Challenging Rabbinical Decrees

. § It was taught in the mishna: One may mark graves on the intermediate days of a Festival so that passersby will know to avoid them and not become ritually impure. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said: Where is there an allusion in the Torah to the marking of graves? The verse states: “And when they that pass through shall pass through the land, and any see a man’s bone, then shall he set up a sign by it” (Ezekiel 39:15). Ezekiel prophesies that at some future time, the Jewish people will erect signs over the strewn remains of the dead so that others will know to avoid ritual impurity.

Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Before the prophet Ezekiel came and alluded to this obligation, who said that graves must be marked? Even before the time of Ezekiel, people were careful with regard to ritual impurity. Rav Ashi responded: And according to your reasoning, that Ezekiel was introducing a new halakha, the same question can be raised with regard to this statement that Rav Ḥisda said. As Rav Ḥisda said with regard to the halakha that one who is uncircumcised or an apostate may not serve in the Temple: This matter we did not learn from the Torah of Moses our teacher, but rather, we learned it from the words of the prophet Ezekiel ben Buzi, who said of such individuals: “No stranger, uncircumcised in heart, or uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into My Sanctuary to serve Me” (Ezekiel 44:9). Here too, one can ask: Before Ezekiel came, who said that such individuals cannot serve in the Temple?

Rather, you must say that originally they learned it as a tradition and it was an accepted halakha for generations, and then Ezekiel came and based it on a verse. Here too, with regard to the obligation to mark graves, they originally learned it as a tradition, and then Ezekiel came and based it on a verse.

Rabbi Abbahu said: An allusion to the marking of graves may be derived from here: “And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and the hair of his head shall go loose, and he shall cover his upper lip, and shall cry: Impure, impure” (Leviticus 13:45). This verse teaches that impurity cries out to the passerby and tells him: Remove yourself. The leper must inform others of his status so that they know not to come into contact with him and thereby maintain their ritual purity. So too, in our case, graves must be marked so that others will know to avoid them and prevent contracting ritual impurity. And similarly, Rabbi Uzziel, grandson of Rabbi Uzziel the Great, said: Impurity cries out to the passerby and tells him: Remove yourself...

Abaye said: An allusion to the marking of graves may be learned from here, as it is written: “You shall not put a stumbling block before the blind” (Leviticus 19:14).

Rav Pappa said the obligation is alluded to in the verse: “And He will say: Pave, pave, clear the way, take up the stumbling block out of the way of My people” (Isaiah 57:14), which indicates that roads must be cleared of all obstacles and hazards.

Rav Ḥinnana said: This may be derived from the end of that very same verse: “Take up the stumbling block from the way of My people” (Isaiah 57:14).

Rabbi Yehoshua, son of Rav Idi, said: This may be derived from the verse: “And you shall show them the way in which they must walk” (Exodus 18:20), i.e., you must properly repair the roads, which includes marking graves.

Mar Zutra said that an allusion to this obligation is found in the verse “Thus you shall separate the children of Israel from their impurity” (Leviticus 15:31), which indicates that people must be warned to stay away from that which could cause them to become ritually impure.

Rav Ashi said it is derived from the verse: “And you shall keep My charge” (Leviticus 18:30), which means that you must establish a safeguard for My charge, i.e., protective measures must be enacted to prevent people from transgressing halakha, a task that includes distancing people from ritual impurity by marking off graves, so that they not come to convey ritual impurity to teruma or other consecrated items.

MISHNA: There was an incident in which two witnesses came to testify about the new moon, and they said: We saw the waning moon in the morning in the east,

and that same day we saw the new moon in the evening in the west. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri said: They are false witnesses, as it is impossible to see the new moon so soon after the last sighting of the waning moon. However, when they arrived in Yavne, Rabban Gamliel accepted them as witnesses without concern.

