Kommentar zu Dewarim 17:11

ימין ושמאל [THOU SHALT NOT DEPART FROM THE WORD WHICH THEY SHALL TELL THEE] TO THE RIGHT NOR TO THE LEFT, even if he (the judge) tells you about what appears to you to be right that it is left, or about what appears to you to be left that it is right, you have to obey him; how much the more is this so if actually he tells you about what is evidently right that it is right and about what is left that it is left (cf. Sifrei Devarim 154:5).

THOU SHALT NOT DEPART FROM THE WORD WHICH THEY SHALL TELL THEE, TO THE RIGHT NOR TO THE LEFT. “Even if he [the judge of the Great Sanhedrin] tells you of the right that it is the left, or about the left that it is the right [you must obey him].” This is Rashi’s language. The purport thereof is that even if you think in your heart that they are mistaken, and the matter is simple in your eyes just as you know [the difference] between your right hand and your left hand, you must still do as they command you. You are not to say: “How can I [permit myself to] eat this real forbidden fat, or execute this innocent man;” instead you are to say, “The Lord Who enjoined the commandments commanded that I perform all His commandments in accordance with all that they, who stand before Him in the place that He shall choose, teach me to do. He gave me the Torah as taught by them, even if they were to err.” Such was the case of Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabban Gamaliel [Rabbi Yehoshua being instructed by Rabban Gamaliel to come before him with his walking stick] on the Day of Atonement that occurred according to his reckoning.⁹⁰Following the destruction of the Second Temple, the Sanhedrin was re-established in Jabneh under the presidency of Rabban Yochanan ben Zaccai (see above, Note 19). It happened that his successor Rabban Gamaliel, once accepted the testimony of two witnesses with regard to proclaiming the New Moon. Rabbi Yehoshua held that their evidence was invalid, and that the New Moon should be proclaimed a day later. Since the month was Tishri, the Day of Atonement [i.e., the tenth of Tishri] would fall a day later according to Rabbi Yehoshua than according to the reckoning of Rabban Gamaliel. When Rabbi Yehoshua refused to accept the opinion of his colleague, who, by virtue of his presidency of the Sanhedrin, had the authority to make the binding decision, Rabban Gamaliel sent to him, “I order you to come to me carrying your walking stick and your money on the day you reckon to be the Day of Atonement. The order caused Rabbi Yehoshua personal anguish because carrying is forbidden on the Day of Atonement. The affair ended with Rabbi Yehoshua obeying Rabban Gamaliel’s command. When Rabbi Yehoshua arrived, “Rabban Gamaliel stood up and kissed him on the head and said to him; ‘Come in peace, my master and my disciple’ — ‘my master’ in wisdom, and ‘my disciple’ because you accepted my words” (Rosh Hashanah 25a).
Now the need for this commandment is very great, for the Torah was given to us in written form and it is known that not all opinions concur on newly arising matters. Disagreements would thus increase and the one Torah would become many Torahs. Scripture, therefore, defined the law that we are to obey the Great Court that stands before G-d in the place that He chose in whatever they tell us with respect to the interpretation of the Torah, whether they received its interpretation by means of witness from witness until Moses [who heard it] from the mouth of the Almighty, or whether they said so based on the implication [of the written words] of the Torah or its intent. For it was subject to their judgment that He gave them the Torah even if it [the judgment] appears to you to exchange right for left. And surely you are obligated to think that they say “right” what is truly right, because G-d’s spirit is upon the ministers of His Sanctuary,⁹¹Ezekiel 45:4. and He forsaketh not His saints; they are preserved forever⁹²Psalms 37:28. from error and stumbling. In the language of the Sifre:⁹³Sifre, Shoftim 154. “Even if they show you before your own eyes that right is left and that left is right — obey them!”

