Tuesday, August 22, 2023

Marriage and divorce

אמת ליעקב דברים פרק כד פסוק א
(א) והיה אם לא תמצא חן בעיניו כי מצא בה ערות דבר11.
הנה במשנה [גיטין דף צ' ע"א] נחלקו בזה התנאים, דב"ה אומרים אפילו הקדיחה תבשילו, ורבי עקיבא אומר אפילו מצא אחרת נאה הימנה וכו'. לכאורה זה טעון הסבר, דמדוע תתיר התורה לאיש לגרש את אשתו אך ורק בשביל שהקדיחה תבשילו או משום שמצא אחרת נאה הימנה, וכי מה חטאה זו שתהא מגורשת?
אמנם נראה שכאן ירדה התורה לבאר לנו מהו ענין הנישואין, והיינו שכל אדם צריך לחשוב על אשתו שהיא היותר חכמה והיותר נאה והיותר טובה משאר הנשים שבעולם (וכן היא צריכה לחשוב כן עליו), ואם יתכן שהוא מצא אחרת נאה הימנה נמצא ששוב הוא אינו מחשב את אשתו להכי נאה וא"כ זהו סימן שאין זיווגם עולה יפה. וכן הוא בענין הקדיחה תבשילו, דהנה זה כלל שאין אדם רואה חובה לעצמו, ואם למשל במקרה הפליט דבר מה מפיו מה שלא היה רוצה להגיד, זה ודאי דלא שייך שיכעוס על לשונו - שהרי הוא לשונו ולשונו הוא, וא"כ אם הוא מרגיש איזה טענה במה שהיא הקדיחה תבשילו זהו סימן שהוא אינו מרגיש את האיחוד ביניהם כראוי ואין זיווגם עולה יפה, ולכן יכול הוא לגרשה. ונמצא שהקדחת התבשיל אינו סיבת הגירושין, אלא מה שמרגיש זה לתביעה עליה זה הוא סיבת הגירושין, ודו"ק היטב בזה.
והנה באמת זו מדרגה קשה להשיג, כי איך יתכן ששני בני אדם שונים יתמזגו ויתאחדו להיות כמעט כמו גוף אחד, ולכאורה זה לגמרי נגד הטבע. ובאמת זהו ביאור מאמרם [סוטה דף ב' ע"א]: וקשין לזווגן כקריעת ים סוף, דלכאורה מה שייך "קשה" קמיה קודשא בריך הוא, והלא הוא ברא את העולם כולו באתא קלילא דלית בה מששא, ומה הקושי בשבילו לקרוע את ים סוף. אלא ביאור הדבר הוא שה' בחכמה יסד ארץ [משלי ג' פי"ט], והיינו שכל מה שהטביע הקדוש ברוך הוא בעולם נעשה ע"פ חכמת הבורא, ולכן כשהוא צריך לשנות את הטבע הרי זה חריגה מדרך החכמה, והרי זה כמו שמאלצים לאדם חכם לעשות דבר שטות שזה דבר מאד "קשה" בשבילו, ולכן לעשות מהים יבשה זה דבר קשה בשביל הקדוש ברוך הוא12. וכמו כן ענין הזיווג, כלומר ההתקשרות בין שני גופים שונים להיות גוף אחד, זה התקשרות שהיא למעלה מטבע האדם שהטביע השי"ת בעולמנו, ולכן קשה הזיווג כקריעת ים סוף.
ונראה שבכדי להקל על העבודה הקשה הזאת ברא הקדוש ברוך הוא את הזכר והנקבה באופן שהם שתי חלקים מגוף אחד, וזה הוא הביאור בדברי חז"ל שארבעים יום קודם יצירת הולד מכריזין בת פלוני לפלוני, והכוונה בזה הוא שמיד בתחילת יצירתו של האדם הרי הוא כבר באמת חלק אחד עם המיועדת לו, וכבר מתחילת הוייתם הם כשני חלקים מגוף אחד וכל אחד מהם באמת הוא רק חצי מדבר שלם, ולכן כשהם מזדווגים זה עם זה הם באמת משלימים את החצי החסר, ורק באופן זה יכולים הם להגיע לידי המטרה העיקרית של הנשואין - האיחוד לגוף אחד, ודו"ק.

