One in Messiah Congregation
Do you think the rabbis, defeated Him??
Read this below!!
Talmud - Mas. Sanhedrin 2a
CHAPTER I
MISHNAH. MONETARY CASES [MUST BE ADJUDICATED] BY THREE JUDGES; CASES OF LARCENY AND MAYHEM,1 BY THREE; CLAIMS FOR FULL OR HALF DAMAGES,2 THE REPAYMENT OF THE DOUBLE3 OR FOUR- OR FIVE-FOLD RESTITUTION [OF STOLEN GOODS],4 BY THREE, AS MUST CASES OF RAPE5 SEDUCTION6 AND LIBEL7 ; SO SAYS R. MEIR. BUT THE SAGES8 HOLD THAT A CASE OF LIBEL REQUIRES A COURT OF TWENTY-THREE SINCE IT MAY INVOLVE A CAPITAL CHARGE.9
CASES INVOLVING FLOGGING,10 BY THREE; IN THE NAME OF R. ISHMAEL IT IS SAID, BY TWENTY-THREE.
THE INTERCALATION OF THE MONTH IS EFFECTED BY A COURT OF THREE;11 THE INTERCALATION OF THE YEAR,12 BY THREE: SO R. MEIR. BUT R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAYS THE MATTER IS INITIATED BY THREE, DISCUSSED BY FIVE AND DETERMINED BY SEVEN. IF HOWEVER, IT BE DETERMINED ONLY BY THREE, THE INTERCALATION HOLDS GOOD. THE LAYING OF THE ELDERS HANDS [ON THE HEAD OF A COMMUNAL SACRIFICE]13 AND THE BREAKING OF THE HEIFER'S NECK14 REQUIRE THE PRESENCE OF THREE: SO SAYS R. SIMEON. ACCORDING TO R. JUDAH, FIVE. THE PERFORMANCE OF HALIZAH,15 AND THE DECISION AS TO MI'UN16 IS MADE BY THREE. THE FOURTH YEAR FRUIT17 AND THE SECOND TITHE18 OF UNKNOWN VALUE ARE ASSESSED BY THREE. THE ASSESSMENT OF CONSECRATED OBJECTS FOR REDEMPTION PURPOSES IS MADE BY THREE; VALUATIONS OF MOVABLE PROPERTY19 BY THREE. ACCORDING TO R. JUDAH ONE OF THEM MUST BE A KOHEN;20 IN THE CASE OF REAL ESTATE, BY TEN INCLUDING A KOHEN, IN THE CASE OF A PERSON, BY THE SAME NUMBER. CAPITAL CASES ARE ADJUDICATED BY TWENTY-THREE. THE PERSON OR BEAST CHARGED WITH UNNATURAL INTERCOURSE, BY TWENTY-THREE, AS IT is WRITTEN, THOU SHALT KILL THE WOMAN AND THE BEAST,21 AND ALSO, AND YE SHALL SLAY THE BEAST.22
THE OX TO BE STONED23 IS TRIED BY TWENTY-THREE, AS IT IS WRITTEN, THE OX SHALL BE STONED AND ITS OWNER SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH24 AS THE DEATH OF THE OWNER, SO THAT OF THE OX, CAN BE DECIDED ONLY BY TWENTY-THREE.
THE DEATH SENTENCE ON THE WOLF OR THE LION OR THE BEAR OR THE LEOPARD OR THE HYENA OR THE SERPENT25 is TO BE PASSED BY TWENTY-THREE. R. ELIEZER SAYS: WHOEVER IS FIRST TO KILL THEM [WITHOUT TRIAL], ACQUIRES MERIT, R. AKIBA, HOWEVER, HOLDS THAT THEIR DEATH IS TO BE DECIDED BY TWENTY-THREE.
A TRIBE,26 A FALSE PROPHET27 AND A HIGH PRIEST CAN ONLY BE TRIED BY A COURT OF SEVENTY-ONE. WAR OF FREE CHOICE27 CAN BE WAGED ONLY BY THE AUTHORITY OF A COURT OF SEVENTY-ONE. NO ADDITION TO THE CITY OF JERUSALEM OR THE TEMPLE COURT-YARDS CAN BE SANCTIONED SAVE BY A COURT OF SEVENTY-ONE.
