We look back with nostalgia, imagining that the giants of the past held all the answers. But Jewish tradition challenges that very notion.
The idea that each generation has its own unique wisdom and authority is a powerful one. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, or perhaps Rabbi Ada bar Ḥunya (the tradition attributes this teaching to both), puts it bluntly: Don't idealize the past. Don't say, "If Rabbi Akiva were alive, I'd study Torah with him," or "If Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Yoḥanan were here, I'd study Mishna (oral law) with them." The generation you're in, and the sages you have now, are just as valuable as those who came before.
It’s a pretty radical idea, isn't it? It suggests that divine wisdom isn't confined to a specific time or place.
Rabbi Yoḥanan brings prooftexts from the book of Samuel (I (Samuel 12:6), 12:11), pointing out how seemingly "lesser" figures like Gideon (Yerubaal), Samson (Bedan), and Jephthah (Yiftah) are placed on the same level as Samuel, and even compared to Moses and Aaron, in terms of their significance. As we find in Psalms (99:6), "Moses and Aaron among his priests, and Samuel among those who call His name." What does this mean?
The Midrash (rabbinic commentary) understands this to mean that the court of Gideon was as significant to God as the court of Moses! The court of Samson was equivalent to that of Aaron, and Jephthah's court held the same weight as Samuel's. Even if someone seems insignificant, if they are appointed a leader in the community, they are equivalent to the noblest of predecessors.
This isn't just some abstract theological concept. It has real-world implications. Deuteronomy (17:9) tells us to go "to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge who will be in those days…" Rabbi Yoḥanan asks a simple, logical question: Can you go to a judge who isn't in your generation? Of course not! The very phrasing "who will be in those days" emphasizes that the judge of your time is just as valid as the judges of the past. That's why Ecclesiastes (7:10) warns us, "Do not say: 'How was it that the former days were better than these?'"
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish adds another layer, advising that we should only listen to the judge of our own time. He brings a verse from Numbers (36:1) about the heads of the families of Gilead, highlighting the different ways the word "fathers" (avot) is used, suggesting that leadership is fluid and changes with each generation.
The Midrash continues with more examples: Rabbi Berekhya interprets a verse in Chronicles (I (Chronicles 12:2)8) to mean that if Aaron had lived in the time of Yehoyada, Yehoyada would have been greater. Similarly, Rabbi Simai suggests that if Aaron and his sons were alive, Tzadok would still be greater because of his position in that era (I (Chronicles 6:3)4).
Rabbi Hillel even points to a verse in Nehemiah (8:17) about the festival of Sukkot (the Festival of Tabernacles), where the name Joshua (Yehoshua) is written in a slightly diminished form (Yeshua), to indicate that Ezra, the leader at the time, deserved even greater honor. And the Rabbis, citing Ezra (7:5-6), suggest that had Aaron been alive, Ezra would still have been considered the chief.
So, what's the takeaway here? It's not about dismissing the wisdom of the past. It's about recognizing that wisdom is constantly being reinterpreted and reapplied to the challenges of the present. It's about trusting the leaders and teachers who are here now, grappling with the issues we face today. Each generation builds upon the foundations laid by those who came before, but each also brings its own unique perspective and understanding. Can we fully embrace the wisdom that exists in our own time, trusting that our leaders, our teachers, and even ourselves, have something valuable to contribute to the ongoing story of our tradition?
