«He who is summoned to be judged by someone lesser than he (Dayyan Qatan Mimenu) »
Now in a hierarchical caste-like system, or a meritocracy, such stratification makes sense. While in a democratic or egalitarian system this becomes difficult to understand. EG there are some "Liberal" rabbis who have a kind of iconoclastic attitude towards "G'dolim" - may we term it "g'dolocastic"?
These "g'doloclasts" seem to mimic Korach's complaint towards Moshe's leadership. Korach asserted "Ki CHOL ho'eidah KULAM Q'doshim". And therefore you Moshe and Aharon, "Madu'a Titnas'u al Q'hal Hashem?"
Coming from this egalitarian paradigm how can one understand this Halachah at all? What does it mean for a Jew to be summoned to a Dayyan who is "qatan mimenu"? Only if there exists some kind of higher and lower status amongst scholars and or officials is this "shayyach" (possible) somehow.
These "g'doloclasts" seem to mimic Korach's complaint towards Moshe's leadership. Korach asserted "Ki CHOL ho'eidah KULAM Q'doshim". And therefore you Moshe and Aharon, "Madu'a Titnas'u al Q'hal Hashem?"
Coming from this egalitarian paradigm how can one understand this Halachah at all? What does it mean for a Jew to be summoned to a Dayyan who is "qatan mimenu"? Only if there exists some kind of higher and lower status amongst scholars and or officials is this "shayyach" (possible) somehow.
KT
No comments:
Post a Comment