Recent months have seen the Israeli governing coalition attempt to enhance the Knesset’s check on the judiciary. The opposition argues that these changes could turn the courts into a vassal of the Knesset. Each side claims to have the support of the nation. The governing coalition’s six parties identify themselves as the majority by tallying the votes they each received individually. The opposition parties, an electoral minority, punch above their weight by leveraging powerful support in the IDF and labor unions, and on university campuses. Demonstrations, rancorous protests and civil disobedience have roiled the streets, rallying hundreds of thousands of participants.
Without judging the judicial reforms at all, and without discussing whether one may disrupt hospitals and highways in a protest, I’d like to ask a non-political question regarding the significance of mass protests in the eyes of the Torah. Does halacha expect us to govern by crowd size? Would a halachic government determine policy based on the size of groups promoting and opposing a proposal?
The Power of the Many
Thousands of years ago, King Shaul acknowledged the authority of the Jewish nation to choose its leaders. After Dovid killed Goliath, Jewish women celebrated with the words, “Shaul struck with his thousands, and Dovid with his myriads.” Shaul interpreted their song as elevating Dovid over himself, and he exclaimed, “They have given Dovid myriads, and to me they have given thousands! What more is there for him? Only the throne!” (Shmuel I 18:7-8). Commentators including Ralbag and Malbim explain that Shaul was not afraid of a coup; rather, he worried that the words of the masses could reflect the Divine will. When large numbers of Jews speak, their words matter.
Of course, Shaul may be an exception; he already knew that Hashem was planning to end his reign. But generations later, King Chizkiyahu also worried about popular opposition. Facing an Assyrian invasion, Chizkiyahu implemented the instructions of the prophet Yeshayahu and refused to surrender. The Talmud reports that a Torah scholar named Shevna argued that the Jews should make peace with the Assyrians. Chizkiyahu noticed that Shevna had more students than he did, and he questioned himself, “Perhaps Hashem’s view follows the majority!” (Sanhedrin 26a, and see Yeshayahu 8:12, 22:15-25 and 36:3). Perhaps a political position matters simply because it is put forth by a large number of Jews.
Respect for the collective voice extends beyond the annals of Tanach; Halacha empowers the masses, especially when they represent an actual majority. As recorded in the Talmud and throughout the ensuing centuries, Jewish communities have long been governed by town councils appointed by the body politic and authorized to set rules (See Megillah 27a and Mordechai to Bava Batra 482). The majority of a synagogue can establish rules regarding matters of maintenance and construction, and the majority rules in communal matters as well (Bava Batra 8b; Hagahot Maymoniyot to Hilchot Tefillah 11:1; Rema, Choshen Mishpat 163:1).
Why should human voices hold such authority in a halachic system which answers to Hashem? We have seen that Kings Shaul and Chizkiyahu feared that the words of the masses may unconsciously reflect Hashem’s will. But beyond echoing Hashem’s will, the words of the masses – especially when expressed by a majority – are supported by Halachic arguments. These arguments include:
- The Torah commands us to follow the majority in disputes, even beyond the beit din (Sanhedrin 26a, and see Bava Metzia 59b and Chullin 11a).
- An unspoken social contract among citizens empowers the community’s leaders to create rules for the benefit of the community (Shu”t Rashba 3:393).
- Leaders and communities are licensed to establish laws and penalties to protect society from harm (Chatam Sofer, Orach Chaim 208).
- It has even been argued that in the absence of a properly anointed monarch, the powers of a king default to the nation as a whole. Authorities from Ramban (Devarim 17:15) and Rabbeinu Nisim (Derashot haRan #11) to Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook (Mishpat Kohen 144:15a) and Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli (Amud haYemini 7) pointed to historical examples like Yehoshua and the Chashmonaim to show that royal powers exist even without halachic royalty. (Note that this may require national support, not merely majority support.)
Right and Righteous
The upshot of this discussion is that a halachic government should take seriously the voice of large groups, and especially majorities. Concession to the many is a halachic value. But numbers are not the end of the conversation and democracy is not our supreme value, as King Chizkiyahu learned from the prophet Yeshayahu. The Talmud reports that Yeshayahu told King Chizkiyahu to ignore Shevna, reassuring him that “a conspiracy of the wicked is not counted” (Sanhedrin ibid., based on Yeshayahu 8:12). This makes sense; after all, the greatest human authority, an anointed king, must revere Hashem, and is meant to lead the Jews in the ways of Hashem’s Torah (See Devarim 17:19-20 and Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 11:4. See, too, Amud haYemini 7 regarding the Hhalachic recognition of apparently wicked kings in Tanach).
But what constitutes a “conspiracy of the wicked”? Wickedness is defined by actions, and also by personal character. In the case of Shevna, Yeshayahu condemned him not for transgressing any laws, but for arrogance and self-aggrandizement (See Yeshayahu 22:15-25, Sanhedrin 26a, Vayikra Rabbah 5:5 and Derashot haRan #11). But in our modern situation, applying this is hard; each side claims the mantle of righteousness. The method of ruling based on righteousness yields a value but not a clear winner.
Mercy and Peace
In a third value, we are taught to govern with mercy. Even when the masses are on our side, and even when we are right and righteous, holding power is not in itself a mandate to exercise it whenever possible; we are still obligated to be compassionate toward the other. The Rambam said as much when describing Jewish social obligations toward non-Jewish neighbors; he invoked the verse in Tehillim (145:9), “Hashem is good to all, and His mercy is upon all of His creations” (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 10:12). If we must model our behavior on Hashem’s mercy when dealing with other nations, all the more so when we deal with our own brethren. Admittedly, this is neither rational nor pragmatic; it is an unabashedly sentimental approach to governance.
Finally, the Rambam also taught us a fourth value: to adopt policies which employ and enable peace. In the aforementioned passage describing our duty toward non-Jewish neighbors, the Rambam added a second verse, “Her paths are pleasant paths, and all of her ways are peace” (Mishlei 3:17). Whatever our system of government and decision-making, our result must be true to this eternal value.
And while we might view this as purely sentimental, the Sefer HaChinuch framed it as a practical necessity: “People’s minds are different, and they will not agree to one view and one practice among many, and that will result in cancellation and cessation of activity. Therefore, they must accept the view of one of them, whether good or bad, so that they will succeed and carry out the world’s business, whether they will find great benefit in his counsel and desire or whether they will find the opposite. All of this is better than strife, which causes total destruction” (Mitzvah 71).
In this light, we may need to accept views we perceive as bad, so long as they are within halacha, for the good of the Jewish people.
May our leadership in Israel and around the world keep these ideas in mind, respecting the will of the many, acting in line with Hhalacha as well as righteousness, making decisions with mercy, and pursuing pleasantness and peace.