SMALL SANHEDRINS FOR THE TRIBES CAN BE INSTITUTED ONLY BY A COURT OF SEVENTY-ONE.
NO CITY CAN BE DECLARED CONDEMNED28 SAVE BY A DECREE OF A COURT OF SEVENTY-ONE. A FRONTIER TOWN CANNOT BE CONDEMNED NOR THREE CITIES AT A TIME,29 BUT ONLY ONE OR TWO.
THE GREAT SANHEDRIN CONSISTED OF SEVENTY-ONE MEMBERS; THE SMALL SANHEDRIN OF TWENTY-THREE. WHENCE DO WE DEDUCE THAT THE GREAT SANHEDRIN IS OF SEVENTY-ONE? IT IS SAID, GATHER UNTO ME SEVENTY MEN;30 WITH MOSES AT THEIR HEAD WE HAVE SEVENTY-ONE. R. JUDAH SAID IT CONSISTED ONLY OF SEVENTY. WHENCE DO WE KNOW THAT THE SMALL SANHEDRIN IS OF ONLY TWENTY-THREE? IT IS SAID, AND THE EDAH31 SHALL JUDGE... AND THE EDAH SHALL DELIVER.32 ONE EDAH JUDGES, [I.E. CONDEMNS] AND THE OTHER MAY DELIVER [I.E. ACQUIT], HENCE WE HAVE TWENTY. BUT HOW DO WE KNOW THAT A CONGREGATION CONSISTS OF NOT LESS THAN TEN? IT IS WRITTEN, HOW LONG SHALL I BEAR WITH THIS EVIL EDAH?33 EXCLUDING JOSHUA AND CALEB, WE HAVE TEN. AND WHENCE DO WE DERIVE THE ADDITIONAL THREE? BY THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE TEXT, THOU SHALT NOT FOLLOW A MAJORITY FOR EVIL,34 I INFER THAT I MAY FOLLOW THEM FOR GOOD;35 IF SO, WHY IS IT SAID, TO INCLINE AFTER THE MAJORITY36 ? TO TEACH THAT THE MAJORITY TO INCLINE AFTER FOR GOOD [I.E. FOR A FAVOURABLE DECISION] IS NOT THE ONE TO INCLINE AFTER FOR EVIL [I.E. FOR AN ADVERSE DECISION] SINCE FOR GOOD, A MAJORITY OF ONE SUFFICES; WHEREAS FOR EVIL, A MAJORITY OF TWO IS REQUIRED. [
____________________
(1) An assault on a person involving bodily injury, Lev. XXIV, 19.
(2) Done by a goring ox, Ex. XXI, 35.
(3) Ex. XXII, 3.
(4) Ex. XXI, 37.
(5) Deut. XXII, 28-29.
(6) Ex. XXII, 15-16.
(7) Deut. XXII, 14ff.
(8) Representing the opinion of teachers in general.
(9) For if the woman is proved guilty she is stoned.
(10) Deut.XXV, 2-3.
(11) V. p. 42.
(12) Making it 13 instead of 12 months.
(13) Lev. IV, 15. According to Maimonides, The Ordination of Elders.
(14) Deut. XXI,1- 9.
(15) Deut. XXV, 5-10. V. p. 91, lit., the drawing off of the shoe.
(16) The annulment of a woman's marriage following her refusal to agree to the union contracted by her as a fatherless girl during her minority.
(17) V. Lev. XIX, 23-25. It could be exchanged into money and its equivalent consumed in Jerusalem.
(18) The tithe taken by the landowner to Jerusalem there to be consumed, as distinct from the first tithe assigned to the Levites, according to Rabbinic interpretation of Deut. XIV, 22-26.
(19) The value of which had been vowed to the Sanctuary.
(20) Priest, v. Glos.
(21) Lev. XX, 16.
(22) Lev. XX, 15. The procedure at the trial of the beast and the person is thus made alike.
(23) If he gored a person. Ex. XXI, 28.
(24) Ex. XXI, 29.
(25) Which has killed a human being.