And there was another incident in which two witnesses came and said: We saw the new moon at its anticipated time, i.e., on the night of the thirtieth day of the previous month; however, on the following night, i.e., the start of the thirty-first, which is often the determinant of a full, thirty-day month, it was not seen. And nevertheless Rabban Gamliel accepted their testimony and established the New Moon on the thirtieth day. Rabbi Dosa ben Horkinas disagreed and said: They are false witnesses; how can witnesses testify that a woman gave birth and the next day her belly is between her teeth, i.e., she is obviously still pregnant? If the new moon was already visible at its anticipated time, how could it not be seen a day later? Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: I see the logic of your statement; the New Moon must be established a day later. Upon hearing that Rabbi Yehoshua had challenged his ruling,

Rabban Gamliel sent a message to him: I decree against you that you must appear before me with your staff and with your money on the day on which Yom Kippur occurs according to your calculation; according to my calculation, that day is the eleventh of Tishrei, the day after Yom Kippur.

Rabbi Akiva went and found Rabbi Yehoshua distressed that the head of the Great Sanhedrin was forcing him to desecrate the day that he maintained was Yom Kippur. In an attempt to console him, Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Yehoshua: I can learn from a verse that everything that Rabban Gamliel did in sanctifying the month is done, i.e., it is valid. As it is stated: “These are the appointed seasons of the Lord, sacred convocations, which you shall proclaim in their season” (Leviticus 23:4). This verse indicates that whether you have proclaimed them at their proper time or whether you have declared them not at their proper time, I have only these Festivals as established by the representatives of the Jewish people.

Rabbi Yehoshua then came to Rabbi Dosa ben Horkinas, who said to him: If we come to debate and question the rulings of the court of Rabban Gamliel, we must debate and question the rulings of every court that has stood from the days of Moses until now. As it is stated: “Then Moses went up, and Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, and seventy of the Elders of Israel” (Exodus 24:9).

But why were the names of these seventy Elders not specified? Rather, this comes to teach that every set of three judges that stands as a court over the Jewish people has the same status as the court of Moses. Since it is not revealed who sat on that court, apparently it is enough that they were official judges in a Jewish court. When Rabbi Yehoshua heard that even Rabbi Dosa ben Horkinas maintained that they must submit to Rabban Gamliel’s decision, he took his staff and his money in his hand, and went to Yavne to Rabban Gamliel on the day on which Yom Kippur occurred according to his own calculation. Upon seeing him, Rabban Gamliel stood up and kissed him on his head. He said to him: Come in peace, my teacher and my student. You are my teacher in wisdom, as Rabbi Yehoshua was wiser than anyone else in his generation, and you are my student, as you accepted my statement, despite your disagreement...

§ The mishna taught that Rabbi Yehoshua next came to Rabbi Dosa ben Horkinas, who proved to him that the court of Rabban Gamliel has the same legal status as the court of Moses.

The Sages taught in a baraita: Why were the names of these seventy Elders who sat together with Moses on his court not specified? The reason is so that a person not say: Is so-and-so the judge in my time, like Moses and Aaron? Is so-and-so like Nadav and Avihu? Is so-and-so like Eldad and Medad? Therefore, the names of the other elders were not specified, so that there is no way of knowing the qualifications of the elders in the time of Moses to compare them to later judges.

And similarly it says: “And Samuel said to the people: It is the Lord Who made Moses and Aaron” (I Samuel 12:6). And it says further: “And the Lord sent Jerubaal and Bedan and Jephthah and Samuel” (I Samuel 12:11). The Gemara explains: Jerubaal, this is Gideon. And why is he called Jerubaal? The reason is that he waged a quarrel against Baal. Bedan, this is Samson. And why is he called Bedan? As he came from the tribe of Dan. Jephthah, in accordance with its regular meaning, i.e., this is referring to Jephthah himself and is not a nickname. And it says in another verse: “Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among those who call His name; they called upon the Lord, and He answered them” (Psalms 99:6). This verse equates Samuel to Moses and Aaron.

In this manner, the verse weighed three light ones of the world, i.e., it considered the three less distinguished figures of Gideon, Samson, and Jephthah as equal to three significant ones of the world, Moses, Aaron, and Samuel, three of the greatest leaders of the Jewish people. This comes to tell you that Jerubaal in his generation is worthy of being treated like Moses in his generation; Bedan in his generation is like Aaron in his generation; and Jephthah in his generation is like Samuel in his generation. This serves to teach you that even the lightest of the light, i.e., the least distinguished individual, once he has been appointed as a leader over the community, he must be treated like the greatest of the great, and all are required to heed him and obey his rulings.

