Religion and Theology

Represented the Ethos of the Age of Definition  
The Talmud on Rabbinic Authority is an interesting piece of theological text that might pose a dilemma in comprehension and interpretation to someone not acquainted with the backdrop to Jewish scriptures, or to someone not tutored about the historic tug-of-war over the domain of legitimate authority in Judaism. Lets briefly discuss the contents of the abovementioned text before we attempt to explain it such as one might.
   
This section of the Talmud begins with a debate over a relatively innocuous matter, viz. whether the Akhnai Stove remained vulnerable to ritual defilement, as maintained by several sages, or proved immune to ritual sullying, as declared by Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Eliezer is then portrayed as being in an argument with others holding a contrary view whereupon, after his best of arguments apparently falling upon deaf ears, he proclaims the virtual occurrence of a miracle, to testify to the truism of his ideas.
   
The desired miracle of the carob tree was instantly caused, but to no avail. Rabbi Eliezer is next narrated as variously asking the stream and the walls of the academy to prove his stance true. A minor complication is introduced with the walls seemingly deferring to the words of Rabbi Joshua as well. So, if truth was being asserted by means of miracles, the duel had progressed beyond words into even the realm of the supernatural as well.
   
Finally, Rabbi Eliezer invokes the heavens to come to his aid. A voice from the heavens unambiguously confirms The law is as he propounds it in all instances. However, this was not the last word on the subject. Rabbi Joshua refuted divine testimony by quoting Deuteronomy 3012 with the following clinching effect, It is not in the heavens.  Rabbi Jeremiah supports Rabbi Joshua by arguing that since the Torah had already been imparted, We pay no attention to heavenly voices, and recalled the injunction in Exodus 232 to Incline after the majority. When Rabbi Nathan asks Prophet Elijah what God may have been doing then, the latter replies that God laughingly accepts that His children have won over Him.    
   
One can offer several observations and derive a few succinct conclusions from this perplexing narration. The first is that the Rabbis were a rather divided lot, arguing over ideas and beliefs. Rabbi Eliezer appears to be bathed in a true presentation of the laws, because nature obviously works miracles to uphold and prove his words. However, there are other Rabbis to reckon with too, and miracles get modified even upon their words. So, the Rabbis are collectively important, and none may claim to monopolize an interpretation of the laws.
   
The casual manner in which Rabbi Jeremiah slights divine signs by quoting the scriptures is a telling commentary on the rising prominence of the authority of the Rabbis, to the detriment of the other Judaic texts. It does not help our understanding much to realize that Rabbi Jeremiah misquotes Exodus 232, which actually cautions against accepting the view of the many Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment.
   
The Talmud on Rabbinic Authority represents the very essence and ethos of the age of definition. The Rabbis had begun to be increasingly vested with authority. Moreover, the sheer ease with which the Rabbis could deny both the scriptures and even miracles to assert their own various versions of reality indicated a phase of ferment, rediscovery and potential strife in Judaism.