Q&A: One May Act Like This Master and One May Act Like That Master
One May Act Like This Master and One May Act Like That Master
Question
Do you think that when people say, “one may act like this master and one may act like that master,” that applies only to the Talmud, and only in the halakhic realm? Because many times you say things and base them on what Maimonides wrote, for example regarding faith-belief as opposed to religious commitment, and on the other hand you say that you are not obligated to agree with what Maimonides writes and it doesn’t bother you to disagree with him—which I agree with. So which is it: should one accept what Maimonides writes or not? Or perhaps you think one can accept one thing from him and reject something else of his?
Answer
Absolutely. I do not rely on Maimonides; I cite him as supporting evidence. It is also my own reasoning.
The phrase “one acted like this master and one acted like that master” was said only in certain passages (if I recall correctly, only two in the entire Talmud), and many halakhic decisors say that we should not do this on our own initiative. Tosafot on Bava Batra 63 did write, however, that this is a general rule wherever no ruling has been decisively established. See my article on autonomy in halakhic ruling:
https://mikyab.net/%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%9E%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%90%D7%95%D7%98%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%9E%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%91%D7%A4%D7%A1%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%9C%D7%9B%D7%94
Discussion on Answer
They have no authority regarding facts, even when those facts are the basis for halakhic determinations. If you become convinced that they are mistaken, then the Jewish law falls away; and in my opinion, as I wrote in the trilogy, you do not even need a religious court to nullify it. That is the situation regarding killing lice on the Sabbath. But in most cases, it is not really a simple factual determination. The question of when it is day is a question of definition—starting from what point it is defined as day—not a question of fact. And also, in a religious court that adjudicates between two litigants, they clarify facts, and their ruling binds the parties, including the factual determinations of course. Even if experts from both sides come before them, the judges are the ones who decide who is “right” (at least for purposes of the halakhic ruling, not scientifically, of course). By the way, the same is true in secular courts as well.
So according to this, can one overturn a religious court’s determination regarding intercalating the year or sanctifying the month if in my opinion they are mistaken?
After all, based on the exposition of the verse, “which you shall proclaim,” and we read it as “you,” even if they err and even if they do so deliberately!!
And even in the case where Rabbi Yehoshua initially disagreed with Rabban Gamliel regarding sanctifying the month, he intended to act stringently in accordance with both views, but not to nullify Rabban Gamliel’s opinion.
You answered yourself. Specifically regarding the calendar, the Sanhedrin has authority even if they act deliberately. There, their mistake has no significance.
Alright. Now regarding this issue: you said (correctly) that the sages (and even the Sanhedrin) have no authority regarding facts, only regarding Jewish law (norms). But in a case where the fact depends on Jewish law—for example, all the calculations halakhic decisors make to determine when it is day, when it is night, when sunset is, and so on and so on—those are all facts, and nevertheless the sages have authority to tell us exactly what the times are!?