Abarbanel(Devarim 21, 24): The 12th question is how is it possible that G‑d’s Torah agrees that marriage can be dissolved by divorce. It would seem to be wrong that a man and woman who were  united before G‑d should be able to separate from each other  and that the woman be allowed to have sexual relations with another man and that the man should marry a different woman. It would seem that those things which are done as mitzvos should not be subject to regret and reversal. And surely this would apply to divorce which can be done without significant justification. The Torah simply says, “If she does not find favor in his eyes because he found in her something unseemly (ervas davar) then he should write a document of divorce and give it to her and send her away.” This is especially problematic according to the view that divorce can result even if he doesn’t like the way she makes his meals. Concerning marriage the Torah says (Bereishis 2:24), Therefore a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife and they should be one flesh.” This is a general lesson concerning the nature of man and how human relations change. So how is it possible that this natural process be reversed? Answer (Devarim 24) : There is no question that the actions of man in this world are in order to achieve one of five goals. 1) Acquiring wealth, 2) love of honor,  3) physical pleasures, 4) spiritual perfection or 5) welfare of one’s children. The joining together of a man and his wife in marriage can bring about all 5 of these goals. Marriage can provide good financial benefits because man is not like other creatures who obtain their clothing through nature as well as their food. In contrast man must acquire clothing and food through work which requires much preparations in order to obtain these things. A wife can be very helpful in acquiring material objects as well as food and clothing. Marriage is also inherently helpful in obtaining honor and respect since a single man finds it difficult to obtain honor because true glory goes to one who has a household. Marriage also provides physical pleasures especially since she obviates the need for prostitutes. There are also additional physical benefits in that she can help him with his tasks and work as well as taking care of his bodily needs and pleasures. Marriage also is helpful in spiritual perfection - not only by keeping him from sin and pursing his lusts - but also in fulfilling      the mitzva of having children aside from the mitzvos that are available to him as married man. In fact marriage is also beneficial for the woman in that she has children. She is the cause of their existence and she raises and educates them as our Sages said in Yevamos (63), It is sufficient for a wife if she simply raises the children and saves her husband from sin. That is why G‑d’s Torah commands us concerning marriage because G‑d saw that it was not good for man to be alone. He also commanded the woman not to commit adultery and that the man was obligated providing her with food, clothing and conjugal duties. However all these benefits of marriage do not automatically exist and come about simply by getting married. Rather these benefits are conditional on there being a compatibility between the couple regarding their natures and personality to maximum degree possible. This compatibility also causes love and tranquility between them as it says that G‑d made her an ezer kenego. In other words an ezer kenegdo means that she is an ezer (help) if she is like him (kenegdo) and agrees with him in all matters. The importance of this compatibility can be seen from the fact that G‑d brought all the animals and birds to Adam in order that he determine the name of each creature. In other words he was to observe each creature to see whether there was one which had the appropriate temperament and was compatible with his personality and his nature. That is why the Torah notes that after examining every creature Adam had not found his ezer kenedgo (his compatible mate). In other words even though he found those creatures which would be ezer (be of help) to him but none which were kenegdo (compatible and complementary to his nature). Because compatibility can not be based solely on the fact that a creature is female. Therefore it was necessary to do something different in order to create the proper compatibility and love. G‑d took one of Adam’s ribs and cloned a woman from it and then brought her to Adam - in order that she have his personality and nature. All of this was done to ensure the proper match and complementarity of the personality and attributes between a man and his wife and that it was inherent from her creation. That is because if it were the opposite then there would be no actual compatibility and thus there would be no basis for a successful household and not one of the five goals we mentioned would be accomplished. If there was no compatibility with the woman then it would be better for the man to remain alone and not join with that vile serpent – the bad wife. This is stated by Shlomo (Koheles 7), I find the woman more bitter than death...Similarly in Mishlei (25), It is better to dwell in the corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman in a roomy house. Another source is Yevamos (63a), If he merits she is a helper (ezer) and if not she is his opponent (kenegdo). What this gemora is saying is that there is no middle neutral position regarding a man and woman. In fact the wife is either a help or an opponent since it is totally dependent upon the compatibility or incompatibility of their natures. How can there be a middle position in being compatible or incompatible? Consequently G‑d has commanded that when a man finds that his nature and personality are not compatible with that of his wife as expressed by the verse, “And if she doesn’t find favor in his eyes because he found in her ervas davar (an unseemly thing) - that their incompatible natures are the reason that he should divorce her. That is because it is better that they get divorced than have increasing hatred, fights and bickering between them.  The philosopher (Aristotle) has already mentioned this idea in relationship to the conduct of society. He has noted that because of this question of compatibility, men have agreed that there should be a period of engagement (eirusin) prior to marriage in order that they have a trial period to see how compatible they are. Only if they experience the love and tranquility that are the indicators of compatibility will they get married. That is because it is better to divorce her while she is still a virgin then a married non-virgin. This is a very solid reason for divorce besides the reason given by the Rambam (Moreh Nevuchim 3:49). However if they did get married and do not experience the indicators of compatibility in any way, the Torah says that they should get divorced which is the lesser of evils. Because perhaps he will marry a different woman who is compatible to his nature and personality and she will marry someone who is like her. This is preferable to them living their lives in suffering and torment and even worse perhaps killing or adultery and other serious evils. Therefore the Torah said, When a man takes a woman for a wife and has sexual intercourse with her. This means that even though she had intercourse with him which you might think make it wrong to get divorced since he has tormented her – nevertheless if she doesn’t find favor in his eyes or he hates her ... then he has the choice of divorcing her. Nevertheless the Torah doesn’t want her divorced by simply telling her that she is divorced or by giving her money or by sending her from his house. That is to ensure that divorce is not easy to do which would result in a woman being divorced multiple times from her husband – because he was in a bad mood. Another negative consequence of easy divorce would be that she could go and falsely tell people that she was divorced in order to commit adultery with another man. Therefore in order to remove all these pitfalls from divorce, G‑d commanded that a man can only divorce his wife with a written document which requires many conditions to be valid as well as witnesses. All of these serve the purpose of making it not so easy for the husband to get divorced. Consequently if the husband wants to divorce his wife when he is in a state of anger and outrage, this will form a difficult barrier to overcome and he will calm down. This complicated procedure also serves to prevent her from falsely declaring that she is divorced – as the Rambam says in Moreh Nevuchim....