(26) That has gone astray after idolworship, v. p. 76.
(27) Deut. XVIII, 20. (12) I.e., all wars apart from the conquest of the seven nations inhabiting Canaan.
(28) Deut. XIII, 13.
(29) V. p. 82.
(30) Num. XI, 16.
(31) vsg Congregation.
(32) Ibid. XXXV, 24.
(33) Ibid. XIV, 27. Referring to the twelve spies. Ibid. XXXV, 24.
(34) I.e., for condemnation. Ex. XXIII, 2.
(35) For acquittal.
(36) Ibid.
Babylonian Talmud, Baba Mezia 59a-59b
The following concerns a halakhic ruling regarding whether a reconstructed oven is ritually pure or impure.
On that day, Rabbi Eliezer used all the arguments in the world. He produced powerful arguments to justify his position that the oven should be considered unreconstructed and not susceptible to ritual impurity. But the Sages did not accept his arguments, and insisted that the oven was susceptible to ritual impurity. After Rabbi Eliezer saw that he was not able to persuade his colleagues with logical arguments, he said to them: If the Halakhah is in accordance with me, let this carob tree prove it.' The carob tree immediately uprooted itself and moved one hundred cubits--and some say four hundred cubits--from its original place. The Sages said to him: Proof cannot be brought from a carob tree. Rabbi Eliezer then said to the Sages: If the Halakhah is in accordance with me, let the channel of water prove it. The channel of water immediately flowed backward, against the direction in which it usually flowed. The sages said to him: `Proof cannot be brought from a channel of water either.' Rabbi Eliezer then said to the Sages: `If the Halakhah is in accordance with me, let the wall of the House of Study prove it.' The walls of the House of Study then leaned and were about to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua, one of Rabbi Eliezer's chief opponents among the Sages, rebuked the falling walls, saying to them: `If Talmudic scholars argue with one another in their discussions about the Halakhah, what affair is it of yours?' The walls did not fall down, out of respect for Rabbi Yehoshua, nor did they straighten, out of respect for Rabbi Eliezer, and indeed those walls still remain leaning to this day. Rabbi Eliezer then said to the Sages: `If the Halakhah is in accordance with me let it be proved directly from Heaven.' Suddenly a heavenly voice went forth and said to the Sages, `Why are you disputing with Rabbi Eliezer? The Halakhah is in accordance with him in all circumstances!' Rabbi Yehoshua rose to his feet and quoted a portion of a verse (Deuteronomy 30:12), saying, The Torah is not in heaven!
The Gemara interrupts the Baraita and asks for a clarification: What did Rabbi Yehoshua mean when he quoted the Scriptural verse that the Torah is not in heaven?
Rabbi Yirmeyah said in reply: Since God already gave the Torah to the Jewish people on Mount Sinai, we no longer pay attention to heavenly voices that attempt to intervene in matters of Halakhah. For You, God, already wrote in the Torah at Mount Sinai (Exodus 23:2),After the majority to incline.
Exod.23 [2] Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment:
From this verse we learn that Halakhic disputes
must be resolved by majority vote of the Rabbis.
God could not contradict His own decision to
allow Torah questions to be decided by free debate and majority vote.
The Gemara relates that generations later Rabbi
Natan met the Prophet Elijah. (Several of the Talmudic Sages had visions of
Elijah the Prophet, and discussed Halakhic questions with him.) Rabbi Natan
asked Elijah about the debate between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua. He
said to him: What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do at that time when Rabbi
Yehoshua refused to heed the heavenly voice? In reply, Elijah said to Rabbi
Natan:
God smiled and said: `My sons have defeated
Me, My sons have defeated Me! God's sons defeated Him with their arguments.
Rabbi Yehoshua was correct in his
contention that a view confirmed by majority vote must be accepted, even where
God Himself holds the opposite view.
Talmud - Mas. Baba Metzia 59b
and this was the oven of Aknai.1 Why [the oven of] Aknai?