Rabbi Abba bar Kahana [said], and some say it in the name of Rabbi Ada bar Ḥunya: The generation that comes should be in your eyes like the generation that has passed, so you should not say: ‘Were Rabbi Akiva alive, I would study Bible before him; were Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Yoḥanan alive, I would study Mishna before them.’ Rather, the generation that comes during your lifetime and the Sage that is in your lifetime are the equivalent of the generation that passed and the early Sages who preceded you. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is written: “The Lord who made Moses and Aaron…” (I Samuel 12:6), and it is written: “The Lord sent Yerubaal, Bedan, Yiftaḥ and Samuel” (I Samuel 12:11). Yerubaal, this is Gideon; Bedan, this is Samson; Yiftaḥ as its plain meaning. And it is written: “Moses and Aaron among his priests, and Samuel among those who call His name” (Psalms 99:6) – the verse parallels three of the insignificant people of the world to three of the prominent people of the world,20The verse in I Samuel (12:11) refers to Gideon, Samson, and Yiftah in the same listing as Samuel, thus equating them, and the verse in Psalms is understood to equate Samuel to Moses and Aaron. to teach you that Yerubaal’s court is as great and significant before the Holy One blessed be He as Moses’s court; Samson’s court is the equivalent of Aaron’s court; and Yiftaḥ’s court is the equivalent of Samuel’s court. This teaches you that anyone who is appointed a leader of the community, even if he is extremely insignificant, he is like the noblest of their noble predecessors, as it is stated: “You shall come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge who will be in those days…” (Deuteronomy 17:9). I have [the ability to come] only to the judge that is in your generation; where [would you be able to find] the judge that is not in your generation? Why does the verse state: “To the judge who will be in those days”?21Clearly, one can go only to a judge who is in his generation. It teaches that the judge in your generation, in his time, is the equivalent of the judge who was in earlier days, and so, it says: “Do not say: How was it that the former days were better than these?” (Ecclesiastes 7:10). Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: You should heed only the judge that is in your generation, as it is written: “The heads of the fathers [ha’avot] of the family of the children of Gilad, son of Makhir, son of Manasseh [came near and spoke before Moses and before the princes; the heads of the fathers’ [avot] houses of the children of Israel]” (Numbers 36:1). Rabbi Yudan said: “The fathers [ha’avot],” “fathers [avot].”22Regarding the family of Gilad, the verse uses the definite article ha’avot, while regarding the leaders of entire tribes, the verse writes simply avot, without the definite article. Rather, these entered into leadership and these were removed from leadership, and that is why the verse presented then deficiently.23The heads of the families of Gilad were from the younger generation, and were entering leadership positions, whereas the tribal princes were from the older generation and were concluding their terms of leadership. Rabbi Berekhya said: It is written: “Yehoyada was the leader of Aaron” (I Chronicles 12:28). Was Yehoyada the leader of Aaron? Rather, had Aaron been alive in the generation of Yehoyada, Yehoyada would have been greater than he was at the time.24The verse is interpreted to mean that Yehoyada was greater than Aaron. However, that is impossible, as Aaron was in fact greater than Yehoyada. The midrash therefore explains that had Aaron been alive in the generation when Yehoyada was the leader of the priests, Aaron would have been subordinate to him and accepted his leadership despite Aaron’s personal superiority. Rabbi Simai said: It is written: “Aaron and his sons were offering on the altar of the burnt offerings…” (I Chronicles 6:34). Were Aaron and his sons alive? Was it not Tzadok and his sons who were [offering these offerings]? Rather, had Aaron and his sons been alive, Tzadok would have been greater than he was at the time.25Aaron and his sons would have accepted Tzadok’s leadership because he was the High Priest at the time. Rabbi Hillel derived it from here: “The entire congregation that returned from captivity made booths, and they dwelled in the booths, as since the days of Joshua [Yeshua] bin Nun, to that day, the children of Israel had not done so. There was very great rejoicing” (Nehemiah 8:17). The verse compromised the honor of the deceased righteous one for the sake of so-and-so at the time.26The verses minimizes the honor of Joshua by writing his name in a deficient manner, Yeshua, instead of the common spelling of his name, Yehoshua. This is in order allude to the fact that the then leader, Ezra, had to be accorded more honor than Joshua, the great leader of the past. The Rabbis derive it from here: “The son of Avishua, son of Pinḥas ben Elazar, [son of Aaron the priest, the chief;] he, Ezra, ascended from Babylon…” (Ezra 7:5–6). Rather, had Aaron been alive, Ezra would have been greater than he was at the time.27The simple reading of the verse is that the word chief refers to Aaron, and thus identifies him as the High Priest. The midrash reads the verse as though the word chief refers not to Aaron but to Ezra, because he was the leader in his generation.