Chinuch(#579): Divorce requires a document: The basis of this mitzva is that since a woman was created to help her husband and she is to him like an desirable utensil. A similar idea is expressed in Sanhedrin (22b), A woman does not make a covenant except with one who makes her into a utensil. Since a woman is there to serve a purpose, it is the will of G‑d that when he is disgusted with this utensil he should remove it from his house. Because of this reason there are some of our Sages who say in Gittin (90a) that even if she burns his food he is able to divorce her i.e., for a trivial matter since she is nothing but a valued utensil in his house. However others Sages say that since she is in G‑d’s form and image and G‑d prepared her for her husband’s needs and honor – with eyes to see and ears to hear and intelligence – it is not right to reject her and send out of his house except for a major reason. This is as the verse says, “Because he found in her ervas davar (something disgusting).” Nevertheless according to all the Sages, if he finds some major problem with her it is correct to divorce her. That is because of the reason I mentioned, that she was only created for his sake. And since she is causing him upset and he is disgusted with her there is no necessity for him to remain with her. The Jewish approach is not that of some of the non-Jews who make a strong binding commitment to marriage that is only ended by death. A man should not be afraid to divorce his wife if she does something repellent and destroys all that is in the house and burns down all of his possessions. However the Torah commands that when she is sent away that it shouldn’t be done by words alone because this can lead to much trouble and immorality in our society. Because a wife who is committing adultery could simply claim that she was already divorced. In addition if divorce is too easy to do then it becomes very common. Consequently the Torah requires that a divorce be based on a written document and that there be witnesses who testify and that all those who claim to be divorced can show it. An additional advantage of a complicated written procedure over an oral agreement is that the delay and effort can cause the man’s anger to dissipate sometimes and he will decide not to divorce his wife and great is peace...

Rashi (Devarim 24:1): Because he found something unseemly in her (ervas davar) – he has a mitzva to divorce her because she does not find favor in his eyes.

