Torah, Chazal & Science Hardcover – November 11, 2013

In this book Rav Meiselman has written an up-to-date authentic treatise on Hashkafa (world view) in tune with mainstream Jewish sources. He emphasizes that proper hashkafa is firmly based on Torah Sheh-Baal Peh (the oral Torah) and he gives examples of both correct and incorrect Hashkafa. He frequently cites his uncle and mentor, Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, and it is evident that Rav Soloveitchik’s influence on his thinking goes beyond the citations. Throughout the book he emphasizes that one cannot arbitrarily interpret the Torah to correspond to the latest ideas in the secular culture. He constantly reiterates that Torah interpretation is not a free-for-all.An important point Rabbi Meiselman makes in his book is that any definitive statement of Chazal (the sages ob”m), whether in Halacha or Nature, is absolutely true. Rav Meiselman is not suggesting this view as something original with him — it represents mainstream Jewish thought, the consensus of both past and present Gedolai Yisrael.Rav Meiselman deals courageously with many issues of Science and Torah. For example, he engages head-on the discrepancy between the scientifically determined age of the universe of 13.8 billion years and the traditional Jewish version of 5775 years and arrives at an interesting and authentic resolution. He notes that the scientific determination depends on the critical assumption of uniformity, that the laws of physics are the same today as they have always been – allegedly for the past 13.8 billion years. All extrapolations into the past rely on this assumption. The assumption cannot be proved, but it is accepted only because it seems reasonable. Without this assumption, there could be no field of cosmogony. Meiselman asserts that this assumption is not accepted by Torah which holds it to be false, making any conclusions based on it worthless. According to the Torah, there are four periods in history, each with different laws of Nature. They are: (1) the six days of Creation, (2) the period from Creation to the flood, (3) the period of the flood itself, and (4) the period from the flood onward. We cannot know what those laws were during the first three periods, so an extrapolation back into any of those periods is without merit. Meiselman says (I think in the name of his uncle) that scientists have no legitimate business engaging in studies of cosmogony because it rests on a false assumption.Rav Meiselman also addresses the issue of changes in Nature (nishtaneh hatevah) over time and from place to place. The principle of nishtaneh hatevah is invoked by Chazal to account for discrepancies between some Biblical statements and what Chazal observed in Nature. The principle was also used by Rishonim (Torah Sages from the 11th to the 15th centuries C.E.) to account for discrepancies between some passages in the Gemara and what they observed in Nature. Meiselman notes that this principle is not an invention of the Gemara nor of the Rishonim. There is an abundance of scientific evidence that biological nature has indeed changed over time and may vary from place to place. There is, for example, irrefutable evidence that lactate intolerance has appeared in humans sometime during the past few thousand years and that the residents of Tibet have a distinctive suite of traits, which must have appeared during the last few thousand years, that adapt them to low-oxygen conditions, and these traits are genetically based. I have devoted a major portion of my latest book, The Evolution Revolution, to a new theory that evolution occurs through a mechanism built into living organisms that responds to environmental stress by adapting the organism to the new conditions. I give several examples of these adaptive changes and I describe the biological mechanism by which it takes place. The principle of nishtaneh hatevah is not the cop-out attributed to our Sages by their critics, but it is now recognized as a well-documented phenomenon of nature.Meiselman strongly criticizes works that assert that, in matters of Nature, Chazal were no more knowledgeable than the wise men of other nations, and that the views they expressed about Nature were merely the wisdom of their time. Meiselman refutes this assertion, which opposes our traditional belief that all definitive statements of Chazal were derived from the Torah. They were absolutely true, because the Torah is absolutely true.He notes that the Torah encompasses all knowledge, but he cautions that we have long ago lost the ability to extract much of this knowledge from the Torah. We lost it because of our sufferings from dispersions and oppressions. This ability was partially lost even to the Sages of the Mishna and the Gemara. They had tradition that they could recruit to retrieve some of this knowledge, but much of it was clouded and blurred. Because of this lack of full clarity, there were disagreements among the Sages about matters of both Halacha and Nature. We believe that when those disagreements were resolved, they were resolved with siyata d’shmaya (the help of Heaven), and their final resolution is therefore to be accepted as absolute truth. We have to believe that the guiding hand of Heaven saw to it that the resolution of a disagreement is therefore always a correct and proper derivation from Torah. In many disagreements among the Chazal, however, a resolution was not reached, and is recorded in the Gemara as tayku (unresolved). Meiselman emphasizes that when a pesak (a ruling) was issued, whether about Halacha or Nature, we can be confident that it was a true derivation from Torah and therefore absolutely correct. Only when a discussion of Nature ends without a definitive pesak, the opinions of the Sages reflect no more than the Science of their day. According to Meiselman, the instances of non-resolution indicate that their ability to derive Science from the Torah was limited, for the reasons stated above.The few negative reviews this book received were evidently the result of misreading or misunderstanding what Meiselman wrote, or even a deliberate attempt to distort his meaning to erect a straw man that could be easily knocked down. The egregious review on these pages by a reviewer named BEN is an extreme example. It is telling that a review (published elsewhere) that BEN cites at length is by Natan Aviezer, who himself distorted both Torah and Science in his own book In the Beginning, in a vain effort to show that the account of Creation in Genesis is compatible with the big-bang theory of the origin of the cosmos.BEN also distorts and misconstrues Meiselman in his discussion of the passage in Pesachim 94b. He reads from this passage (which Meiselman also cites and refutes charges such as BEN’s in advance) that Chazal believed that the sun follows a strange and impossible path, presumably demonstrating that they had no special knowledge of any facts of Nature. Here Chazal cite the wise men of Israel as saying that during the day the sun travels east to west below the rekia (sky, vault of heaven), and at night travels west to east above the rekia. They cite the wise men of the other nations (presumably the Greek philosophers) as saying that during the day the sun travels east to west below the rekia and at night travels west to east below the earth (both were using a geocentric coordinate system). Chazal then say that the opinion of the wise men of the other nations appears to be more correct. Since they deferred to the other opinion, it is clear that they felt they did not have a mesora (tradition) on this issue. Meiselman points out here that there is no indication that the “wise men of Israel” were the Torah Sages, but were probably Jewish astronomers. Obviously, Meiselman does not claim that the view of the wise men of Israel was Torah-backed absolute truth. For BEN to say otherwise is a misreading of the book.The book is a tour de force. It supplies an important need today for an authoritative, traditional, Jewish view of the relation between Torah and Science. The book is especially necessary today because of the plethora of works that vainly try to make Torah fit with current Science. The copious footnotes of sources are a gold-mine of information for anyone wanting to delve deeper into the subjects he treats.

