Ash, I just read your post. It seems that you think that I believe science to be illusory. Only what we see with our eyes is real. That is not what I said. I thought I was clear that science is very real. I believe with as much conviction as basically anything else that our bodies are made of cells and that Saturn exists and that time slows down when travelling close to the speed of light. I am not casting any doubt on science's discoveries. I firmly believe that Hashem created the world with these properties.
All I was prattling about was that this reality is not the one which determines Halacha and is not the which gives the deeper meaning that the ancient idea of science gave.
" Chazal refer to the wisdom of the “speech” of the trees (i.e. how trees “communicate” with humans), astrology (how humans read the stars), palm reading, witchcraft and more. Although nowadays these ideas have been labeled as primitive by those who think they know best, these are actually what the world truly is about"
I could not possibly disagree more. Palm reading is what the world is about!!!??? You actually believe in this stuff? Cmon, you're intelligent!
You're kind of cherry picking, but yes, I defend my statement that palm reading (however in the universe that works) can give insight into the deeper, more real part of the world. More than peering into a microscope.
He does? I was not aware. R Nachman is very into accepting everything as true in order that one does not descend into denying truth. I understand this in the same way as R Shagar, which is postmodernism. But if I was trying to work with an objectively real framwork, instead of a postmodern one, I would not accept it.
Actually, people who are intelligent are far more likely to fall for confirmation bias as they can creatively defend their thesis, while less smart people will have to concede. I think that's what is happening here.
Btw, nothing I said here was crafted around the question of science, rather the facts are all true, from numerous sources; how nice it is that they can also answer these questions. In this sense, it is not a 'confirmation bias'
Yah I did not think this post was written in quite your style. At the end of the day, I'm yeshivish - I even warned you prior. To quote from https://daastorah.substack.com/p/read-the-torah/comment/16243187: "I'd like to emphasize though, that despite my Yeshivish perspective, I believe these ideas can be discussed in an open and inclusive manner, but there may be a LOT of prior assumptions that we'd have to sift through, perhaps from both sides."
But I back everything I said and am happy to discuss in terms you're more comfortable with.
Thank you Dovid for a thought provoking post. I enjoyed reading your ideas very much! I think your main point can be more fully fleshed out with this example.
What is the tzaraas spoken about in parshas tazria and metzora? According to chazal, it is a physical manifestation of a spiritual malady. The most commonly spoken about 'spiritual malady' is the sin of speaking lashon hara. In other words, the tzaraas os caused by speaking lashon hara. Was the tzaraas a physical disease like measles, bubonic plague, or chickenpox? Was it caused by bacteria or viruses? The answer is...I don't know, but it does not matter! The cure for this disease was not ant-biotics or anti viral drugs, the cure was doing teshuva for the underlying sin that caused it.
One can look at the tzaraas through the eyes of a medical doctor only, and see it as merely some type of physical disease. Or, one can look at it through the eyes of chazal, and understand that it is a punishment for a specific sin. The reality is, that it was a punishment for a sin. A modern medical doctor of today might have described it purely as a bacterial, or fungal, or viral infection. He might even have been right. But that is not the underlying reality. The underlying reality is that it is a punishment for a sin.
The prophets, and to a lesser extent chazal, were able to see the underlying spirituality in all things. This is the spiritual realities that Hashem built into the world. Those who have access to the underlying spiritual realities, were able to use this knowledge to bypass the rules of science, to some extent. This is how those like R. Chanina ben Dosa were able to perform miracles, and this is how kishuf works as well. (See Ramban on Devarim 18:9 for a brief understanding of how kishuf works) They were able to 'see' the sins of a person written on their arm (which is why many are strict even today, that when they put the head on the arm for tachanun, they do not put their head directly on their arm, but have a talis or a jacket sleeve intervene). They were also able to 'see' in the palm of a person real insights into that person. This is not the Gypsy fortunetelling, but a real ability to 'see' things using their spiritual eyes.
As time went on, much of the understanding of the spiritual underpinnings of the world faded from mankind. We can not perform miracles like R. Chanina ben Dosa today, and much of what passes for kishuf is nothing more than light of hand. Can people still read palms today? I don't know! If such an ability still exists, those who can still do this do not advertise their services! They are not Gypsy fortunetellers!
When it come to the lice on Shabbos, since we can not see their eggs, from a Halacha standpoint they do not exist. Of course anyone can see them in a microscope! Of course sub visual bacteria, fungi, and viruses exist! That is why we take anti-biotics and vaccines! If we did not believe in anything we can not see, we would not take antibiotics or vaccines, and we all do. (Except for small groups of people who deny science altogether.) The Torahs rules are based on what we can see with our eyes, and what we can not, is ignored entirely. One can say, that the reality as defined by the Torah is, what we can see only with a microscope is irrelevant to the Halachic process. It plays no role in the Halacha or in the Halacha process. Since we can not see the lice eggs, the reality of Halacha says they do not exist. Here too, the reality of Halacha and the reality of the scientist are different. That is not a problem, they can be different, it is just that when it comes to Halacha, we use the reality of Halacha, not that of the scientist.
Did chazal know that lice really come from eggs that can not be seen? Perhaps they did, perhaps they did not. It is really irrelevant to the Halachic process, since if we can not see it, Halacha does not take it into account at all. The term I would use to describe this, is in the Halacha world what can not be seen is irrelevant. Since we can not see lice eggs, they are not taken into account at all, and we view the lice as coming from sweat. The fact that we can see lice coming from eggs with a microscope, is completely irrelevant to the Halachic process.
Did chazal know that silver is an antibiotic (Shabbos 65a, where the gemara says that a silver coin placed on a wound can aid the healing process)? Did they know about microscopic germs and this knowledge forms the basis of the Halacha? Or did they have ho knowledge of bacterial infections, but they recorded the halacha as it was taught to them by the previous generations? It really makes no difference in the Halacha at all. They recorded this Halacha, so it is Halacha. Perhaps they understood how a silver coin helps, perhaps they did not.
One can ask, and this is a good question, why would Hashem set up the world this way? Why would He create something that is not taken into account? The world is full of things that we do not know the reason why. Why does light travel at the speed of 186,000 miles per second? Why not 185,000, or 187,000, or 100,000,000? This is the way Hashem created the world, and we do not know why He created the world this way. We also do not know with certainty why Hashem created microscopic eggs and then disregarded them in the Halacha.
We can speculate, that since the ancients had no way of seeing or taking into account things that can mot be seen, Hashem taught us that they are not taken into account when deciding the Halacha. We can say the opposite, since Hashem did not want these things taken into account (for reasons known to Him), He made sure that we had no way of identifying these things. Either way, this is my own speculation, and nothing more.
Another example of Chazal knowing about the spirtual underpinnings of the world, Ezra HaSofer decreed that men should eat garlic Friday night, since it increases a man's zera (and Friday night is the appropriate time for tashmish hamitah). The Slifkins of the world will say that this is clearly nonsense, based on the foolish idea that since garlic and zera are a similar color, that is why he said to eat it. They fail to explain why Ezra said specifically garlic, not radishes or turnips which are also an off white color. Firm believers in Chazal will say, that Ezra understood the spiritual underpinnings of the world, and understood that garlic has this affect, and turnips and radishes do not. This was not based merely on the similarity of their colors, but on a deeper understanding of the spiritual underpinnings of the world. Based on that, Ezra understood that garlic will increase zera, and turnips won't, so he said we should eat garlic, and did not not say we should eat turnips. Modern science actually does say that garlic has an aphrodisiacal effect. Did Ezra know exactly why and how garlic works to increase zera? Was he able to give a scientific explanation for it? I do not know. The truth is, whether or not he knew the scientific explanation of it is irrelevant. He knew the way the world REALLY works, and was able to come to this clonclusion.
Taka, tzaraas is a really great example! The Ramban says that it was only when the klal yisroel were in Eretz Yisroel living on the highest levels that Tzaraas worked, very much along the lines of these ideas. We can add that they controlled the rain patterns with Tefilah and Teshuva as well, as anyone knows from the Psukim we say every day. (The Gr'a's interpretation of those psukim are actually a huge basis for my whole thesis...)
As for Chazal knowing our science, I really don't think they did, but they had a perfectly working science - of the time - which followed the true reality. Either tshuva or using the refuos known from the doctors who were also based on the inner workings of the world (which were not kishuf as discussed by many sources) was enough. But like you said, it makes no difference.
Of course they didn't know the science of our time. A bit of dynamite would have got rid of those pesky Romans in no time at all. One F15 even quicker. And they wouldn't need to rely on the fetuses of cats to cure disease.
I'm impressed you are not giving standard yeshivah answer #23b. Of course they could have created an F15 but they knew it was time for churban and golus.
The medical cures found in the gemara bother many people. I have seen several different ways to address this alleged question.
1. It is not a question at all. We do not know precisely what malady the gemara is describing, nor do we know the exact ingredients the gemara says are needed for the cure. Aramaic has not been the spoken language for most of our people for well over a millennium, so some of the precise details have been lost to us. Additionally, we do not know the exact ways that the remedies are supposed to be prepared or applied. If our knowledge of what the gemara describes was more perfect, we would be able to use these cures and they would work. In other words, who says they don't work. People assume they don't because...(insert whatever reason here), but until they have actually been tried in the proper manner, we can not dismiss them as not working.
2. The real cures for anything come from Hashem. When we are sick or suffer injury, we should be davening to Hahsem and doing teshuvah. That is the point of an illness or injury, to get us to improve ourselves. We are also supposed to do our hishtadlus to recover from the illness or injury. The hishtadlus is going to the doctors and doing what they say. Once a person does the proper teshuvah and/or tikunim necessary, and he does the hishtadlus, his illness will disappear. In earlier days, doctors advised different cures than the doctors advise today. Perhaps those cures really worked in those days, because that was the hishtadlus that was required in those days! These days, the doctors say to do different things, and if we ignore the advice of the doctors, that is a wrong hishtadlus. If a person forgoes the teshuvah and does only what the doctors say to do, often Hashem will cure the illness or injury anyway. In that case, he has to do a REAL hishtadus, and must do exactly what we know to work. In the old days when people who were sick did a proper teshuvah, the purpose of the illness was accomplished, and even a quack cure migth have worked, since that is what the doctors would have said to do.
3. Chazel knew the spiritual underpinnings of each illness, and described cures to work on those spiritual realities. I am somewhat uncomfortable with this answer, as many acharonim and rishonim say something along the lines that the physical realities have changed, or that the cures were time and place specific ( a more modern twist would be, that the cures were for specific strains of bacteria or fungi, and would still work against those specific strains, if we were able to identify exactly what the gemara was referring to). If it refers to the spiritual, underlying reality, why would they say that things today are different? Did the inner workings of the world change as well?
4. Chazal were not doctors per se, and they merely transcribed what was the current medical theory of the day. This is attributed to a teshuvah of R. Sherayrah Gaon. As can be seen in the book "Torah, Chazal, and Science", there is serious doubt whether this unnamed teshuvah was actually written by R. Sherayrah Gaon. He offers some strong evidence that it was not. Some readers will automatically dismiss anything that comes out of that book, without even looking at it, but the cahpter where he discusses this is based on the work of others (as cited in the footnotes), and is not the author's own work.
I did not at all mean to say that our cures do not work. We can clearly see that they do. What I meant was, the REAL reason why our cures work, is because Hashem decided that they do. He decided that this drug should kill this bacteria, and that is why anti-biotics work.
However, the underlying reason why a person gets sick is not the bacteria. It is because Hashem wants that person to get sick. He is trying to send the person a message that something is not right, and He decides that the person should be sick. The real way to get rid of the sickness, is to correct the spiritual malady that he has. The medicines that the doctor prescribes are needed only because a person has to do hishtadlus and go to the doctor and listen to the doctor's advice. Back then, the hishtadlus would have been to go to the doctor and take the medicine the doctor prescribes. Perhaps, once a person did the proper teshuvah, Hashem would have made that medicine effective because he already did his teshuvah, and the illness already served its purpose.
Nowadays, we clearly see that Hashem decided that our lifespans should be longer. He enlightened our eyes and allowed us to find anti-biotics and other medicines in order for us to reach the longer lifespans that He desired. In the old days, Hashem saw fit to give us shorter lifespans, and despite the hishtadlus of taking the prescribed medicines, people lived shorter.
4 is also Rav Avrohom ben Harambam. 1 is nonsense. We know enough aramaic to identify words used for fetuses, cats (only certain colours mind you, different colours for different diseases) and we know enough about the body and disease to show that the substantial change required in 1500 years simply did not happen. Finally we have medicine books from that era from non Jews with similar cures.
Writing off anything uncomfortable with "its a forgery" is classic yeshivish fare. Maybe the cures of the talmud are forgeries inserted by some dodgy talmid who went babylonian medical school. The talmud refers to blood letting. We know that. We now that non-jews were also big into blood letting. We also know now that blood letting never worked and never could have worked, which is why you won't find it offered in your local hospital.
Not only is it far from nonsense, it is the truth to anyone who is familiar with seder Zeraim. Please learn masechet kilayim and masechet sheviis with the commentaries of the Rambam, Rosh, Rash, and Ri ben Malki Tzedek. You will see for yourself how many times the Rishonim argue about the definitions of the plants and herbs mentioned there. Unless we tried these remedies, we can not say for sure that they do not work. Since we have no exact way of replicating the cures mentioned, we can not try them, and can not say definitively that they do not work.
Major changes in human physiology are not required. How many times today do doctors speak about super bugs that are resistant to anti-biotics? There are many cases today where doctors have to change the medications given because the diseases become resistant to the old medications!! These are facts!! Look them up if you don't believe them!! Other areas where there are KNOWN differences in biology, are the onset of puberty and the regularity of women's menses. It is known that these have changed from the earlier days!
Regarding your comments about a forgery. They say, "Denial is not just a river in Egypt!". I have seen this evidence cited in the book. You did not. Whose position is the one in denial? Until you actually read this evidence yourself, your claims about a forgery have zero validity! Case in point, they do not claim that the teshuvah from R. Sherayrah Gaon is a forgery, they say it was misidentified as that of R. Sherayrah. Bear in mind that we are dealing with un-named and un-dated manuscripts pulled out of the Cairo genizah or from other university libraries scattered about Europe. Unless you care to read the evidence yourself, there is no point in arguing with you about this.
Yes, think about it! And like last time, take everything I say with a grain of salt. This is my perspective (probably based mostly on the Ramchal, but even that is my own understanding). If people like it and give feedback, I'll allow to establish itself more in my head. For now I'm just throwing out an idea...
About the Greeks, true, I was mainly referring to before the Greeks, like why didn't they even begin experimenting at all until the Greeks? What were the powerful Egyptians, Babylonians and so on doing that whole time?
Seriously? Where were the Babylonians and Egyptians viz a viz scientific experiments? Have you ever thought why Hametz was proscribed on Pesach? Go start with that.
It must have taken you hours to prepare this nonsense. You thank me for being honest with you. It's gibberish. Try some other venture.
If you have a problem, speak it out clearly. I don't mind the insult, and if that's what you want to do, go ahead. But if you actually can't grasp what I'm saying, I'm happy to explain any point you wish.
No, I didn't mean it as an insult. But I was serious about the critique. Please research Babylonian and Egyptian science,. Then the Law codes of both. I believe you will learn something. And my question about Chametz is the key . Good hunting.
Your welcome to explain and/or provide links and I will gladly look into it. But be aware that I have many, many sources - Torah sources - backing me up. I'm not going to blindly hunt for something I'm not even sure what it is.
Links? My goodness, a simple google search will tell you about ancient babylonian and Egyptian discoveries and inventions. Then look at the Babylonian Law code so that you can understand some of the narrative in Genesis, some of which Chazal did not have access to. I'm only posting so that impressionable surfers don't get fooled by the nonsense you have posted, not only in the very long unintelligible screed, but your responses to challenges. And once you start learning properly, you'll figure out about Chametz. Have a great Yom Tov/Shabbat
1. What was the point of the whole wizard-cake analogy, if in the end, the scientific reality is irrelevant? Why not just say that with our pre-modern science human perception, we can't see that the world is older than the age given to us in the Torah, and that's all that matters? Dinosaur bones and the ability to age them is relatively recent science, as is the heliocentric model. Yet you seem concerned about dinosaur bones, and not concerned about the heliocentric model. Why?
2. How do you explain Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi conceding that the sages of the nations of the world are correct over the Jewish sages, in the matter of the sun's path at night (Pesachim 94a)? Does it not appear that scientific reality is relevant to him?
1) Scientific reality is not irrelevant. It is the way the world is. The world is actually made of atoms and gravity really exists. Heliocentrism is real, it is the way the planets move. It is not an illusion. My point is that there is a dual reality going on. One, where Hashem "exists" everything - in this model things don't keep existing because they did and therefore no scientific model has any meaning (and can be suspended if you know the Sheimos). The other reality is the scientific reality which is quite real, but it only exists in order to give this illusion of permanence.
2) Same as before, the nation's view (geocentrism) is real. The Earth is actually round and not flat. That is real and relevant. But the Chachomim's view is real as per the "real" reality, as intended for us to see and interpret to understand Hashem's was.
(As for what Reb Yehuda HaNasi actually meant, see Gr'a where he talks about Mazal Teli (מזל תלי - I'm not sure I'm pronouncing it correctly in English), where of course Chazal had it right... I'll try bl'n to locate the exact Maareh Makom and link it)
I just read your q again and I see I didn't answer fully, so to add one more point.
Age of the universe, in my opinion, is not debatable, as I wrote, "There are no Sheimos for the existence of a dinosaur." In the Torah's view existence is only when Hashem is 'existing' it, and He does that only for human eyes. Also, I believe the pashut pshat that Adam Harishon was created fresh. As discussed in the comments on previous posts, I don't believe Adam had a mother in law nagging him to treat Chava better, for example. The reason is because that is from the human perspective. Adam looked around and saw that he was the first person. The scientific reality only exists when you actually look under a microscope.