Meiri(Gittin 89b): Beis Shammai said that one should not divorce his wife unless he found ervas davar (something disgusting). Beis Hillel said that he can divorce her even if she just ruined the food. In other words she doesn’t make an effort to run the house properly. The general rule for Beis Hillel is that it is grounds for divorce if she is not compliant and does not conduct herself according to what he wants. Rabbi Akiva said that even if he finds someone prettier it is grounds for divorce. In other words even if there is no real reason except that he prefers someone else. The halacha is not in accord with either Rabbi Akiva or Beis Shammai but rather is in accord with Beis Hillel. Nevertheless even if he divorces his wife without any reason – the divorce is valid and it is not reversible. It is only when a woman is raped that we say that the rapist - who is forced to marry her if she wants - can never divorce her all his days. In other words it is only a rapist who is forced to stay married and a divorce that he gives is not valid – unless his wife wants it – but in all other cases the divorce is good and final.

Jews not absolutely determined by Mazel

  Shabbos (156b)  From Samuel too [we learn that] Israel is immune from planetary influence. For Samuel and Ablat were sitting, while certain people were going to a lake.5 Said Ablat6 to Samuel: ‘That man is going but will not return, [for] a snake will bite him and he will die.’ ‘If he is an Israelite,’ replied Samuel. ‘he will go and return.’7 While they were sitting he went and returned. [Thereupon] Ablat arose and threw off his [the man's] knapsack, [and] found a snake therein cut up and lying in two pieces — Said Samuel to him, ‘What did you do?’8 ‘Every day we pooled our bread and ate it; but to-day one of us had no bread, and he was ashamed. Said I to them, "I will go and collect [the bread]".9 When I came to him, I pretended to take [bread] from him, so that he should not be ashamed.’ ‘You have done a good deed,’ said he to him. Then Samuel went out and lectured: But charity10 delivereth from death;11 and [this does not mean] from an unnatural death, but from death itself.

       From R. Akiba too [we learn that] Israel is free from planetary influence. For R. Akiba had a daughter. Now, astrologers12 told him, On the day she enters the bridal chamber a snake will bite her and she will die. He was very worried about this. On that day [of her marriage] she took a brooch [and] stuck it into the wall and by chance it penetrated [sank] into the eye of a serpent. The following morning, when she took it out, the snake came trailing after it. ‘What did you do?’ her father asked her. ‘A poor man came to our door in the evening.’ she replied, ‘and everybody was busy at the banquet, and there was none to attend to him. So I took the portion which was given to me and gave it to him. ‘You have done a good deed,’ said he to her. Thereupon R. Akiba went out and lectured: ‘But charity delivereth from death’: and not [merely] from an unnatural death, but from death itself.

       From R. Nahman b. Isaac too [we learn that] Israel is free from planetary influence. For R. Nahman b. Isaac's mother was told by astrologers, Your son will be a thief. [So] she did not let him [be] bareheaded, saying to him, ‘Cover your head so that the fear of heaven may be upon you, and pray [for mercy]’. Now, he did not know why she spoke that to him. One day he was sitting and studying under a palm tree; temptation13 overcame him, he climbed up and bit off a cluster [of dates] with his teeth.1

Problematic leaders

    Shabbos (139a)It was taught. R. Jose b. Elisha said: If you see a generation overwhelmed by many troubles, go forth and examine the judges of Israel, for all retribution that comes to the world comes only on account of the Judges of Israel, as it is said, Hear this, I pray you ye heads of the house of Jacob, and rulers of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment, and pervert all equity. They build up Zion with blood and Jerusalem with iniquity. The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money; yet will they lean upon the Lord, etc.3 They are wicked, but they place their confidence in Him Who decreed, and the world came into existence.4 Therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring three punishments upon them answering to the three sins which they cultivate,5 as it is said, Therefore shall Zion for your sake be ploughed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest.6 And the Holy One, blessed be He, will not cause His Divine presence to rest upon Israel until the wicked judges and officers cease out of Israel, for it is said, And I will turn my hand upon thee, and thoroughly purge away thy dross, and will take away all thy tin. And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning, etc.7

       ‘Ulla said: Jerusalem shall be redeemed only by righteousness,8 as it is written, Zion shall be redeemed with judgement, and her converts with righteousness.9

       R. Papa said: When the haughty cease to exist [in Israel], the magi10 shall cease [among the Persians]. When the judges cease to exist [in Israel], the chiliarchi11 shall cease. ‘When the haughty cease to exist [in Israel], the magi shall cease [among the Persians]’; as it is written, And I will surely purge away thy haughty ones.12 When the judges cease to exist [in Israel], the chiliarchi shall cease, as it is written, The Lord hath taken away thy judgements, he hath cast out thine enemy.13