Said Rab Judah in Samuel' name: [It means] that they encompassed it with
arguments2 as a snake, and proved it unclean. It has been taught: On that day
R. Eliezer brought forward every imaginable argument ,3 but they did not accept
them. Said he to them: If the halachah agrees with me, let this carob-tree
prove it! Thereupon the carob-tree was torn a hundred cubits out of its place
others affirm, four hundred cubits. No proof can be brought from a carob-tree,
they retorted. Again he said to them: If the halachah agrees with me, let
the stream of water prove it! Whereupon the stream of water flowed backwards
No proof can be brought from a stream of water, they rejoined. Again
he urged: If the halachah agrees with me, let the walls of the schoolhouse
prove it, whereupon the walls inclined to fall. But R. Joshua rebuked them,
saying: When scholars are engaged in a halachic dispute, what have ye to
interfere? Hence they did not fall, in honour of R. Joshua, nor did they
resume the upright, in honour of R. Eliezer; and they are still standing thus
inclined. Again he said to them: If the halachah agrees with me, let it be
proved from Heaven! Whereupon a Heavenly Voice cried out: Why do ye dispute
with R. Eliezer, seeing that in all matters the halachah agrees with him!
But R. Joshua arose and exclaimed: It is not in heaven.4 What did he mean
by this? Said R. Jeremiah: That the Torah had already been given at Mount
Sinai; we pay no attention to a Heavenly Voice, because Thou hast long since
written in the Torah at Mount Sinai, After the majority must one incline.5
R. Nathan met Elijah6 and asked him: What did the
Holy One, Blessed be He, do in that hour? He laughed [with joy], he replied,
saying, My sons have defeated
Me, My sons have defeated Me. It was said: On
that day all objects which R. Eliezer had declared clean were brought and burnt
in fire.7 Then they took a vote and excommunicated him.8 Said they, Who shall
go and inform him?I will go, answered R. Akiba, lest an unsuitable
person go and inform him, and thus destroy the whole world.9 What did R.
Akiba do? He donned black garments and wrapped himself in black,10 and sat
at a distance of four cubits from him. Akiba, said R. Eliezer to him, what
has particularly happened to-day?11 Master, he replied, it appears
to me that thy companions hold aloof from thee. Thereupon he too rent his
garments, put off his shoes, removed [his seat] and sat on the earth, whilst
tears streamed from his eyes.12 The world was then smitten: a third of the
olive crop, a third of the wheat, and a third of the barley crop. Some say,
the dough in women's hands swelled up.
A Tanna taught: Great was the calamity that befell
that day, for everything at which R. Eliezer cast his eyes was burned up. R.
Gamaliel13 too was travelling in a ship, when a huge wave arose to drown him.
It appears to me, he reflected, that this is on account of none other
but R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus. Thereupon he arose and exclaimed, Sovereign
of the Universe! Thou knowest full well that I have not acted for my honour,
nor for the honour of my paternal house, but for Thine, so that strife may
not multiply in Israel! At that the raging sea subsided.
Ima Shalom was R. Eliezer's wife, and sister to R.
Gamaliel. From the time of this incident onwards she did not permit him to
fall upon his face.14 Now a certain day happened to be New Moon, but she mistook
a full month for a defective one.15 Others say, a poor man came and stood at
the door, and she took out some bread to him.16 [On her return] she found him
fallen on his face. Arise, she cried out to him, thou hast slain my brother.
In the meanwhile an announcement was made from the house of Rabban Gamaliel
that he had died. Whence dost thou know it? he questioned her. I have
this tradition from my father's house: All gates are locked, excepting the
gates of wounded feelings.17
Our Rabbis taught: He who wounds the feelings of
a proselyte transgresses three negative injunctions, and he who oppresses him
infringes two. Wherein does wronging differ? Because three negative injunctions
are stated: Viz., Thou shalt not wrong a stranger [i.e., a proselyte],18 And
if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not wrong him,19 and
ye shall not therefore wrong each his fellowman,20 a proselyte being included
in fellowman. But for oppression also three are written, viz., and
thou shalt not oppress him,21 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger,22 and
[If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee,] thou shalt not
be to him as a usurer23 which includes a proselyte! But [say] both [are
forbidden] by three [injunctions].