Because it is seen only using scientific tools, as opposed to Adam's MIL which is from a human perspective. And these civilizations are necessary in the history to have us in these 6000 years be the way we are. And also, for good measure, I'm by no means an expert but as you probably know I'm not too fond of archeology. An inch off due to natural causes or animals pushing etc. can cause a huge discrepancy. I won't actually discount this stuff, but it should cast doubt and I am not going to visit Göbekli Tepe ever so I may never actually know. But perhaps doubt isn't bad when the flip side is doubting Chazal...
Importantly, If you don't like my answer, I'm okay with leaving it as a ha'ara b'alma.
If you, however, think it's such strong question that it undermines our Mesorah, we'd have to continue with our above conversation first.
1. But why bother with your explanations of how the world looks scientifically different in comparison to the Torah’s description, if we can just say that the Torah’s description of the world is based on how we perceive it, and not based on the scientific reality? You seem to be answering a contradiction (I.e. the wizard-cake analogy), while simultaneously claiming that no contradiction ever existed in the first place (I.e. the Torah speaks in a different language, based on our functional perception, and not based on the scientific reality).
2. Why concede that the sages of the nations had it right, if according to the real way of looking at things, they had it wrong? What is the actual point of his acknowledgement? Also, the flow of the Gemara does not make sense at all if he is acknowledging the Chachmei Yisroel had it right in one way, but the sages of the world had it right in another way. And why does he acknowledge the scientific truth here, but not in other places where they were scientifically wrong? It is also interesting to note that you take the esoteric story of Bereishis completely literally, but you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to reinterpret a simple statement by a Tanna.
1) "...if we can just say that the Torah’s description of the world is based on how we perceive it, and not based on the scientific reality?" Is that not what I am saying? People think there is a contradiction, but in fact there are two realities.
2) Honestly, I don't know the full answer to these questions, same as I can't explain why Tefilin is black and has a four-headed Shin. I don't understand most of Chazal's statements, though I am slowly getting there and hope to get further and further in my understanding. I know that the Gr'a and Arizal and Chazal understood it. Probably people like Reb Dovid Cohen Shlit'a of Chevron can help with the specifics of that Gemara. The Ramchal and Gr'a discuss this Gemara extensively.
But it is important to acknowledge the truth of the Chachmei Umos Haolam because they knew from Aristotle that the Earth is actually round. It was an established fact by that time.
"It is also interesting to note that you take the esoteric story of Bereishis completely literally, but you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to reinterpret a simple statement by a Tanna." I didn't reinterpret anything. Bereishis I (sort of) understand, and to the extent that I do, it's clearly literal. Rebbi's statement I don't fully understand, but I know that it is "כפשטן" as the Ramchal and Gra say about all the words of Chazal. I don't understand yet how, and I hope to get there...
I had a chance over Shavuos to look up the Gr'a and Ramchal again and it is more complicated. In short, it's pretty clear that the Chachmei Ha'umos were mostly not discussing the physical aspect of flat earth vs. round earth, rather they were discussing the 'spiritual' ramifications of the celestial spheres (which is what the philosophers were always about, see beginning of Kuzari), which were completely legitimate. The Gaon says that they erred only in one aspect (the Mazal תלי which I referenced earlier, which I have little clue what he is referring to other than that it has to do with Adar Sheini and Middah 13, ונקה which the Gr'a is maarich about how it beyond philosophical perception, see there) and that is what the discussion was about. I didn't find specifically how he explains Rebbi's words but point is that it is complicated and way beyond me, and not specifically discussing the scientific reality alone.
So all I have to do is chalk up every bit of nonsense, pseudoscience and ignorance of reality to 'different perspective" and Voila!! It all fits in a "torah sense". It doesn't matter if astrology or homeopathy are nonsense and make verifiably untrue claims, they're 'true' in the astrology and homeopathy sense, and from a 'homeopathy works in other ways' perspective. Your approach is universal apologetics . It works on *everything*, which is to say it works on nothing at all and is completely worthless.
If you don't believe what the Torah or Chazal say about how the world works, yes it is 100% universal apologetics. But let's discuss the case at hand. What do you believe about the world? Do you believe Hashem create the world? Do you believe Hashem split the Yam Suf? We can start with that.
Once u believe homeopathy is effective u can accept it's effectiveness in some other homeopathic sense. See how well your universal apologetics works? Truth and reality are meaningless.
Once an a priori belief in T and C is required this answers no questions nor reconciles any contradictions with reality i.e. science. -- No I don't believe God exists or created anything.
I'm happy to discuss with you why I believe in God in a different setting (it is only an a priori when discussing what follows), you can email me or write a post, but if you don't believe in God, you are not part of this conversation. Bye.
"Despite these errors, we still adhere to their halachic rulings due to some vague concept of “אלפיים תורה”, suggesting that Hashem guided the decision-making process based on the wisdom of that era"
No, we follow them the same reason we follow the US constitution- we need a codified body of law, even if it was written hundreds or thousands of years ago. Unlike the constitution, the only way halacha can be potentially amended (or more accurately, be correctly reinterpreted) is with a Sanhedrin, which we lack. So as halacha and Torah following yidden we keep the rules, until a Sanhedrin comes.
I disagree. We follow Halacha because that is what Hashem wants us to follow. Hashem wouldn't allow an error in His Torah. Our Halacha is not a b'dieved.
Great post R' Dovid! I'll add to this point that its very nice people discovered things about lice and worms in fish ect. a few hundred years ago, but if the halacha would have to change, that would also mean that for the first 3,000 years the torah was around, it was not possible to keep it properly! Not just that sages erred, but the abilities to find this out was not attainable at that time. It is therefore compelling that the torah is based on human grasp not limited to our generation.
I admire the effort put into this, and you've always been respectful to me, so I won't insult you. However, I do think this is very farfetched and reeks of cognitive dissonance.
It reminds me of when I used to read Chabad writings explaining how the Rebbe is still alive. The Rebbe is still alive in true reality, the Torah reality, it's just our weak eyes cannot observe it. If we used ruchniyes eyes we'd see the rebbe right there in 770. This feels the same.
You are not obliged to accept my approach, but I must point out that it feels the same as the 770 apologetics, except that they are describing the Rebbe being alive, something we don't subscribe to, but we are describing Chazal, which we do subscribe to.
I can ask a very pointed question to begin the conversation: Do you believe that the Yam split for the Yidden some thirty three hundred years ago?
If saying Chazal is true is conspiratorial, sure. And I'll add, it isn't surprising at all that Hashem would create a massive conspiracy where the 'bad' in the world dominates, and only if you follow Him do you get the truth, since this is what the world is about.
Test, what are you talking about? Do you not see the difference between finding 'anything' in Chazal vs. what Chazal actually say straight out? They talk very clearly about bloodletting, They talk openly about the refuos. They mince no words about astrology.
And there are obscure midroshim that state 'clearly' according to chabad anyway that mishiach can comr from the dead.
Anyway nothing is clearc in chazal. That's why there are machlokas about everything. Every diyuk etc. Happy claims 'yichud' a clear word, does not mean 'seclusion'.
Additionally, I believe it because we have a mesorah for it heading back to yetzias metzrayim. We have no mesorah for what you are saying. I have never heard a Rebbe of mine say anything remotely like it.
The real mesorah is to treat the science and philosophy of the day with respect. You see that from talmud through to rishonim and acharonim. They may not have agreed with all of it, but they presented clear reasoning why they disagreed. Not 'the bunch of koferdike scientists', 'alternative reality' type of approach. That is NOT the mesorah. That is Lakewood yeshivishness. Very modern.
Your approach negates the fact that the scientific approach attempts to examine and objectively understand the reality of the universe. Your speculations are just that.The Rambam was in favor of reality check . He and his son and many other Rishonim and some Achronim reject many statements in the Talmud because they defied reality.
As far as the Rambam goes, I repeatedly responded that he was wrong in these areas. But if you do want to hang your hat on the Rambam, you need to learn his shita properly because he may have been the biggest defender of Chazal in all of Jewish history.
And do you have a Torah source for that? You wrote " While a “rationalist” might mistakenly identify certain passages in Chazal as being primitive and going with the silly primitive ideas of the time, a more refined person realizes that the science of the time itself was not primitive; it was merely a completely different – and way more sophisticated – system of understanding.
Do you really believe that the חכמי אומות העולם who at one time believe in a geocentric model for example, were coming from sophistication? And do you have a Torah source for that?
Yes, I have plenty of sources! Our literature is full of such sources, as is theirs. I would begin with the Kuzari and the Moreh who talk about Greek philosophy. It isn't a two second discussion but one worth pursuing. In short, although this is probably over most people's heads (it took me a long while to chapp this, and I still don't fully appreciate it myself, but I know enough to trust the Rambam along with all of these numerous sources to know that there's something there). They discuss a world of minds, where one perfects their nature to such a degree that they have complete mastery over their instincts and enter a world where they live (like a disembodied intellect or angel (in its literal sense)) in the realm of the mind, which is like a sixth sense, only much more powerful. In this world, our experiences take on a new meaning, where they are clearly just 'shadows' of the 'real' world (you can look up Plato's cave, often mistaken by scientific thinkers to mean something way less important). It is in this world where the *entire* Plato-Aristotle Greek philosophy exists. The Rambam spends most of his Moreh on these points and the Kuzari spends most of his time putting these ideas in their place (not for now to get into the Rambam/Kuzari differences of opinion). This mode of thought is the one where kabbalah exists as the Ramchal writes about at length, as well as so many other of our sources, including the Gr'a. Sefer Yetzira discusses astronomy by the same token.
If I am not being clear, it may the topic material, but I'm more than happy to provide more specific sources, but believe you me, they are too many to count.
Please define your theory. Are you saying that all scientific mistakes have a deep hidden reality? Then please provide at least one clear source for this theory. It does not seem to confirm with the simple reading of the Ramchal in his maamar on Agados, which suggests that these are just borrowed terminologies.
I wouldn't say all, but most of these 'mistakes' are not actually mistakes in what they truly meant to represent, only mistkes in thinking that these were also the physical reality. The list is long, but the main one I have discussed thus far is astrology, which contains many clear sources. Astrology is a typical 'outdated', 'primitive' concept to the scientific thinker, but it becomes clear that these ideas contain a ton of truth. The Rambam discusses astrology (in the Yad and in the Moreh), as do the Kuzari (when he discusses the Greek concept of the celestial spheres etc), the Ramchal (in above sources as well as Daas Tevunos towards the beginning when he lists the five evils), the Arizal (I can't remember right now exactly where, but when he talks about the שינויים in the Tefilos and explains that every day is different than the next, as we see the alignment of the stars are different) and the Gr'a (all over his pirush on Safra D'tzniyusa he talks about the Mazalos, and in Sefer Yetzirah, a small list from many). It is an integral part of Sefer Yetzirah. This is a simple example of something which seems to be 'primitive' but is really loaded with a deep hidden reality. The stars are the physical manifestations of the channels in which HKBH provides to His בריאה, and if we understood these things, we could figure out which Middos define that day (every second of these 6,000 years represent the range of permutations between חד"ר, חסד דין רחמים and these are somehow understood through the differences in the alignments of the stars every second, being that the stars themselves represent different levels of חד"ר.
The עובדי *כוכבים* ומזלות were very aware of this (at least the חכמים שבהם, like פרעה). The Greeks were significantly less aware, but they still understood these things in a very deep way. You can check out the Kuzari at length; in short they believed these stars to be angelic intellects, placed in different 'spheres' based on their level of intelligence (i.e. perfection), and man is able to tap in to this intelligence and thus become a part of their noncorporeal, eternal word of minds and intellects, by perfecting his nature and rising above his bodily instincts which blind him of his true reality. The Rambam predicates his Moreh on this idea of perfection of man and busies himself with trying to show how those who appreciate the world of perfected intellects can actually begin to sense the 'spiritual' world, where Malachim and HKBH live, because the mind is a sixth, only more powerful sense, where we can 'sense' through it the spiritual world. He spends most of the Moreh, first dismissing Hagshama, a prerequisite to understanding this world of 'minds', and then building up his world view, which is only understood by those who are able to experience this world (as he states clearly in his hakdama when talking about nevuah and the 'lightening experience').
Throughout Jewish literature, many Sefarim are predicated on the idea of this truer reality, including many Sifrei Mussar (even classics such as Alei Shur or Ohr Yisroel, as explained in Shaarei Orah by R' Itzele Blazer). There is no shortage of mechabrim trying to express these ideas, but they get nowhere to those who are 'blind'. (R' Avigdor Miller calls it 'True knowledge", the Chazon Ish (beginning of Emuna Ubitachon and later) calls it "a world opening up in front of you", the Rema (begining of O'C) calls it "Shivisi", Reb Itzele (ibid) calls it "Yiraas Haromeimus", the Baal Hatanya calls it "Yiras Hashem", Reb Avraham Ben HaRambam (in Hamaspik) calls it a "Pegisha", a 'date' with Hashem, the Mekubalim all over call it "Daas" and on...)
If the Greeks were aware of this (you can read Plato's Republic and begin to understand a lot of what he means, or the Kuzari or Rambam, as well as the many Arabic philosophers who followed Aristotle), there was clearly something much deeper being discusses. And, mind you, the Greeks were a huge step down from the חכמה of idolatry which was far from silly (and probably hence more evil). You can look up the Arizal about פרעה in his drushim about pesach for starters.
This is a very general overview, אידך פירושא זיל גמור. I am in no way an expert and I could be wrong in some details but there is a lot of solid ground here.
Based on the Ramchal's explanation of Yeridas Hadoros in Daas Tevunos, this fits very well, that the earlier generations were closer to the ability of grasping the truth, i.e. Hashem was more accessible to those who were interested (hence those who were had the ability to be so much greater and closer to Hashem - Nevuah and all - while those who wanted to follow their own whims had to be more anti through avoda zara because hashem simply wasn't as ignorable as he is today R'l) though they used it for their own pleasures and controls.
(Ramchal in Maamar al Hahagados is relevant, I don't remember exactly what he says - I'll have to look it up again - he does talk about 'borrowing' the understanding of the times, but he is discussing the Chitzonius of the Gemara; this isn't to say that the Greeks had zero Pnimius though. But I could be wrong about this detail, I'll check it out...)
Let me know if this is helpful at all in any way in answering your questions. If not, I'm happy to be shown where I am mistaken.
In short, Chazal could've been very mistaken about science, they were not ahead of the times in this regard. I doubt they knew that gravity is the reason why things fall and why the planets revolve around the sun. I doubt they knew that time slows down when travelling close to the speed of light. But these things don't quite matter because they are the 'חיצוניות', of which our views do change over time and we refine and develop our knowledge of the world throughout history. They, however, were describing a different reality, the 'פנימיות' of the world, the inner workings of how it really works. That is unchangeable. Ancient science, depending on point in history, were knowledgeable of some form of the פנימיות and so when Chazal were describing this world, they were able to borrow from their terminology to bring out their point. If they were here today they would have to use our terminology but it would really be drastically different, practically ignoring our science to bring out their point.
But mainly, it is just simply undeniable to see that there was something to their wisdom, as per חכמה בגויים תאמין, and realizing this does wonders to the super scientific, materialist mind. It's easy to deny something you have no experience with; we are exactly like a world of blind people denying and ridiculing the sense of sight (which, to a blind person, seems fantastical and even a tad magical) - moshol not mine, rather the Rambam, Plato and the Navi. There is a whole world out there that is buried in us but we are blind to it. That is my theory, and if you read any of the above works, you'll see there's a lot a lot to this.
I never took issue with any of these quotes from kadmonim. (The discussion regarding the Gra's view on astrology was a separate issue). My issue was your generalization that "the science of the time itself was not primitive; it was merely a completely different – and way more sophisticated – system of understanding", and the fact that you used this to easily dismiss all questions on Chazal from science.
The general tone of your post was that in order to be in touch with a deeper reality one has to live with a "fake" science, and that this magically answers all questions on Chazal from science. Do you have any source for this? (As I noted earlier Reb Zalman Hillel Fendel zatsal wrote extensively along these lines, but that is exactly the point. He didn't suffice with one cryptic article without any sources. I don't believe he wrote any sort of generalization that fake science provides a glimpse into deeper reality. He learned up each sugya by itself. And much of his mehalech remains a chiddush.)
Come to think of it, I guess you are taking the same approach as the sefer I quoted (The Great Zemanim debate), but in the opposite direction. You also assume that astrology cannot exist without ancient astronomy,. From there you extrapolate that ancient astronomy must be "real" in some sense. You deduct from this that if our senses perceived reality in a certain way it teaches us something deeper.
Am I following yor line of reasoning correctly?
If so, please acknowledge that this is your own extrapolation, or please provide a souce for it.
No, one does not have to live with any fake science whatsoever. I am in no way saying that their חכמה was ‘scientifically’ accurate. And I’ll say it again: It wasn’t. Scientifically, they were way off. What we do have to live with is the human eye view of the world, because that is the system where this real reality has meaning. Calling it ‘fake science’ misses the point. Rather, I would say it wasn’t science at all in any classic sense of the word. They did no experiments, they did no gathering of research and data. They saw what we see from our very *non-scientific* eyes, the ones Hashem intended us to see with, and in that view they knew (mostly from traditions, partly from their own chochma – the balance varying depending on which generations we’re referring to) the deeper meanings.
As for a source to how I know that they were using perception, I have no explicit source, but I’m nt sure I need one. 1) it is all they had (as @Yudi poined out: https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-torah/comment/16515691). Should the true meaning be found only using Einstein’s equations? 2) though there is no explicit source, it so happens to be that everything they discuss follows the human eye view, 3) the פנימיות follows the deeper meaning of everything, and that meaning is the one Hashem intended for us, and שמות always follow the “functional definitions” (this point is more subtle but very important, I’ll explain in a next comment a bit more) and 4) as I said in the post, our eyes are the tools that Hashem gave us to see and decipher His world. If you think these reasons are not enough you’re welcome to explain, and I can break down the Ramchal better to show you my points.
As for my words, "the science of the time itself was not primitive; it was merely a completely different – and way more sophisticated – system of understanding", the many sources in my previous comment should be plenty to show that was tremendous sophistication in their wisdom, pertaining to this realm of minds (pardon the English language making it sound silly, see my first post...).