       R. Melai14 said in the name of R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon: What is meant by the verse, The Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, the sceptre of the rulers?15 ‘The Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked’ refers to the judges who become a staff for their sheriffs;16 ‘the sceptre of the rulers’ refers to the scholars in the families of the judges.17 Mar Zutra said: This refers to the scholars who teach the laws of the public18 to ignorant judges.19
    R. Melai14 said in the name of R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon: What is meant by the verse, The Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, the sceptre of the rulers?15 ‘The Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked’ refers to the judges who become a staff for their sheriffs;16 ‘the sceptre of the rulers’ refers to the scholars in the families of the judges.17 Mar Zutra said: This refers to the scholars who teach the laws of the public18 to ignorant judges.19

       R. Eleazar b. Melai said in the name of Resh Lakish: What is meant by the verse, For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue muttereth wickedness?20 ‘For your hands are defiled with blood’: this refers to the judges: ‘and your fingers with iniquity’, to the judges’ scribes;21 ‘your lips have spoken lies’ to the advocates of the judges;22 ‘your tongue muttereth wickedness’ — to the litigants.

Text and verbal teachings are not the Mesorah

I recently reviewed the following gemorah which seems to indicate that the main Mesorah is based on observation not text or verbal lessons. In fact we have the rule Berachos (7b)shimush is greater than learning. Maharsha has a different explanation. Any other suggestions would be appreciated. In fact I think this indicates that what is taught in seforim and classes might actually contradict actual practise!

     Berachos (7b)  R. Johanan further said in the name of R. Simeon b. Yohai: The service of the Torah is greater than the study thereof.36 For it is said: Here is Elisha the son of Shaphat, who poured water on the hands of Elijah.37 It is not said, who learned, but who poured water. This teaches that the service of the Torah is greater than the study thereof.
תפארת ישראל - יכין מסכת אבות פרק ב
קג) והוי מתחמם כנגד אורן של חכמים. זה אמר כנגד לימוד התורה שנקראת אור, שנאמר ותורה אור [משלי ו' כ"ג], אמנם אפשר לקבל האורה מהאור מרחוק, אבל א"א שיתחמם מהאור מרחוק, להכי אמר הוה מתחמם וכו', ר"ל לא תסתפק להיות מואר מלימודם מרחוק, אבל ראה שתתקרב אליהם ותחמם הרגשותיך כשתראה מעשיהם בהתלהבות קדוש, דגדולה שימושה של תורה יותר מלימודה [כברכות ד"ז ב']:

ר' צדוק:

...והוצרך לשלוח יהושע משרתו שנקרא נוצר תאנה שהיה מסדר הספסלים ומשמש לדברי תורה, ואז"ל (ברכות ז' ב') גדולה שימושה של תורה יותר מלימודה, ושמעתי דהלימוד הרי יש לו גבול עד כמה הוא משיג, אבל השימוש הוא החשק והאהבה שיש למשמש שמחמתו הוא משמש ומשתדל להקים דגל התורה, זה אין לו גבול, כי הוא אינו משיג עצמות דברי תורה המתגלה לחכמים רק חומד וכוסף לדברי תורה, היינו לשורש התורה כולה, ולכך מצד השימוש יש גם כן בכללו כח של שער הנ' הנעלם ומצידו הוא ניצוח עמלק... (חלק ה רסיסי לילה עמוד קכ)



Berachos (62a)It has been taught: R. Akiba said: Once I went in after R. Joshua to a privy, and I learnt from him three things. I learnt that one does not sit east and west but north and south; I learnt that one evacuates not standing but sitting; and I learnt that it is proper to wipe with the left hand and not with the right. Said Ben Azzai to him: Did you dare to take such liberties with your master? He replied: It was a matter of Torah, and I required to learn. It has been taught: Ben ‘Azzai said: Once I went in after R. Akiba to a privy, and I learnt from him three things. I learnt that one does not evacuate east and west but north and south. I also learnt that one evacuates sitting and not standing. I also learnt it is proper to wipe with the left hand and not with the right. Said R. Judah to him: Did you dare to take such liberties with your master? — He replied: It was a matter of Torah, and I required to learn. R. Kahana once went in and hid under Rab's bed. He heard him chatting [with his wife] and joking and doing what he required. He said to him: One would think that Abba's mouth had never sipped the dish before! He said to him: Kahana, are you here? Go out, because it is rude.1 He replied: It is a matter of Torah, and I require to learn.