It has been taught: R. Eliezer the Great said: Why
did the Torah warn against [the wronging of] a proselyte in thirty-six, or
as others say, in forty-six, places? Because he has a strong inclination to
evil.24 What is the meaning of the verse, Thou shalt neither wrong a stranger,
nor oppress him; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt? It has been taught:
R. Nathan said: Do not taunt your neighbour with the blemish you yourself have.25
And thus the proverb runs:26 If there is a case of hanging in a man's family
record, say not to him,27 Hang this fish up for me.
MISHNAH. PRODUCE MAY NOT BE MIXED WITH OTHER PRODUCE,
EVEN NEW WITH NEW,
____________________
(1) This refers to an oven, which, instead of being made
in one piece, was made in a series of separate portions with a layer of sand
between each. R. Eliezer maintains that since each portion in itself is not
a utensil, the sand between prevents the whole structure from being regarded
as a single utensil, and therefore it is not liable to uncleanness. The Sages
however hold that the outer coating of mortar or cement unifies the whole,
and it is therefore liable to uncleanness. (This is the explanation given by
Maimonides on the Mishnah, Kel. V, 10. Rashi a.l. adopts a different reasoning).
Aknai is a proper noun, probably the name of a master, but it also means
snake. (Gr. ** ) which meaning the Talmud proceeds to discuss.
(2) Lit., words.
(3) Lit., all the arguments in the world.
(4) Deut. XXX,12.
(5) Ex. XXIII,2; though the story is told in a legendary
form, this is a remarkable assertion of the independence of human reasoning.
(6) It was believed that Elijah, who had never died, often
appeared to the Rabbis.
(7) As unclean.
(8) Lit., blessed him, a euphemism for excommunication.
(9) I.e., commit a great wrong by informing him tactlessly
and brutally.
(10) As a sign of mourning, which a person under the ban
had to observe.
(11) Lit., what is this day (different) from yesterday
(or to-morrow)?
(12) Rending the garments etc. were all mourning observances.
(In ancient times mourners sat actually upon the earth, not, as nowadays, upon
low stools.) The character of R. Eliezer is hotly contested by Weiss and
Halevi. The former, mainly on the basis of this story (though adducing some
other proof too), severely castigates him as a man of extreme stubbornness
and conceit, who would brook no disagreement, a bitter controversialist from
his youth until death, and ever seeking quarrels (Dor. II, 82). Halevy (Doroth
1, 5, pp. 374 et seqq.) energetically defends him, pointing out that this is
the only instance recorded in the whole Talmud of R. Eliezer's maintaining
his view against the majority. He further contends that the meekness with which
he accepted his sentence, though he was sufficiently great to have disputed
and fought it, is a powerful testimony to his humility and peace-loving nature.
(13) The Nasi and the prime mover in the ban against R.
Eliezer.
(14) After the Eighteen Benedictions there follows a short
interval for private prayer, during which each person offered up his own individual
supplications to God. These were called supplications ( iubj, ), and the suppliant
prostrated himself upon his face; they were omitted on New Moons and Festivals.
Elbogen, Der judische Gottesdienst, pp. 73 et seqq. Ima Shalom feared that
her husband might pour out his grief and feeling of injury in these prayers,
and that God, listening to them, would punish R. Gamaliel, her brother.
(15) Jewish months consist of either 30 days (full) or 29
(defective). Thinking that the previous month had consisted of 29 days, and
that the 30th would be New Moon, she believed that R. Eliezer could not engage
in these private prayers in any case, and relaxed her watch over him. But actually
it was a full month, so that the 30th was an ordinary day, when these prayers
are permitted.
(16) I.e., she did not mistake the day, but was momentarily
forced to leave her husband in order to give bread to a beggar.
(17) Lit., wrong, v. p. 354, n. 4. She felt sure that
R. Eliezer had seized the opportunity of her absence or error to cry out to
God about the ban.
(18) Ex. XXII, 20.
(19) Lev. XIX, 33.
(20) Lev. XXV, 17.
(21) Ex. XXII, 20.
(22) Ex. XXIII, 9.
(23) Ex. XXII, 24
(24) So Rashi in Hor. 13a. Jast.: because his original character
is bad into which
[Click Here to Print]