![]() |
(Malachi 1:1 - 2:7) November 9, 2002 |
![]() |
Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yose Hagalili used this verse to contrast the role of a judge with the role of an arbitrator. He taught: “It is forbidden [for a judge] to arbitrate in a settlement and a judge who arbitrates sins..., for it is written: ‘He who blesses an arbitrator curses God’ (Psalm 10:3) [This is Rabbi Eliezer’s interpretive understanding of this verse.] Rather let the law cut through the mountain, for it is written: ‘For the judgment is God’s’ (Deuteronomy 1:17) [Consequently no court has a right to tamper with the law.] And so Moses [who represents the judiciary] says: ‘Let the law cut through the mountain’, but Aaron [the first High Priest], loved peace and pursued peace and made peace between people, as it is written: ‘The law of truth was in his mouth, unrighteousness was not found on his lips, he walked with Me in peace and uprightness and turned many away from sin’. (Sanhedrin 6b)
A legal system ought not veer from the law. It leaves
one litigant the winner and one the loser. The consequences of such an
outcome will not necessarily be conducive to bringing peace between the
parties. Rabbi Samuel Edels (Maharsha), the 16-17th century Talmudist,
explained the virtues of arbitration over judicial judgment. He points
out that in judicial decisions, sometimes judges err and do an injustice
to the litigants. When this happens it is a perversion of justice, which
makes the judge and the litigants sinners. In arbitration, however,
since both parties agree to a compromise, the potential for error disappears
and none of the parties sins in the process of making a decision. The outcome
of such a decision is more likely to bring peace between the parties. This
is the model of Aaron, the High Priest. It is an important role for religious
leaders to take upon themselves.