2

In the famous argument about Tanuro Shel Akhnai (Bava Metzia.59b) R' Eliezer claims to faithfully represent the Heavenly tradition and he's supported by the Heaven. Neither R' Yehoshua, nor God admits that R' Yehoshua's approach is traditional as the Gemmorah testifies:

"בההיא שעתא א"ל קא חייך ואמר נצחוני בני נצחוני בני"
"The Holy One, Blessed be He, smiled and said: My children have triumphed over Me;"

From the fact that God did not respond in the manner He resolved the dispute between the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai: "Both are the words of the living God", I understand that in God's eyes Rabbinic ruling was NOT traditional, in other words, there was no such custom coming down from Moses.

On the other hand, the fact that R"Y did not simply evoke the majority rule but opposed the "Heavenly assertion of R"E's truth" points to his objection to the very approach of following the divine teachings, which I understand as "the tradition".

Do our sources discuss the phenomenon, that when the "Not in Heaven" approach was accepted as a legitimate Halachic approach, the chain of the Mosaic tradition(s) was broken?

Al Berko
  • 25,936
  • 2
  • 22
  • 57
  • Lichorah you could simplify this question to, "What does nitzchuni banai mean?" – pcoz May 26 '22 at 12:23
  • 1
    Why do you think R Eliezer had a tradition? Maybe he simply had the best logical argument, such that G-d himself agreed with it? – Joel K May 26 '22 at 12:25
  • @JoelK If R"E didn't have the tradition you made the situation even worse. But what does "הלכה כמותו בכל מקום" mean then? – Al Berko May 26 '22 at 12:45
  • 1
    Why do you say it makes it worse? No one had a tradition about this specific case. They are attempting to draw conclusions about a new situation. Halacha kemoso bechol makom - "he's the sharpest tool in the shed, always comes to the correct conclusion" – Joel K May 26 '22 at 12:50
  • I don't remember at the moment where I heard this, but recently I heard that the disputation in that gemara was what is exactly the "traditional" form of halachic rulings - is it simply passing on things as you heard them from your master, your rabbi, or right from the moment the Torah was given the format was: the collective thought process and brainstorming of the subjects and that thinking of how to address issues that arise in every generation. ר"א held the former and ר"י the latter, and most of the sages agreed with ר"י. – Harel13 May 26 '22 at 12:51
  • @Harel13 באותו היום השיב רבי אליעזר כל תשובות שבעולם ולא קיבלו הימנו doesn't sound like he's just passing on traditions. (Although it is true that there are other sugyot which sound like R Eliezer would never innovate in halacha) – Joel K May 26 '22 at 12:53
  • @JoelK "מימיי...ולא אמרתי דבר שלא שמעתי מפי רבי מעולם", Sukkah 28a. – Harel13 May 26 '22 at 12:59
  • @Harel13 Yep. Hence what I said in parantheses above. But my point still stands regarding the language of the sugya here. – Joel K May 26 '22 at 13:00
  • 3
    "R' Eliezer claims to faithfully represent the Heavenly tradition and he's supported by the Heaven. " Where does R. Eliezer claim to represent "the Heavenly tradition"? He claims that the law should accord with his opinion and even heaven would agree with him. I do not see any invocation of a tradition, heavenly or otherwise. It seems to me that this question is unanswerable as it is built upon a false premise. – Deuteronomy May 26 '22 at 16:02
  • @Deuteronomy Here's my line of thought: since B"H and B"S were called דברי א"ח, I understand their teachings were "traditional". R"E was a student of B"S and God attested that Halachah is like R"E everywhere. – Al Berko May 26 '22 at 16:44
  • @JoelK It sounds from your and others' comments, that there was no tradition (even about this particular case). There are two problems with this view: 1. This is not what R"Y claimed, were it the case he could simply follow the majority rule. His objection was against the "Heavenly line of thought" which has to be "traditional". 2. You undermine the very idea of the passing of the oral tradition. If not R"E and R"Y, the rest of the Gemmorah is all rabbinic speculations. This contradicts, of course, Rambam's introduction to MT and everything else. – Al Berko May 26 '22 at 16:49