And it further says: “And you shall come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge who shall be in those days” (Deuteronomy 17:9). But can it enter your mind that a person can go to a judge that is not alive in his days? What, then, is the meaning of the phrase “in those days”? It teaches that you need to go only to the judge in one’s days, i.e., he is authorized to judge and decide matters.

And it also says: “Do not say: How was it that the former days were better than these? For it is not out of wisdom that you inquire concerning this” (Ecclesiastes 7:10). Instead, one must accept the rulings of the leaders of his generation.

1. “Qohelet had great wisdom, but more than that, he taught the people, he balanced, researched, and established many proverbs.” He balanced the words of Torah, researched the words of Torah, and made handles for the Torah. You find that until Shelomo there was no dogma/example.
2. Rav Nahman offered two analogies: he said it [the Torah] was like a big palace with many openings, in which people lost their way. One wise man came and hung a spool of wool by the door, and everyone started coming in and leaving following the thread. Similarly, before Shelomo no one was able to understand the words of Torah, and once Shelomo came along everyone started analyzing Torah.
3. A different analogy was offered by Rav Nahman: this is similar to a thicket of reeds through which no one could go through. A wise man came, took a sickle, and started cutting a pathway, and all followed the pathway he cleared.
4. Rabbi Yose said, this is similar to a large basket full of fruits, but without handles, which no one was able to carry. A wise man came and made handles for it, and it was now movable…
5. Rabbi Shiloh said, this is similar to a large kettle full of boiling water but with no handle. One person came and made a handle for it, and it was now possible to use the cattle.
6. Rabbi Hanina said, this is similar to a deep well full of water, and its water was cool and sweet and good, but nobody was able to drink from it. One man came and connected one rope to another and one thread to another, and then drew water and drank. Everyone followed suit and they were drawing water and drinking. Similarly, from one thing to another, from one proverb to another, Shelomo deciphered the secrets of Torah

...

Rabbi Simlai taught in Netzivin: With regard to oil, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and his court were counted, i.e., voted, on this matter and permitted it...

The Gemara asks: And how could Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permit an ordinance issued by the students of Shammai and Hillel? But didn’t we learn in a mishna that a court cannot void the statements of another court, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number?

And furthermore, doesn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: With regard to all issues, a court can void the statements of another court, except the eighteen matters decreed by the students of Beit Shammai, as, even if Elijah and his court were to come and rescind them, one would not listen to him.

Rav Mesharshiyya said: What is the reason that none of the eighteen decrees can be voided? Since the prohibition spread among the majority of the Jewish people, it cannot be voided. But with regard to oil, its prohibition did not spread among the majority of the Jewish people, and therefore it can be voided.

As Rabbi Shmuel bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Our Sages sat and inspected the matter of gentiles’ oil and determined that its prohibition had not spread among the majority of the Jewish people, and our Sages relied upon the statement of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and upon the statement of Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok, who would say: The Sages issue a decree upon the community only if most of the community is able to abide by it.

(5) And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many, when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many? So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person it may depend on him. For no court may set aside the decision of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. If it was greater than it in wisdom but not in number, in number but not in wisdom, it may not set aside its decision, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number.

MISHNAH: These are of the practices which were pronounced at the upper floor of Ḥananiah ben Ḥizqiah ben Garon, when they came to visit him. They voted and the House of Shammai had the majority over the House of Hillel; eighteen items they decided on that day.

HALAKHAH: ... “This day was hard for Israel like the day on which the Golden C alf was made.

Rebbi Eliezer said, on that day they filled the bushel to overflow. Rebbi Joshua said, on that day they filled the bushel to the rim.

Rebbi Eliezer said to him, if it was deficient and they filled it it would have been reasonable, as with an amphora full of nuts; if you fill it with sesame seeds it will be strengthened.

Rebbi Joshua said to him, if it had been full and they diminished it, it would have been reasonable, as with an amphora filled with oil; if you add water to it it dilutes the oil.”

Rebbi Joshua from Ono stated: The students of the House of Shammai were standing downstairs and killing the students of the House of Hillel. It was stated, six of them went up; the rest were standing around them with swords and lances.