DOC PREVIEW
USC HIST 101g - 13615801-Rav-Soloveitchik-The-Common-sense-Rebellion-Against-Torah-Authority

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 6 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

THE "COMMON-SENSE" REBELLION AGAINST TORAH AUTHORITY By Rav Yosef Soloveitchik Jews defer only to recognized Torah scholars in the interpretation of Jewish Law. Today many individuals claim the right to exercise their own common sense in determining the relevance and format of contemporary Judaism, despite the fact that they are hardly Biblical and Talmudic scholars. Synagogue ritual committees and popular magazine articles debate the continued usefulness of various religious practices and explore the possibilities of reformulating Judaism in line with modem thought. These self-styled "poskim" concede their lack of formal training in Jewish texts and sources, but they insist nonetheless on their right to decide fundamental religious questions on the basis of "common sense." This is not a recent phenomenon. It dates back to the earliest period of Jewish history. To the very generation which received the Torah at Mt. Sinai. Not very long after that event, the Torah (Num. Chap. 16) relates, Korah led a rebellion against Moses and Hazal imply that he sought to replace Moses as the teacher and leader of Israel. Korah publicly challenged the halakhic competency of Moses and ridiculed his interpretations of Jewish law as being contrary to elementary reason. Citing the Tanhuma, Rashi records the following clever ploy of Korah: What did he do? He assembled two-hundred and fifty distinguished men and women ... and he attired them in robes of pure blue wool. They came and stood before Moses and said to him: "Does a garment that is entirely blue still require tzitzit or is it exempt?" Moses replied that it did require tzitzit. Whereupon, they began to jeer at him: "Is that logical? A robe of any other color fulfills the tzitzit requirement merely by having one of its threads blue. Surely a garment which is entirely blue should not require an additional blue thread!" (Rashi, Num. 16: I). Likewise, the Midrash tells us of another provocation. "Does a house which is filled with Torah scrolls still require a mezuzah on its doorpost?" Korah asked. Moses replied in the affirmative. Korah retorted: "If one brief section of the Torah placed inside the mezuzah [the Shema and vehayah im shamo'a] satisfies the mitzvah requirement, most certainly a multitude of scrolls which contain many portions should! Such halakhic decisions do not emanate from God but are fabrications" (Num. R. 18). Korah insisted that to require a mezuzah under such circumstances violated elementary logic. Korah's Rationale Korah was a demagogue motivated by selfish ambitions. His antagonism began when Aaron and his family were elevated to the priesthood, while the Levites, among whom Korah was prominent were relegated to mere assistants of the Kohanim. Now, we know that every rebellion against authority needs an ideology to arouse the fervor of the people and sustain its momentum. It needs a slogan or a motto which projects a noble ideal to replace the intolerable status quo. The rallying cry which Korah chose was "common sense." He proclaimed that all reasonable people have the right to interpret Jewish law according to their best understanding: "For all the community are holy" (Num. 16: 3). In down-to-earth logic, the lowliest woodcutter is the equal of Moses. This appeal to populism evokes considerable support because it promisesfreedom from centralized authority; it flatters the people's common intelligence and it approves the right of each Jew or group of Jews to follow their own individual judgment. The Midrash describes how Korah propagandized his cause. "Korah went about all that night to mislead the Israelites. He said to them: 'What do you suppose-that I am working to obtain greatness for myself? I desire that we should all enjoy greatness in rotation' " (Num. R. 18). Korah was an intelligent man, pike'ah hayah (Rashi, ibid. v. 7). He would certainly concede that there were specialized fields in which only experts who have studied extensively over many years are entitled to be recognized as authorities. The intrusion of common-sense judgments in these areas by unlearned laymen would be both presumptuous and misleading. Korah would not have dared to interfere with Bezalel's architectural and engineering expertise in the construction of the Tabernacle, the Mishkan, because construction skills were dearly beyond his competence. Today, reasonable people concede the authority of mathematicians. physicists, and physicians in their areas of expertise, and would not think of challenging them merely on the basis of common sense. Why, then, are so many well intentioned people ready to question the authority of the Torah scholar, the lamdan, in his area of specialized knowledge? Korah's rationale can be understood more readily if we clarify three terms denoting the various levels of reason and intelligence. The Torah says: "He has endowed [Bezalel] with a Divine spirit, with knowledge [hokhmah], intellect [binah] and intelligence [da'at]" 6 (Ex. 35: 31). Hokhmah refers to the specialized knowledge and scholarship which are acquired by extensive and detailed study. Binah is the capacity to analyze, to make distinctions, to draw inferences and apply them to various situations. When binah is combined with bokhmah, we have the especially gifted and creative thinker. Da'at deals with common sense, basic intelligence, and sound practical judgment. Korah's appeal to common sense in Judaism was basically a claim that only da'at, and not hokhmah, is involved in the application of Halakhah. He conceded that the legal aspects of Halakhah require expertise, technical and academic. But he maintained that there is also a psychological and emotional aspect in the practice of Halakhah and the observance of mitzvot. In judging the utility, relevance, and beneficial effects of the mitzvot, all intelligent people are qualified to render judgment on the basis of close and informed observation. For this aspect, he argued, common sense, human experience, and basic judgment are the criteria. And on this basis he challenged the authority of Moses. Korah was committed to the doctrine of religious subjectivism, which regards one's personal feelings as primary in the religious experience. God requires the heart. Rahmana liba ba'i (Sanh. I 06b), and it is in the mysterious recesses of his personality that man meets his Maker. The mitzvot, by contrast, are physical acts which reflect the inner quest, the hidden feelings of religious emotion. The


View Full Document

USC HIST 101g - 13615801-Rav-Soloveitchik-The-Common-sense-Rebellion-Against-Torah-Authority

Documents in this Course
Load more
Download 13615801-Rav-Soloveitchik-The-Common-sense-Rebellion-Against-Torah-Authority
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view 13615801-Rav-Soloveitchik-The-Common-sense-Rebellion-Against-Torah-Authority and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view 13615801-Rav-Soloveitchik-The-Common-sense-Rebellion-Against-Torah-Authority 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?