Berakhot 027

I read with pleasure your analysis of the events that led to the downfall and resurrection of Rabban Gamaliel's presidency. I read the story a bit differently, devoid of some of the emotional sides that you see in it.

I agree as to the role of Mrs. El'azar ben Azariah, but am not quite sure if it is fair to paint her husband as the youthful nebish, that I believe you portray. To me, he always was a heroic genius, so young and yet already so brilliant [Ahem. Isn't this a bit emotional, Ed? – SR], who just was naive about matters of state and the way the world is. I love the event as portrayed here and elsewhere in Talmud, and it always brings issues to mind that are not germane to our mishnaic deliberations:

1. Hillel, the ancestor of Rabban Gamli'el, was a poor immigrant from Babel. His followers are known largely to be populists, as opposed to the aristocratic Shammai. Still, it seems here that personal wealth was needed to head the Sanhedrin at Yavneh. Where did Rabban Gamli'el make his fortune? [According to Rabbi Louis Finklestein z"l, it was the father of Rabban Gamli'el, Rabban Shim'on ben-Gamli'el, who first showed signs of siding with the elitist conservatives, and who amassed money and estates. If this is the case, the wealth of Rabban Gamli'el was inherited. – SR]
2. Why is El'azar ben Azariah described with the honorific title Rabban? [I do not understand the question: I cannot recall even one instance where El'azar ben-Azaryah is given the title 'Rabban'. But even if there should be such instances, why would this be problematic? – he was, after all, President of the Sanhedrin for one quarter of every month. – SR]
3. To me the most beautiful aspect of the story is the list of accomplishments of El'azar ben Azariah during his short solo reign [It was, indeed, short: from the Talmud it appears it may only have been for one or two days! – SR], changes that I believe Rabban Gamli'el maintained, particularly the opening of educational opportunities to all interested students. [My reading of the text is that the abolition of the 'entrance requirements' for attending the sessions of the Sanhedrin was not a decision of Rabbi El'azar ben-Azaryah but a mass decision of the majority of the members themselves. – SR]
4. I also find the story interesting if read from Rabban Gamli'el's side. Here a man is trying to maintain the sovereignty of office against a rebellion foisted by his arch-opponent [With the greatest of respect to Ed, I think he is misreading the map here: the 'rebellion' was caused by Rabban Gamli'el treating a much-loved and much-respected 'elder statesman' autocratically and cruelly; the confrontation between Rabbi Yehoshu'a and Rabban Gamli'el was deliberately sought by the latter, and in full session Rabbi Yehoshu'a tried his hardest to avoid it – even by 'handling the truth carelessly' – SR]. His behavior, while despicable, perhaps was in place. Somehow, however, he lost a vote of no-confidence as his own Hillelites compared wealthy Gamli'el to the poor, older charcoal maker, Rabbi Yehoshu'a.
5. Finally, is it not interesting that the Sanhedrin is hoisted on its own petard? They argue maalim b'kdusha v'lo moridim [one should only progress in sanctity never regress: this was the argument against the complete deposition of Rabbi El'azar ben-Azaryah after the reinstatement of Rabban Gamli'el. – SR] If so they had no right to depose Rabban Gamaliel, and therefore must reassign him to his presidency. However, once they had elected a successor, he could not be fired either.

I wonder at what stage – perhaps you know – the Sanhedrin leadership was divided between a Nasi and an Av-Bet-Din? Was this a precursor?

To this last point I respond in full:

No this was not a precursor. The dual leadership of the Pharisaic entity goes back at least 250 years before this period! From before the Maccabean uprising there were two leaders – as a perfunctory reading of the first chapter of Tractate Avot will show. This dual leadership seems to have been interrupted when it was decided to vest the Presidency in the descendants of Hillel, so that the appointment of Rabbi El'azar ben-Azaryah might be seen as the reintroduction of an old established custom that had been in abeyance. Rabbi Louis Finklestein z"l sees other attempts at appointing a colleague to the Nasi in order always to maintain the parity between the 'liberal' wing and the 'conservative' wing; but he admits that these attempts were not always successful.

I shall try to post, sometime over the next few days, a complete translation of this episode, so that everyone can decide for themselves.