To expound on what I said, “3) the פנימיות follows the deeper meaning of everything, and that meaning is the one Hashem intended for us, and שמות always follow the “functional definitions” – Hashem created the בריאה for us to understand Him. Everything we see is a manifestation of Hashem’s middos. The entire world is really being run by Hashem’s middos and this is manifest to us as the גשמיות that we see around us (through the stars, through the four elements which everything is made of, through every blade of grass etc.). Since Hashem created the world to manifest His middos, and by manifest, we mean to us humans to appreciate Hashem’s ways, it follows that the human perception is the one where He is manifest. If red is just a wavelength scientifically, this doesn’t change that to our human perception it is the experience of red. That experience, regardless of its scientific nature, is a manifestation of Hashem. Not the wavelength. Not incidentally, the ‘functional definition’ is the one that describes the human experience, not the scientific nature. (This is a rough overview of how Hashem created the world with שמות. ‘Words’ are nothing more than how we communicate our inner, personal experiences to others. Hashem is expressing Himself through the בריאה, and expression is always with words. So these words, which define the human experience, also express (at their core) the experience we have with Hashem, i.e. His middos, the way He interacts with us, are our experience of Him. because all we know about Hashem is not His עצמיות, rather His interaction with us, or our *experience* of Him, through His middos. It is obvious that this should follow the human perception.) There is a lot here, but it is a side point anyways. If you (or anyone) are interested in discussing further we can email.
I wish you would answer my questions directly and to the point. If you wish to add explanation, do it afterward. It's often hard for me to decipher whether you addressed my questions.
I took issue with your sentence "the science of the time itself was not primitive" because you didn't say they were sophisticated in other ways, as the Ramban says. (I keep saying the Ramban because I believe he is the first to explicitly argue on the Rambam and assert that חכמת האומות does not always only progress forward with the arrow of time). Rather, you said that the science itself was not primitive, and you gave examples of where you believe this applies (geocentricism, hilchos treifos). You asserted that though the חיצוניות of their science may not have been true, the science itself had deeper sophistication. I believe that is your own chidush.
I still have not received a clear definition of your theory. When are we to assume that scientific mistakes have an inner meaning? However, from between the lines of your extensive writing I would deduce that any mistake that Chazal quoted must have a deeper sophistication.
Let's flesh this out. The classic yeshivishe explanation is that Chazal knew all their scientific knowledge from גמרא גמירי לה א"נ מסוד ה' ליראיו (I know it's a גמרא but the גמרא does not say this is the rule כידוע) or that they somehow deduced it from the תורה (וכמפורסם דברי הרמב"ן בהקדמה לפירושו על התורה). The other approach is that many, if not most times they trusted contemporary science. You seem to be creating a mix of both pshatim. They trusted contemporary science, but only when they understood that there was a deeper sophistication behind it.
Am I understanding you correctly? Please answer yes or no.
As for a source, you claim not to need one. I guess you mean למ"ל קרא סברא הוא. I think it is highly unfair to say that in an issue שכבר נתחבטו בה גדולים וטובים ממנו. More importantly, there so many complicated sugyos that are affected by this. I can't wait until you come out with the book : Sacred Monsters The Hidden Secrets Behind the mysterious and mystical creatures (and the rest of ancient science). In addition, I think that it was misleading for you not to write clearly that you don't have a source. Even after we had a long שקלא וטריא Happy asserted that you had sources.
(Yudi's sevara in particular does not sit right with me. It's a beautiful hergesh, but it has been abused way too much to take it seriously. Do you also agree with the assertion of a certain great raavad shlita that 72 minutes at every season and at every place must have some deeper existence in reality due to the same line of reasoning? We believe that התורה ניתנה לבני אדם for each generation to study and apply according to contemporary science.)
"The discussion regarding the Gra's view on astrology was a separate issue" - Understood. I used astrology as an example because it brings out the point well, nothing to do with the comment about the Gr'a.
If I may interrupt, I think it is unfair to characterize this post as without sources. There are several sources in the footnotes. If I wrote something like this (not that I necessarily agree with it), I would have included more quotations in the body of the post along with explanations of how they prove the point. So that would be my mild criticism here. But he does bring sources.
I agree that I may have written too sharply, but I still maintain that he wrote a major chidush without clearly defining what it is and without providing any sources for the actual chidush, only for side points. Even after all this back and forth I am still waiting for an acknowledgement of this or an alternative explanation.
1.The Gra in Yoreh Deah does not state that astrology is true, only Kishuf (see the sefer The great zemanim debate about this.) Even what the Gra does say, regarding magic, is hardly a settled debate. The Gra is arguing on a psak in Tur and Shulchan Aruch. Regarding the questions from pesukim, some of our great Mefarshei Hatora (such as RSRH and HaMalbim) understand the pahtus of the pesukim like the Rambam.
To pretend otherwise was a great mistake on the part of Reb Moshe Meiselman, Ruvy Shmeltzer and co. Their writings caused a great chillul Hashem (possibly greater than that caused by their opponent (וד"ל. Please don't repeat it.
2.The bar plugta on the rambam (mentioned by Avraham on May 27) regarding Treifos was the Rashba. Reb Moshe writes that the rashba was proven wrong by modern science. Unfortunately, Reb Moshe and others still tried hard to escape from the Rambams clear intention, i.e that Chazal may have been wrong, yet we still follow their psak. This is also clear from the pasuk the Rambam quotes (see rambam mamrim).
3.The entire piece regarding ancient science was both unintelligible and unsourced. There is no chiyuv to believe that ancient science was in any way more developed than modern science. Not only does all the physical evidence tell us otherwise, but the Torah itself bears witness many times to the constant progress of human civilization, from the early לוטשי נחושת וברזל until the רכב ברזל (יהושע יז,טז) etc. It is possible, as the Ramban suggests, that there was an element of wisdom lost when the Greeks lost trust in the previous superstitions, but that in no way suggests that Greek wisdom was not a vast improvement over the ancients. Sorry, but there is nothing inherently good about Avoda Zara, even if losing the יצה"ר for it entailed a loss of our grasp to the experience of Nevuah. The wisdom of the Greeks is part of the Brachah of יפיפיותו של יפת, which do not reject but rather retain and use in the service of ישכון באהלי שם. (A Torah blog is an excellent example of this.) This enables it to be a source of אור rather than the opposite ch"v (as when it is used as an escape route from the הקב"ה without having to resort to כישוף וע"ז.) (ולכאו' כן נראה מדברי הגר"א בביאורו המפורסם לסוף סדר עולם, שהשורש הוא ביטול היצרא דע"ז, ומשם נובע הזה לעומת זה של ביטול הנבואה, וכל זה נתחדש בתחלת מנין שטרות, דהיינו תחלת מלכות יון, וכמבואר שם בסדר עולם, והיינו שיד חכמת יון באמצע. ונראה שזה גם עומק הבנת דברי הפסיקתא (פל"ה) שלא זכו לנבואה ע"י בנין בית שני משום שנבנה ע"י כורש ואין השכינה שורה במעשה ידיו של יפת. והיינו שמה שלא זכו לבנות בית המקדש אלא ע"י כורש הוא גופא משום שלא היה להם הזכות של העמידה נגד היצה"ר דע"ז, שהרי ע"ז גופא הוצרכו ליפיפיותו של יפת לסייעם.)
In general, I am very disappointed from David's work. He claimed to have sophisticated answers to some basic questions, yet he has resorted to classic yeshivishe runarounds. "We don’t have to discuss these questions because they have no real meaning." So then don't. Wouldn't you be better off spending your time horeving on a Rashba? Why are you posting? Just to show us how unintelligible yeshivishe people can get? We have Ruvy Shmelzer's sefarim for that.
P.S. I recommend דוד to study the sefarim of Rav Zalman Hillel Fendel zatsal. They seem to be up his alley.
I had a back and forth with @Yehoshua privately and I think I now understand his question. Due to time constraints we are still in middle, but if I do understand correctly now, he wanted to challenge how one decides when to go with this ‘real’ reality as far as Halacha is concerned. When do we and when do we not follow this reality.
The answer is: never.
For example, if the Halacha is that Shabbos ends at 72 minutes, it must follow the spiritual reality of what days are, which means that, “72 minutes at every season and at every place must have some deeper existence in reality due to the same line of reasoning”. But this is an out of context oversimplification. We, and I mean in these later דורות, NEVER pasken based the true reality. We hardly know what this reality is or how it works. We only trust that the Tannaim and Amoraim understood this reality and they knew how it plays out in Halacha. We then follow them, ignoring the deeper meanings which we don’t understand, trying our best to decipher what they said. We are not in the business of figuring things out for ourselves because we don’t understand how halachic reality works. So we do our work. We learn up their holy words, we ask questions, we see all the relevant sugyos, we see what the rishonim had to say, we repeat this same process (of questions, seeing all relevant etc.) with all the rishonim, and we make our best bet based on the rigorous formula of learning the rishonim and poskim to come out with the correct Halacha.
If the Halacha turns out to be 72 minutes (which, for most who go through the sugya know that this just a minority opinion at least as far as מעיקר הדין) then yes, we must assume that “72 minutes at every season and at every place must have some deeper existence in reality due to the same line of reasoning”. Because Shabbos, and days, mean something and if that is the definition of day, that’s what it’s deeper meaning is. But that doesn’t really matter to us in Halacha. We have a system of how to come out with the proper psak to the best of our ability. (This explains the famous kezayis debate, but not for now…)
What my essay is about is what is really happening, meaning what the Gemara and Chazal was doing. Whatever Chazal did mean, it was based on this spiritual reality. We don’t pasken based on that, rather based on our best understanding of the Rishonim who did their best to understand the Gemara.
Yehoshua, I apologize for the confusion, I thought you were asking a whole other question and responded in kind. Let me know if what I’m saying now helps and if we are finally talking the same language.
1. The Gr'a in many places discusses astrology, I'm not sure how familiar you are with other sifrei haGr'a. He was quite into it, as was the Arizal as is the Zohar.
3. Your main issue seems to be that you somehow got the impression that I think they were more developed scientifically back then. I said nothing of the sort. I was pretty clear that I think science does wonders and develops our world in a way nothing else did or could. I was clear that I don't think the wisdom of kishuf and avoda zara made any advancements in the scientific arena. I'm not sure what gave you the impression that I believe otherwise. All I said was that it was a different, and yes, way more advanced chochma, but not, by any means, in a scientific way. They understood many things about the world that we don't understand today, and those things are entirely unscientific in the classical sense of the word. But, for example, they understood what 'red' actually meant in its spiritual context (which this world is just a manifestation of).
Regarding the Greeks, they were more advanced only scientifically, but not in the 'true' (spiritual) wisdom. In that regard, when being compared with the חכמה of עבודה זרה, Greek philosophy was levels below. You seem to be conflating these two things.
If it was unintelligible to you, I'm happy to discuss specifics, but that sounds like an ad hominem more than a real problem.
I'd like to make a correction; I think you have astronomy and astrology mixed up. You probably meant by bringing up the sefer Great Zmanim debate in reference to chazal initially using the flat earth theory and then accepting the platonic model. (I read that sefer cover to cover and corresponded with the author many times.) Astrology in this discussion is in plain English - "star gazing", meaning telling the future based on the stars, and that should be in no different category than kishuf.
As far as Rabbi Mieselman and Schmeltzer, I don't think it is nice putting them together, since Rabbi Mieselman simply ignored some sources against his approach assuming its not the accepted mesora (not that he's correct) and Schmeltzer blatantly forges almost every רמב"ם חובות הלבבות כוזרי ספר העקרים ועוד to mean what he's saying when in the source they say the exact opposite.
If you read what I wrote I clearly differentiated between Rabbi Mieselman and Schmeltzer.
However, I don't believe "Rabbi Mieselman simply ignored some sources". Any intellegent person who reads his sefer will see that his own sources show that he is wrong. I consdier this his greatest maalah,. He didn't hide the major sources. The marei mekomos regarding treifos are in his sefer. He also quotes the Rambam and the Rashba that Chazl sometimes trusted their contemporary חכמי אומות העולם, yet he expects the reader to trust his assertion that those 2 cases are exclusions to the rule.
I see both of their sefarim as a great chillul Hashem, as they are represented and viewed as the classic yeshivishe hashkafa, which thereby implies that to be yeshivishe one must be unintelligent and misinformed.
I see you are right about that, I must have missed that footnote. I am not sure if he is correct, I'll have to look into that more.
I didn't think you didn't see a difference between those two books, I just wanted to highlight the difference. I also found R' Meiselmans book troubling, but I don't think he was deliberately dishonest, only too convinced of his views to deal with all the sources. The latter is the worst book ever to befall our nation.
Actually, the Gra earlier in the siman (סק"ז) does quote sources that astrology is real. It is possible that when he is masig on the Rambam regarding kishuf he intends to include astrology as בכלל מאתים מנה.
I did more looking today, astrology is accepted by the same who believe in kishuf, and I think it's more inline with nature than Kishuf is. I think Great Zmanim debate is wrong, as the shulchan aruch just forbids following astrologers, which makes no difference if kishuf is real or not, and in Bais yosef there he mainly brings opinion that it is real. Even the Tur, the main reason he quotes the rambam is for the psak, and the Bach clearly goes this way. The Gr"a is already known what his opinion is, someone not too shabby in science, as well as the Shach and Maharshal there, as well as Radvaz sighted by pischei teshuva.
The Ramchal spends a long time on this in דרך ה', saying it is all part of השתלשלות הבראיה , something the Rambam rejects but is accepted by all mekubalim starting with Ramban. Additionally, the fact that astrology is not accepted can just be because it was forgotten, although I understand the Rambam felt otherwise, and although other ways were discovered to determine seasons ect. that doesn't mean there was never another way.
There are numerous pesukim that indicate kishuf really works. There are numerous statements from Chazal that say that astrology also is real. Those who say otherwise struggle to explain the pesukim and chazals. If the Rambam was around to ask, he'd probably give a good answer, but he is not, and others struggle to explain them.
As an example, how do they explain the incident with Shaul and the Ov practitioner? Shaul reached the level of a navi! Surely he would know that the Ov is fake, so why did he ask her all? If we could know that the Ov us fake, would a real Navi be so easily fooled?? See the Radak on those pesukim who offers some possibilities, but none of them answer this basic question, How could a real Navi not know that these things are fake?
I don't think it's farfetched to say, that believing that kishuf really works, was the mainstream opinion, despite what the Rambam says about it.
I don't have a problem if you say it is the mainstream opinion. Afer all, the Gra says so. I do have a problem when one makes an issue of mesora out of it and presents the Rambam as a daas yachid, when the Radak says that all the Geonim held like that, the Tur and Shulchan Aruch say like that, and the Mefarshei Hatora written after the Gra explain pshuto shel mikra like that.
See my comment above; I won't call the Rambam a Daas yachid but the majority is still against him. The baalei pshuto shel mikra also include העמק דבר ומשך חכמה who don't follow this approach. In addition, Rav Hirsh clearly writes in a letter that he made no attempt to figure out between the Ramban and Rambam, so explaining the pesukim one way is simply one option. I think the reason the Ramban is more accepted is because the Tanaim and Amoraim took it seriously, (I can't say for sure but I think the Rambam and Geonim had no problem saying they were mistaken) as well as the majority opinion is so, and Kabala supports this approach. You don't have to call it mesorah and you're not bound to believe it this way but I do think it deserves the title of being the accepted approach.
It's from a letter written in Hebrew to Rabbi Pinchos M.E. Wechsler,
and were published in 1976 by Mordechai Breuer in the Jerusalem journal Hama'yan. It was printed translated in Light Magazine (Volume XIV: 1-5) in 1978.
Being this article is not available everywhere I'll paste what he writes regarding this discussion:
.…"A related topic is the question of what is meant by magic, astrology, demons (sheidim), and related matters. Who dares to choose between Rambam and Ramban, following whom the entire Jewish camp is split in two on these matters?
…"Consequently every intelligent person may choose either opinion in these matters without being considered wrong. Alternatively - and in my opinion this is the truer way - he can admit that he has no clarity in these matters.
I admit unashamedly that I never made an effort to get to the
roots of these matters just as I never found myself curious to
inquire about the nature of olom ha-bo, the world after the resurrection of the dead, and related matters. For the reality of
these matters as of those is hidden from human vision and it
is impossible to know them with absolute clarity. Whatever is
said about them is no more than a guess - however close -
at what may be the truth; and there is no obligation upon Jews
It is not an issue of mesorah. The Rambam said this, and the Rambam definitely is part of the mesorah. I did not think the Radak says that all of the geonim said like the Rambam. He quotes some who definitely did, and he asks on their opinion.
I know that there are some who explain the pesukim in line with the opinion that it is not real. Nevertheless, there are a number of statements of chazal that are difficult to align with this opinion.
I would suggest that this theory can only be useful for someone who "isn't bothered" by the challenge of science vs. Torah to begin with. For such a person, the discussion is more of a fun mental exercise, but it's not so important if the answer is slightly to extremely far-fetched.
To someone who is genuinely troubled by these challenges - let's say he has a tendency to believe Torah is Divine but certain things give him pause - an answer like this IMHO will actually cause more damage than benefit. The reason I say that is because when people in the second category read something like this, which clearly comes from someone who is intelligent, they start to suspect that even intelligent people can twist logic to fit their own beliefs and it starts to call the mesorah into question.
Very solid point. From many of the responses it is becoming increasingly clear that you're probably correct. I really hope that no חילול כבוד שמים comes חלילה from me speaking what I believe to be the truth. I really do hope that anyone with an open mind can get themselves involved in how other people think and try to understand from their perspective, but perhaps I really am being too optimistic:(
I guess i just hope people can open their mind to Chazal and the Torah as much as they do to outside culture...
