The Rabbis: Supermen or Fallible Human Beings?

sdfghjhjk

Overview: There’s a common misconception that turns the rabbis into supermen who can never make a mistake in science or Halacha. This article will bring sources and proofs to demonstrate the possibility for error in rabbinic work, including the sciences of the Talmud.

Naturally, one of the most common questions on the Oral Law is how we know it was properly preserved and accurately transmitted. Can there be mistakes in the tradition? Are the rabbis considered infallible?

Although it might come as a shock to some Orthodox Jews, truthfully speaking there’s no Torah-basis to the assumption that rabbis are supermen who can’t make mistakes in their teachings. In fact, all logic goes against that and there are Torah-sources that prove how mistakes are indeed possible—and happened.

Yet despite this fact, we are bound to the rabbinic authority as a matter of principle. This is like the absolute power of government courts despite the fact no one is denying they are fallible humans who may err. We may have a hard time distinguishing and identifying what those mistakes are, but we still recognize the possibility of errors within the vast bulk of rabbinic literature.

We obviously cannot pick and choose what we believe is a mistake and what is not, for doing so would defeat the whole purpose of their authority. The Torah writes of the Supreme Court that “you shall not turn from their words right or left.”[i] This implies that even when there’s a chance of them erroring, it’s still God’s will that we keep their rulings. It’s our responsibility to listen to all their rulings while it’s theirs to avoid mistakes as much as possible.

Sefer HaChinuch mitzvah 496 says:

“‘You shall not stray from [it] right or left’—even if they say to you about right that it is left, do not stray from their commandments”—meaning to say that even if they err in one of the things, it is not fitting for us to differ with them. Rather, we should do like their mistake. And it is better to suffer one mistake, and everything be given over under their constant good opinion; and not that each and every one go according to his [own] opinion. As with [the latter], there would be destruction of the religion, dissent in the heart of the people and total loss of the nation.”

Well, you might now be wondering; isn’t the Oral Law concept similar to the ‘broken telephone’ game where many mistakes are expected, if not inevitable?

There are a few big differences between the broken telephone game and the oral fashion of transmission.

As mentioned earlier, only a considerably small number of details about certain Mitzvos originate from Sinai. The clear majority are rabbinic inventions. It’s not clear whether it was permitted to write those “rabbinic oral laws.” If it was allowed, then this issue is trivial since the broken-telephone game would only be with a small amount of information, i.e. the oral laws stemming from Sinai. But even in regard to the “Sinaic oral laws,” the transmission process was far different than the game of broken telephone.

For starters, these were the biggest geniuses of the generation with memories one of a kind. Second, they were the most God-fearing men, who would put the greatest concern not to forget or err. Thirdly, it’s not a one-time study-and-go, but years of repetition, learning the same material over and over. Fourth, even if one were to get mistaken, he would immediately be corrected by his companions in study. Fifth, while it was prohibited to put this Oral Law in public writing, having personal private “notes” (known in Talmudic terms as megillas nistarim) to review the material was permitted.[ii]

 

Back to our previous discussion, here are some Torah-sources that confirm this possibility of rabbinic error:

The High Court is required to bring a sacrifice when unintentionally diverting a law that includes all of Israel.[iii] We find arguments as well in factual reality (e.g., the argument between Shmuel and Rav Ada regarding the exact length of the solar year[iv]). Obviously one of these rabbis had to be mistaken because they each contradict the other. Similarly, there are arguments regarding some versions of many texts in the Talmud, as well as different explanations for it. Obviously, the Talmud had only one explanation, leaving only one commentator with the truth. See Rosh Hashanah 25a regarding the possibility for the High Court to make a mistake in the calendar calculations.

See Pesachim 94a which states “and it was the rabbis who were mistaken.”

Often, the Talmud and other Jewish works mentioned the science of its times,[v] either the science of the world in general, or the science of the Jewish thinkers themselves. Some of the science has been outdated since. In light of the above, this of course presents no problem to the rabbis, who are actually human and thus fallible. Much of this science can be found in tractate Pesachim page 94 and the remedies found in Gittin 67b and further.[1] [2] [3] For more discussion on this topic, see “Did the Wild Stories of Midrash Actually Happen?

 

“Because not necessarily does a Prophet have all the correct scientific knowledge concerning the secrets of reality [of astrophysics].” (Ralbag on Genesis 15:1)

“It is not appropriate to believe in something that has been scientifically discredited only because it was stated by some predecessor. Rather we must contemplate the idea with our logic. If we find proof for it, we accept it; if we find possible evidence for it, then we take it as a possibility, and if we find evidence in the negative, we shall regard it as a negative.”