Image of elokim - creation of man Chizkuni


Chizkuni (Bereishis 1:27) G-d created man in his image  meaning in the image of an angel . Don’t be astonished if this is not expressed in the Torah as being the image of angels because Moshe did not write here angels or hell or the mysteries of the chariot but only those things that we see in the world as I explained before. Another explanation that his image in G-ds image so that he didn’t need to borrow any image from others or ascribe G-d as being like man. The image of G-d  can also mean the image of angels because the appearance of man and angels is equal.  This is also the explanation to the later verse And they will be like god” “(Bereishis 3:22). And a proof in this matter, is that in Bereishis Rabbah (20:4) there is is sum of all mentions all of “elokim” in the Torah from the beginning until “To Adam”(Bereishis 3:17)  and says there are 71. [ alluding to the fact that the serpent was judged by a full court since Sanhedrin had 71judges] And if you want to say that “let us make man “ and they will be like god”are included in the 71 then in fact there would be 73 mentions.  So clearly the term “elokim “ in these verses is referring to angels. This also reflected in the fact that the Targum doesn’t say this verse is about G-d Alternatively the word tzalem (image)  is referring to a judge meaning in the image of a judge He created him. Or it means that G-d created man with a plan even though all other creatures were created with a statement alone but man was created with an image as Rashi explains to show man’s importance.”Male and female He created them,” as the verse explains later that G-d took one of Adam’s ribs

Commonsense morality and empathy can be corrupted by religion and theology


The most bizarre and troubling aspect about child abuse in the religious community is not the abuse itself. It is the lack of seichel and moral outrage about children being harmed. It is common for victims of abuse and their family to be more traumatized and angry at the community and its leaders - than at the sick person who did the abuse. A child who runs to his rabbi or parent to report being abused - and is slapped and humiliated by these authority figures whom he viewed as his protector and role model - often suffers more psychological damage than he does from the abuse itself. The victim who is silenced or driven out of the community for complaining about the abuse has been horribly betrayed by those who are at the foundation of his existence. 

I have often wondered how great rabbis who spend their whole life seeking spirituality and immersed in Torah study - react in a more boorish and insensitive fashion than not only the ignorant religious masses - but also the non-religious or non-Jew. What has happened to their human feelings?  The answer obviously is that their understanding of religion and halacha has displaced their natural feelings. In fact they will proudly tell you that emotions and feelings can only follow - not lead an intellectual understanding from Torah. This loss of commonsense is the loss of the sense of yoshrus which I discuss at length in my books on abuse. There obviously are exceptions to this and the exceptions are becoming more numerous as the result of learning about the reality of the harm of abuse. 

update  June 17, 2014 See Post - Biblical Slavery and Morality

update: 6/13/14 Dr. Marc Shapiro on Seforim Blog noted that not only did Rav Kook emphasize the value of commonsense to distinguish right and wrong but Rav Itzele Ponovezh stated that the masses not the gedolim are the repository of Daas Torah - apparently because of their collective commonsense. And that this idea is clearly acknowledged by Chazal and Rishonim and Achronim.

In previous posts I have commented that one of the novelties of haredi ideology is the notion that the “Gedolim” are the carriers of all truth. See here where I quote R. Itzele of Ponovezh’s assertion that it is the people, עמך, not the Gedolim, who represent what today is referred to as Daas Torah.[13] This idea can be found in the Talmud and later rabbinic literature as well. When the Talmud and post-Talmudic authorities state אם אינם נביאים בני נביאים הם  or פוק חזי מאי עמא דבר  or קול המון כקול ש-די  or מנהג ישראל תורה  they are not referring to the Gedolim but to the masses of pious Jews, the ones who make up the kehillah kedoshah.