I was thinking about your comment more. I wish to add an important idea to the discussion: those that are really bothered are mostly because they are spending so much time reading about outside science and culture, but if they would spend more time seeing the depths of the Torah they would see a lot, lot, lot of the truths in that, to the point that a lot of the questions turn into nothing but mild nuisances, where we are okay even if we don't have the answer. This doesn't mean we shouldn't question ourselves, but the depths of the Torah do wonders to show where the truth lays.
Our Torah poses MANY more questions to the atheist than science poses to the Torah.
An atheist has the (imagined) advantage to just dismiss the Torah from his perview because he knows nothing about it, while we can't just discount science. And the atheist is loud about his views and his many clever words affect those who hear his arguments, especially since, "Hey! I never did see a river turn into blood!"
I think this brings out a really crucial point, that our perspectives are very heavily influenced by our surroundings and the company we keep, more than we think. A lot of people, especially in this kind of forum, will object that they are indeed being impartial and evidence based, but I beg them to think about that assumption.
By the way, can you give an example of a type of depth you see in the Torah that would pose a question to an Atheist's belief system?
I personally see many aspects in nature that I believe do that (even though I know that is out of style these days..), but I struggle to find something comparable from the Torah itself.
Well, to begin with, if the Nile river turned into blood for a week, for one who is a pure scientific 'rationalist', his heart should skip a few beats. The sun stood still, the Yam Suf and Jordan river both split, Rabbah brought his friend back to life and ...Hashem created the universe. These are very 'irrational' things to the scientific mind. @Shmuel brought up Tzaraas earlier which is a great example, and the fact that our deeds have the power over rain in the ideal world is a clear indication that there is more to the story than the scientific picture we experience today. You kind of have to pick which worldview you adhere to immediately.
You can then take the so-called rational approach and feel better about yourself when you are told that Hashem limits these things to very specific instances, but, while true, I'm not quite sure why this helps people feel better.
And the Rambam doesn't really help as much as people think he does. The main thing one learns about when learning the Rambam *correctly* is that world is hardly about science, and is far more about a 'world of minds', where the perfection of man and his main goal in life is this mind over matter perfection which allows what may seem like 'spiritually' and 'angels' and Hashem Himself for that matter to actually be 'rational', just as what we see with our eyes is completely rational to our worldview. In this new world, of minds, there exists an entire fully encompassing reality where the perfection of everything we see exists in a more pure, Godly form. See my comments to @Avraham below about this. His so called rationality actually stemmed from his hyperfocus on this point, which the Gr'a criticized him for.
(Incidentally, it is in his very world where what people call 'mysticism' exists, and the Torah is not quite so 'irrational' when getting involved in such a world. Our literature, and even their literature, is full to the brim with sources to this end, but as the Rambam says, in his Hakdama, "Concerning those who never beheld the light even for one day, but walk in continual darkness, it is written, “They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness”. Truth, in spite of all its powerful manifestations, is completely withheld from them, and the following words of Scripture may be applied to them, “And now men see not the light which is bright in the skies..." The Rambam elsewhere compares such people to the blind person who doesn't even know what light is and reflects his world view onto those who see and even calls them foolish for believing such nonsense.)
If you learn our Torah and discover this world, even if you personally don't experience it, it should give you major pause and tremendous humility towards these giants of refined souls, the angels of human race, who walked the face of this earth. The atheist has very little on them, except that he never beheld their experiences, and steadfastly and stubbornly refuses to believe that it exists despite the millions of indications. Oh right, because these indications came from some 'primitive' people who hadn't yet developed the 'light' of science...
The examples you give present a question to those who believe the Torah is divine but want to keep a rationalist viewpoint. I am asking for examples of things in the Torah that make it very hard to deny that the Torah is of divine origin (as you said, "Our Torah poses MANY more questions to the atheist than science poses to the Torah")
I wasn't sure which way you meant. If you mean that way than the first examples are out (unless we run down the road of the 'Kuzari argument'. And the other arguments, like you mentioned: from design, ontological, first cause etc, which although can be dismissed philosophically in a scientific world view, are still extremely more reasonable if there is a God but I digress as these are not specifically from the Torah). But the idea that there exists a world of minds is a big giant question on him, which he just dismisses as nothing simply because he never experienced it. There is so much stacked against his assertion of its meaninglessness. One needn't come from the Rambam, but from any philosopher before a thousand years ago. This idea of a world of minds is a huge (albeit, just a first) step in the right direction to move from the material atheistic ideology toward Torah ideology. If I'm still not being clear, let me know...
Sounds like a fair point that everyone comes in with their own biases.
What I'm very curious to hear from you and the rest of the authors on this blog (which btw looks like its exploded since the last time I was here) is have you guys ever at any point in your lives seriously considered the alternative that Torah is not Divine, to such an extent that you would have been willing to change your belief if you found something convincing enough? I myself have gone pretty far in terms of my searches, but deep down I knew I was sticking with the Torah no matter what I found
I see you have a further reply that adds to this comment, but before I read it and possibly have my judgment clouded, I just want to point out that I really really respect that you can agree with my comment. That is very intellectually honest and super-rare from what I'm used to, so I wanted to commend you on that.
Thank you, that's sweet of you to say! I really do enjoy other viewpoints, I think others who have gotten to know me a bit can attest to that by now. And I'd love to keep hearing from you, here or in email...
There is not one geocentric model. There are at least two.
The Ptolemaic model, which has issues, and is well-known.
There is also the Tycho Brahe model, which is a combined geo-helio-centric model, and was proposed after recording the motions of the planets for decades. The sun and moon orbit above and around the earth. The planets orbit the sun.
I suggest reading up on him, and how it came to be that man the credited with recording the data Kepler stole and used to formulate his own modified Copernican model, had his own ideas rendered irrelevant historically.
Also, that video depicting the Copernican model doesn't do justice to the absurdity of what it has evolved into. To whit, the earth and entire solar system move in orbit around the Milky Way (which historically was always called the Great Rift - perhaps related to the Mabul), and the Milky Way is, further, careening through the universe.
Every human being on earth is subjected to four different vectors of acceleration simultaneously, while we can't feel or detect any of it. In spite of the constant motion in many directions, the planets and stars remain completely predictable and in their ordained paths. It's crazy.
That being said, my understanding is that our mesorah is compatible with a flat or globe earth (I lean flat, for many reasons). One thing it is incompatible with entirely is a moving earth that orbits the sun. No. Not happening. Period.
Good point, But I think that a) it's always good for the truth to be spoken, and b) it's not really hakdamos which are necessary, it's allowing oneself to believe 'primitive' ideas against the common current, which is very difficult for those involved in the outside world. But if one is open to the fact that this world has been created by Hashem and that He split the yam suf, the rest is easier. But one really has to be 'open minded' to come to terms! We are also proud of our open-mindedness, even though it's not not popular!
Also, I think the clarifications in the comments are important because they bring out which hakdamos are necessary...
I've read this several times and I don't get it. How are you dealing with the bizarre medical cures of the talmud? Penned well after churban bayis sheini. And that match the cures historical evidence show was used by everyone back then.
No more pushing you off! The medicine question is a bit more complex, but to answer your specific question, the meaning of things didn't just disappear instantaneously, it went away slowly, and way after Bayis sheini they were still in touch with many of the real workings of the world.
(The complication is that when it comes to the human body, the workings of the body are more connected with the workings of the (non-physical) soul and so medicine actually changes over time as per mankind's connection with the 'true' reality)
Ok. So basically nishtenah hatevah. The talmud is not that old, and zero evidence has ever been found that the talmudic cures worked or ever could have worked. The changes needed in both the human body and disease would have had to be massive, to say they could take place in 1500 years without leaving a trace, well believe it if you wish.
You love oversimplifying to the point where you kind of miss the point being said. I wouldn't call it nishane hateva so much - the 'teva' hardly changed. The mind (which is the world of 'spirituality'), and our ability to connect with it is what changed, therefore, since we are less connected we are less affected, and our bodies run their natural course instead. If you wish to oversimplify that to nishtane hateva, do that at your own risk.
The fact that the body follows the mind is something we experience slightly even today, such as your heart racing when your mind gets excited (it's worth thinking about that), amongst other areas, but back then, when they were more in tune - more 'excited' - their bodies were affected more.
And you love long waffle which is not clear enough to deal with anything at all. Now you have thrown in the 'mind'.
Your heart does not race when your mind gets excited, by the way. It races when the mind influences the body to get excited preparing or active in physical activity. Not once does the heart start racing when the mind is excited with a bit of tosfos.
So their mind/bodies were more in tune with the fetuses of cats than today? This is getting embarrasing now.
Respectfully, Yekutiel, you really missed the boat here, I'm sorry to say. Avoda zara was practiced all over the world precisely *because* of its tremendous wisdom, not because everyone was a bunch of blathering fools who couldn't tell their right hand from their left. They were as smart and logical as you and me, but they were privy to a ton of knowledge that we are not privy to. I'm am not, chalilah, advocating avoda zara; I am am only saying that it wasn't coming from stupidity. This is a common misconception (perhaps based on the psukim which make avoda zara sound silly as per leitzanusa d'avoda zara, perhaps more simply because it *seems* silly to us) but that's what it is, a misconception. There are plenty of sources to this affect, see here for starters: https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-torah/comment/16805864
You are good at Google arn't you? Like halochoh, you can find a source for everything in literature. Go find a hospital or doctor that offers blood letting. Not a witch doctor, by the way.
Rav Sherirya and Rav Hai Gaon had a simple answer. It was the science of their times. They weren't bothered by the fact thag our knowledge develops over time.
First of all, although this isn't a simple discussion, they seem to have been wrong about that, as I discussed in the post. See comment below: https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-torah/comment/16520004 (Although there is always the possibility that they were doing 'kiruv' work, as to not make Chazal sound silly to those who thought it was obviously ridiculous, but I'm not sure I buy that. Maybe this really is the answer though. Even if so, the Rambam clearly held what he held. And the Rambam, as I wrote above, is a slightly more nuanced discussion.)
Who decides who's correct? Are you arguing with Geonim? You dare think these sages would lie to do Kiruv?
The Rambam says chazal decided on Tereifot using the science of their times as well(even though we have no right to change those). His Masora was that of the Geonei Bavel.
Chalila I'm not arguing with the Geonim, but the G'ra and co are. But no, they wouldn't lie, rather they are simplifying things for the masses by saying something that isn't technically incorrect since the masses aren't up to understanding the clearer truth and it was calling a greater chilul Hashem to explain properly for those loudmouths. But what I am saying is pure apologetics (though there are sources that hold that the Geonim were doing as I said); it's completely possible that they meant it, as the Rambam clearly did, and in that case, Chazal taken literally prevail over the Gaonim's forced interpretation...
1st of all, it's not just the Gr'a, it's the Ramban and many many others.
The reason why they are in fact more authoritative is because they explain themselves quite well and point to the fact that they have information which these Geonim and Rishonim didn't have. These Geonim and Rishonim held that this world is an opposite of the next and we can't affect the uppers from here (as the philosophers held). To roughly quote myself from an earlier comment, just because I think I said it well then: Basically, there are two planes of existence, the one we experience daily, the physical world which we see and touch and breath. And the עולמות העליונים, where our Neshomo (or in more Rambamic terms, the intellect and mind), Malachim, etc. and HKBH reside. In a Zohar world everything happens on both planes; this world is a manifestation of the next. The Rambam believed that never the twain shall meet and therefore any time they seem to, he explains it as happening in the “real” world, the עולמות העליונים. This is, more or less, the one single area the מקובלים disagree with the Rambam. The disagreements with the Rambam and the Ramban are always about this one single point. Avraham’s Malachim, Sheidim, Korbanos, astrology, magic and so on." And in our case, medicine is the same.
The Gr'a represented this side that the two always meet, especially when it comes to the mind and body. Incidentally, kabbalah is רובא דרובא about sheimos, which, like our speech, is the mode of 'communication' between the two worlds.
The 'rationalists' today (I don't mean you, Avraham) who know never were zoche to understand a word of the Arizal and Gr'a (and never understood the Rambam properly either for that matter. Or, for the same matter, they also never understood Aristotle...) write it off as two camps as if they have the right to follow one over the other, but in reality there's no question that the Rambam וסיעתו would 100% agree had they known what the Ramban and friends knew. It's not a machlokes - the Rambam was 99.999% of the way there and he would've loved to take the next step. (The Chida does bring those that have proof that the Rambam was zoche to take the next step at the end of his life, see Sheim Hagedolim, erech Rambam)
I never said they argues with each other. The Rambam learned his ratiobalist mesora from them. We don't need to follow חכמי צרפת in מחשבה. Just like we don't need to follow מורה נבוכים.
But it doesn't change the fact that the Rambam is of the Amudei Horaah did not agree with many חכמי צרפת. The Rambam is certainly not a heretic ,and neither those who follow him.
Of course. That is the answer. We know it is because we now have historic medical books from that era with very similar cures. That part of talmud is simply not torah.
Can I ask a simple question: Did those cures actually not work back then? If they didn't work, what in God's name were even the 'scientists' of the times talking about?? If it don't work, why were they doing those stupid, inane things? I promise you they weren't that stupid. Obviously there actually was something going on...
Because they didn't know about triple blind placebo studies and all that. Enough people got better naturally to convince them that they worked. Even today, duff medicines also appear to work on many occasion. Have you or somebody you know never had an extreme stomach ache when you thought you would need to be hospitalised only for boruch Hashem for it to dissappear without trace by itself? There is a reason why a common response from doctors is go home and rest for a few days.
And when they didn't work and the chap died, ir was for his sins/yissiurim shel ahavah/tzadik v'ra lo etc. The medecine not working was simply not on the agenda. After all, EVERYBODY used that medicine and they wouldn't do so if it was a load of rubbisg :)
PS I don't dispute that some of the herbal remedies may have helped. It's the exotic ones involving dead cst featuses and suchlike that have issues (only products from a white cat can treat a snakebite from a white snake sort of thing.)
Depends on how you define 'stupid', doesn't it. Plenty of intelligent chareidi Jews belive the COVID vaccine is a hoax. Will not give a measles vaccine. Will believe in all sorts of bizairre segulos. Believe the nonsene from Kupat Ha'ir. Is that stupid?
Science was quite primitive back then. People didn't know of bacteria before the microscope. Life expectancy wasn't quite high. If you had no idea how the body worked what choice would you have but to stick with whatever stuff previous generations believed in?
Yes. Hygiene wasn't a thing back then because mankind was uneducated for the most part. That's why they turned to witch doctors like the Africans today. Blood Letting is just another example.
I'd like to highlight this comment of mine to summarize things: https://daastorah.substack.com/p/the-rebbe-is-still-alive-just-open/comment/16669743
Ash, I just read your post. It seems that you think that I believe science to be illusory. Only what we see with our eyes is real. That is not what I said. I thought I was clear that science is very real. I believe with as much conviction as basically anything else that our bodies are made of cells and that Saturn exists and that time slows down when travelling close to the speed of light. I am not casting any doubt on science's discoveries. I firmly believe that Hashem created the world with these properties.
All I was prattling about was that this reality is not the one which determines Halacha and is not the which gives the deeper meaning that the ancient idea of science gave.
" Chazal refer to the wisdom of the “speech” of the trees (i.e. how trees “communicate” with humans), astrology (how humans read the stars), palm reading, witchcraft and more. Although nowadays these ideas have been labeled as primitive by those who think they know best, these are actually what the world truly is about"
I could not possibly disagree more. Palm reading is what the world is about!!!??? You actually believe in this stuff? Cmon, you're intelligent!
You're kind of cherry picking, but yes, I defend my statement that palm reading (however in the universe that works) can give insight into the deeper, more real part of the world. More than peering into a microscope.
Why in the world would you think it does?
Because there are sources that I believe to be part of our Mesorah that say it does (including Reb Nachman, if I remember correctly)
He does? I was not aware. R Nachman is very into accepting everything as true in order that one does not descend into denying truth. I understand this in the same way as R Shagar, which is postmodernism. But if I was trying to work with an objectively real framwork, instead of a postmodern one, I would not accept it.
I'm not understanding you. How is anything about palm reading 'descend into denying truth'?
"Cmon, you're intelligent!"
No he isn't.
Actually, people who are intelligent are far more likely to fall for confirmation bias as they can creatively defend their thesis, while less smart people will have to concede. I think that's what is happening here.
Btw, nothing I said here was crafted around the question of science, rather the facts are all true, from numerous sources; how nice it is that they can also answer these questions. In this sense, it is not a 'confirmation bias'
Ash, I'm still waiting for your response to this: https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-torah/comment/16512707
Plants talk.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-groundbreaking-research-tel-aviv-u-team-records-plants-talking-for-first-time/
Once you realize much of what passes for science is false, it opens up new horizons of understanding. We are intelligent.
Cool article. What in the world does it have to do with science being false?
Plus, you equated talking plants with palm reading. You are wrong the latter as well as the former.
Plants being able to communicate has nothing whatsoever to do with what Chazal were talking about.
Not all science. "Much of science."
Because things like palm reading and astrology are very real, even if we don't understand them today.
Your leaning towards Avodah Zorah.
https://www.amazon.com/Signs-Times-Zodiac-Jewish-Tradition/dp/1583304371
Do you own this book? Have you read it?
Maybe they work in veriphysics.
What does this have to do with plants being able to communicate?
Just going to link to it here if someone wants to read it:
https://daastorah.substack.com/p/the-rebbe-is-still-alive-just-open
"Ash, I just read your post. It seems that you think that I believe science to be illusory. Only what we see with our eyes is real."
I misunderstood you then. But I wonder how much of it is me and how much is this post.
Yah I did not think this post was written in quite your style. At the end of the day, I'm yeshivish - I even warned you prior. To quote from https://daastorah.substack.com/p/read-the-torah/comment/16243187: "I'd like to emphasize though, that despite my Yeshivish perspective, I believe these ideas can be discussed in an open and inclusive manner, but there may be a LOT of prior assumptions that we'd have to sift through, perhaps from both sides."
But I back everything I said and am happy to discuss in terms you're more comfortable with.
Thank you Dovid for a thought provoking post. I enjoyed reading your ideas very much! I think your main point can be more fully fleshed out with this example.