(Rav Shmuel ben Chafni Gaon, in his commentary on the Torah Rashbach p. 520)

This goes even further. The Talmud suggests that the Jeremiah the Prophet erred and documented his error in his Book of Jeremiah! Same goes with Ezekiel in his Book of Ezekiel.[vi] [4] If a prophet can err, certainly a rabbi can.

This, however, is only regarding part of the Oral Law; most of it, though, was preserved in an elegant transmission process from generation to generation. The sages are known to have put great concern and emphasis on both academia and religion, which would minimize many potential errors.

 

Examples of scientific error:

Flat Earth

A good example would be concerning the shape of the Earth. Back in primitive times, many or perhaps most people believed that the Earth was flat. Some believed it was round, but the bottom half was engulfed in water, and some believed that it was round, as science today knows. We cannot blame anyone who thought the Earth was flat. After all, everywhere we look, the Earth still seems flat. There weren’t any rocket-ships or satellites to show a round, sphere-shaped Earth. So some rabbinic sages embraced that popular position, unsurprisingly.

R”I of Barcelona (in his book Sefer Yetzirah p. 254a) says in the name of Rav Saadyah Gaon that indeed  a minority of sages took the position of a flat earth.[5] The Talmud in Pesachim 94b states: The Jewish Sages say that during the day the sun travels beneath the firmament and is therefore visible, and at night it travels above the firmament. And the sages of the nations of the world say that during the day the sun travels beneath the firmament, and at night it travels beneath the earth and around to the other side of the world. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: And the statement of the sages of the nations of the world appears to be more accurate than our statement. A proof to this is that during the day, springs that originate deep in the ground are cold, and during the night they are hot compared to the air temperature, which supports the theory that these springs are warmed by the sun as it travels beneath the earth.”

It seems that the Sages believed that the sun travels above a firmament which is solid (which is why the sunlight doesn’t penetrate it during the night). Since it’s clearly visible that the sun travels upward by sunrise and downward by sunset, the Sages probably believed in a common belief at that time. This belief was that the earth is spherical with its bottom half submerged in water. The sages of the world said that instead of going above the firmament, the sun travels beneath the water that the earth is submerged in. Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi takes the fact that the springs produce hot water at night (compared to the air temperature) as evidence that the sun travels beneath the water, as the sages of the world say. He had no understanding of internal mantels of the Earth to realize that this was scientifically erroneous.

This statement is said in a Halachic context (albeit it itself has no Halachic implications) and is therefore highly unlikely to be metaphoric (as are some other Talmudic statements—see “Did the Wild Stories of Midrash Actually Happen?”). Additionally, it would seem highly unlikely that this “metaphoric” statement “so happened” to parallel a common belief at the time.

Similarly, it would seem that Rabbi Nosson, both in his statement on 94a and his statement on 94b (neither quoted here), also believed in a flat Earth. See Bereishis Rabbah 6:8 where this argument between the Jewish sages and the gentile sages is brought as an argument between the Jewish sages themselves (R’ Yehudah bar Illaii and the sages, with an uncertainty who holds what; Rabbi Yochanan says there’s a proof for each position and Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai says that he cannot determine which side is correct).

Likewise, Talmud Yerushalmi Avodah Zara 3:1 says: “R’ Yonah said: When Alexander the Macedonian wanted to go back, he flew [on the back of an eagle] higher and higher until he saw the earth as a ball and the sea as a plate.” This legend is a Greek one found in other sources besides the Talmud and it seems that R’ Yonah believed in this widespread legend. This legend makes sense only with the primitive understanding of the world at that time that the world was a sphere dipped into water at its half point.

 

Movement of the sun

Another example of an obvious scientific mistake to the modern man can be found in Tamid 32:1. In that narrative, Alexander the Great asks the Rabbis which distance is greater, the sun from the east to the west or the sun from the height of the sky to the earth. The first opinion of the Rabbis held that the distance of from east to west is greater. They proved this with a simple observation. The human eye has an easy time staring at the sun when it is either rising or setting. This, they explained, was because the sun is farther. On the other hand, at midday when the sun is directly above us it is impossible to stare at the sun. This, they explained, is because the sun is closer to the Earth. This is an obvious misunderstanding of modern science which can prove that the sun circles the earth with a perfect circle on a daily basis. The reason that we can stare at the sun when it is rising and setting is because its intensity is obstructed by a greater amount of the ozone layer given the diagonal angle the rays are shining through.