 update 6/16/2014:   Rabbi Yitzchok Isaac Sher (Leket Sichos Mussar 1:59): The Rambam (Hilchos De’os 1:7)  teaches concerning the perfection of character that a person should not chose an extreme position in character traits but rather he should pick the moderate middle position which is the path of G-d Who has commanded us to conduct ourselves in that manner. This raises an important question – who decides that a trait is in the middle? Furthermore why is this middle path called “the path of G-d”?  The answer is that it is clear that the Rambam’s meant that a person should rely on his commonsense (seichel) to guide him in finding the middle path. Therefore when a person conducts himself according to seichel (commonsense) rather than his basic lusts – this is “the path of G-d”. In fact this is the path that G-d taught Adam from the beginning of his creation and He implanted in him good commonsense to guide him properly. And even after we received the Torah and the 613 mitzvos in order to guide our commonsense according to the Divine intelligence – we are still told “It is not in Heaven” (Devarim 30:12 – Bava Metzia 59b). We are not to rely on Heaven to teach us what G-d’s will is but rather we are to rely on our commonsense [as we were before the Torah was given] in order to clarify the path of the Torah and the path of G-d. If we do that we will be successful – as the Rambam concludes there, “This is the heritage that Avraham taught his descendants –as the Torah (Bereishis 18:19) states, “For I have known him so that he will command his descendants...to keep the path of God.". One who follows this path brings benefit and blessing to himself, as [the verse concludes]: "so that God will bring about for Abraham all that He promised.

update: Read the Seichel Deficit from Yated

update: One of the children of a young kollelman developed a very high fever on Shabbos. Being a talmid chachom he researched the halacha and concluded that while it was permitted to call the doctor or even take the child to the hospital - he decided that he would be machmir and not violate Shabbos. When Shabbos was over - Rabbeinu Tam - he rushed the child to the hospital where the doctor said that his son had suffered irreversible brain damage from the fever. The broken father went to Rav Moshe and asked him how his son could have been harmed when he had been so careful to observe halacha? Rav Moshe replied that this was a case of pikuach nefesh and seichel should have told you that it wasn't time to be machmir.

update There are many sources describing the need to follow commonsense as well as the oligation to observe that which commonsense dictates. This is the issue known as natural law. I have a chapter devoted to this issue in my sefer Daas Torah. Spirtuality and Decency: Torah and Natural Law
Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky[(Emes L’Yaakov): According to the Halacha, Avraham was not obligated to risk his life to save his nephew Lot…. Avraham risked his life because the Patriarchs were yeshorim (upright) [Avoda Zara 25a]. That means that their actions were not governed only by the strict letter of Torah law - but by straight thinking. G‑d made man inherently yashar (upright). According to uprightness, there was an obligation to try and save Lot… Avraham felt responsible for Lot’s welfare because Lot’s father had died in a furnace because of his belief in the G‑d of Avraham. Therefore, according to uprightness (menshlikeit) Avraham had to organize his men and pursue after Lot’s captors. In truth the lives of the Patriarchs - which was before the giving of the Torah - was based on the attribute uprightness. This is the meaning of the expression [Vayikra Rabbah 9:3] that derech eretz (civility) preceded the Torah… Therefore, this civility and menshlikeit can be expected even from non‑Jews. Even though they weren’t given all the mitzvos, but everyone can live in accordance with the inherent uprightness - if he wants.

update: The Netziv says that commonsense obligates one as well as the Torah. Where there is a contradiction then Torah takes precedence. On the other hand where there is no Torah directive but there is from commonsense - then one must follow commonsense. For example he notes that while there is no obligation from the Torah to honor a non-Jewish father - but there is one from commonsense.