  • Regarding point 2, the Rambam is pretty clear that any tradition from Sinai is not subject to machloket. A machloket (in a deoraita) can only ever be in a case where there is no tradition and the rabbanim are making logical deductions. See his third category here: https://www.sefaria.org.il/Rambam_Introduction_to_the_Mishnah.8.42?ven=Rambam_Introduction_to_the_Mishnah,_translation_by_Rabbi_Francis_Nataf,_2017&vhe=Vilna_Edition&lang=he&with=all&lang2=he – Joel K May 26 '22 at 16:54
  • @JoelK This is not consistent with God's reaction. Here's the logic: 1. God already had this case in mind. 2. He taught that to Moses etc ... 3. R"E's resolution fitted perfectly with #1. (6). R"Y's resolution (in any way) did not fit God's teachings. Therefore there's no need to speculate that R"E's view was not traditional. And Rambam's view contradicts the explicit Machlokes of B"H and B"S. – Al Berko May 26 '22 at 17:07
  • 1
    “He taught that to Moses etc ...” this is your key assumption. But you have not justified it – Joel K May 26 '22 at 17:08
  • 1
    no it does not b/c our tradition sets out how Halacha is decided. Furthermore, this tradition was given to us by G-d. The statement my children have triumphed over me is a celebration by Hashem that his children have kept to this tradition of how Halacha must be decided. – Dude May 26 '22 at 17:42
  • @Dude You have to decide whether in "our tradition" we got Halochos or methods. If you assume that Moses received specific Halochos for every case then my line of thought should work, if it is only methods, then there's no reason for God to support R"E EVERYWHERE. In addition, R"Y should have agreed that the methods he used were also "from Heaven". – Al Berko May 26 '22 at 22:04
  • As for how various commentaries contrast the two cases, see what I wrote at https://judaism.stackexchange.com/a/67460/1570 – Micha Berger May 27 '22 at 08:09
  • 1
    @AlBerko the point is that Halacha is not decided from a bas kol but the method we were given by Hashem. This is not called "from heaven" b/c the deciding factor is not in heaven but the best din here in our world. Furthermore, the binary way in which you phrase this is lav davka. – Dude May 27 '22 at 18:33
  • 1
    @AlBerko "Here's my line of thought: since B"H and B"S were called דברי א"ח, I understand their teachings were "traditional"" - Yes, they are traditional insofar as they both reflect a perpetuation of legal methodology, that does not mean that each position endorsed in and of itself had a tradition. The same applies to R. Eliezer here. Your claim in the OP that he had a "heavenly tradition" is thus unsubstantiated, and unsupported. Your question is accordingly unanswerable. – Deuteronomy May 31 '22 at 23:46
  • @Deuteronomy Just to make it clear, you're with the camp that holds that no clear Halochos were given to Moses but only principles, and the sages could infer whatever they could from the scriptures using those principles. This completely contradicts the idea of "הלכה למשה מסיני". THis also contradicts the fact that the majority of the Mishnaic laws have no Biblical support to derive them from in the first place. – Al Berko Jun 09 '22 at 07:48
  • 1
    @AlBerko To make it clear, you just put a bunch of words in my mouth when I said nothing of the sort. I suggest you learn the Rambam's haqdama to his commentary on the Mishnah and you will better understand what types of laws were and were not transmitted at Sinai, as well as what the idea of הלכה למשה מסיני actually means. If you take the time to do so I think many of your misunderstandings here will evaporate. All the best. – Deuteronomy Jun 09 '22 at 15:30
  • https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%94%D7%A7%D7%93%D7%9E%D7%AA_%D7%94%D7%A8%D7%9E%D7%91%22%D7%9D_%D7%9C%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%A0%D7%94_(%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%96%D7%99_%D7%9E%D7%94%D7%93%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%AA_%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%A8) – Deuteronomy Jun 09 '22 at 15:32

0 Answers0