[Avodah] Dr. Berkovits and R' Marc Angel

[Michael Makovi]

Michael Makovi (quoting RMDA) wrote:
> > Rabbi Yehuda the Prince, in the mid-second century C.E., compiled the
>> Mishnah, a record of the oral law up to his time. From then on, the
>> mishnah became the central text in halakhah; rabbis no longer derived
>> laws directly from the text of the Torah, but focused their studies
>> and decisions on the texts of the Mishnah.

R' David Riceman responded,
> This is a gross oversimplification of a process that took many
> generations.  Certainly the Tosefta derives halacha primarily from
> psukim, and much of what the amoraim did was to provide Biblical
> justification for Tannaitic norms.  It's only in the time of the geonim
> that deriving halacha from psukim became rare.

It may certainly be an oversimplification. Perhaps "mishnah" is lav
davka, and includes also the writing of other Tannaitic texts. But the
gist seems to be the same. And while the Amoraim provided Biblical
*justifications* for laws *already* taught by the Tannaim, and
sometimes even offered a better text than the Tanna's pasuk (R' Zvi
Lampel's Dynamics of Dispute offers a novel interpretation of why they
could do this: the Amoraim could mix-and-match Tannaitic opinions as
they desired, taking half of this shita and half of that shita and
crafting a hybrid, as long as they preserved the lowest common
denominator of every Tannaitic opinion involved), I'm not aware of any
times when the Amoraim actually derived wholly new laws from pasukim,
as the Tannaim did. The Tannaim derived new laws with new drashot; the
Amoraim justified old laws with new drashot. So as far as I know, the
end of the Tannaitic age was the end of direct Scriptural exegesis as
a method of *creating* law.

Also, Menachem Elon, in Encyclopedia Judaica, "Interpretation", says
almost the exact same thing as Rabbi Angel does here. Perhaps someone
has an Encyclopedia Judaica to check whether my memory is correct?

Also, I'll add that Rabbi Glasner and Dr. Berkovits rely on the
*writing* of the Mishna, which is problematic according to the version
of Iggeret haRav Sherira Gaon that says Rebbe merely orally compiled
the Mishna. For that reason, I prefer Rabbi Dr. Isidore Epstein, who
explains that the Glasner/Berkovits phenomenon occurred not with the
*writing* of the Mishna, but rather, with the transition from midrash
halakhah to mishnah, whether written or oral.

------------------------------------

R' David Glasner pointed out to me that I am in error in my assertion
that Rabbi Moshe Shmuel Glasner required Mashiah's coming for a
Sanhedrin. He notes that the Dor Revi'i supported Rabbi
Fishman/Maimon's effort to reinstate the Sanhedrin.

Also, regarding Hilhot Mamrim that one Sanhedrin can overturn a
previous Sanhedrin's drash, the Dor Revi'i writes,
However, while this opinion of the Rambam's is the essential law, in
accordance with the verse "the judge that will be in those days," it
is really a law for Messianic times (hilkheta li-meshiha). For [when]
the Temple is rebuilt (speedily in our times!), and the "children
return to their boundary," and the crown is returned to its former
condition in that the Oral Torah will be transmitted orally and it
will be forbidden to write it down-then the sages of each generation
will have the right to interpret the Torah [according to their own
understanding] without reference to the interpretations of their
predecessors, for the Oral Torah will not have been written down in an
"iron pen" to be unchanging.

Regarding our governing Israel according to the Torah, Rabbi Glasner writes,
Now, concerning the public administration and how to administer it
according to the Torah, it would be an idle task as yet to enter into
this topic too deeply. It is clear that the holy Torah cannot put
insurmountable obstacles in our way, so that we should be unable to
live our national life in our land and that we should be required to
remain in the Diaspora. There can be no doubt that had Israel remained
in its homeland for the past two thousand years, it would not have
been capable of being closed off from advancements in all areas of
life. As a wise and understanding nation, the people of Israel would
have been required to light the path before the nations in these
fields, too. We can be sure that if we return now, after two thousand
years of exile, to live our national lives in our homeland, that the
Holy One Blessed Be He will give, and from the midst of the people
there will arise, leaders worthy of their great assignment who will
know how to reconcile life with the laws of the Torah in the manner in
which the Rambam posited in his commentary on the Mishnah at the
beginning of Sanhedrin.
And it appears to me that when there will be an agreement among all
the scholars to advance one man from the academy upon them, and they
will place him at their head, provided, as we have mentioned, that
this takes place in the land of Israel, then the academy will be
established for this man and he will be ordained. He will then be able
to ordain whomever he wants to. For if you will say otherwise, it is
impossible that the Sanhedrin will never be extant, because it is
necessary that each member of the Sanhedrin be ordained and the Holy
One Blessed Be He promised that they would return as it is written
(Isaiah 1:26): "And I shall return your judges as at first and your
counselors as in the beginning. And then it will be called unto you a
city of justice." And without doubt this will occur when the Blessed
Creator will prepare the hearts of the people and their merits will be
multiplied and their longing will be for the name of the Blessed One
and the Torah and their wisdom will become great before the coming of
the Messiah, as this is explained in many verses in the Scripture.
If we faithfully attach ourselves to these holy and prophetic words of
the Rambam, why should we not march in formation toward the task of
settling and taking possession of the Holy Land, trusting in the
Divine promise "I shall return your judges as at first and your
counselors as in the beginning," which, according to the Rambam, is
destined to occur before the arrival of the Messiah?

It appears from Rabbi Glasner's words that the Sanhedrin can be
instituted before Mashiah. If so, his opinion would appear to be
(almost) exactly like Rabbi Uziel's.

Michael Makovi


-- 
Michael Makovi
מיכאל מאקאווי
mikewinddale at gmail.com
http://michaelmakovi.blogspot.com