<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"><html><head><title>[Aspaqlaria] Science
and Halakhah</title><link rel="stylesheet"
href="https://www.aishdas.org/asp/wp-content/themes/my_hueman/style.css"
type="text/css" media="screen" /><meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body>Aspaqlaria has posted a new
item, '<a href="https://www.aishdas.org/asp/science-and-halakhah">Science and
Halakhah</a>'<br>
<br>
<font size=+1><br>
<div class="pf-content">
<p> I think many discussions of the <em>gemara </em>about rice not producing
<em>chameitz </em>head in the wrong direction.</p>
<p>The definition of <em>chameitz </em>isn’t entirely scientific. After
all, if you mix wheat flour with 100% apple juice, it also does not produce
<em>chameitz</em>.</p>
<p>(Ashkenazim have a <em>minhag </em>for healthy people to avoid “egg
<em>matzah</em>“, but that’s a tangent I found too long to go
into. Sticking to <em>halakhah</em>…)</p>
<p>Second, there is a scriptural basis for the choice of the 5 grains that can
be used to make <em>matzah </em>and whose leavened dough qualifies as
<em>chameitz</em>. Israel is praised for its ability to grow 7 kinds of crops,
the first two of which are grains (<a
href="https://www.sefaria.org/Deuteronomy.8.8">Devarim 8:8)</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p class="he" dir="rtl" lang="he">אֶ֤רֶץ חִטָּה֙
וּשְׂעֹרָ֔ה וְגֶ֥פֶן וּתְאֵנָ֖ה
וְרִמּ֑וֹן אֶֽרֶץ־זֵ֥ית שֶׁ֖מֶן
וּדְבָֽשׁ׃</p>
<p class="en" lang="en">a land of wheat and barley, of vines, figs, and
pomegranates, a land of olive trees and honey;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And the <em>beraisa </em>(<a
href="https://www.sefaria.org/Menachot.70a.17">Manachos 70a, bottom</a>)
says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p class="he" dir="rtl" lang="he">כוסמין מין חיטים שיבולת
שועל ושיפון מין שעורין כוסמין</p>
<p class="en" lang="en">Spelt is a type of wheat, oats (?) and rye are [each]
a type of barley.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The two species of grain in the <em>pasuq </em>comprise a total of 5
strains. The list of grains that can yield <em>chameitz</em>, like the list of
liquids, isn’t entirely scientifically defined. Not everything called
“leavening” is called “<em>chimutz</em>” or fits the
prohibition.</p>
<p>And yet, the Yerushalmi (<a
href="https://www.sefaria.org/Jerusalem_Talmud_Hallah.1b.1">Challah 1b</a>; <a
href="https://www.sefaria.org/Jerusalem_Talmud_Hallah.1b.1">Pesachim 17a</a>)
records a dispute between the Chakhamim, who said that <em>chameitz</em>
cannot be made from rice flour, and Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri who said that it
could. So, the gemara suggests, “So check it!” A scientific
determination! But it turns out they did check it, but the two sides disputed
about “<em>iqar bediqasah</em> — the essence of the check.”
The argument was over how to determine the result.</p>
<p>It is science’s job to define the possible physical states reality
could be in. It is the <em>poseiq</em>‘s job to tell us which of those
states are included in a halachic statement, and which not.</p>
<p>To the Rabanan, the physical state they saw when they looked at what
happened to rice dough was in the halachic set of states we call
<em>sirchon</em> , to Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri, the result is <em>chimutz.</em>
Knowing the science is not enough to know how to categorize it
halachically.</p>
<p>And we cannot confuse the same word, such as “leaven”, when
used as a scientific term and when used as an English translation of a
halachic term. And it must be even more confusing in Israel, where the terms
coincide without any translation. But this is a case of homonyms.</p>
<p>We have a similar and more severe issue when it comes to defining death.
The AMA adopted the definition of brain death. This isn’t a “we
know what death is better now” situation. It’s a group of doctors
and medical ethicists deciding what moral value to put on certain states of a
human body, and not on others.</p>
<p>Halakhah may still retain a different definition. Or it may not; a
<em>poseiq </em>may decide that Chazal used approximations for things we can
now measure. Such as, perhaps <em>halakhah</em>‘s definition of death
should distinguish between someone whose heart is running because their brain
functions well enough to keep it running, and someone whose heart is running
artificially. But that is a halachic question that has to be answered by
<em>posqim</em>.</p>
<p>Just as a discourse on the biochemistry of fermentation and leavening could
help inform someone about how the <em>halakhah </em>should be decided, how its
definitions should be applied. But not what <em>halakhah</em>‘s
criterion is for the definition itself. </p>
</div><br>
</font><br>
<br>
You may view the latest post at<br>
<a
href="https://www.aishdas.org/asp/science-and-halakhah">https://www.aishdas.org/asp/science-and-halakhah</a><br>
<br>
You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.<br>
Best regards,<br>
micha<br>
micha@aishdas.org</body></html>