David Hartman, Jewish Political Tradition
When the Talmud announces that "It is not in heaven," human beings replace God and take responsibility for applying the law without need for further revelation. The signs and wonders of our text serve the ironic purpose of providing an occasion for the Rabbis to admonish God. To paraphrase the madras, God is told politely: "Please stay out of this discussion. Your presence here is inappropriate. You gave us Torah, but we must now apply it in our own lives according to our own understanding. And" -this point is crucial for grasping the religious phenomenology of Rabbinic thought- "we are n to going to try to intuit Your thoughts about what is right. We have to make sense of the law in particular situations through our own practical reasoning."
In the Bible, the community is called upon to choose between "life and death," between "good and evil" (Deut. 30:15). Revelation provides a law for the community but leaves responsibility for fulfilling the law in the hands of the community itself.
(יז) כָּל מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, אֵין סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. אֵיזוֹ הִיא מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, זוֹ מַחֲלֹקֶת הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, זוֹ מַחֲלֹקֶת קֹרַח וְכָל עֲדָתוֹ:
(17) Every argument that is for [the sake of] heaven's name, it is destined to endure. But if it is not for [the sake of] heaven's name -- it is not destined to endure. What is [an example of an argument] for [the sake of] heaven's name? The argument of Hillel and Shammai. What is [an example of an argument] not for [the sake of] heaven's name? The argument of Korach and all of his congregation.
Michael Walzer, Jewish Political Tradition
Speech of this sort [disruptive prophetic preaching] undermines authority. It challenges the status quo and the people who benefit from it.
But these prophets are not agitators in the modern sense. They don't aim to create a political or social movement; they make no effort to organize their audience; they aren't looking for the responsibility that Shakespeare's Marc Antony wins from the Roman crowd. On the other hand, they are also unlike modern social critics, who sit in their studies writing books and magazine articles and can hardly be imagined speaking in the streets.
The prophets are religious preachers, something like contemporary revivalists, and although they criticize the whole of society and hope for its moral transformation, their precise demand is for individual teshuvah -"repentance"; the literal meaning is "a turning back" to the laws of the covenant. What they want is that people repent of their sins (sometimes the emphasis is on idolatry, sometimes on injustice and oppression) and then turn, as it were, in place: each person to enact the covenant in his or her sphere of activity. The goal is a series of turning, not a change of political regime - although if princes and judges repent, the effect may be something like a change of regime.
Anyone who is able to protest against the transgressions of one's household and does not, is punished for the actions of the members of the household; anyone who is able to protest against the transgressions of one's townspeople and does not, is punished for the transgressions of the townspeople; anyone who is able to protest against the transgressions of the entire world and does not is punished for the transgressions of the entire world. Rav Papa said: The house of the exilarch (Jewish communal authority during Babylonian exile) was punished for the transgressions of the entire world, as Rav Hanina said, "What is the meaning of the verse, 'God will bring judgment on the elders and the officers of the peope'" (Isaiah 3:14)? Perhaps the officers have sinned, but have the elders sinned? Rather, this verse signifies that God brings judgment on the elders for not having protested against the transgressions of the officers.