 

Viability of an 8th month baby

Sages in the Talmud unanimously believed that a child born in the 8th month of pregnancy[6] will not survive, whereas a child born in the 7th month has a much bigger chance of survival.[vii] They would give explanations for the “few” times the baby would survive.[viii]

This theory which was widespread back in the day, stands no chance these days when the data is vividly clear that the longer the baby is in the womb up to 9 months the greater the chance of survival. An eight-month baby has a much greater survival rate than a seventh month one.

This Talmudic belief cannot be explained as metaphoric for two reasons. (1) It was widespread belief in the ancient world. Many blamed it on the astrology of the 8th month. It would unlikely that the Sages had a metaphoric understanding to it while the world so happened to share the same belief and understood it in its physical sense. (2) The Talmudic belief has Halachic ramifications discussed in the Gemara. For example, the Halacha in the Gemara is that we cannot do “work” on Shabbat in order to save the baby since it isn’t considered to be a human that will live.

The Rama[ix] attempts to explain that our bodies have since evolved and this concept is no longer applicable. But his explanation seems unfitting given all the scientific data we know about how a baby constantly develops in the womb getting a greater chance of survival the longer it develops in the womb.

 

Pregnancy span of wild animals

The Talmudic sages compiled a list[x] of animals citing the pregnancy span for each of them.

“A Kosher small animal (like sheep and goats) give birth at 6 months. A Kosher large animal (like the cow) at 9 months; a dog at 50 days; a cat at 52; a pig at 60; a fox and all types of creeping animals at 6 months; the wolf, the lion, the bear, the ‘bardales’, the elephant, the monkey, and the long-tailed ape at 3 years; and the snake at 7 years.”[xi]

This comprehensive list attests to the primitive knowledge of the time due to lack of zoologists. Ironically, only the domesticated animals have the right pregnancy span while all the wild animals are radically off than what it is in reality. The only domesticated animal’s pregnancy span that is also off in the list is the pig. This makes sense since the pig is considered a taboo animal and wasn’t domesticated by the Jews.[7]

These errors are understandable considering the lack of knowledge they would have had of wild beasts.[8] However, at the end of the day they are mistakes that even the rabbis were able to make as human beings.

This cannot be interpreted metaphorically since if that were the case the domesticated animals wouldn’t have had the same numbers as is in reality. This also makes explaining that nature changed over time to also be highly unlikely. If nature has changed so that the animal’s pregnancy span would change, why is it that the domesticated animals all stayed the same while the wild ones not?!

There are many more examples of scientific errors found in the Talmud, but we will not go through each case as the point was already well established.[9]

 

For the sake of transparency I will note that there have been some recent great rabbis that have claimed that the sages cannot be mistaken.[xii] But of course, all the evidence above demonstrates that these very rabbis are mistaken in their view that the sages cannot be mistaken.

___________________

 

[1] Even according to the opinions in Kabbalah that every word mentioned in the Talmud—including every opinion—was given to Moses at Sinai, that would only be on the spiritual level. On the literal, physical, earthly level there were opinions in the Talmud that were completely wrong. It is possible that the very fact that the sages said their Torah teachings, whether they were mistaken or not, creates a spiritual reality in the upper realms where that Torah statement now remains true in that upper world.

The same applies to Kabbalistic statements like “there are seventy faces [i.e. viewpoints] to the Torah.” Similarly goes with the statement “eilu va’eilu divrei elokim chayim” (Eruvin 13b). On a simpler level of understanding, we can explain these statements to be going on most arguments in the Talmud—and possibly only in Halacha and not Aggadah. Most arguments in the Talmud are based on two logical approaches that don’t disagree about any facts. They are two logical approaches of how to apply the law by interpreting Torah each with their own understanding. Logic itself often allows for opposite approaches to both make sense. Because they are both valid, being that they are both logical and coincide with the logical methods of biblical interpretation, they are both valid in God’s eyes because that is exactly what he wants—the sages to use their logic to apply law. In practice, however, although they are both “true” in this sense, only one approach can be practiced in action. Because unlike logic, action doesn’t allow for opposites to both be true simultaneously.

 

There are Seforim that say that the books of Chazal until the Shach and the Taz (and according to some until the Maharsha) were written with ruach hakodesh, divine inspiration. What exactly this means is unclear but here’s a thought about what it may mean. It certainly doesn’t mean that they cannot make mistakes, since they clearly have erred as noted. Rather it means that the very fact that we take their words as Halacha (the Shulchan Aruch along with its commentators are regarded as the final Halacha for these days), makes their words ruach hakodesh – i.e. the Divine Will, what God wants us to keep. For the sake of unification within Halacha, the rabbis decided to accept the Mishna as the Code of Law. Afterwards, the same authority was granted to the explanation of the Mishna provided in the Talmud. Many years later, the same happened with the Shulchan Aruch. So being that these early works, along with the commentary on them, are regarded as Halacha for us nowadays, that follows that their work is the Divine Will, otherwise called ruach hakodesh. So there’s not much inherently holy about their works in compared to the Halachic works written afterward; rather it was the fact that it’s Halacha that makes it ruach hakodesh.