What is the tzaraas spoken about in parshas tazria and metzora? According to chazal, it is a physical manifestation of a spiritual malady. The most commonly spoken about 'spiritual malady' is the sin of speaking lashon hara. In other words, the tzaraas os caused by speaking lashon hara. Was the tzaraas a physical disease like measles, bubonic plague, or chickenpox? Was it caused by bacteria or viruses? The answer is...I don't know, but it does not matter! The cure for this disease was not ant-biotics or anti viral drugs, the cure was doing teshuva for the underlying sin that caused it.
One can look at the tzaraas through the eyes of a medical doctor only, and see it as merely some type of physical disease. Or, one can look at it through the eyes of chazal, and understand that it is a punishment for a specific sin. The reality is, that it was a punishment for a sin. A modern medical doctor of today might have described it purely as a bacterial, or fungal, or viral infection. He might even have been right. But that is not the underlying reality. The underlying reality is that it is a punishment for a sin.
The prophets, and to a lesser extent chazal, were able to see the underlying spirituality in all things. This is the spiritual realities that Hashem built into the world. Those who have access to the underlying spiritual realities, were able to use this knowledge to bypass the rules of science, to some extent. This is how those like R. Chanina ben Dosa were able to perform miracles, and this is how kishuf works as well. (See Ramban on Devarim 18:9 for a brief understanding of how kishuf works) They were able to 'see' the sins of a person written on their arm (which is why many are strict even today, that when they put the head on the arm for tachanun, they do not put their head directly on their arm, but have a talis or a jacket sleeve intervene). They were also able to 'see' in the palm of a person real insights into that person. This is not the Gypsy fortunetelling, but a real ability to 'see' things using their spiritual eyes.
As time went on, much of the understanding of the spiritual underpinnings of the world faded from mankind. We can not perform miracles like R. Chanina ben Dosa today, and much of what passes for kishuf is nothing more than light of hand. Can people still read palms today? I don't know! If such an ability still exists, those who can still do this do not advertise their services! They are not Gypsy fortunetellers!
When it come to the lice on Shabbos, since we can not see their eggs, from a Halacha standpoint they do not exist. Of course anyone can see them in a microscope! Of course sub visual bacteria, fungi, and viruses exist! That is why we take anti-biotics and vaccines! If we did not believe in anything we can not see, we would not take antibiotics or vaccines, and we all do. (Except for small groups of people who deny science altogether.) The Torahs rules are based on what we can see with our eyes, and what we can not, is ignored entirely. One can say, that the reality as defined by the Torah is, what we can see only with a microscope is irrelevant to the Halachic process. It plays no role in the Halacha or in the Halacha process. Since we can not see the lice eggs, the reality of Halacha says they do not exist. Here too, the reality of Halacha and the reality of the scientist are different. That is not a problem, they can be different, it is just that when it comes to Halacha, we use the reality of Halacha, not that of the scientist.
Did chazal know that lice really come from eggs that can not be seen? Perhaps they did, perhaps they did not. It is really irrelevant to the Halachic process, since if we can not see it, Halacha does not take it into account at all. The term I would use to describe this, is in the Halacha world what can not be seen is irrelevant. Since we can not see lice eggs, they are not taken into account at all, and we view the lice as coming from sweat. The fact that we can see lice coming from eggs with a microscope, is completely irrelevant to the Halachic process.
Did chazal know that silver is an antibiotic (Shabbos 65a, where the gemara says that a silver coin placed on a wound can aid the healing process)? Did they know about microscopic germs and this knowledge forms the basis of the Halacha? Or did they have ho knowledge of bacterial infections, but they recorded the halacha as it was taught to them by the previous generations? It really makes no difference in the Halacha at all. They recorded this Halacha, so it is Halacha. Perhaps they understood how a silver coin helps, perhaps they did not.
One can ask, and this is a good question, why would Hashem set up the world this way? Why would He create something that is not taken into account? The world is full of things that we do not know the reason why. Why does light travel at the speed of 186,000 miles per second? Why not 185,000, or 187,000, or 100,000,000? This is the way Hashem created the world, and we do not know why He created the world this way. We also do not know with certainty why Hashem created microscopic eggs and then disregarded them in the Halacha.
We can speculate, that since the ancients had no way of seeing or taking into account things that can mot be seen, Hashem taught us that they are not taken into account when deciding the Halacha. We can say the opposite, since Hashem did not want these things taken into account (for reasons known to Him), He made sure that we had no way of identifying these things. Either way, this is my own speculation, and nothing more.
Another example of Chazal knowing about the spirtual underpinnings of the world, Ezra HaSofer decreed that men should eat garlic Friday night, since it increases a man's zera (and Friday night is the appropriate time for tashmish hamitah). The Slifkins of the world will say that this is clearly nonsense, based on the foolish idea that since garlic and zera are a similar color, that is why he said to eat it. They fail to explain why Ezra said specifically garlic, not radishes or turnips which are also an off white color. Firm believers in Chazal will say, that Ezra understood the spiritual underpinnings of the world, and understood that garlic has this affect, and turnips and radishes do not. This was not based merely on the similarity of their colors, but on a deeper understanding of the spiritual underpinnings of the world. Based on that, Ezra understood that garlic will increase zera, and turnips won't, so he said we should eat garlic, and did not not say we should eat turnips. Modern science actually does say that garlic has an aphrodisiacal effect. Did Ezra know exactly why and how garlic works to increase zera? Was he able to give a scientific explanation for it? I do not know. The truth is, whether or not he knew the scientific explanation of it is irrelevant. He knew the way the world REALLY works, and was able to come to this clonclusion.
Thank you! I enjoy hearing from you as well!
Taka, tzaraas is a really great example! The Ramban says that it was only when the klal yisroel were in Eretz Yisroel living on the highest levels that Tzaraas worked, very much along the lines of these ideas. We can add that they controlled the rain patterns with Tefilah and Teshuva as well, as anyone knows from the Psukim we say every day. (The Gr'a's interpretation of those psukim are actually a huge basis for my whole thesis...)
As for Chazal knowing our science, I really don't think they did, but they had a perfectly working science - of the time - which followed the true reality. Either tshuva or using the refuos known from the doctors who were also based on the inner workings of the world (which were not kishuf as discussed by many sources) was enough. But like you said, it makes no difference.
The non Jewish doctors who documented similar cures also had access to the 'inner workigs of the world'?
Yes. They were doing kishuf before that as well.
Of course they didn't know the science of our time. A bit of dynamite would have got rid of those pesky Romans in no time at all. One F15 even quicker. And they wouldn't need to rely on the fetuses of cats to cure disease.
Maskim.
I'm impressed you are not giving standard yeshivah answer #23b. Of course they could have created an F15 but they knew it was time for churban and golus.
lol I'm actually going to discuss this in the next (and final) post! I can say that because I am not pushing you off, agreed?
The medical cures found in the gemara bother many people. I have seen several different ways to address this alleged question.
1. It is not a question at all. We do not know precisely what malady the gemara is describing, nor do we know the exact ingredients the gemara says are needed for the cure. Aramaic has not been the spoken language for most of our people for well over a millennium, so some of the precise details have been lost to us. Additionally, we do not know the exact ways that the remedies are supposed to be prepared or applied. If our knowledge of what the gemara describes was more perfect, we would be able to use these cures and they would work. In other words, who says they don't work. People assume they don't because...(insert whatever reason here), but until they have actually been tried in the proper manner, we can not dismiss them as not working.
2. The real cures for anything come from Hashem. When we are sick or suffer injury, we should be davening to Hahsem and doing teshuvah. That is the point of an illness or injury, to get us to improve ourselves. We are also supposed to do our hishtadlus to recover from the illness or injury. The hishtadlus is going to the doctors and doing what they say. Once a person does the proper teshuvah and/or tikunim necessary, and he does the hishtadlus, his illness will disappear. In earlier days, doctors advised different cures than the doctors advise today. Perhaps those cures really worked in those days, because that was the hishtadlus that was required in those days! These days, the doctors say to do different things, and if we ignore the advice of the doctors, that is a wrong hishtadlus. If a person forgoes the teshuvah and does only what the doctors say to do, often Hashem will cure the illness or injury anyway. In that case, he has to do a REAL hishtadus, and must do exactly what we know to work. In the old days when people who were sick did a proper teshuvah, the purpose of the illness was accomplished, and even a quack cure migth have worked, since that is what the doctors would have said to do.
3. Chazel knew the spiritual underpinnings of each illness, and described cures to work on those spiritual realities. I am somewhat uncomfortable with this answer, as many acharonim and rishonim say something along the lines that the physical realities have changed, or that the cures were time and place specific ( a more modern twist would be, that the cures were for specific strains of bacteria or fungi, and would still work against those specific strains, if we were able to identify exactly what the gemara was referring to). If it refers to the spiritual, underlying reality, why would they say that things today are different? Did the inner workings of the world change as well?
4. Chazal were not doctors per se, and they merely transcribed what was the current medical theory of the day. This is attributed to a teshuvah of R. Sherayrah Gaon. As can be seen in the book "Torah, Chazal, and Science", there is serious doubt whether this unnamed teshuvah was actually written by R. Sherayrah Gaon. He offers some strong evidence that it was not. Some readers will automatically dismiss anything that comes out of that book, without even looking at it, but the cahpter where he discusses this is based on the work of others (as cited in the footnotes), and is not the author's own work.
#2 ignores the increased life expectancy of our times vis a vis chazal's, heavily implying our cures do work.
Shmuel never said our cures don't work, or even that they're not an improvement. Shmuel, am I wrong?
I did not at all mean to say that our cures do not work. We can clearly see that they do. What I meant was, the REAL reason why our cures work, is because Hashem decided that they do. He decided that this drug should kill this bacteria, and that is why anti-biotics work.
However, the underlying reason why a person gets sick is not the bacteria. It is because Hashem wants that person to get sick. He is trying to send the person a message that something is not right, and He decides that the person should be sick. The real way to get rid of the sickness, is to correct the spiritual malady that he has. The medicines that the doctor prescribes are needed only because a person has to do hishtadlus and go to the doctor and listen to the doctor's advice. Back then, the hishtadlus would have been to go to the doctor and take the medicine the doctor prescribes. Perhaps, once a person did the proper teshuvah, Hashem would have made that medicine effective because he already did his teshuvah, and the illness already served its purpose.
Nowadays, we clearly see that Hashem decided that our lifespans should be longer. He enlightened our eyes and allowed us to find anti-biotics and other medicines in order for us to reach the longer lifespans that He desired. In the old days, Hashem saw fit to give us shorter lifespans, and despite the hishtadlus of taking the prescribed medicines, people lived shorter.
4 is also Rav Avrohom ben Harambam. 1 is nonsense. We know enough aramaic to identify words used for fetuses, cats (only certain colours mind you, different colours for different diseases) and we know enough about the body and disease to show that the substantial change required in 1500 years simply did not happen. Finally we have medicine books from that era from non Jews with similar cures.
Writing off anything uncomfortable with "its a forgery" is classic yeshivish fare. Maybe the cures of the talmud are forgeries inserted by some dodgy talmid who went babylonian medical school. The talmud refers to blood letting. We know that. We now that non-jews were also big into blood letting. We also know now that blood letting never worked and never could have worked, which is why you won't find it offered in your local hospital.
We don't know that those cures never worked. But we do know that test routinely makes stuff up.
We know from our knowledge of the body and disease they couldn't have worked. So you are back to nishtena hatevah/scientists are wrong answers.
We know from our knowledge of test that he just makes stuff up on the spot and spews it out.
Not only is it far from nonsense, it is the truth to anyone who is familiar with seder Zeraim. Please learn masechet kilayim and masechet sheviis with the commentaries of the Rambam, Rosh, Rash, and Ri ben Malki Tzedek. You will see for yourself how many times the Rishonim argue about the definitions of the plants and herbs mentioned there. Unless we tried these remedies, we can not say for sure that they do not work. Since we have no exact way of replicating the cures mentioned, we can not try them, and can not say definitively that they do not work.
Major changes in human physiology are not required. How many times today do doctors speak about super bugs that are resistant to anti-biotics? There are many cases today where doctors have to change the medications given because the diseases become resistant to the old medications!! These are facts!! Look them up if you don't believe them!! Other areas where there are KNOWN differences in biology, are the onset of puberty and the regularity of women's menses. It is known that these have changed from the earlier days!
Regarding your comments about a forgery. They say, "Denial is not just a river in Egypt!". I have seen this evidence cited in the book. You did not. Whose position is the one in denial? Until you actually read this evidence yourself, your claims about a forgery have zero validity! Case in point, they do not claim that the teshuvah from R. Sherayrah Gaon is a forgery, they say it was misidentified as that of R. Sherayrah. Bear in mind that we are dealing with un-named and un-dated manuscripts pulled out of the Cairo genizah or from other university libraries scattered about Europe. Unless you care to read the evidence yourself, there is no point in arguing with you about this.
Wow this is a very elaborate thesis! I'm not sure I necessarily agree with it but it gave me a lot to think about.
One important point. When people say the ancients didn't experiment, that's historically wrong. The ancient Greeks did all sorts of experiments https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-classical-journal/article/experiment-in-early-greek-philosophy-and-medicine/4029BC48DF68AF56542D51D830FCCA13
Yes, think about it! And like last time, take everything I say with a grain of salt. This is my perspective (probably based mostly on the Ramchal, but even that is my own understanding). If people like it and give feedback, I'll allow to establish itself more in my head. For now I'm just throwing out an idea...
About the Greeks, true, I was mainly referring to before the Greeks, like why didn't they even begin experimenting at all until the Greeks? What were the powerful Egyptians, Babylonians and so on doing that whole time?
Seriously? Where were the Babylonians and Egyptians viz a viz scientific experiments? Have you ever thought why Hametz was proscribed on Pesach? Go start with that.
It must have taken you hours to prepare this nonsense. You thank me for being honest with you. It's gibberish. Try some other venture.
If you have a problem, speak it out clearly. I don't mind the insult, and if that's what you want to do, go ahead. But if you actually can't grasp what I'm saying, I'm happy to explain any point you wish.
No, I didn't mean it as an insult. But I was serious about the critique. Please research Babylonian and Egyptian science,. Then the Law codes of both. I believe you will learn something. And my question about Chametz is the key . Good hunting.
Your welcome to explain and/or provide links and I will gladly look into it. But be aware that I have many, many sources - Torah sources - backing me up. I'm not going to blindly hunt for something I'm not even sure what it is.
Links? My goodness, a simple google search will tell you about ancient babylonian and Egyptian discoveries and inventions. Then look at the Babylonian Law code so that you can understand some of the narrative in Genesis, some of which Chazal did not have access to. I'm only posting so that impressionable surfers don't get fooled by the nonsense you have posted, not only in the very long unintelligible screed, but your responses to challenges. And once you start learning properly, you'll figure out about Chametz. Have a great Yom Tov/Shabbat
1. What was the point of the whole wizard-cake analogy, if in the end, the scientific reality is irrelevant? Why not just say that with our pre-modern science human perception, we can't see that the world is older than the age given to us in the Torah, and that's all that matters? Dinosaur bones and the ability to age them is relatively recent science, as is the heliocentric model. Yet you seem concerned about dinosaur bones, and not concerned about the heliocentric model. Why?
2. How do you explain Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi conceding that the sages of the nations of the world are correct over the Jewish sages, in the matter of the sun's path at night (Pesachim 94a)? Does it not appear that scientific reality is relevant to him?
1) Scientific reality is not irrelevant. It is the way the world is. The world is actually made of atoms and gravity really exists. Heliocentrism is real, it is the way the planets move. It is not an illusion. My point is that there is a dual reality going on. One, where Hashem "exists" everything - in this model things don't keep existing because they did and therefore no scientific model has any meaning (and can be suspended if you know the Sheimos). The other reality is the scientific reality which is quite real, but it only exists in order to give this illusion of permanence.
2) Same as before, the nation's view (geocentrism) is real. The Earth is actually round and not flat. That is real and relevant. But the Chachomim's view is real as per the "real" reality, as intended for us to see and interpret to understand Hashem's was.
(As for what Reb Yehuda HaNasi actually meant, see Gr'a where he talks about Mazal Teli (מזל תלי - I'm not sure I'm pronouncing it correctly in English), where of course Chazal had it right... I'll try bl'n to locate the exact Maareh Makom and link it)
I just read your q again and I see I didn't answer fully, so to add one more point.
Age of the universe, in my opinion, is not debatable, as I wrote, "There are no Sheimos for the existence of a dinosaur." In the Torah's view existence is only when Hashem is 'existing' it, and He does that only for human eyes. Also, I believe the pashut pshat that Adam Harishon was created fresh. As discussed in the comments on previous posts, I don't believe Adam had a mother in law nagging him to treat Chava better, for example. The reason is because that is from the human perspective. Adam looked around and saw that he was the first person. The scientific reality only exists when you actually look under a microscope.
Does that help?
How, for the umpteenth time, do you explain the evidence for pre-Adam civilizations?
Because it is seen only using scientific tools, as opposed to Adam's MIL which is from a human perspective. And these civilizations are necessary in the history to have us in these 6000 years be the way we are. And also, for good measure, I'm by no means an expert but as you probably know I'm not too fond of archeology. An inch off due to natural causes or animals pushing etc. can cause a huge discrepancy. I won't actually discount this stuff, but it should cast doubt and I am not going to visit Göbekli Tepe ever so I may never actually know. But perhaps doubt isn't bad when the flip side is doubting Chazal...
Importantly, If you don't like my answer, I'm okay with leaving it as a ha'ara b'alma.
If you, however, think it's such strong question that it undermines our Mesorah, we'd have to continue with our above conversation first.
1. But why bother with your explanations of how the world looks scientifically different in comparison to the Torah’s description, if we can just say that the Torah’s description of the world is based on how we perceive it, and not based on the scientific reality? You seem to be answering a contradiction (I.e. the wizard-cake analogy), while simultaneously claiming that no contradiction ever existed in the first place (I.e. the Torah speaks in a different language, based on our functional perception, and not based on the scientific reality).
