Shimon Ben Shatach Said: "Examine The Witnesses Thoroughly; And Be Cautious With Your Words, Lest Through Them They [The Witnesses Or The Litigants] Learn To Speak Falsehood."
The two mishnayos that report what Yehudah ben Tabbai and ShImon ben Shetach taught appear to have little to do with the rest of Avos. On the surface they are out of tune with the remainder of this ethical-homiletic tractate and make up a unit that is jarringly out of place. After all, they deal with technical matters that a judge must know and are of little interest to the general population. One also wonders why both of these personalities were so preoccupy[pied with specifically legal matters, to the extent that none of the other rabbis appear to be.
One can often understand how individual Sages were viewed by the Talmud by examining stories that it tells about them. The selection of what is preserved and what is not, presents a certain understanding of what they believed and taught. Interestingly, both Yehuda ben Tabbai and Shimon ben Shettach are said to have erred in their capacity as Court Judges. Together these stories create an image of a process gone awry.
R' Yehudah ben Tabbai had an false witness killed to show the Tziddukim they were wrong regarding a law, but made a mistake himself, which Shimon ben Shetach pointed out. From then on, he refused to rule in law other than before Shimon ben Shetach, and he spent his life crying at the grave of his victim for forgiveness: Makkot 5b
Shimon ben Shatach on a single day sentenced to death eighty witches In Ahskelon. The relatives of these women, filled with a desire for revenge, brought false witnesses against Simeon's son, whom they accused of a crime which involved capital punishment; and as a result of this charge he was sentenced to death. On the way to the place of execution the son protested his innocence in so pathetic a manner that even the witnesses were moved to admit the falsity of their testimony. When the judges were about to liberate the condemned man he called their attention to the fact that, according to the Law, a witness must not be believed when he withdraws a former statement, and he said to his father, "If you desire that the welfare of Israel shall be strengthened by thy hand, then consider me as a beam on which you may tread without regret." The execution then proceeded. The commentators suggest that this sad event was probably the reason why Shimon issued a warning in this mishna in Avos that witnesses should always be carefully cross-questioned ( Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 23b).
The approach that we have taken to the first chapter of Avos is that it represents a chronicle of the attempt of the Rabbis to find a formula that would enable a righteous Jewish polity to function within the framework of a state that disregarded its covenantal imperative to God. The Kings were not of the House of David and were, besides, wicked, and various heresies competed for their allegiance. The preceding mishnayos document various formulations with which the perushim attempted to preserve the historic-covenant relationship of God with the Jewish people in the framework of some kind of a national grouping. From the hope of Shimon Hatsaddik that the Jewish State would be firmly based on Torah, Temple Service and progressive social policy, the rabbis, in response to Hellenization and corruption of the ruling class, attempted to create autonomous social groupings that would function as a state within a state and dependently of the larger State structure. As I wrote previously:
" The subject matter of this mishna is judicial procedures. This, as Maharal observes in his commentary, is unexpected. Why should advice to judges interrupt the flow of moral maxims, spiritual advice and teachings on personal development that come before and after it. Yehuda ben Tabbai and Shimon ben Shetach (of who we will soon speak) are the only pair of Teachers in this chapter that concern themselves with judicial minutia. Why, then do they? To understand this, we must briefly review what has come before. We maintain that, this chapter traces for us the process by which "chassidim harishonim", the early pious ones, became a well regulated, self identified (and leading) religious body within Jewry. We traced the unfortunate failure of Shimon Hatsaddik's vision of a polity that was to be based on Torah, Temple Service and benevolence in public affairs to a growing recognition that the Hellenistic state that was built by the later Hasmoneans was renegade and corrupt and that the only solution laid in separating from it and in duplicating its features within a self regulated and self just governed body of religious believers.This process culminated with the last mishna in this chapter, when R. Shimon ben Gamliel could repeat Shimon Hatsaddik's teaching as a vision accomplished, not in the Jewish State, but within an autonomous religious community that resided in it.
The preceding several mishnayos laid out the policy of building self sufficient communities and discussed how it's done. It took several generations to learn how to function simultaneously within the larger body of Jewry and as independent, self contained communities. Over several generations, a parallel state within a state developed in Judea, headed by a Nasi (Prince) and Av Beis Din (Head of the Court). The mishna at this point is able to go beyond the consideration of who is an insider and who is an outsider and how to deal fairly with both insiders and outsiders. Now, that communities are stable and their boundaries are well defined,the committment of their adherents is strong enough to even survive its institutions, that is to subject themselves wholly to its courts. Losing a court case really tests one's committment. Before self- identity of the community had fully solidified, its courts coudl have no coercive power, being as they were, dependent solely on moral persuasion and possessing no means of enforcement. Now, in the generation of Yehudah ben Tabbai and Shimon ben Shetach, the self regulating voluntary communal affiliation took its final shape. In a mature structure of voluntary affiliation, the willingness to freely submit to its courts and to not contest its decision by recourse to the outsiders, indicates the final maturing and independence of the community. It is in this generations that the "chassidim" became "perushim" and the personally pious turned into a large, powerful and proud political force of which we read in Josephus and tannaitic literature."
Seen in this light, Yehuda ben Tabbai and Shimon ben Shetach represent the failure of the "judicial" model of Jewish social organization. Reliance of Beid Din as the supreme authority in the society lead to mistakes because the Law without its supplementation by other factors,does not necessarily lead to Justice . By recording the stories of R,. Yehuda ben Tabai and Shimon ben Shetach's errors, our Talmud subtly communicated to us the historic reality of this noble experiment that did not succeed. Judicial structures alone do not ensure religious survival and growth, and the subsequent generations abandoned the judicial model and focused on the "service of the heart", each refining or emphasizing a particular aspect of avodah in an approach that continues to be with us to this day.
Comments