[2] Of course, we shouldn’t run to such a conclusion when not understanding a statement properly. The sages were clearly very smart people and wouldn’t be mistaken on basic scientific ideas. But when it comes to science that is hard to test, such as in cases where sophisticated modern equipment is needed, we can understand how the sages could be err

For a larger discussion about the reliability of Aggadah, see:

https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/53349/is-belief-in-midrashim-optional/53351#53351 where many sources are brought to demonstrate the potential fallibility in Aggadah. However, this is all not to say that we should disregard Aggadah. On the contrary, it is a part of Torah and is therefore to be relied upon, with the realization, however, that it may be wrong or the personal opinion of a particular sage.

[4] Here is a rough translation of the Talmudic passage:

It is written, “[In the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month], a breach was made in the city“ (Jer.39.2).

And yet you say this (that it was breached on the 17th)?
Said R. Tanhum bar Hanilai, “There is an error in calculation here.“
That is in line with what is written:“In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came to me“ (Ezek.26.1).

“Son of man, because Tyre said concerning Jerusalem, `Aha, [the gate of the people is broken, it has swung open to me, I shall be replenished now that she is laid to waste].“`
What is the meaning of “Aha?“ [The cited verse indicates that Tyre rejoiced on the first day of the month.]
If you say that it was on the first of Ab, the city had not yet been burned.
If you say it was on the first of Elul, could a courier [who carries letters] go in a day and a night [i.e., in just a short time] from Jerusalem to Tyre?

  1. Yohanan and R. Simeon b. Laqish: R. Yohanan said, “It may be compared to a king who was sitting and making calculations. They came and told him, `Your son has been taken captive,` and he erred in his calculations. He said. Let this day stand at the beginning of calculations.“`
    R. Simeon b. Laqish said, “It may be compared to a king who was sitting and making calculations. They came and told him, `Your son has been taken captive and prostituted.` He said, `Let this day stand at the beginning of calculations.“`
  2. .Mana asked, “There is no problem as to why the calculations on what has happened should be thrown off [by the sorrow]. [That accounts for error.] But is that the case for what was going to happen [that Ezekiel, writing before the first destruction, should have been guilty of this error in his calculations]?“

[5] By flat we mean that there isn’t land on both sides of it. Some people back then believed in a sphere-like earth that was submerged in water at its half point. This was apparently the understanding of Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi later to be mentioned and probably the understanding of the sages as well.

[6] i.e. after 8 months were completed and entering the 9th month.

[7] The Talmud often criticizes those who raise pigs in Israel.

[8] This explains the method the Gemara uses to explain from where they derived that the snake is pregnant for 7 years. The Talmud in Bechorot 8a derives it from a verse in Genesis interpreting it in an interesting way out of the simple meaning of the verse. The Gemara had to use such measures because it had little access to wild life.

[9] For a more thorough discussion on this subject, see http://www.yahadut.org.il/maamarim/yediat-hateva.pdf (Hebrew).

[i] Deuteronomy 17:11.

[ii]  Talmud Sabbas 6b, see Hakdamah of Rambam to his Yad Hachazakah.

[iii] Numbers 15:24.

[iv] Talmud Eiruvin 56a, Pirki DeRabbi Eliezer ch. 6, Beraisa DeMazolos ch. 8, Rambam Hilchos Kidush Hachodesh 9:1.

[v] See Niddah 22b, Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 3:5, Kiddush Hachodesh 17:24, and Igros Kodesh (Lubavitcher Rebbe) 1:1.

[vi] Talmud Yerushalmi Taanis 4:5 (23a).

[vii] Tosefta Shabbat 15:5; Talmud Bavli 135a, Yevamot 80a, and Bava Batra20a.

[viii] Yevamot 80b.

[ix] Even Haezer 156:4.

[x] Tosefta Bechoros 1:10.

[xi] Tosefta on Bechoros 1:10. Also brought with additions or subtractions in Talmud Bavli Bechoros 8a and in Midrash Rabbah 20:4.

[xii] Chazon Ish in kovetz igeros chazon ish letter 15; some say that Rav Moshe Feinstein also holds that the early sages couldn’t have made mistakes.

Footnotes
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Response

  1. Turk Hill says:

    I agree. Rambam said: “Do not ask of me to show that everything they have said regarding astronomical matters conforms to the way things really are. For at that time, mathematics was imperfect.” (Guide, 3:14)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *