After calling for the rabbis - who condemned Rav "S" as a moser and drove him out of Lakewood - to publicly apologize, I realized that there are not many well known cases of rabbis apologizing. This is either because rabbis rarely make mistakes or alternatively they don't want to be perceived as fallible. It is interesting to note that the Torah reports the mistakes of our forefathers e.g., Yehuda and Tamar. You can also find references in the gemora to serious errors of talmidei chachomim- such a Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and Rav Avkulas (see below). I posted the story of . Rav Yochanon and Reish Lakish where the errors on both sides resulted in the death of both of them. However no apology resulted. Post Talmudic you have the case of Rabbeinu Yonah and the Rambam. I would appreciate other cases - in particular a reference to the Shaloh making a mistake. There are discussions about talmidei chachomim being protected from error - but that seems to be about eating unkosher food. Any sources that a rabbi should admit error and apologize or alternatively that a rabbi should not apologize and people shouldn't mention that rabbis erred would also be helpful.
Gittin (56a): R. Johanan said: What is illustrative of the verse, Happy is the man that feareth alway, but he that hardeneth his heart shall fall into mischief?The destruction of Jerusalem came through a Kamza and a Bar Kamza; the destruction of Tur Malka came through a cock and a hen; the destruction of Bethar came through the shaft of a leather. The destruction of Jerusalem came through a Kamza and a Bar Kamza in this way. A certain man had a friend Kamza and an enemy Bar Kamza. He once made a party and said to his servant, Go and bring Kamza. The man went and brought Bar Kamza. When the man [who gave the party] found him there he said, See, you tell tales about me; what are you doing here? Get out. Said the other: Since I am here, let me stay, and I will pay you for whatever I eat and drink.He said, I won't. Then let me give you half the cost of the party. No, said the other. Then let me pay for the whole party. He still said, No, and he took him by the hand and put him out. Said the other, Since the Rabbis were sitting there and did not stop him, this shows that they agreed with him. I will go and inform against then, to the Government. He went and said to the Emperor, The Jews are rebelling against you. He said, How can I tell? He said to him: Send them an offering and see whether they will offer it [on the altar]. So he sent with him a fine calf. While on the way he made a blemish on its upper lip, or as some say on the white of its eye, in a place where we [Jews] count it a blemish but they do not. The Rabbis were inclined to offer it in order not to offend the Government. Said R. Zechariah b. Abkulas to them: People will say that blemished animals are offered on the altar. They then proposed to kill Bar Kamza so that he should not go and inform against them, but R. Zechariah b. Abkulas said to them, Is one who makes a blemish on consecrated animals to be put to death? R. Johanan thereupon remarked: Through the scrupulousness of R. Zechariah b. Abkulas our House has been destroyed, our Temple burnt and we ourselves exiled from our land.
Ta'anis (20a): Our Rabbis have taught: A man should always be gentle as the reed and never unyielding as the cedar. Once R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon was coming from Migdal Gedor,from the house of his teacher, and he was riding leisurely on his ass by the riverside and was feeling happy and elated because he had studied much Torah. There chanced to meet him an exceedingly ugly man who greeted him, ‘Peace be upon you, Sir’. He, however, did not return his salutation but instead said to him, ‘Raca,1 how ugly you are. Are all your fellow citizens as ugly as you are?’ The man replied: ‘I do not know, but go and tell the craftsman who made me, "How Ugly is the vessel which you have made".’ When R. Eleazar realized that he had done wrong he dismounted from the ass and prostrated himself before the man and said to him, ‘I submit myself to you, forgive me’. The man replied: ‘I will not forgive you until you go to the craftsman who made me and say to him,"How ugly is the vessel which you have made".’ He [R. Eleazar] walked behind him until he reached his native city. When his fellow citizens came out to meet him greeting him with the words, ‘Peace be upon you O Teacher, O Master,’ the man asked them, ‘Whom are you addressing thus’? They replied, ‘The man who is walking behind you.’ Thereupon he exclaimed: ‘If this man is a teacher, may there not be any more like him in Israel’! The people then asked him: ‘Why’? He replied: ‘Such and such a thing has he done to me. They said to him: ‘Nevertheless, forgive him, for he is a man greatly learned in the Torah.’ The man replied: ‘For your sakes I will forgive him, but only on the condition that he does not act in the same manner in the future.’ Soon after this R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon entered [the Beth Hamidrash] and expounded thus, A man should always be gentle as the reed and let him never be unyielding as the cedar. And for this reason the reed merited that of it should be made a pen for the writing of the Law, Phylacteries and Mezuzoth.
Update July 10: From Rabbi Yair Hoffman posted with his permission
Update July 10: From Rabbi Yair Hoffman posted with his permission
Dear Rabbi Eidensohn,
Regarding your call for Rabbinic apologies, there is a fascinating and most remarkable Yam Shel Shlomo (Bava Kamma Perek 7 Siman 37). The author writes that, according to his opinion, an actual blessing should be recited at a Siyum – a completion of a Talmudic tractate. Yes, the Maharshal - Rabbi Shlomo Luriah was of the opinion that the blessing of “SheHaSimcha B’mono” should be recited at a siyum – because “there is no greater simcha or rina before Hashem than a simcha of Torah.” And he writes further, “And so I ruled.”
But then at one such party – sheer pandemonium struck. The holy Maharshal writes, “And I pinned this terrible event on myself - for I have violated the words of the sages, who had never heard such a thing [about this new practice of reciting the blessing]..”
Now as far as what the apology does and can do..There is a fascinating Ralbag regarding the sin of Gaychazi (Malcham II 5:25) that is most appropriate here.
Let us recall that Elisha the prophet cured Naaman, the general of Aram of his leprosy. Naaman wanted to reward Elisha. Elisha refused to take anything. Gaychazi waited until Elisha was out of sight and ran quickly to Naaman. He tactfully implied that Elisha required a talent of silver and two suits of clothing. Naaman gave him two talents of silver.
Later, Elisha asked Gaychazi, “Where are you coming from?” Gaychazi answered, “Your servant went neither here nor there.” The Ralbag remarks that if Gaychazi would have admitted to the theft he would have incurred a lesser punishment. Elisha would have told him to return the items in a manner that would demonstrate to Naaman that Elisha had not asked for anything. Instead, Gaychazi added to his sin by not admitting his error.
It is clear from this Ralbag that when a person has erred, even if he errs grievously – his punishment is lessened if he admits guilt. Not so with Gaychazi – he confounded his error, by not admitting. This proved to be the cause of his complete downfall. Gaychazi was stricken with leprosy forever onward.
I hope these mekoros are helpful.
Yair Hoffman
.jpg)
0 comments:
Post a Comment