ימין או שמאל, “to the right or to the left.” Rashi says that even if the ruling is such that it appears what the man in the street knows to be right as being left, and vice versa, i.e. that you are convinced that the decision is flawed, you must accept their decision and conduct yourself in accordance with it. You cannot, because of your conscience, say that you refuse to eat a piece of חלב, fat tissue forbidden on pain of the Karet penalty, that you are certain is such in spite of the Supreme Court’s decision to the contrary. The following is how Nachmanides elaborates on the words of Rashi. It was necessary for Moses to spell this out, seeing that the Torah was given to the people as a written document, and it is common knowledge that not a single letter in that document will ever be changed or tampered with. If it were possible to do that, we would soon have numerous such books, each claiming to be the original Torah. This is why in that same written Torah we needed to have a verse explaining the absolute authority of the leading scholars of the nation to interpret the Torah according to approved guidelines. It is not necessary for these Torah scholars to have received that particular piece of legislation, or interpretation, from Moses directly. Basically, Moses teaches that the Torah that will be taught to us after his death, will be taught to us on the basis of how these scholars understood and interpreted it. It is irrelevant if minor scholars, or learned individuals are convinced that the Supreme Court had erred in a specific ruling.

Even if he tells you that right is left, etc. It seems that Rashi means as follows: Even if he tells you that what you consider right is left and that what you consider left is right you should listen to him and blame the mistake not on him but on yourself, because Hashem always places His Spirit on those who serve in His sanctuary; and He guards them from any error so that only truth comes out from their mouths. You might ask: How does Rashi know to expound [the verse] this way? Perhaps [it should be understood] according to its obvious meaning that one should not deviate from that word either right or left! The answer is that since the “word” is an intellectual matter, right or left is not relevant to it. Therefore they expound what they expound.

V. 11. ׳ועשית וגו. Was V. 10 für einen einzelnen zur Entscheidung gebrachten Fall zur Pflicht gemacht ist, wird hier (V. 11) allgemein für die ganze Gesetzespraxis als bindende Verpflichtung ausgesprochen, und zwar in der bereits angedeuteten Dreiteiligkeit der gesetzeslehrenden Wirksamkeit des höchsten Tribunals: die Gesetzeserfüllung schützende und fördernde Anordnung von גזרות und תקנות, die eigentlichen תורות דרבנן אשר יורוך, zu denen die allgemeine Verpflichtung bereits wiederholt in dem שמירה-Gebote gegeben ist (siehe Schmot 23, 13 und Wajikra 18, 30); die von den traditionellen hermeneutischen מדות getragenen Resultate der Gesetzesforschung, המשפט אשר יאמרו לך; und endlich die Weiterüberlieferung der empfangenen Tradition, הדבר אשר יגידו לך; für alle drei fordert der Gesetzgeber gebietend und verbietend, תעשה ולא תסור, die unentwegte Befolgung, und hat damit allen Aussprüchen des ב׳׳ד הגדול in vorhinein eine die ganze Nation verpflichtende Gesetzessanktion erteilt. (Sifri und Rambam Hilchot Mamrim, 1, 2). Allen מצות דרבנן liegt somit eine ראוריתא-Verpflichtung zu Grunde, und ist das Zuwiderhandeln gegen eine rabbinische Verordnung nichts weniger als die Übertretung eines göttlichen Gebots und Verbots, weshalb wir ja auch vor der Erfüllung eines rabbinischen Gebotes: — אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו mit voller Befugnis sprechen (Schabbat 23 a). Es haben jedoch die Chachamim ihre Anordnungen scharf markiert und sie dadurch für die Klarstellung der Gesetzeskunde kenntlich von den דאוריתא-Gesetzen unterschieden, indem sie für dieselben in manchen Beziehungen eine leichtere Behandlung statuierten, so ,בשל ,ספק דאורי׳ לחומרא ספק דרבנן לקולא המינינהו דרבנן בדרבנן ,לא אתי דרבנן ומפיק דאוריתא ,גוזרין גזרה לגזרה ,סופרים הלך אחר המיקל usw. (siehe מגלת אסתר zu שורש ראשון ,ספר המצות). Und wenn sie gleich nach dem Gesetze befugt gewesen wären, ihre zum Schutze der Gesetzeserfüllung zu treffenden Anordnungen mit diktatorischer Rechtsverbindlichkeit hinauszugeben, so haben sie dies doch in der Regel nicht getan, haben vielmehr ihren Anordnungen erst dann volle Gesetzeskraft definitiv zuerteilt, wenn sie durch praktische Aufnahme in dem größten Teile der Nation die letzte Sanktion erhalten halten: פשט איסורו ברוב ישראל ,גזרו וקבלו (Aboda Sara 36 a u. b).