Background Information and The History
of Rabbinical Ordinations
By Rabbi Yaakov Siegel
The Awareness Center - July 19, 2007
Part 1
In recent months, The Awareness Center has issued articles
and opinions about the giving and revoking of Smichah (rabbinical ordination).
I would like to clarify certain things in this regard, and to offer some
suggestions that might be helpful.
First of all, our ordination is not an unbroken chain
from Moses. There was indeed such an ordination, but it died out (or, more
correctly was killed out) in the fourth century c.e. by a systematic Roman
decree (anyone giving or receiving ordination, as well as all Jewish residents
of the town it was given in, or if outside a town, then the nearest town,
would be killed). That is why the early Rabbis of the Talmud have the title
rabbi, and the later ones rav, the latter indicating that while a sage, he
lacked official ordination.
Maimonides opines that the chain could be restarted
if all the sages in the Land of Israel would ordain one man, that man would
resume the chain. There were several unsuccessful attempts to do this, most
notably in the 16th century. There is currently another effort in this direction,
but, so far, has met with little support.
After the 4th century, sages were looked to for guidance
and instruction, but there was no ordination process. It should be noted
that there is no currently observed Jewish ritual that needs a rabbi. Any
Jew can perform any function, provided he knows all the applicable laws,
and abides by them. The function of a rabbi at a wedding, for instance, is
to ensure that all rituals are done properly. This is in contrast to Christian
marriage, where the priest or minister make the marriage. In Judaism, the
couple and witnesses make the marriage. The rabbi is a sort of legal
adviser.
Part 2
Around the year 1300, a prominent German rabbi was
troubled by the phenomenon of unqualified people presenting themselves for
communal positions (nothing new under the Sun!). He instituted a rule in
Germany that no one could serve as a rabbi unless he was authorized by a
recognized figure. This authorization was called smichah, although it had
little to do with the original smichah. It was, in effect, a letter of
recommendation, as good aw the person giving it. This procedure was challenged
by many (the great North African rabbi, Yitzchal ben Sheshet, wrote a responsum
that a rabbi is made not by a letter, but by the acceptance of the community
[Teshuvot HaRivash 271]). However the practice spread, and became standard
in most Jewish communities.
It should be clear that a rabbi's legitimacy depends
on his knowledge and integrity, not on his ordination. One very prominent
East European rabbinical figure of the late 19th and early 20th century was
without ordination nearly all of his life. When the Polish government required
him to get an official ordination, he simply went to one of his disciples
to be ordained!
Since the 14th century, most communities required a
rabbi to be certified (ordained) by known and respected figures. A rabbi
might have several such smichot to show the extent of his acceptance. In
ultra-Orthodox circles this is still the norm. I personally have seven
Smichot.
In modern orthodox circles, as well as non-Orthodox
circles, institutional (Yeshiva or Seminary) ordination has largely replaced
private Smichot.
Now we may understand why a particular body can not
"defrock" a rabbi whom they did not ordain, or even recognize. It isn't an
"either you do or don't have Smicha" situation. The Smicha is as good as
the person giving it. If a particular rabbi or seminary felt that one of
their ordainees was no longer worthy, they may issue such a statement. No
one else could.
In Israel, the Chief Rabbinate has legal standing.
Rabbinical positions are, in effect, civil service positions, funded jointly by the Ministry of Religious
Affairs and the Ministry of the Interior. Only those either ordained by the Chief Rabbinate, or those who
have been personally approved by one of the Chief Rabbis (some positions
require approval of three members of the Supreme Rabbinical Council too)
may serve as a rabbi. That is why in Israel an official rabbi may be "defrocked"
i.e. no longer recognized by the institution of the Chief Rabbinate. People
outside the "system" i.e. rabbis without the authorization of the rabbinate,
have no legal status anyway.
Part 3
Before we can discuss how to deal with our "bad apples"
and the rabbis and institutions who seem insensitive to the situation, I
think we need to understand the dynamics of the situation. There was and
is a tiny minority of "rabbis" who sell smichot. However, these are widely
known (years ago there was even one who advertised the sale of smichot in
the newspapers), and shunned by other rabbis.
There is, however, a danger to unsophisticated
congregations who don't do their homework when hiring a rabbi. Then there
is another small group that gives ordination as a favor, usually to help
someone get a position so as to earn a living. their motive is unselfish,
but nevertheless dangerous to the community. However, even great rabbis may
be lulled into silence for one of several reasons.
First, there is the fear of violating the prohibition
of Lashon Hara-slander. There are many laws governing this grievous sin.
Although there are clear rules when one may expose an evildoer, few rabbis
have the resources to check out the veracity of charges. The feeling is "since
I can't be sure, better I do nothing."
Second, there is the concern for causing the offender
to lose his livelihood. Recently, a colleague of mine was studying with another
rabbi in the study hall of a well known yeshiva. A menial worker at the yeshiva
was insulted, or at least thought he was insulted, by a student in his early
teens. The worker grabbed the student by the throat.
My friend came to the students defense, and was struck.
The boy's father called the authorities, and the worker was arrested. That
evening the man came to evening services at the yeshiva, and the Rosh Yeshiva
(dean) stood up and shook his hand warmly.
My friend asked the Rosh Yeshiva for the meaning of
his actions. He informed my friend that he had personally bailed him out.
When my friend protested, the Rosh Yeshiva said "Don't you realize that this
miserable job is this man's only livelihood?" Undoubtedly, the Rosh Yeshiva
felt he was performing an act of ultimate chessed-kindness. He apparently
felt that this came before the physical safety of the students.
Third, there is concern for the honor of the offenders
family. While this is a legitimate concern, it must, of course, be balanced
with the honor of the victim.
Fourth, there is a fear of getting the secular authorities
involved. Although the Halachah (Jewish law) provides for cases where a person
who is a danger may be given over to the police, the fear of doing so in
a case which might not be true deters most.
Fifth, there is the fear of chillul Hashem-desecrating
the Name of G-d were it to be known that a "rabbi" had committed unspeakable
evils. This must be balanced with the principle "in a place of desecration
of G-d's Name, we give no honor even to a rabbi."
Sixth, there is a concept of despising a scholar.
Maimonides considers this a serious form of heresy.
Many will simply not believe that a earned man could
do such base things. They usually are right, but, unfortunately, not always.
So, protecting the offender is usually done from a feeling of misplaced altruism,
fueled by the real feeling that the allegations may, in fact, be false.