2. Why concede that the sages of the nations had it right, if according to the real way of looking at things, they had it wrong? What is the actual point of his acknowledgement? Also, the flow of the Gemara does not make sense at all if he is acknowledging the Chachmei Yisroel had it right in one way, but the sages of the world had it right in another way. And why does he acknowledge the scientific truth here, but not in other places where they were scientifically wrong? It is also interesting to note that you take the esoteric story of Bereishis completely literally, but you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to reinterpret a simple statement by a Tanna.
1) "...if we can just say that the Torah’s description of the world is based on how we perceive it, and not based on the scientific reality?" Is that not what I am saying? People think there is a contradiction, but in fact there are two realities.
2) Honestly, I don't know the full answer to these questions, same as I can't explain why Tefilin is black and has a four-headed Shin. I don't understand most of Chazal's statements, though I am slowly getting there and hope to get further and further in my understanding. I know that the Gr'a and Arizal and Chazal understood it. Probably people like Reb Dovid Cohen Shlit'a of Chevron can help with the specifics of that Gemara. The Ramchal and Gr'a discuss this Gemara extensively.
But it is important to acknowledge the truth of the Chachmei Umos Haolam because they knew from Aristotle that the Earth is actually round. It was an established fact by that time.
"It is also interesting to note that you take the esoteric story of Bereishis completely literally, but you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to reinterpret a simple statement by a Tanna." I didn't reinterpret anything. Bereishis I (sort of) understand, and to the extent that I do, it's clearly literal. Rebbi's statement I don't fully understand, but I know that it is "כפשטן" as the Ramchal and Gra say about all the words of Chazal. I don't understand yet how, and I hope to get there...
I had a chance over Shavuos to look up the Gr'a and Ramchal again and it is more complicated. In short, it's pretty clear that the Chachmei Ha'umos were mostly not discussing the physical aspect of flat earth vs. round earth, rather they were discussing the 'spiritual' ramifications of the celestial spheres (which is what the philosophers were always about, see beginning of Kuzari), which were completely legitimate. The Gaon says that they erred only in one aspect (the Mazal תלי which I referenced earlier, which I have little clue what he is referring to other than that it has to do with Adar Sheini and Middah 13, ונקה which the Gr'a is maarich about how it beyond philosophical perception, see there) and that is what the discussion was about. I didn't find specifically how he explains Rebbi's words but point is that it is complicated and way beyond me, and not specifically discussing the scientific reality alone.
That will be addressed in a future post.....
Lol!
So all I have to do is chalk up every bit of nonsense, pseudoscience and ignorance of reality to 'different perspective" and Voila!! It all fits in a "torah sense". It doesn't matter if astrology or homeopathy are nonsense and make verifiably untrue claims, they're 'true' in the astrology and homeopathy sense, and from a 'homeopathy works in other ways' perspective. Your approach is universal apologetics . It works on *everything*, which is to say it works on nothing at all and is completely worthless.
If you don't believe what the Torah or Chazal say about how the world works, yes it is 100% universal apologetics. But let's discuss the case at hand. What do you believe about the world? Do you believe Hashem create the world? Do you believe Hashem split the Yam Suf? We can start with that.
Once u believe homeopathy is effective u can accept it's effectiveness in some other homeopathic sense. See how well your universal apologetics works? Truth and reality are meaningless.
Once an a priori belief in T and C is required this answers no questions nor reconciles any contradictions with reality i.e. science. -- No I don't believe God exists or created anything.
I'm happy to discuss with you why I believe in God in a different setting (it is only an a priori when discussing what follows), you can email me or write a post, but if you don't believe in God, you are not part of this conversation. Bye.
Not surprised.
"Despite these errors, we still adhere to their halachic rulings due to some vague concept of “אלפיים תורה”, suggesting that Hashem guided the decision-making process based on the wisdom of that era"
No, we follow them the same reason we follow the US constitution- we need a codified body of law, even if it was written hundreds or thousands of years ago. Unlike the constitution, the only way halacha can be potentially amended (or more accurately, be correctly reinterpreted) is with a Sanhedrin, which we lack. So as halacha and Torah following yidden we keep the rules, until a Sanhedrin comes.
I disagree. We follow Halacha because that is what Hashem wants us to follow. Hashem wouldn't allow an error in His Torah. Our Halacha is not a b'dieved.
Great post R' Dovid! I'll add to this point that its very nice people discovered things about lice and worms in fish ect. a few hundred years ago, but if the halacha would have to change, that would also mean that for the first 3,000 years the torah was around, it was not possible to keep it properly! Not just that sages erred, but the abilities to find this out was not attainable at that time. It is therefore compelling that the torah is based on human grasp not limited to our generation.
Thanks.
Well said! It's hard to say they were just אנוס...
R Dovid,
I admire the effort put into this, and you've always been respectful to me, so I won't insult you. However, I do think this is very farfetched and reeks of cognitive dissonance.
It reminds me of when I used to read Chabad writings explaining how the Rebbe is still alive. The Rebbe is still alive in true reality, the Torah reality, it's just our weak eyes cannot observe it. If we used ruchniyes eyes we'd see the rebbe right there in 770. This feels the same.
You are not obliged to accept my approach, but I must point out that it feels the same as the 770 apologetics, except that they are describing the Rebbe being alive, something we don't subscribe to, but we are describing Chazal, which we do subscribe to.
I can ask a very pointed question to begin the conversation: Do you believe that the Yam split for the Yidden some thirty three hundred years ago?
Btw I'm very aware of how my approach sounds to an outsider. But I speak what I believe to be the truth. Any issue you have, I'm glad to discuss.
"Btw I'm very aware of how my approach sounds to an outsider"
I am happy you have that self-awareness. But if most bystanders would never accept it, how do you plan on convincing them?
Unless you go postmodern and say that no proof is required for anything, but that doesn't seem to be your approach. (It's mine.)
Mostly by back and forth. And btw I don't plan on convincing anyone, but I would love for them to at least hear why my side is reasonable.
And of course, only those who know how to be reasonable.
You base the Kuzari on being a conspiracy. https://tjoancyk123.substack.com/p/kuzari-argument-comment
But this post is way more conspiratorial than any biblical criticism
If saying Chazal is true is conspiratorial, sure. And I'll add, it isn't surprising at all that Hashem would create a massive conspiracy where the 'bad' in the world dominates, and only if you follow Him do you get the truth, since this is what the world is about.
Oh, Chabad do have ''mekoros in chazal' to rely on. You can find anything in Chazal.
Test, what are you talking about? Do you not see the difference between finding 'anything' in Chazal vs. what Chazal actually say straight out? They talk very clearly about bloodletting, They talk openly about the refuos. They mince no words about astrology.
And there are obscure midroshim that state 'clearly' according to chabad anyway that mishiach can comr from the dead.
Anyway nothing is clearc in chazal. That's why there are machlokas about everything. Every diyuk etc. Happy claims 'yichud' a clear word, does not mean 'seclusion'.
Astrology is pretty clear unless you assume it isn't real and have to twist. I don't twist Chazal.
I don't either. I believe chazal believed in astrology. i also believe it did not in fact work. No twisting whatsoever.
Additionally, I believe it because we have a mesorah for it heading back to yetzias metzrayim. We have no mesorah for what you are saying. I have never heard a Rebbe of mine say anything remotely like it.
Which things that I mentioned do we not have a Mesorah for?
The real mesorah is to treat the science and philosophy of the day with respect. You see that from talmud through to rishonim and acharonim. They may not have agreed with all of it, but they presented clear reasoning why they disagreed. Not 'the bunch of koferdike scientists', 'alternative reality' type of approach. That is NOT the mesorah. That is Lakewood yeshivishness. Very modern.
I explained the difference between their science and ours in my post. If you don't like what I said, talk to the point.
That there is a true reality behind this one.
K, this is a very important point to discuss, before we discuss anything else:
Do you think that the world exists by itself, or does it only exist because Hashem wills it to exist?
The latter (though the Ralbag says the former.)
Yes. But that is not the same as ignoring all reality.
Please explain. What reality am I ignoring?
"But to us they are just losing themselves in the world of illusion."
I do not think our world is illusory at all.
Sorry, it is not illusory. I mean that only in context of the two realities I've been describing. Atoms are very real. Gravity is very real.
Your approach negates the fact that the scientific approach attempts to examine and objectively understand the reality of the universe. Your speculations are just that.The Rambam was in favor of reality check . He and his son and many other Rishonim and some Achronim reject many statements in the Talmud because they defied reality.
Have you read my last post (https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-creation)? What you call 'objective' and 'reality' has to be understood in its context.
As far as the Rambam goes, I repeatedly responded that he was wrong in these areas. But if you do want to hang your hat on the Rambam, you need to learn his shita properly because he may have been the biggest defender of Chazal in all of Jewish history.
And do you have a Torah source for that? You wrote " While a “rationalist” might mistakenly identify certain passages in Chazal as being primitive and going with the silly primitive ideas of the time, a more refined person realizes that the science of the time itself was not primitive; it was merely a completely different – and way more sophisticated – system of understanding.
Do you really believe that the חכמי אומות העולם who at one time believe in a geocentric model for example, were coming from sophistication? And do you have a Torah source for that?
Yes, I have plenty of sources! Our literature is full of such sources, as is theirs. I would begin with the Kuzari and the Moreh who talk about Greek philosophy. It isn't a two second discussion but one worth pursuing. In short, although this is probably over most people's heads (it took me a long while to chapp this, and I still don't fully appreciate it myself, but I know enough to trust the Rambam along with all of these numerous sources to know that there's something there). They discuss a world of minds, where one perfects their nature to such a degree that they have complete mastery over their instincts and enter a world where they live (like a disembodied intellect or angel (in its literal sense)) in the realm of the mind, which is like a sixth sense, only much more powerful. In this world, our experiences take on a new meaning, where they are clearly just 'shadows' of the 'real' world (you can look up Plato's cave, often mistaken by scientific thinkers to mean something way less important). It is in this world where the *entire* Plato-Aristotle Greek philosophy exists. The Rambam spends most of his Moreh on these points and the Kuzari spends most of his time putting these ideas in their place (not for now to get into the Rambam/Kuzari differences of opinion). This mode of thought is the one where kabbalah exists as the Ramchal writes about at length, as well as so many other of our sources, including the Gr'a. Sefer Yetzira discusses astronomy by the same token.
If I am not being clear, it may the topic material, but I'm more than happy to provide more specific sources, but believe you me, they are too many to count.
Please define your theory. Are you saying that all scientific mistakes have a deep hidden reality? Then please provide at least one clear source for this theory. It does not seem to confirm with the simple reading of the Ramchal in his maamar on Agados, which suggests that these are just borrowed terminologies.
Sure!
I wouldn't say all, but most of these 'mistakes' are not actually mistakes in what they truly meant to represent, only mistkes in thinking that these were also the physical reality. The list is long, but the main one I have discussed thus far is astrology, which contains many clear sources. Astrology is a typical 'outdated', 'primitive' concept to the scientific thinker, but it becomes clear that these ideas contain a ton of truth. The Rambam discusses astrology (in the Yad and in the Moreh), as do the Kuzari (when he discusses the Greek concept of the celestial spheres etc), the Ramchal (in above sources as well as Daas Tevunos towards the beginning when he lists the five evils), the Arizal (I can't remember right now exactly where, but when he talks about the שינויים in the Tefilos and explains that every day is different than the next, as we see the alignment of the stars are different) and the Gr'a (all over his pirush on Safra D'tzniyusa he talks about the Mazalos, and in Sefer Yetzirah, a small list from many). It is an integral part of Sefer Yetzirah. This is a simple example of something which seems to be 'primitive' but is really loaded with a deep hidden reality. The stars are the physical manifestations of the channels in which HKBH provides to His בריאה, and if we understood these things, we could figure out which Middos define that day (every second of these 6,000 years represent the range of permutations between חד"ר, חסד דין רחמים and these are somehow understood through the differences in the alignments of the stars every second, being that the stars themselves represent different levels of חד"ר.
The עובדי *כוכבים* ומזלות were very aware of this (at least the חכמים שבהם, like פרעה). The Greeks were significantly less aware, but they still understood these things in a very deep way. You can check out the Kuzari at length; in short they believed these stars to be angelic intellects, placed in different 'spheres' based on their level of intelligence (i.e. perfection), and man is able to tap in to this intelligence and thus become a part of their noncorporeal, eternal word of minds and intellects, by perfecting his nature and rising above his bodily instincts which blind him of his true reality. The Rambam predicates his Moreh on this idea of perfection of man and busies himself with trying to show how those who appreciate the world of perfected intellects can actually begin to sense the 'spiritual' world, where Malachim and HKBH live, because the mind is a sixth, only more powerful sense, where we can 'sense' through it the spiritual world. He spends most of the Moreh, first dismissing Hagshama, a prerequisite to understanding this world of 'minds', and then building up his world view, which is only understood by those who are able to experience this world (as he states clearly in his hakdama when talking about nevuah and the 'lightening experience').
Throughout Jewish literature, many Sefarim are predicated on the idea of this truer reality, including many Sifrei Mussar (even classics such as Alei Shur or Ohr Yisroel, as explained in Shaarei Orah by R' Itzele Blazer). There is no shortage of mechabrim trying to express these ideas, but they get nowhere to those who are 'blind'. (R' Avigdor Miller calls it 'True knowledge", the Chazon Ish (beginning of Emuna Ubitachon and later) calls it "a world opening up in front of you", the Rema (begining of O'C) calls it "Shivisi", Reb Itzele (ibid) calls it "Yiraas Haromeimus", the Baal Hatanya calls it "Yiras Hashem", Reb Avraham Ben HaRambam (in Hamaspik) calls it a "Pegisha", a 'date' with Hashem, the Mekubalim all over call it "Daas" and on...)
If the Greeks were aware of this (you can read Plato's Republic and begin to understand a lot of what he means, or the Kuzari or Rambam, as well as the many Arabic philosophers who followed Aristotle), there was clearly something much deeper being discusses. And, mind you, the Greeks were a huge step down from the חכמה of idolatry which was far from silly (and probably hence more evil). You can look up the Arizal about פרעה in his drushim about pesach for starters.
This is a very general overview, אידך פירושא זיל גמור. I am in no way an expert and I could be wrong in some details but there is a lot of solid ground here.
Based on the Ramchal's explanation of Yeridas Hadoros in Daas Tevunos, this fits very well, that the earlier generations were closer to the ability of grasping the truth, i.e. Hashem was more accessible to those who were interested (hence those who were had the ability to be so much greater and closer to Hashem - Nevuah and all - while those who wanted to follow their own whims had to be more anti through avoda zara because hashem simply wasn't as ignorable as he is today R'l) though they used it for their own pleasures and controls.
(Ramchal in Maamar al Hahagados is relevant, I don't remember exactly what he says - I'll have to look it up again - he does talk about 'borrowing' the understanding of the times, but he is discussing the Chitzonius of the Gemara; this isn't to say that the Greeks had zero Pnimius though. But I could be wrong about this detail, I'll check it out...)
Let me know if this is helpful at all in any way in answering your questions. If not, I'm happy to be shown where I am mistaken.
In short, Chazal could've been very mistaken about science, they were not ahead of the times in this regard. I doubt they knew that gravity is the reason why things fall and why the planets revolve around the sun. I doubt they knew that time slows down when travelling close to the speed of light. But these things don't quite matter because they are the 'חיצוניות', of which our views do change over time and we refine and develop our knowledge of the world throughout history. They, however, were describing a different reality, the 'פנימיות' of the world, the inner workings of how it really works. That is unchangeable. Ancient science, depending on point in history, were knowledgeable of some form of the פנימיות and so when Chazal were describing this world, they were able to borrow from their terminology to bring out their point. If they were here today they would have to use our terminology but it would really be drastically different, practically ignoring our science to bring out their point.
But mainly, it is just simply undeniable to see that there was something to their wisdom, as per חכמה בגויים תאמין, and realizing this does wonders to the super scientific, materialist mind. It's easy to deny something you have no experience with; we are exactly like a world of blind people denying and ridiculing the sense of sight (which, to a blind person, seems fantastical and even a tad magical) - moshol not mine, rather the Rambam, Plato and the Navi. There is a whole world out there that is buried in us but we are blind to it. That is my theory, and if you read any of the above works, you'll see there's a lot a lot to this.
I never took issue with any of these quotes from kadmonim. (The discussion regarding the Gra's view on astrology was a separate issue). My issue was your generalization that "the science of the time itself was not primitive; it was merely a completely different – and way more sophisticated – system of understanding", and the fact that you used this to easily dismiss all questions on Chazal from science.
The general tone of your post was that in order to be in touch with a deeper reality one has to live with a "fake" science, and that this magically answers all questions on Chazal from science. Do you have any source for this? (As I noted earlier Reb Zalman Hillel Fendel zatsal wrote extensively along these lines, but that is exactly the point. He didn't suffice with one cryptic article without any sources. I don't believe he wrote any sort of generalization that fake science provides a glimpse into deeper reality. He learned up each sugya by itself. And much of his mehalech remains a chiddush.)
Come to think of it, I guess you are taking the same approach as the sefer I quoted (The Great Zemanim debate), but in the opposite direction. You also assume that astrology cannot exist without ancient astronomy,. From there you extrapolate that ancient astronomy must be "real" in some sense. You deduct from this that if our senses perceived reality in a certain way it teaches us something deeper.
Am I following yor line of reasoning correctly?
If so, please acknowledge that this is your own extrapolation, or please provide a souce for it.
No, one does not have to live with any fake science whatsoever. I am in no way saying that their חכמה was ‘scientifically’ accurate. And I’ll say it again: It wasn’t. Scientifically, they were way off. What we do have to live with is the human eye view of the world, because that is the system where this real reality has meaning. Calling it ‘fake science’ misses the point. Rather, I would say it wasn’t science at all in any classic sense of the word. They did no experiments, they did no gathering of research and data. They saw what we see from our very *non-scientific* eyes, the ones Hashem intended us to see with, and in that view they knew (mostly from traditions, partly from their own chochma – the balance varying depending on which generations we’re referring to) the deeper meanings.
