Since the days of Moses, Jews have had their own unique judicial system. We’ve had a practicing judiciary long before other societies.
Halachah (Jewish law) covers not only ritual but also legal, financial and marital issues. That’s why, according to our tradition, it is forbidden to go to secular, non-Jewish courts when dealing with a fellow Jew.
Why would we require non-Jewish courts when our own Torah has all the answers? To go elsewhere is an insult to our own wide-ranging, impressive traditional judicial system.
So, if two Jews have a financial dispute or some type of altercation, they should not approach the secular courts, but rather put their case before the beit din—the Jewish ecclesiastical court—or before a qualified rabbi.
If it’s between us, we should keep it between us. It is considered an affront to God and His Torah if we demonstrate that we cannot find resolution in our own legal system and need to seek justice in non-Jewish courts.
We all know there are 613 biblical commandments in the Torah, the Five Books of Moses. But did you know that there are also seven rabbinical commandments?
These are lighting Shabbat candles; reciting blessings; observing Chanukah and Purim; reciting Hallel; washing our hands before meals; and following the rules of carrying items on Shabbat within an eruv.
When performing the above commandments, we recite a blessing. These blessings are the same formula and language used when observing biblical commandments. We say, in Hebrew: Asher kidishanu b’mitzvotav vtzivanu … . “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to ... .”
Really? But God didn’t command us to perform these seven commandments. It was the rabbis, not God. So how then can we say that God has commanded us when it is, in fact, a rabbinic commandment?
The answer comes from this week’s Torah reading, Shoftim. The rabbis have instituted these practices by the authority vested in them by God in His Torah.
If a point of law eludes you … you should approach the judges who exist at that time … you shall inquire of them, and they shall tell you the words of judgment. You must obey their words and act in accordance with their instructions and according to the judgments that they issue to you. … You shall not deviate from their words, neither right nor left … (Deuteronomy 17: 8-11).
These are the classical words of empowerment to the Jewish spiritual leaders of every generation. Here, the Torah itself mandates the rabbis in every era to be the guiding lights of their generation. When they issue a ruling, it is not only them, but it is God Himself rendering judgment by the powers He invested in the rabbinic leadership of every generation.
Therefore, when the rabbis established a rabbinic commandment, we say a bracha, a “blessing,” and in that blessing, we use the very same formula as for the biblical commandments … . “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to ... .”
This principle of rabbinic authority carries down to our own time. Today, too, established rabbinic scholars and Batei Din—“Houses of Judgment”—respond to questions of Jewish law and deal with disputes among Jews in every established Jewish community in the world. As a rule, their authority is respected, and their rulings are obeyed.
I remember hearing a story reflecting the strong leadership of former South African chief rabbi, Louis Rabinowitz, who served in that position between 1945 and 1961. There was a gentleman who was divorced from his wife but refused to give her a get, the Jewish religious divorce.
The matter had come before the Johannesburg beit din, and with his stubborn refusal, the man was in contempt of it. That Friday night at the synagogue service in the Great Synagogue of Johannesburg, Rabbi Rabinowitz announced from the pulpit: “Here in shul tonight is a gentleman who is in contempt of the beit din and refuses to grant his wife a Jewish divorce. If the matter is not resolved during this coming week, then next Friday night, I shall name him.”
The matter was resolved.
That was before my time. But I remember another case back in 2004, when a certain individual was likewise in contempt of the beit din and had obstinately refused to abide by the rabbinic ruling pertaining to the financial obligations accorded his family after he divorced his wife. The husband had been “ducking and diving” for a long time, and eventually, when the beit din ran out of patience, it placed him in cherem. This was an excommunication or shunning order.
The terms were very strict indeed. The individual was banned from taking part in a minyan and even told he may not have a Jewish burial or be buried in a Jewish cemetery. The announcement was made from every synagogue pulpit on the same Shabbat. I distinctly remember when I mentioned that he would not be allowed a Jewish funeral, that we could feel the shock waves rippling through the pews in shul.
This particular gentleman was no pushover, though, and he took the beit din to the High Court of Johannesburg, claiming that it was interfering with his democratic rights to practice his faith.
The matter appeared before Judge Frans Malan in September 2004, and Jewish communities all over the world were watching the outcome of this case with great interest. There was serious consternation in our own community at that time. What if the judge ruled in favor of the complainant? Would it emasculate the beit din’s authority in our community?
Thankfully, Malan ruled in favor of the beit din and argued that every community, club or movement has the right to establish its own rules and that those who wish to be part of that community must abide by them or face censure or ejection.
In his summary, the judge said Orthodox Jews accept the authority of their faith, including disciplinary measures. Excommunication, the cherem, formed part of Orthodox Judaism, and those who wished to practise the faith were obliged to demonstrate fidelity to it.
“(Members of the faith) who adhere to the religion consensually undertake to submit themselves to the discipline which has been imposed on them … .”
He said it was reasonable to limit the religious rights of the man because not to do so would have the result that the Jewish faith and community would be unable to protect the integrity of Jewish law and of its own traditions.
So, in the end, thankfully, the rabbinate was supported and strengthened by the non-Jewish South African judge.
Please God, all our communities will respect the rabbinate and its leadership wherever in the world we may live. And in so doing, not only will we be respecting God and the Torah, but ultimately, we will be respecting ourselves.
