“The cow of Rav Elazar ben Azaria used to go out on Shabbat with a strap between its horns, against the will of the rabbis”. Shabbat is the day of rest, both for ourselves and for our animals; and we must not allow our animals to carry that which we ourselves may not carry. There is much discussion about what constitutes animal “clothing” (which is allowed), and what is considered a burden (and hence forbidden). The rabbis, in apparent disagreement with Rav Elazar, felt that a strap crosses that line and, hence, is forbidden.
Interestingly, the Gemarah explains that it was not actually his cow; rather, it was that of his neighbor. However, since Rav Elazar ben Azaria had no influence on his neighbor—and did not even try to stop him—the Sages considered it as if he, himself, had done it: “Because he did not protest, it was attributed to him”.
Whereas western civilization extols the virtues of minding our own business, Jewish values insist that we have an obligation to at least try to be a positive influence on others. We must protest both moral and religious wrongs. While the Talmud (Yevamot 6?) is quite cognizant of the fact that giving rebuke can often be counterproductive—and thus, in those cases, it is forbidden—when rebuke has a possibility of working, we must engage in it. It was inconceivable to our Sages that a person such as Rav Elazar ben Azaria could have no influence on his neighbours. He must not have even tried.
Such influence may stem less from Rav Elazar’s piety than from his considerable wealth. For many, perhaps most people, money makes more of an impression than piety. (I do not think it is a coincidence that the great growth of Orthodoxy in the past two generations coincides with the greater economic success of many Orthodox people.)
Rav Elazar had so many cows—the Talmud claims his yearly tithe was 12,000 calves—that one cannot speak of “Rav Elazar’s cow” in the singular. The Talmud concludes that it must have been his (poorer) neighbour’s cow. Apparently, neighborhoods back then had a mix of social economic classes.
The importance of at least trying to rebuke a transgressor when necessary is such that the Gemarah claims that failing to do so is the only sin that causes the Almighty to “reverse” a promise for good (55a). The Gemarah, in analyzing a passage in Yechezkel (9:4-6) relates how G-d instructed the angel Gavriel to put a mark on the heads of the righteous to distinguish them from the wicked, thereby saving them from harm. However, the “attribute of justice” complained that the righteous are in reality anything but, as they do not protest the wrongs around them. G-d came to their defence, arguing that the protests would have fallen on deaf ears. Yet “justice won” when it retorted that, while G-d may have known the protests would be ineffective, the people themselves had no way of knowing that. Thus they, too, had to be punished for their inaction.
We often underestimate our ability to influence others. “One who has the ability to protest [the wrongdoings] of his household is held accountable for the [sins] of his household, for his city is held accountable for the entire city, for the world is held accountable for the whole world” (54b). Unfortunately, in this area (and few others), we tend to have a false humility, too often assuming that we cannot make a difference. Judaism teaches we can and we must, and often, if we just try, it’s likely we will.