Netziv(Approbation to Ahavas Chesed): ….It says in Yevamos (79a): There are three inherent characteristics of the Jewish people – they are merciful, shy and they do acts of kindness to others. … Nevertheless there are explicit commands in the Torah to do acts of kindness such as Vayikra (25:35): You shall support your brother who has become poor, Shemos (22:24): Do not lend money with interest. The reason for this is to teach us that besides being obligated to do acts of kindness because we are human beings we have an addition obligation from the Torah – just as we have for all the mitzvos which we wouldn’t know from commonsense. The consequences of having both an inherent commonsense obligation as being part of mankind as well as an explicit command in the Torah is illustrated by the obligation to honor parents. The Torah command teaches that even though there is a command from commonsense that all of mankind is obligated to keep and receives reward for do it, nevertheless G‑d has in addition explicitly commanded us to do it as an aspect of the Torah (Shemos 20:11)… As a Torah mitzva honoring parents is a statute which must be done simply because it was commanded and not because it makes sense. For example if a non‑Jew fathers a child with a Jewish woman, than according to the Torah that child has a mother but no father. Therefore there is a greater obligation of honoring the mother than the father because the honor of the mother is dictated by not only commonsense but also from the Torah. …There are also consequences for lending money to a needy person. Even though it is clearly a commonsense obligation but it is also governed by Torah law. In this case the obligation from commonsense is inconsistent with the obligation of the Torah. The contradiction occurs in regard to charging interest. For example, in the case of a person whose life depends upon lending money with reasonable interest. From the commonsense point of view he still performs a great mitzva of lending money – even with interest – to sustain another person who desperately needs the loan. However the Torah specifically prohibits charging interest. Therefore according to the Torah a Jew would not be able to lend the money and thus he is prohibited from doing the kindness to the other person as well as sustaining himself. [This was explained in Harchev Davar - Bereishis 48:19 – concerning the Tabernacle at Shiloh…]
I recently came across two statements of Rav Kook which while acknowledging the reality of this process - explicitly reject it as an invalid Torah process. Rav Kook notes that a religious education that make one less sensitive and aware of commonsense morality and concerns - is invalid. While I have translated his words, it is best to see the Hebrew text.
Rav Kook(Shemonah Kevatzim (1:463):  The people who rely solely on their commonsense - because they are not learned - actually have an advantage in many respects over those who are learned. That is because their natural understanding and sense of decency has not become corrupted by errors that result from scholarship and or by the exhaustion and emotional frustrations that result from the burden of study. Nevertheless the unlearned masses obviously need the guidance of the scholars to know the particulars of the halacha. On the other hand, the scholars need to adopt and utilize as much is possible of the unadulterated commonsense of the unlearned masses – whether it is the approach to life or recognizing the natural moral values. This will result in the continued proper development of their understanding. This approach is even for tzadikim and even for those wicked people who retain a natural part which provides them with the potential to build on their natural power and purity to the same degree as the righteous at their highest level. The same can be said in regards to the nations in their relationship with each other – in particular non-Jew and Jews.
Rav Kook(Shemonah Kevatzim 1:75): It is prohibited for fear of heaven (yiras shamayim) - which is the result of learning - to displace natural commonsense ethics and morality. Because if it does - then it is no longer pure fear of heaven. Fear of heaven is only pure and genuine if the native moral sense itself is developed and elevated to a greater degree than it was before. However if one imagines that fear of heaven is something that without its influence, life is more likely to be good and to produce results that are beneficial to the individual and the community and that its influence actually reduces the goodness of life – such fear of heaven is not genuine.


רב קוק (שמונה קבצים א:תסג): האנשים הטבעיים שאינם מלומדים, יש להם יתרון בהרבה דברים על המלומדים, בזה שלא נתטשטש אצלם השכל הטבעי והמוסר העצמי ע"י השגיאות העולות מהלימודים וע"י חלישות הכחות וההתקצפות הבאה ע"י העול הלימודי, ומ"מ הם צריכים לקבל הדרכה בפרטי החחים מהמלומדים. והמלומדים צריכים תמיד לסגל לעצמם, כפי האפשרי להם, את הכשרון הטבעי של עמי הארץ, בין בהשקפת החיים בין בהכרת המוסר מצד טבעיותו, ואז יתעלו הם בפיתוח שכלם יותר ויותר, וכן הדבר נוהג אפילו בצדיקים ורשעים שישנם רשעים כאלה, שהחלק הטוב שנשאר אצלם הוא מבונה בכח טבעי עצמי וטהור כ"כ, עד שצדיקים במעלתם העליונה, וכן הדבר נוהג גם בכלל האומות ביחש כל אחת מהם לחבירתה, וביחוד בין אוה"ע לישראל.

 רב קוק (שמונה קבצים (א:עה): אסור ליראת שמים שתדחק את המוסר הטבעי של האדם, כי אז אינה עוד יראת שמים טהורה. סימן ליראת שמים טהורה הוא כשהמוסר הטבעי הנטוע בטבע הישר של האדם, הולך ועולה על פיה במעלות יותר בגוהות ממה שהוא עומד מבלעדה. אבל אם חצוייר יראת שמים בתכונה כזאת שבלא השפעתה על החיים היו החיים יותר נוטים לפעול טוב, ולהוציא על הפועל דברים מועילים לפרט ולכלל וע"פ השפעתה מתמעט כח הפועל ההוא יראת שמים כזאת היא יראה פסולה.