What are the halachic borders of Israel, and approximately how many rabbis are there now? Also, who is considered a rabbi for the purpose of agreeing to ordination? If one can’t get all the rabbis to agree on someone (which seems likely), would it be possible to convince all of them to go on holiday to New York or something leaving behind like two rabbis who could then ordain someone?
More seriously, would it be even remotely possible to get the rabbis to agree on candidates for ordination if some way could be found to get them together for discussion? I imagine the main problem with agreeing on someone would be the varying sects, each wanting their own guy to be ordained. I’m thinking this could be worked past by coming to agreements that every sect would get one of their guys on the Sanhedrin – i.e. a “we’ll agree to your guy if you agree to our guy” sort of thing. After all, wasn’t one of the features of the old Sanhedrin that it tended to feature a quite wide assortment of views, from hardline Pharisees to pinko Hellenizers, and everything in between?
A much simpler solution would be to follow the time-honored tradition of those who wanted to create a Sanhedrin simply declaring anyone who opposed them apostates and heretics and then convening their own small conclave to do whatever they wanted. Of course, this would have pretty much no chance of being ratified by the Israeli Supreme Court or Knesset, but such a group would probably declare that they were not bound by such “modern” irritations anyway.
As one more small group of people who could add strife to the world, I guess they should be watched, but barring the reappearance of Elijah or Jesus, I don’t think we’ve got too much to worry about in the next few years.
Perhaps I’m remembering this wrong, but the titles at the end of Schindler’s List said that some time in the '60s or or '70s, “Oskar Schindler was officially declared a righteous gentile by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.” So I thought the Sanhedrin was “restored” a long time ago. Perhaps there’s more than one?
I don’t know the precise answers to these questions. I know that there are areas in the current State of Israel that are not part of the halachic definition of Israel (Eilat, I believe is one of those areas). Likewise, there are areas that are not part of the current State of Israel, but yet are considered Eretz Yisroel for halachic purposes. I don’t know the precise boundaries, nor do I know how many rabbis are contained therein.
My guess would be that it would have to be someone who observed the commandments (thus excluding the Reform, Conservative and other branches). As to what specific requirements they would have to meet, I couldn’t tell you.
You know the old saying “two Jews, three opinions,” right? In truth, considering that Maimonides himself was unsure about this, and the fact that in the Radvaz’s time (a few hundred years later) they still couldn’t come to a definite agreement on whether or not this should be done, I doubt that such an agreement could be arrived at today as well. As such, we may have to simply wait for Elijah.
As an aside, it’s always been my personal belief (not rooted in Jewish law, tradition, etc.) that the sure sign that someone is the messiah, is if he can get all the Jews to agree that he is. Anyone who can pull off that miraculous feat is pretty good in my book.
I noticed you said “Maimonides himself” which implies that what he said caries great weight. I’m curious, why is Maimonides considered such a great authority? Is it just the brilliance of his writings, or is there some sort of official way of agreeing on whose writings are authoritative? Was he recognized in his own time as a great scholar, or was it only years later?
“From Moses to Moses, there has been none such as Moses;” That’s what was said of him in his own day, and his reputation has only grown. Moses Ben Maimon - Maimonides, the RAMBAM - is considered the single greatest and wisest Jewish scholar of the Diaspora period. He’s at least as important to Judaic thought as Thomas Aquinas is to the Catholic. Basically, what he says, goes.
To understand a bit about Maimonides, you have to understand a bit about the Talmud.
The Talmud is not written as a standard law book might be written, orgainized into major sections, chapters and laws. It is written largely in the style of minutes taken at a rabbinical meeting. IOW, rather than presenting the final law on a particular subject, the Talmud goes into the various rabbinical positions on any given situation. Ideas are advances, proofs given for those ideas, rebuttals presented, questions on the rebuttals, etc. In addition, once a topic (even if not in the main topic of discussion), the Talmud may go off on a tangent discussing that side point. For example, in the tractate dealing with meal-offerings, there is a discussion lasting several pages on the laws of tefillin (phylacteries).
As such, while the Talmud is essential for understand the evolution of the Law and why certain laws are one way in one situation and another way in a different case, it really does not make a convenient way to quickly look up the law on any particular subject.
About six hundred years after the close of the Talmud, Maimonides undertook to compile just such a volume. This work is called the Mishneh Torah (also known as the Yad Chazaka, which I quoted above). Composed of 14 sections, it covers laws that applied to Jews living in his time, as well as topics that weren’t applicable at the time (sacrificial law, etc.).
While everyone acknowledged Maimonides greatness in terms of his knowledge of the mitzvos (commandments), he drew great criticism for his work in certain circles. It was felt that he was trying to “do away” with Talmud study by presenting the laws in an easier-to-find, final-answer format.
Despite this, his work remained the main source of information on everyday Jewish law until the Arba Turim was written later on. In addition, since the Arba Turim only dealt with laws applicable to everyday life for Jews (i.e. it did not include such topic as sacrificial law) and since later codes (such as the Shulchan Aruch ) were based on the Arba Turim, Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah more or less remains the final word on laws such as the ones were are discussing in this thread.
They apparently are self appointed as there is no ubroken line of conveyance of authority to appoint them in the proper way. This also would also appear to be the case for any ‘new’ Aaronic priesthood since all of the geneological recrods were utterly destroyed with the temple in 70 AD. Any such sanhedrin and/or priesthood would be illigetimate and without God’s approval.
(1) They were, in no way, setting up a new priesthood.
(2) Your contention that all the genealogical records were destroyed with the Temple is incorrect.
(3) There exists today a priesthood, which never died out. A new one does not need to be established.
