Shemayah and Avtalyon received [the tradition] from them. Shemayah says: Love work, hate authority and do not attach yourself to the government.
EXPLANATIONS (continued):
24:
While the three parts of the statement attributed to Shemayah can be seen as complementary, each of them may also be considered separately, which, of course, we shall do. The second element in our mishnah is 'hate authority'. The format of the Hebrew, 'rabbanut', makes it clear that the intention of the teaching is 'hate being in authority', 'hate having to exercise authority' – over others. The term 'rabbanut' here intends no immediate reference to what we call today the 'rabbinate'. As I suggested in the previous shiur, the first two parts of this tripartite teaching, when taken together, suggest a posture of 'heads down': get on with your job and refrain from being in a position of authority. Certainly, when taken together with the third element of the teaching it is advice superbly understandable for the Herodian era.
25:
It is interesting, however, that Shemayah does not say 'refrain from being in authority', but says 'hate being in authority'. While everyone must recognize that the good ordering of society requires someone to be in charge, it would always be better for society if the person or people exercising that authority were unhappy with their situation of power. Sadly, recently we have seen vivid examples of the corruption that overtakes otherwise decent people when they wish to obtain or maintain power. When a person is in a position of authority over others there is always the possibility of the abuse of power. The greater the power the greater the possibility of abuse of power. I would imagine that most people have heard the famous truism of the British historian Lord Acton [1834-1902]; but I would also imagine that few people would recognize the sentences that precede that truism, so I present here the whole quotation:
And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
To that I suspect Shemayah would piously respond: Amen.
26:
The problem with democracy is that it requires people to stand up and ask to be given power. The Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw summed up, I think, the problem of the democratic system brilliantly in his play "The Apple Cart" [1929], where one of his characters – a politician, of course – says:
I talk democracy to these men and women. I tell them that they have the vote, and that theirs is the kingdom and the power and the glory. I say to them 'You are supreme: exercise your power.' They say, 'That's right: tell us what to do;' and I tell them. I say 'Exercise our vote intelligently by voting for me.' And they do. That's democracy; and a splendid thing it is too for putting the right men in the right place.
27:
Of course, this recognition of the deficiencies of the democratic system will sound like heresy to some. They would be advised to be aware of the words of another British historian, Winston Churchill [1874-1965]:
No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
28:
I think that Shemayah would also have answered Amen to the teaching of another great philosopher, Confucius, who really did say:
Only those are worthy to govern who would rather be excused.
Society can only be sure that it will not be abused by those in whose hands the direction of its affairs has been confided when those public officials recognize the awesomeness of the power that is placed in their hands – and tremble. As far as I am aware no system of government has yet been concocted that would lead to such a desideratum. However, a hint is afforded us in the Bible: all the great prophets, when instructed by God to perform their prophetic task, said that they "would rather be excused" – Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos.
To be continued.
DISCUSSION:
In Avot042 I wrote: Technically you may be right, but I still stick to my guns. Deborah was a prophetess not a monarch, and the sages took great pains to point out that hers was a task of encouragement and not one of rule.
Meir Noach writes:
I must ask did the Sages take pains to point out that Gideon ,Tola or any other male Judge only gave encouragement? Or did they say this of her so that women like Henrietta Szold would not ask to be made a Rabbi since Deborah was a Judge. Deborah is problem for some of the Sages whom do not think women should be Torah Judges. In Emanuel Quint's 'Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law, Volume l' he writes:
What concerns the commentators is the phrase that "She judged Israel at that time". Several explanations are given. One is that perhaps women are actually not excluded from judging. Or perhaps Deborah's case is unique because she was judging at the Divine command. Or perhaps she was not actually judging but merely advising the judges. Added to this is a view in Tosafoth (see Niddah 50a, Tosafoth introductory words kol ha-kasher) and a strong view in Sefer Hachinuch, commandment 77, that women may judge. Clearly, The Question of whether women should be permitted to judge merits more study.
I respond:
When the sages teach that the task of Deborah was one of encouragement and not of rule they are not referring to her role as prophetess, but to her role in the prosecution of a war – the perquisite of political leadership: she did not prosecute the war; she only advised and goaded Barak. Women serving in a judicial function is not a problem for modern Conservative Judaism.
NOTICE & CLARIFICATION:
The participants in the Halakhah Study Group, by the plurality of their votes, have determined that the next topic to be studied in that forum will be "Shabbat Eve in the Home". If anyone in this study group who is not already subscribed to the Halakhah Study Group is interested in receiving those shiurim please visit the subscription page.
