Big Questions

Pammy Brenner submitted a bunch of questions to the blog - here are some responses:

Hello Pammy,

These are wonderful questions. I’ll try to address each one but the most important thing I’ll do is direct you to sources which will be far more helpful.

1. How does one reconcile science with Torah? To what degree can one accept scientific beliefs?

This is a broad sweeping and  great question and one that all religions in the world (most likely the majority of people on Earth) have to address.

Paraphrasing a friend of mine getting a PhD in cell biology in NYU, there are many theories raised and rejected in scientific research. Many “facts” are later disproven. So, it’s important to think of science as a dynamic area rather than something fixed.

Also, some areas of science work beautifully with the Torah and other areas of science pose, at least at first glance, a challenge to Torah. The scientific fact that the moon waxes and wanes and the sun setting work fine with the Torah. But the age of the universe, evolution, and miracles do require some more thought.

Let me be clear, there are many sophisticated and learned Jews who believe in science and the Torah. I do strongly believe one can reconcile or live comfortably in both worlds.

Before I go on I urge you to watch the debate at this link. The debate is between R. Lord Jonathan Sachs, the chief rabbi of England, and Richard Dawkings, a scientist and ardent and public atheist. Although they raise many fascinating issues their central debate is about if or how science and religion can coexist. 

I’m going to address three of what I believe to be the most challenging religion-science issues:

1.      Age of the Universe: to quote people smarter than I (maybe R. Lord Jonathan Sachs) science tells humanity the “what” and “how” and religion tells humanity the “why.” Or, to put more poetically: science tells humanity how we got here and religion tells humanity what to do once we’re here. Hence, the goal of prakim 1-2, the creation story, in Sefer Bereshit, is not to tell us how single celled organisms became dinosaurs but rather it is meant to teach us values and religious messages.

Why would G-d mislead us and tell us the world was created in seven days if it wasn’t? I don’t have a definitive answer but four thousand years ago a more detailed version may have been too confusing, or to convey the values most effectively a shorter seven day version of creation was necessary. But, most centrally, once one makes the paradigm shift that the Torah isn’t primarily concerned with science this becomes a less bothersome question.

2.      Evolution: This answer is for evolution but also for the age of the universe question. We believe that the world is 5773 years old. However, science declares that the world and the evolution of humanity took billions and millions of years respectively. One approach is to claim that each day of early creation was really a stage of creation. So, while we have 5773 years, that is from a point when Adam had evolved from some less developed being. Hence, billions of years may have elapsed from day one to day six.

3.      Miracles: There seem to be two schools regarding how to understand miracles. Some rationalistic thinkers claim that G-d may have woven miracles into the natural order. This seems to have great support from the Mishna in (Avot 5:6) where it says that G-d created certain miracles right before the end of the six days of creation. If so, while miracles break the normal order they do not break the natural order. A more common approach is that indeed G-d who created the world can suspend elements of the natural order in certain instances. I don’t think that this needs to be a fundamental conflict. One can champion miracles and still, in 99% of cases, believe that science guides the world.

It should be noted that the answers above assume that one need not reconcile the conflict. However, there are number of Jewish scientist who attempt to fully reconcile science with religion.

Here are some books to read which adopt the “reconcile” approach:

1.      Dr. Gerald Schroeder- Genesis and the Big Bang, The Science of God and The Hidden Face of God

2.      Slifkin, Natan- The Challenge of Creation: Judaism's Encounter with Science, Cosmology and Evolution

3. How closely should we follow the Torah Umadda philosophy? How much "Madda" are we allowed to let into our daily lives? How much are we supposed to incorporate into our Torah views of the world?

Early on in my years at Gush I spent a Shabbat with a friend who was in a yeshivish yeshiva. This was a yeshiva that looked very unfavorably upon general studies. On Friday night I ate by the head of the yeshiva. Immediately, upon telling him that I was learning at Gush, he commented in a mocking tone: “Oh, the literature yeshiva!” I was shocked but I learned, and since then I’ve come to see it more clearly, that most religious Jewish communities look down upon college education and are staunchly opposed to non-practical general studies, English, history, etc.

Over the years my understandings and feelings of this topic have evolved but I think what I experientially knew to be true in high school is what guides my thinking about this topic today.

People often begin this conversation the wrong way. People ask: is it muttar or assur to read Shakespeare? The starting point should be different: how can you be the best human you possibly can be? And, of course, “the best human” from an Orthodox perspective means having a deep relationship with G-d.

However, what does it mean to have a relationship with G-d? I won’t fully answer it now but it must include becoming the best person possible. A person who is deep and passionate and caring and honest etc. etc. etc.

How do you get there? For some this means full time learning. For others it means chessed. For others it means making tons of money and giving it all to tzedakah. For others it means maddah.

There is no chiyuv to learn maddah. And in fact, for many people I wouldn’t push them to learn maddah. But I do believe that many of those people could gain from maddah. Maddah is a way to work both the mind and heart in powerful ways.

It is clear, however, that Torah is both the most direct way to a relationship with G-d and to the development of one’s humanity. And it is this point where people often start the conversation: How does one justify reading Shakespeare when a more direct root, Torah, exists? Each person must craft a meaningful and honest balance of Torah, the most direct way to reach G-d, and maddah, a less good way to reach G-d. Some people are wired in a way that hiking in nature creates inspired moments and others a beautiful poem.

Let me highlight this with two personal anecdotes:

1.      When I was younger I went with my family to Les Miserables (now it is something I wouldn’t do because of my understanding of the halachot of kol isha). While my guess is that most people know the storyline I’ll summarize it quickly. Jean Valjean, the protagonist, who suffered in prison for nineteen years for stealing a loaf of bread, is caught stealing from a kind Bishop who invited Valjean to spend the night with him. The Bishop defends Valjean against the police and, in a moving song which ends up inspiring Valjean to change his life, the Bishop sings: “What we have we have to share….” Chazal certainly speak about the value of generosity. But the Bishop’s (a Bishop mind you!) beautiful voice in the context of a very moving story allowed this phrase to impact me greatly. When I think about themes of chessed and giving this phrase comes to mind. I now know more sources and more halachot of chessed etc. but the emotional pull to do chessed comes in some part from what I experienced while watching Les Miserables.

2.      The Tannach and Gemarah are full of discussions about death and mourning. Some of them I know and some I don’t. However, reading Edgar Allen Poe’s The Raven gave me both intellectual and, more importantly, emotional insight into the haunting feeling of pining for a lost loved to return.

An amazing article which addressed this topic in a thorough and sophisticated fashion is R. Lichtenstein's "Torah U'Madda: Congruence, Confluence, and Conflict" printed in Judaism't Encounter with Other Cultures: Rejection or Integration? (1997).

Good luck,
R Yair Hindin