Jewish Leadership Struggle in the Roman Era part 2

The Sanhedrin was probably the primary religious institution in Ancient Israel, second only to the Temple. The Torah (Deut.17:8-13) gives the Sanhedrin full authority not only over judicial matters, but to interpret the text authoritatively, and make new legislation intended to enhance the observance of Judaism ("Fences"). Once the Temple was destroyed, Sadduceean Judaism, based as it was primarily around the Temple, ceased to exist. But those Pharisees who reestablished the Sanhedrin in Yavne (and later other places) had, in essence, created a portable Judaism. As Roman persecution increased greatly with the rise of Christianity, the Sanhedrin's role as judiciary waned, until it became known simply as "the Vaad" (The Committee), where the Torah could be debated, and laws enacted, but without "teeth" to enforced their decisions. This is believed to be the origin of the Yeshiva. The Torah prescribes a death penalty to those who oppose the rulings of the Sanhedrin (Deut. 17:12), so great was the importance of that institution. With the constraints of Roman law limiting the actions of the Sanhedrin, capital punishment was very seldom imposed.Nevertheless, a theoretical death penalty put the importance of a law into proper perspective. In most cases, the "herem" (ban of excommunication) served in lieu of court penalties. Challenges to Rabban Gamliel's authority, and the authority of the Sanhedrin, did come. The first case was Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, also known as "Rabbi Eliezer the Great." He is one of the central figures in the Mishnah, and he was Rabban Gamliel's brother-in-law. The point of dispute was a rather curious one. The Torah stipulates methods of making utensils clean if they became impure (usually through immersion). However, an earthenware utensil could not be purified and had to be destroyed. The question came up, what if we have an earthenware oven that is made out of small pieces, none of which was in any sense of the word a "utensil." If it became unclean, could it simply be taken apart, and reassembled? Rabban Gamliel's Sanhedrin voted that this would not be efficacious. Rabbi Eliezer was totally convinced of the opposite opinion. "If I am right, let the stream outside run backwards" It did. "No proof can be brought from a stream!". "If I am right, let the tree outside become uprooted, and reroot itself!". That happened. "No proof can be brought from a tree!" "may the walls testify!". The walls became bent. "No proof from a wall"! "May G-d testify!" A voice was heard "the halachah is as is being said like my son Eliezer!" The rabbis jumped up and said "The Torah is not in Heaven! (Deut.30:12). The Sanhedrin's ruling is what must be followed". (One of the rabbis is said to have met Elijah after this, and asked him what G-d's reaction was. G-d laughed, and said "my children have vanquished me!"' Rabbi Eliezer, so certain of his ruling, did not accept the decision of his colleagues, and was excommunicated by Rabban Gamliel. He spent the rest of his life in relative obscurity. We have here a classical example of the conflict between conscience and a system of law. Rabban Gamliel won this round, but it was not to be the last.