Q&A: Disagreeing with Earlier Authorities
Disagreeing with Earlier Authorities
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I enjoyed reading on the Sabbath in the book Two Carts and a Hot-Air Balloon your explanation of the concept of the decline of the generations—that it is not a decline in intelligence or in the skills of thought and inference, but rather in the inner understanding of concepts. Since the earlier generations were closer in time, they lived the concepts more truly and not merely through their external definitions; therefore we accept the words of the earlier generations to mediate that understanding for us.
And you brought an example from language learning: study in an ulpan, which gives students the rules of the language, is not at all comparable to a person who speaks the language as a mother tongue, who lives the language itself even without being aware of all the rules that guide it.
So I would like to understand why you do not refrain at all from disagreeing with the great earlier authorities, as you explain in several articles here on the site: since they have no binding authority, their view is only a recommendation, and when it seems otherwise to you, you disagree. But it is truth that we seek; and if they speak the language of Torah at a time closer to the source, why not assume that we are limited in our ability to understand more than they did, and therefore bend ourselves to their words [as in fact all Orthodox sages do, and for this reason]?
Answer
That is exactly the difference between formal authority and substantive authority. Formal authority obligates obedience, regardless of your opinion and regardless of whether the instruction is mistaken. But substantive authority stems from the fact that the “authority” figure (in quotation marks, because this is not really authority) is wiser or more accurate with respect to the truth, like the authority of an expert. With that kind of authority, if I become convinced that the authority figure erred, I will not listen to him. Of course I take his view seriously, and therefore I will not disagree with the earlier authorities lightly; but where I am sufficiently convinced of my own view, I allow myself to disagree with them.
By the way, I do not agree that Orthodox rabbis refrain from disagreeing for that reason. Most of them would tell you that it is because of the immense wisdom of the earlier authorities and their divine inspiration, and perhaps also divine providence over them that keeps them from error.
Discussion on Answer
Yes, but the impression is that you disagree very easily and very decisively (at least lately). I think that is what the questioner meant.
It is hard for me to discuss impressions. If you want, bring an example and we can discuss it.
I would just note that for this reason you sometimes find later authorities (Acharonim) disagreeing with medieval authorities (Rishonim), and medieval authorities disagreeing with the Geonim. In all those cases we are dealing with substantive authority. But you will not find Amoraim disagreeing with Tannaim, or medieval authorities disagreeing with Amoraim (the cases that are cited, in my opinion, are incorrect), because there we are dealing with formal authority.