Great exposition of torah and science (and many other fascinating areas such as allegories, time, aggadah) and the reliability of the sages of the Talmud (CHAZAL) based on the teachings of CHAZAL, the major Geonim and Rishonim (with a major focus on RAMBAM (Maimonides)) and Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik. (This may answer many negative reviewers who have criticized the book for not mentioning their favorite rabbi/torah personality.) Negative reviews of this book (here on amazon and elsewhere) have largely been unfair and not entirely accurate (obviously I am not familiar with every last negative review, but of the ones I've seen they have been particularly nasty and unwarranted). Rabbi Moshe Meiselman, shlita, presents a strong case for the reliability of CHAZAL in matters beyond halacha (Jewish law) including matters of science. Unlike the picture painted by many negative reviews, Rabbi Meiselman's argument is nuanced and refreshingly honest. For instance, Rabbi Meiselman states numerous times that CHAZAL were not omniscient and that in numerous instances they admit when they don't have the answer by explicitly leaving the matter unresolved. However, he shows that the traditional view is that CHAZAL were on a much higher level intellectually and morally and much closer to Mesorah (Jewish tradition) than those who came later, especially people living today. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman brings down numerous authoritative sources showing that the divine wisdom in the Written Torah and the Oral Torah goes beyond halacha (a major and obvious example is creation). Being closer to the source of this wisdom (Sinai, Moshe, Prophets, etc.), CHAZAL were in a much better position to determine its scope and its proper exposition. Contrary to what has been stated in many negative reviews, Rabbi Moshe Meiselman states that there are areas where CHAZAL did use experimentation or relied on outside knowledge. However, it is much more limited and nuanced than detractors will lead you to believe (e.g., many of the classic examples of the blemishes on animals and the movements of stars at night are addressed and acknowledged in the book; however, these are sui generis. This does not apply to all statements that a person today would consider to fall into the "natural sciences." The fact that CHAZAL readily admitted to when they used experimentation or relied on outside knowledge further supports the argument that in cases where they make a definitive, unqualified statement about something, this means they did not rely on experimentation or outside knowledge. Otherwise, they would say so. Another example is medical remedies which is one of the few cases where the knowledge is not from Mesorah and this is acknowledged in the book and by the Geonim. I think the biggest problem is that people see these few examples and then want the license to dismiss any statement by CHAZAL that they feel is contradicted by the latest theory of modern science.) Another bizarre line of attack is that this book shockingly states that certain views are heretical, such as disparaging the sages and questioning their authority. If this is shocking to you, then you will have trouble reading many other classic Jewish texts (e.g., Mishneh Torah). Some people seem to be objecting only to the inclusion of statements regarding the "natural sciences" into this category. My issue with this objection is who is to determine when something falls into the "natural sciences" and when is CHAZAL wrong and modern science right. To me, this looks like a cop-out to essentially worship modern science (i.e., whenever modern science/academia says something is true then it is true and these people want to go reinterpret the Torah based on the latest scientific theory. If this is how you want to interpret the Torah, then that is your prerogative, but it isn't traditional Judaism). I recommend you read this book for yourself and check the sources. Do not be discouraged by negative reviews.

This is an excellent book. I enjoyed reading it both as a Jew and as a professor of physics. The author correctly emphasizes the limitations of the scientific method. Unfortunately, most people uncritically believe everything scientists claim. For example, the age of the universe is derived assuming that the physical laws were the same for billions of years, which is based on the observations of the two recent centuries at most. The result reflects the assumption. The Mesorah is certainly a more superior knowledge. This point is made very clearly in the book.

Great book! Goes through many subjects in depth, but keeps the langue simple so anyone can understand it. As a student in a mainstream college, there were many questions that I had a hard time explaining to my fellow classmates. This book was a valuable resource.

It is a book that covers a multitude of Torah vs science subjects pertaining to all of existence. It's long and I intend to finish the book.

Lots of paper and very little substance. The young intellectual cannot be dismissed with crucial questions being swept under the carpet. The running theme of the book is to dismiss scientific facts out of hand. There are much better books around to convince the Baal Teshuvah of the integrity of Torah and mesorah. See for example "The Science in Torah" by Yehudah Levi. Rabbi Meiselman's book is fine if you simply want to have 'faith'. There are better works which convince me about the truth of Torah.

Great great book. a recommended read for any one who takes this subject seriously. It was a great price for what was put into it

Very clear presentation according to the orthodox Jewish tradition.