As for a source to how I know that they were using perception, I have no explicit source, but I’m nt sure I need one. 1) it is all they had (as @Yudi poined out: https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-torah/comment/16515691). Should the true meaning be found only using Einstein’s equations? 2) though there is no explicit source, it so happens to be that everything they discuss follows the human eye view, 3) the פנימיות follows the deeper meaning of everything, and that meaning is the one Hashem intended for us, and שמות always follow the “functional definitions” (this point is more subtle but very important, I’ll explain in a next comment a bit more) and 4) as I said in the post, our eyes are the tools that Hashem gave us to see and decipher His world. If you think these reasons are not enough you’re welcome to explain, and I can break down the Ramchal better to show you my points.
As for my words, "the science of the time itself was not primitive; it was merely a completely different – and way more sophisticated – system of understanding", the many sources in my previous comment should be plenty to show that was tremendous sophistication in their wisdom, pertaining to this realm of minds (pardon the English language making it sound silly, see my first post...).
To expound on what I said, “3) the פנימיות follows the deeper meaning of everything, and that meaning is the one Hashem intended for us, and שמות always follow the “functional definitions” – Hashem created the בריאה for us to understand Him. Everything we see is a manifestation of Hashem’s middos. The entire world is really being run by Hashem’s middos and this is manifest to us as the גשמיות that we see around us (through the stars, through the four elements which everything is made of, through every blade of grass etc.). Since Hashem created the world to manifest His middos, and by manifest, we mean to us humans to appreciate Hashem’s ways, it follows that the human perception is the one where He is manifest. If red is just a wavelength scientifically, this doesn’t change that to our human perception it is the experience of red. That experience, regardless of its scientific nature, is a manifestation of Hashem. Not the wavelength. Not incidentally, the ‘functional definition’ is the one that describes the human experience, not the scientific nature. (This is a rough overview of how Hashem created the world with שמות. ‘Words’ are nothing more than how we communicate our inner, personal experiences to others. Hashem is expressing Himself through the בריאה, and expression is always with words. So these words, which define the human experience, also express (at their core) the experience we have with Hashem, i.e. His middos, the way He interacts with us, are our experience of Him. because all we know about Hashem is not His עצמיות, rather His interaction with us, or our *experience* of Him, through His middos. It is obvious that this should follow the human perception.) There is a lot here, but it is a side point anyways. If you (or anyone) are interested in discussing further we can email.
I wish you would answer my questions directly and to the point. If you wish to add explanation, do it afterward. It's often hard for me to decipher whether you addressed my questions.
I took issue with your sentence "the science of the time itself was not primitive" because you didn't say they were sophisticated in other ways, as the Ramban says. (I keep saying the Ramban because I believe he is the first to explicitly argue on the Rambam and assert that חכמת האומות does not always only progress forward with the arrow of time). Rather, you said that the science itself was not primitive, and you gave examples of where you believe this applies (geocentricism, hilchos treifos). You asserted that though the חיצוניות of their science may not have been true, the science itself had deeper sophistication. I believe that is your own chidush.
I still have not received a clear definition of your theory. When are we to assume that scientific mistakes have an inner meaning? However, from between the lines of your extensive writing I would deduce that any mistake that Chazal quoted must have a deeper sophistication.
Let's flesh this out. The classic yeshivishe explanation is that Chazal knew all their scientific knowledge from גמרא גמירי לה א"נ מסוד ה' ליראיו (I know it's a גמרא but the גמרא does not say this is the rule כידוע) or that they somehow deduced it from the תורה (וכמפורסם דברי הרמב"ן בהקדמה לפירושו על התורה). The other approach is that many, if not most times they trusted contemporary science. You seem to be creating a mix of both pshatim. They trusted contemporary science, but only when they understood that there was a deeper sophistication behind it.
Am I understanding you correctly? Please answer yes or no.
As for a source, you claim not to need one. I guess you mean למ"ל קרא סברא הוא. I think it is highly unfair to say that in an issue שכבר נתחבטו בה גדולים וטובים ממנו. More importantly, there so many complicated sugyos that are affected by this. I can't wait until you come out with the book : Sacred Monsters The Hidden Secrets Behind the mysterious and mystical creatures (and the rest of ancient science). In addition, I think that it was misleading for you not to write clearly that you don't have a source. Even after we had a long שקלא וטריא Happy asserted that you had sources.
(Yudi's sevara in particular does not sit right with me. It's a beautiful hergesh, but it has been abused way too much to take it seriously. Do you also agree with the assertion of a certain great raavad shlita that 72 minutes at every season and at every place must have some deeper existence in reality due to the same line of reasoning? We believe that התורה ניתנה לבני אדם for each generation to study and apply according to contemporary science.)
"The discussion regarding the Gra's view on astrology was a separate issue" - Understood. I used astrology as an example because it brings out the point well, nothing to do with the comment about the Gr'a.
If I may interrupt, I think it is unfair to characterize this post as without sources. There are several sources in the footnotes. If I wrote something like this (not that I necessarily agree with it), I would have included more quotations in the body of the post along with explanations of how they prove the point. So that would be my mild criticism here. But he does bring sources.
I agree that I may have written too sharply, but I still maintain that he wrote a major chidush without clearly defining what it is and without providing any sources for the actual chidush, only for side points. Even after all this back and forth I am still waiting for an acknowledgement of this or an alternative explanation.
A few corrections.
1.The Gra in Yoreh Deah does not state that astrology is true, only Kishuf (see the sefer The great zemanim debate about this.) Even what the Gra does say, regarding magic, is hardly a settled debate. The Gra is arguing on a psak in Tur and Shulchan Aruch. Regarding the questions from pesukim, some of our great Mefarshei Hatora (such as RSRH and HaMalbim) understand the pahtus of the pesukim like the Rambam.
To pretend otherwise was a great mistake on the part of Reb Moshe Meiselman, Ruvy Shmeltzer and co. Their writings caused a great chillul Hashem (possibly greater than that caused by their opponent (וד"ל. Please don't repeat it.
2.The bar plugta on the rambam (mentioned by Avraham on May 27) regarding Treifos was the Rashba. Reb Moshe writes that the rashba was proven wrong by modern science. Unfortunately, Reb Moshe and others still tried hard to escape from the Rambams clear intention, i.e that Chazal may have been wrong, yet we still follow their psak. This is also clear from the pasuk the Rambam quotes (see rambam mamrim).
3.The entire piece regarding ancient science was both unintelligible and unsourced. There is no chiyuv to believe that ancient science was in any way more developed than modern science. Not only does all the physical evidence tell us otherwise, but the Torah itself bears witness many times to the constant progress of human civilization, from the early לוטשי נחושת וברזל until the רכב ברזל (יהושע יז,טז) etc. It is possible, as the Ramban suggests, that there was an element of wisdom lost when the Greeks lost trust in the previous superstitions, but that in no way suggests that Greek wisdom was not a vast improvement over the ancients. Sorry, but there is nothing inherently good about Avoda Zara, even if losing the יצה"ר for it entailed a loss of our grasp to the experience of Nevuah. The wisdom of the Greeks is part of the Brachah of יפיפיותו של יפת, which do not reject but rather retain and use in the service of ישכון באהלי שם. (A Torah blog is an excellent example of this.) This enables it to be a source of אור rather than the opposite ch"v (as when it is used as an escape route from the הקב"ה without having to resort to כישוף וע"ז.) (ולכאו' כן נראה מדברי הגר"א בביאורו המפורסם לסוף סדר עולם, שהשורש הוא ביטול היצרא דע"ז, ומשם נובע הזה לעומת זה של ביטול הנבואה, וכל זה נתחדש בתחלת מנין שטרות, דהיינו תחלת מלכות יון, וכמבואר שם בסדר עולם, והיינו שיד חכמת יון באמצע. ונראה שזה גם עומק הבנת דברי הפסיקתא (פל"ה) שלא זכו לנבואה ע"י בנין בית שני משום שנבנה ע"י כורש ואין השכינה שורה במעשה ידיו של יפת. והיינו שמה שלא זכו לבנות בית המקדש אלא ע"י כורש הוא גופא משום שלא היה להם הזכות של העמידה נגד היצה"ר דע"ז, שהרי ע"ז גופא הוצרכו ליפיפיותו של יפת לסייעם.)
In general, I am very disappointed from David's work. He claimed to have sophisticated answers to some basic questions, yet he has resorted to classic yeshivishe runarounds. "We don’t have to discuss these questions because they have no real meaning." So then don't. Wouldn't you be better off spending your time horeving on a Rashba? Why are you posting? Just to show us how unintelligible yeshivishe people can get? We have Ruvy Shmelzer's sefarim for that.
P.S. I recommend דוד to study the sefarim of Rav Zalman Hillel Fendel zatsal. They seem to be up his alley.
I had a back and forth with @Yehoshua privately and I think I now understand his question. Due to time constraints we are still in middle, but if I do understand correctly now, he wanted to challenge how one decides when to go with this ‘real’ reality as far as Halacha is concerned. When do we and when do we not follow this reality.
The answer is: never.
For example, if the Halacha is that Shabbos ends at 72 minutes, it must follow the spiritual reality of what days are, which means that, “72 minutes at every season and at every place must have some deeper existence in reality due to the same line of reasoning”. But this is an out of context oversimplification. We, and I mean in these later דורות, NEVER pasken based the true reality. We hardly know what this reality is or how it works. We only trust that the Tannaim and Amoraim understood this reality and they knew how it plays out in Halacha. We then follow them, ignoring the deeper meanings which we don’t understand, trying our best to decipher what they said. We are not in the business of figuring things out for ourselves because we don’t understand how halachic reality works. So we do our work. We learn up their holy words, we ask questions, we see all the relevant sugyos, we see what the rishonim had to say, we repeat this same process (of questions, seeing all relevant etc.) with all the rishonim, and we make our best bet based on the rigorous formula of learning the rishonim and poskim to come out with the correct Halacha.
If the Halacha turns out to be 72 minutes (which, for most who go through the sugya know that this just a minority opinion at least as far as מעיקר הדין) then yes, we must assume that “72 minutes at every season and at every place must have some deeper existence in reality due to the same line of reasoning”. Because Shabbos, and days, mean something and if that is the definition of day, that’s what it’s deeper meaning is. But that doesn’t really matter to us in Halacha. We have a system of how to come out with the proper psak to the best of our ability. (This explains the famous kezayis debate, but not for now…)
What my essay is about is what is really happening, meaning what the Gemara and Chazal was doing. Whatever Chazal did mean, it was based on this spiritual reality. We don’t pasken based on that, rather based on our best understanding of the Rishonim who did their best to understand the Gemara.
Yehoshua, I apologize for the confusion, I thought you were asking a whole other question and responded in kind. Let me know if what I’m saying now helps and if we are finally talking the same language.
Thank you for taking the time.
1. The Gr'a in many places discusses astrology, I'm not sure how familiar you are with other sifrei haGr'a. He was quite into it, as was the Arizal as is the Zohar.
3. Your main issue seems to be that you somehow got the impression that I think they were more developed scientifically back then. I said nothing of the sort. I was pretty clear that I think science does wonders and develops our world in a way nothing else did or could. I was clear that I don't think the wisdom of kishuf and avoda zara made any advancements in the scientific arena. I'm not sure what gave you the impression that I believe otherwise. All I said was that it was a different, and yes, way more advanced chochma, but not, by any means, in a scientific way. They understood many things about the world that we don't understand today, and those things are entirely unscientific in the classical sense of the word. But, for example, they understood what 'red' actually meant in its spiritual context (which this world is just a manifestation of).
Regarding the Greeks, they were more advanced only scientifically, but not in the 'true' (spiritual) wisdom. In that regard, when being compared with the חכמה of עבודה זרה, Greek philosophy was levels below. You seem to be conflating these two things.
If it was unintelligible to you, I'm happy to discuss specifics, but that sounds like an ad hominem more than a real problem.
I'd like to make a correction; I think you have astronomy and astrology mixed up. You probably meant by bringing up the sefer Great Zmanim debate in reference to chazal initially using the flat earth theory and then accepting the platonic model. (I read that sefer cover to cover and corresponded with the author many times.) Astrology in this discussion is in plain English - "star gazing", meaning telling the future based on the stars, and that should be in no different category than kishuf.
As far as Rabbi Mieselman and Schmeltzer, I don't think it is nice putting them together, since Rabbi Mieselman simply ignored some sources against his approach assuming its not the accepted mesora (not that he's correct) and Schmeltzer blatantly forges almost every רמב"ם חובות הלבבות כוזרי ספר העקרים ועוד to mean what he's saying when in the source they say the exact opposite.
I was referring to the footnote on page 78.
If you read what I wrote I clearly differentiated between Rabbi Mieselman and Schmeltzer.
However, I don't believe "Rabbi Mieselman simply ignored some sources". Any intellegent person who reads his sefer will see that his own sources show that he is wrong. I consdier this his greatest maalah,. He didn't hide the major sources. The marei mekomos regarding treifos are in his sefer. He also quotes the Rambam and the Rashba that Chazl sometimes trusted their contemporary חכמי אומות העולם, yet he expects the reader to trust his assertion that those 2 cases are exclusions to the rule.
I see both of their sefarim as a great chillul Hashem, as they are represented and viewed as the classic yeshivishe hashkafa, which thereby implies that to be yeshivishe one must be unintelligent and misinformed.
I see you are right about that, I must have missed that footnote. I am not sure if he is correct, I'll have to look into that more.
I didn't think you didn't see a difference between those two books, I just wanted to highlight the difference. I also found R' Meiselmans book troubling, but I don't think he was deliberately dishonest, only too convinced of his views to deal with all the sources. The latter is the worst book ever to befall our nation.
Actually, the Gra earlier in the siman (סק"ז) does quote sources that astrology is real. It is possible that when he is masig on the Rambam regarding kishuf he intends to include astrology as בכלל מאתים מנה.
I did more looking today, astrology is accepted by the same who believe in kishuf, and I think it's more inline with nature than Kishuf is. I think Great Zmanim debate is wrong, as the shulchan aruch just forbids following astrologers, which makes no difference if kishuf is real or not, and in Bais yosef there he mainly brings opinion that it is real. Even the Tur, the main reason he quotes the rambam is for the psak, and the Bach clearly goes this way. The Gr"a is already known what his opinion is, someone not too shabby in science, as well as the Shach and Maharshal there, as well as Radvaz sighted by pischei teshuva.
The Ramchal spends a long time on this in דרך ה', saying it is all part of השתלשלות הבראיה , something the Rambam rejects but is accepted by all mekubalim starting with Ramban. Additionally, the fact that astrology is not accepted can just be because it was forgotten, although I understand the Rambam felt otherwise, and although other ways were discovered to determine seasons ect. that doesn't mean there was never another way.
There are numerous pesukim that indicate kishuf really works. There are numerous statements from Chazal that say that astrology also is real. Those who say otherwise struggle to explain the pesukim and chazals. If the Rambam was around to ask, he'd probably give a good answer, but he is not, and others struggle to explain them.
As an example, how do they explain the incident with Shaul and the Ov practitioner? Shaul reached the level of a navi! Surely he would know that the Ov is fake, so why did he ask her all? If we could know that the Ov us fake, would a real Navi be so easily fooled?? See the Radak on those pesukim who offers some possibilities, but none of them answer this basic question, How could a real Navi not know that these things are fake?
I don't think it's farfetched to say, that believing that kishuf really works, was the mainstream opinion, despite what the Rambam says about it.
I don't have a problem if you say it is the mainstream opinion. Afer all, the Gra says so. I do have a problem when one makes an issue of mesora out of it and presents the Rambam as a daas yachid, when the Radak says that all the Geonim held like that, the Tur and Shulchan Aruch say like that, and the Mefarshei Hatora written after the Gra explain pshuto shel mikra like that.
See my comment above; I won't call the Rambam a Daas yachid but the majority is still against him. The baalei pshuto shel mikra also include העמק דבר ומשך חכמה who don't follow this approach. In addition, Rav Hirsh clearly writes in a letter that he made no attempt to figure out between the Ramban and Rambam, so explaining the pesukim one way is simply one option. I think the reason the Ramban is more accepted is because the Tanaim and Amoraim took it seriously, (I can't say for sure but I think the Rambam and Geonim had no problem saying they were mistaken) as well as the majority opinion is so, and Kabala supports this approach. You don't have to call it mesorah and you're not bound to believe it this way but I do think it deserves the title of being the accepted approach.
I mostly agree with you. Just curious; where is this letter from Rav Hirsh printed?
It's from a letter written in Hebrew to Rabbi Pinchos M.E. Wechsler,
and were published in 1976 by Mordechai Breuer in the Jerusalem journal Hama'yan. It was printed translated in Light Magazine (Volume XIV: 1-5) in 1978.
Being this article is not available everywhere I'll paste what he writes regarding this discussion:
.…"A related topic is the question of what is meant by magic, astrology, demons (sheidim), and related matters. Who dares to choose between Rambam and Ramban, following whom the entire Jewish camp is split in two on these matters?
…"Consequently every intelligent person may choose either opinion in these matters without being considered wrong. Alternatively - and in my opinion this is the truer way - he can admit that he has no clarity in these matters.
I admit unashamedly that I never made an effort to get to the
roots of these matters just as I never found myself curious to
inquire about the nature of olom ha-bo, the world after the resurrection of the dead, and related matters. For the reality of
these matters as of those is hidden from human vision and it
is impossible to know them with absolute clarity. Whatever is
said about them is no more than a guess - however close -
at what may be the truth; and there is no obligation upon Jews
to know these and related matters."
That letter is very humbling.
It is not an issue of mesorah. The Rambam said this, and the Rambam definitely is part of the mesorah. I did not think the Radak says that all of the geonim said like the Rambam. He quotes some who definitely did, and he asks on their opinion.
I know that there are some who explain the pesukim in line with the opinion that it is not real. Nevertheless, there are a number of statements of chazal that are difficult to align with this opinion.
