I closed my Facebook account yesterday. I had very little reason for it in the first place, mostly as a venue to distribute TftD sort of passively-aggressively. However, two things tilted the scales in favor of breaking off relations; both regarding the reaction I saw to the horrifying events in Pittsburgh this last Shabbos, May HaShem extract vengeance for the innocent victims. One reaction was people barely referencing the event itself, but using the opportunity of a juicy news story to further their political agenda. Folks from all ends of the political spectrum (unfortunately, in America today politics only has "ends" with no meeting ground for meaningful discussion) used the event that way. I was sickened by that. I also, though, saw that a rav had posted a video of another rav commenting on the event. The posting rav strongly disagreed with the message in the video, which he stated while still keeping a respectful and professional demeanor. A comment on the post, though, was thoroughly disgraceful and insulting. That just saddened me. Deleting my Facebook account, on the other hand, caused my no distress whatsoever.
How do Jews argue and disagree? On daf 59b in Bava Metzia is the famous argument between R' Eliezer and the Sages about a certain kind of oven. R' Eliezer brought all the proofs to his opinion that he could; that Sages did not budge. R' Eliezer then wrought three miraculous events; the Sages replied that miracles are one thing, halacha is another. Finally, R' Eliezer asked that Heaven itself declare that he is correct. A בת קול/Divine utterance declared Heaven's agreement with R' Eliezer. The Sages replied: The Torah itself tells us that we may not pay no attention to a בת קול/Divine utterance in matters of halacha (D'varim 30:12) Moreover, the Torah that was already given to us from Har Sinai informed us that the halacha follows the majority. (Shmos 23:2) End of argument.
Interestingly, though, there is another gemara (Yevamos 14a) that says we decide halacha in accordance with the opinion of Beis Hillel and not Beis Shammai. Why? Precisely because of a בת קול/Divine utterance that informed us of that. Tosafos (first one on Bava Metzia 59b) explains that the situations are quite different. In the case of the argument about the oven there was simple majority that held one position in halacha and an individual who disagreed. The halacha in clear cut in that case. In the dispute between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai, on the other hand, we have a difference in opinion of two schools of thought; both of whom came to their conclusions based on the rule that the halacha follows the majority. However, in a dispute between two academies, the question was whether to follow the larger academy or the sharper ("smarter", if you will) academy. There was no disagreement about which academy had a larger membership; nor was there any disagreement about which academy was sharper. The only question was which holds sway: size or depth? For that a בת קול/Divine utterance was needed.
Differences of opinions are inevitable and, in fact, desirable -- no, scratch that, differences of opinion are essential to find the Truth. Regardless of the strength of one's convictions and the chasm between the positions, though, there is never a place for disrespect nor disdain.
How do Jews argue and disagree? On daf 59b in Bava Metzia is the famous argument between R' Eliezer and the Sages about a certain kind of oven. R' Eliezer brought all the proofs to his opinion that he could; that Sages did not budge. R' Eliezer then wrought three miraculous events; the Sages replied that miracles are one thing, halacha is another. Finally, R' Eliezer asked that Heaven itself declare that he is correct. A בת קול/Divine utterance declared Heaven's agreement with R' Eliezer. The Sages replied: The Torah itself tells us that we may not pay no attention to a בת קול/Divine utterance in matters of halacha (D'varim 30:12) Moreover, the Torah that was already given to us from Har Sinai informed us that the halacha follows the majority. (Shmos 23:2) End of argument.
Interestingly, though, there is another gemara (Yevamos 14a) that says we decide halacha in accordance with the opinion of Beis Hillel and not Beis Shammai. Why? Precisely because of a בת קול/Divine utterance that informed us of that. Tosafos (first one on Bava Metzia 59b) explains that the situations are quite different. In the case of the argument about the oven there was simple majority that held one position in halacha and an individual who disagreed. The halacha in clear cut in that case. In the dispute between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai, on the other hand, we have a difference in opinion of two schools of thought; both of whom came to their conclusions based on the rule that the halacha follows the majority. However, in a dispute between two academies, the question was whether to follow the larger academy or the sharper ("smarter", if you will) academy. There was no disagreement about which academy had a larger membership; nor was there any disagreement about which academy was sharper. The only question was which holds sway: size or depth? For that a בת קול/Divine utterance was needed.
Differences of opinions are inevitable and, in fact, desirable -- no, scratch that, differences of opinion are essential to find the Truth. Regardless of the strength of one's convictions and the chasm between the positions, though, there is never a place for disrespect nor disdain.
Comments