(Please follow the idea before finding counterarguments).
The dawn of Judaism - Abraham, Itzhok, Yaakov, the Tribes - most fateful decisions were made almost exclusively on personal basis, without consulting other living authorities. Abraham and Itzhok did not consult Shem and Ever (and Noah), even though they lived in the same time in Eretz Isroel. The Brothers did not consult neither the family (father and grandfather) nor the Shem's Beis Din.
Tanakh: Moses, Joshuah, Judges, Kings - all issued their rulings without, seemingly, consulting the Zkeynim (or any Beis Din). Phrases like "Let me ask the Beis Din!" or "Let the Sanhedrin decide!" are very rare in the Tanakh.
Talmudic times: from Hillel and Shammay and to Amorayim - the great Sanhedrin was fully functioning through the whole epoch, but nevertheless every Rabbi kept his own Braysos and ruled for himself. The situation was so severe, that the next generation Tanoyim or Amoroyim had no idea what the previous generation had in mind. 90% of uncertainties in the Talmud could be avoided if the discussions were brought to the Sanhedrin.
Ever since: Geoynim, Rishoynim, Akhroynim and to the present days Gdoylim , all Halokhos were ruled individually by single persons (with a few exceptions), with no attempts to gather the leading Rabbis of every era and rule Halochos together either to resemble the Torah's idea of the "70 Elders" or simply to seek agreement and acceptance.
As such, they all suffer from extreme lack of systematization, lack of accepted terminology, personal cultural biases, duplicates (hence waste of time), mutual disregard and accusations and more.
How come the original Torah idea of bringing every Makhloykes to a Beis Din was kept overridden in all times? Is this how Judaism is planned to work?
No comments:
Post a Comment