Hi,
I would suggest that this theory can only be useful for someone who "isn't bothered" by the challenge of science vs. Torah to begin with. For such a person, the discussion is more of a fun mental exercise, but it's not so important if the answer is slightly to extremely far-fetched.
To someone who is genuinely troubled by these challenges - let's say he has a tendency to believe Torah is Divine but certain things give him pause - an answer like this IMHO will actually cause more damage than benefit. The reason I say that is because when people in the second category read something like this, which clearly comes from someone who is intelligent, they start to suspect that even intelligent people can twist logic to fit their own beliefs and it starts to call the mesorah into question.
Very solid point. From many of the responses it is becoming increasingly clear that you're probably correct. I really hope that no חילול כבוד שמים comes חלילה from me speaking what I believe to be the truth. I really do hope that anyone with an open mind can get themselves involved in how other people think and try to understand from their perspective, but perhaps I really am being too optimistic:(
I guess i just hope people can open their mind to Chazal and the Torah as much as they do to outside culture...
I was thinking about your comment more. I wish to add an important idea to the discussion: those that are really bothered are mostly because they are spending so much time reading about outside science and culture, but if they would spend more time seeing the depths of the Torah they would see a lot, lot, lot of the truths in that, to the point that a lot of the questions turn into nothing but mild nuisances, where we are okay even if we don't have the answer. This doesn't mean we shouldn't question ourselves, but the depths of the Torah do wonders to show where the truth lays.
Our Torah poses MANY more questions to the atheist than science poses to the Torah.
An atheist has the (imagined) advantage to just dismiss the Torah from his perview because he knows nothing about it, while we can't just discount science. And the atheist is loud about his views and his many clever words affect those who hear his arguments, especially since, "Hey! I never did see a river turn into blood!"
I think this brings out a really crucial point, that our perspectives are very heavily influenced by our surroundings and the company we keep, more than we think. A lot of people, especially in this kind of forum, will object that they are indeed being impartial and evidence based, but I beg them to think about that assumption.
By the way, can you give an example of a type of depth you see in the Torah that would pose a question to an Atheist's belief system?
I personally see many aspects in nature that I believe do that (even though I know that is out of style these days..), but I struggle to find something comparable from the Torah itself.
Well, to begin with, if the Nile river turned into blood for a week, for one who is a pure scientific 'rationalist', his heart should skip a few beats. The sun stood still, the Yam Suf and Jordan river both split, Rabbah brought his friend back to life and ...Hashem created the universe. These are very 'irrational' things to the scientific mind. @Shmuel brought up Tzaraas earlier which is a great example, and the fact that our deeds have the power over rain in the ideal world is a clear indication that there is more to the story than the scientific picture we experience today. You kind of have to pick which worldview you adhere to immediately.
You can then take the so-called rational approach and feel better about yourself when you are told that Hashem limits these things to very specific instances, but, while true, I'm not quite sure why this helps people feel better.
And the Rambam doesn't really help as much as people think he does. The main thing one learns about when learning the Rambam *correctly* is that world is hardly about science, and is far more about a 'world of minds', where the perfection of man and his main goal in life is this mind over matter perfection which allows what may seem like 'spiritually' and 'angels' and Hashem Himself for that matter to actually be 'rational', just as what we see with our eyes is completely rational to our worldview. In this new world, of minds, there exists an entire fully encompassing reality where the perfection of everything we see exists in a more pure, Godly form. See my comments to @Avraham below about this. His so called rationality actually stemmed from his hyperfocus on this point, which the Gr'a criticized him for.
(Incidentally, it is in his very world where what people call 'mysticism' exists, and the Torah is not quite so 'irrational' when getting involved in such a world. Our literature, and even their literature, is full to the brim with sources to this end, but as the Rambam says, in his Hakdama, "Concerning those who never beheld the light even for one day, but walk in continual darkness, it is written, “They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness”. Truth, in spite of all its powerful manifestations, is completely withheld from them, and the following words of Scripture may be applied to them, “And now men see not the light which is bright in the skies..." The Rambam elsewhere compares such people to the blind person who doesn't even know what light is and reflects his world view onto those who see and even calls them foolish for believing such nonsense.)
If you learn our Torah and discover this world, even if you personally don't experience it, it should give you major pause and tremendous humility towards these giants of refined souls, the angels of human race, who walked the face of this earth. The atheist has very little on them, except that he never beheld their experiences, and steadfastly and stubbornly refuses to believe that it exists despite the millions of indications. Oh right, because these indications came from some 'primitive' people who hadn't yet developed the 'light' of science...
The examples you give present a question to those who believe the Torah is divine but want to keep a rationalist viewpoint. I am asking for examples of things in the Torah that make it very hard to deny that the Torah is of divine origin (as you said, "Our Torah poses MANY more questions to the atheist than science poses to the Torah")
I wasn't sure which way you meant. If you mean that way than the first examples are out (unless we run down the road of the 'Kuzari argument'. And the other arguments, like you mentioned: from design, ontological, first cause etc, which although can be dismissed philosophically in a scientific world view, are still extremely more reasonable if there is a God but I digress as these are not specifically from the Torah). But the idea that there exists a world of minds is a big giant question on him, which he just dismisses as nothing simply because he never experienced it. There is so much stacked against his assertion of its meaninglessness. One needn't come from the Rambam, but from any philosopher before a thousand years ago. This idea of a world of minds is a huge (albeit, just a first) step in the right direction to move from the material atheistic ideology toward Torah ideology. If I'm still not being clear, let me know...
Sounds like a fair point that everyone comes in with their own biases.
What I'm very curious to hear from you and the rest of the authors on this blog (which btw looks like its exploded since the last time I was here) is have you guys ever at any point in your lives seriously considered the alternative that Torah is not Divine, to such an extent that you would have been willing to change your belief if you found something convincing enough? I myself have gone pretty far in terms of my searches, but deep down I knew I was sticking with the Torah no matter what I found
I will IYH have an upcoming post where among other things, I touch on this point briefly
Hi, did you ever address this in a follow-up post?
Another one on this general topic https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-legend-of-king-maryumana
Yes, https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/hes-just-a-historian-he-just-reports
Man, you really know how to keep me in suspense ;-)
In the meantime, a quick yes/no answer would be very informative
Sorry, it's not a yes no answer, but rather it is the wrong question! 😁 Sorry for the suspense, I will explain it more in the post!
I see you have a further reply that adds to this comment, but before I read it and possibly have my judgment clouded, I just want to point out that I really really respect that you can agree with my comment. That is very intellectually honest and super-rare from what I'm used to, so I wanted to commend you on that.
Thank you, that's sweet of you to say! I really do enjoy other viewpoints, I think others who have gotten to know me a bit can attest to that by now. And I'd love to keep hearing from you, here or in email...
There is not one geocentric model. There are at least two.
The Ptolemaic model, which has issues, and is well-known.
There is also the Tycho Brahe model, which is a combined geo-helio-centric model, and was proposed after recording the motions of the planets for decades. The sun and moon orbit above and around the earth. The planets orbit the sun.
I suggest reading up on him, and how it came to be that man the credited with recording the data Kepler stole and used to formulate his own modified Copernican model, had his own ideas rendered irrelevant historically.
Also, that video depicting the Copernican model doesn't do justice to the absurdity of what it has evolved into. To whit, the earth and entire solar system move in orbit around the Milky Way (which historically was always called the Great Rift - perhaps related to the Mabul), and the Milky Way is, further, careening through the universe.
This what is really happening, according to science: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuaPyQFrYk
Every human being on earth is subjected to four different vectors of acceleration simultaneously, while we can't feel or detect any of it. In spite of the constant motion in many directions, the planets and stars remain completely predictable and in their ordained paths. It's crazy.
That being said, my understanding is that our mesorah is compatible with a flat or globe earth (I lean flat, for many reasons). One thing it is incompatible with entirely is a moving earth that orbits the sun. No. Not happening. Period.
ר' דוד
I think that you are indeed correct in your general מהלך
However, I think that it can't be grasped without the neccessary הקדמות, which almost everybody (including most שומרי תורה ומצוות) unfortunately lack.
Good point, But I think that a) it's always good for the truth to be spoken, and b) it's not really hakdamos which are necessary, it's allowing oneself to believe 'primitive' ideas against the common current, which is very difficult for those involved in the outside world. But if one is open to the fact that this world has been created by Hashem and that He split the yam suf, the rest is easier. But one really has to be 'open minded' to come to terms! We are also proud of our open-mindedness, even though it's not not popular!
Also, I think the clarifications in the comments are important because they bring out which hakdamos are necessary...
Indeed.
What you calll 'open-minded' is indeed predicated on the הקדמה of יראת שמים!
I was travelling on a train so I had the time to read this. I'm at a loss for words to describe my reaction. So, to sum up, it's indescribable!
I've read this several times and I don't get it. How are you dealing with the bizarre medical cures of the talmud? Penned well after churban bayis sheini. And that match the cures historical evidence show was used by everyone back then.
No more pushing you off! The medicine question is a bit more complex, but to answer your specific question, the meaning of things didn't just disappear instantaneously, it went away slowly, and way after Bayis sheini they were still in touch with many of the real workings of the world.
(The complication is that when it comes to the human body, the workings of the body are more connected with the workings of the (non-physical) soul and so medicine actually changes over time as per mankind's connection with the 'true' reality)
Ok. So basically nishtenah hatevah. The talmud is not that old, and zero evidence has ever been found that the talmudic cures worked or ever could have worked. The changes needed in both the human body and disease would have had to be massive, to say they could take place in 1500 years without leaving a trace, well believe it if you wish.
You love oversimplifying to the point where you kind of miss the point being said. I wouldn't call it nishane hateva so much - the 'teva' hardly changed. The mind (which is the world of 'spirituality'), and our ability to connect with it is what changed, therefore, since we are less connected we are less affected, and our bodies run their natural course instead. If you wish to oversimplify that to nishtane hateva, do that at your own risk.
The fact that the body follows the mind is something we experience slightly even today, such as your heart racing when your mind gets excited (it's worth thinking about that), amongst other areas, but back then, when they were more in tune - more 'excited' - their bodies were affected more.
And you love long waffle which is not clear enough to deal with anything at all. Now you have thrown in the 'mind'.
Your heart does not race when your mind gets excited, by the way. It races when the mind influences the body to get excited preparing or active in physical activity. Not once does the heart start racing when the mind is excited with a bit of tosfos.
So their mind/bodies were more in tune with the fetuses of cats than today? This is getting embarrasing now.
My point exactly - the mind influences the body. Fetuses of cats were not medicinal so its part of a different discussion.
This is wrong. It's a good thing you didn't become a doctor. As if you could have gotten into medical school.
Blood letting used to be effective?
Does it make sense that a medical treatment that was universally practiced, all over the world, for thousands of years had absolutely no effect?
https://greensboro.com/study-iron-fuels-staph-germ-research-suggests-that-bloodletting-may-have-slowed-staph-infections-by/article_6ca404bb-be1b-5f5b-9a98-685ca4955a46.html
Yes. Does it make sense that billions of people today believe the Pope can give blessings and cure the sick?
If bloodletting was a religious experience like prayer or l'havdil the pope, you would have a point. But it isn't, so you don't.
Looks like you don't know how to read. No surprise there. Avraham's question wasn't if hospitals currently do bloodletting. But you are hopeless.
Absolutely! Avodah Zorah was also.."universally practiced all over the world.
Respectfully, Yekutiel, you really missed the boat here, I'm sorry to say. Avoda zara was practiced all over the world precisely *because* of its tremendous wisdom, not because everyone was a bunch of blathering fools who couldn't tell their right hand from their left. They were as smart and logical as you and me, but they were privy to a ton of knowledge that we are not privy to. I'm am not, chalilah, advocating avoda zara; I am am only saying that it wasn't coming from stupidity. This is a common misconception (perhaps based on the psukim which make avoda zara sound silly as per leitzanusa d'avoda zara, perhaps more simply because it *seems* silly to us) but that's what it is, a misconception. There are plenty of sources to this affect, see here for starters: https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-torah/comment/16805864
he also missed the boat because there is no comparison between worshipping gods and medical treatment
If they didn't know better it would be a placebo.
If it worked, it worked. No matter how it worked.
You are good at Google arn't you? Like halochoh, you can find a source for everything in literature. Go find a hospital or doctor that offers blood letting. Not a witch doctor, by the way.
Look up the term therapeutic phlebotomy.
Yes!
Rav Sherirya and Rav Hai Gaon had a simple answer. It was the science of their times. They weren't bothered by the fact thag our knowledge develops over time.
First of all, although this isn't a simple discussion, they seem to have been wrong about that, as I discussed in the post. See comment below: https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-acceptance-of-torah/comment/16520004 (Although there is always the possibility that they were doing 'kiruv' work, as to not make Chazal sound silly to those who thought it was obviously ridiculous, but I'm not sure I buy that. Maybe this really is the answer though. Even if so, the Rambam clearly held what he held. And the Rambam, as I wrote above, is a slightly more nuanced discussion.)
Who decides who's correct? Are you arguing with Geonim? You dare think these sages would lie to do Kiruv?
The Rambam says chazal decided on Tereifot using the science of their times as well(even though we have no right to change those). His Masora was that of the Geonei Bavel.
Chalila I'm not arguing with the Geonim, but the G'ra and co are. But no, they wouldn't lie, rather they are simplifying things for the masses by saying something that isn't technically incorrect since the masses aren't up to understanding the clearer truth and it was calling a greater chilul Hashem to explain properly for those loudmouths. But what I am saying is pure apologetics (though there are sources that hold that the Geonim were doing as I said); it's completely possible that they meant it, as the Rambam clearly did, and in that case, Chazal taken literally prevail over the Gaonim's forced interpretation...
Is the Gra more authoritative than the Geonim? The literal interpretation is that they are offering medicinal cures like the Geonim said...
1st of all, it's not just the Gr'a, it's the Ramban and many many others.
The reason why they are in fact more authoritative is because they explain themselves quite well and point to the fact that they have information which these Geonim and Rishonim didn't have. These Geonim and Rishonim held that this world is an opposite of the next and we can't affect the uppers from here (as the philosophers held). To roughly quote myself from an earlier comment, just because I think I said it well then: Basically, there are two planes of existence, the one we experience daily, the physical world which we see and touch and breath. And the עולמות העליונים, where our Neshomo (or in more Rambamic terms, the intellect and mind), Malachim, etc. and HKBH reside. In a Zohar world everything happens on both planes; this world is a manifestation of the next. The Rambam believed that never the twain shall meet and therefore any time they seem to, he explains it as happening in the “real” world, the עולמות העליונים. This is, more or less, the one single area the מקובלים disagree with the Rambam. The disagreements with the Rambam and the Ramban are always about this one single point. Avraham’s Malachim, Sheidim, Korbanos, astrology, magic and so on." And in our case, medicine is the same.
The Gr'a represented this side that the two always meet, especially when it comes to the mind and body. Incidentally, kabbalah is רובא דרובא about sheimos, which, like our speech, is the mode of 'communication' between the two worlds.
The 'rationalists' today (I don't mean you, Avraham) who know never were zoche to understand a word of the Arizal and Gr'a (and never understood the Rambam properly either for that matter. Or, for the same matter, they also never understood Aristotle...) write it off as two camps as if they have the right to follow one over the other, but in reality there's no question that the Rambam וסיעתו would 100% agree had they known what the Ramban and friends knew. It's not a machlokes - the Rambam was 99.999% of the way there and he would've loved to take the next step. (The Chida does bring those that have proof that the Rambam was zoche to take the next step at the end of his life, see Sheim Hagedolim, erech Rambam)
רב האי גאון himself wrote that there were מחלוקות between גאוני בבל about these issues.
And חכמי אשכנז וצרפת certainlt did'nt agree with the חלק מהגאונים והרמב"ם who held this, and there מסורה goes back to תקופת הגאונים as well
I never said they argues with each other. The Rambam learned his ratiobalist mesora from them. We don't need to follow חכמי צרפת in מחשבה. Just like we don't need to follow מורה נבוכים.
But it doesn't change the fact that the Rambam is of the Amudei Horaah did not agree with many חכמי צרפת. The Rambam is certainly not a heretic ,and neither those who follow him.
So I don't understand what you meant to say.
Of course. That is the answer. We know it is because we now have historic medical books from that era with very similar cures. That part of talmud is simply not torah.
Can I ask a simple question: Did those cures actually not work back then? If they didn't work, what in God's name were even the 'scientists' of the times talking about?? If it don't work, why were they doing those stupid, inane things? I promise you they weren't that stupid. Obviously there actually was something going on...
Because they didn't know about triple blind placebo studies and all that. Enough people got better naturally to convince them that they worked. Even today, duff medicines also appear to work on many occasion. Have you or somebody you know never had an extreme stomach ache when you thought you would need to be hospitalised only for boruch Hashem for it to dissappear without trace by itself? There is a reason why a common response from doctors is go home and rest for a few days.
And when they didn't work and the chap died, ir was for his sins/yissiurim shel ahavah/tzadik v'ra lo etc. The medecine not working was simply not on the agenda. After all, EVERYBODY used that medicine and they wouldn't do so if it was a load of rubbisg :)
PS I don't dispute that some of the herbal remedies may have helped. It's the exotic ones involving dead cst featuses and suchlike that have issues (only products from a white cat can treat a snakebite from a white snake sort of thing.)
Enjoy your revisionism of the past. I don't buy that they were quite so stupid.
Depends on how you define 'stupid', doesn't it. Plenty of intelligent chareidi Jews belive the COVID vaccine is a hoax. Will not give a measles vaccine. Will believe in all sorts of bizairre segulos. Believe the nonsene from Kupat Ha'ir. Is that stupid?
Science was quite primitive back then. People didn't know of bacteria before the microscope. Life expectancy wasn't quite high. If you had no idea how the body worked what choice would you have but to stick with whatever stuff previous generations believed in?
Actually, life expectancy rose mostly because of improved hygiene, better agricultural practice etc.
Yes. Hygiene wasn't a thing back then because mankind was uneducated for the most part. That's why they turned to witch doctors like the Africans today. Blood Letting is just another example.