages. This is true even though it is possible that an individual can have greater knowledge and that he has a greater grasp of the truth then they – the halacha still follows the decision of the majority. An individual or minority is not allowed to act in disagreement with the majority. This was the issue in the dispute between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Eliezer (Bava Metzia 59b). Even though Rabbi Eliezer was clearly superior to the others in wisdom as we see that a Heavenly Voice announced that his disputants had no basis to disagree with him since the halacha was always in accord with him – but Rabbi Yehoshua stood up and declared that the halacha was not in heaven. In other words that even if the truth was in accord with the view of Rabbi Eliezar, the view of the majority could not be abandoned in deference to the minority since the Torah has stated that halacha is determined by the majority. Even if in a single matter we would follow the minority against the majority, it would create a major dispute in every generation. That is because it will set a precedent for allowing each individual to claim that he is right and allow him to follow his own views against the majority and this will cause a general collapse of the Torah system. Therefore we can’t allow exceptions to the rule of following the majority in order to accept a minority opinion. Of course the authority of the majority is only if they are sages and not the ignorant masses who are typically fools in these matters and their views are not trustworthy….

Chinuch (#496): We are enjoined not to dispute the authorities of the Oral Law, not to change their words and not even to avoid fulfilling their commands regarding any aspect of the Torah. Concerning this matter, the Torah (Devarim 17:11) says: You shall not turn aside from that which they tell you right or left. The Sifre (Devarim 154) explains: Not to turn aside - this is a Torah prohibition. The reason for this commandment is the fact that the views and understandings of people concerning issues are not identical. In other words, you will not find total agreement on an issue amongst a large group of people. G d knew that if everyone was given the authority to follow his own interpretation of the Torah, each person would understand the Torah differently and there would be a large number of disagreements between Jews. Consequently instead of having a single Torah there would be many Torahs. (This is similar to what I wrote concerning the need for the principle of majority rule Mishpatim #75). Therefore G d, the master of all wisdom, made our Torah of Truth complete by commanding us to obey the true understanding of our Sages. We are to obey not only our ancient sages but those of each generation. That is because the sages in each generation have received their words and drunk the water from their books and have toiled mightily day and night to understand the depths of their words and the wonder of their views. With this principle of agreement we have the path of truth to knowing the Torah, while without it we will be ensnared by our thoughts and poor understanding and not succeed at all. As an indication of the greatness and truthfulness of this mitzva, our sages (Sifre) have said that we are to obey our Torah authorities even if they say to you that right is left and the left is right. In other words, even if they are mistaken in one issue they are not to be disobeyed but their error must be followed. It is better to suffer from this one error in order to assure that everything is always under their authority. The alternative is that everyone follows his own opinion which will result in the destruction of the religion and anarchy and ultimately the complete loss of the entire people. Because of this the determination of the correct meaning of the Torah has been given to the Torah authorities and amongst these authorities the governing principle is that the minority must submit to the view of the majority for the same reason. And illustration of this principle is found in the astounding Bava Metzia (59b) concerning the dispute between R' Eliezar and the Oven of Achnai. It states that Eliyahu was asked what G d was doing during the dispute. He answered that He smiled and said My children have triumphed over me. G d was happy that His children followed the way of the Torah and its command to always obey majority rule. This that it says there My children have triumphed over Me obviously is not meant literally - Heaven forbid! The explanation is that in this dispute the truth was in fact with R' Eliezar as was testified to by the Heavenly Voice (bas kol). Therefore even though the truth was with R' Eliezar but since his thinking was too profound for them and they did not want to concede to him even after the bas kol. Their claim was that the Torah clearly establishes the requirement to listen to the majority always whether their position is true or they are mistaken. That is why G d said that My children triumphed over me. In other words since they have deviated from the path of the truth which R' Eliezar had determined and not them, they asserted their authority based upon the principle of majority rule. Therefore it had to be concede that in this case truth was vanquished and it was like the Master of Truth was vanquished. 

Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabiah Omer Y.D. 6:7.2): … The Yerushalmi (Horious 1:1) states, that you might think even if they tell you that "right" is "left" and that "left" is "right" that they must be obeyed. Therefore the Torah says that you should only obey them if they say that "right" is "right" and "left" is "left". But this is the opposite of the Sifre [that you must obey them even if they tell you that "right" is "left" and "left" is "right"…. However according to the explanation of the Ramban (Sefer HaMitzvos Shoresh I) and those who support him [Ran Sanhedrin 87a] there is a reconciliation. According to the Ramban as long as the dissenting view has not been directly presented to the Sanhedrin [or Rabbinic authority] then he must refuse to eat that which the Sanhedrin insists is kosher. [If he eats food that he regards as unkosher because he is relying on the Sanhedrin he must bring a korbon] However once he has directly discussed the issue with the Sanhedrin and they have rejected his view [despite his best efforts] then the halacha becomes that he must obey them [even if he is still convinced he is right.]