[Avodah] Rav Keller's JO article on evolution

[Zvi Lampel]

Mon, 26 Jun 2006 from: Gershon Seif <gershonseif at yahoo.com> wrote:

> On page 16 of the recent JO, Rav Keller brings proofs that when the Torah 
says a day in Mayseh Beraishis, it is literal... 

> Here's my understanding of what he wrote. 

> 1. Ein mikra yotzai midai pshuto. Since the Torah has definite lines of 
demarcation of time and evolution assumes one long continuum, it would 
be against this basic rule of learning Torah to twist mayseh Bereishis 
into an evolving creation....<

Of course, I have much to say in support of Rav Keller's compelling arguments, but to focus on the first point, summed up above, I thought it would be informative to quote a passage from Rav Yosef Albo's Sefer HaIkkarim. Rav Albo (whose work vies mostly with Christianity, rather than, say, Karaism) champions peshuto shel mikreh in understanding both the mitzvos of the Torah and the Torah's narratives. For our purposes, however, I will just include the comments regarding narrative.

Similar to the Rambam's Moreh Nevuchim, although the work does not explicitly formulate the qualifying role of Chazal and mesorah in either mitzvos or narratives, the use of Chazal and mesorah as a categorical yardstick for validity of renditions permeates the Sefer HaIkkarim. He is clearly loyal to their adjustments to peshat.

I would also add a principle in analyzing the statements of commentators, and indeed anyone who's statements are worthy of interpretation: When one uses words that have a primary, usual contextual meaning (e.g., "day," to mean a 12 or 24-hour type day) and also a secondary contextual meaning (e.g., "day" to mean a year or an era), then--when the context alone does not reveal the intended meaning (e.g., "In my day we never questioned Chazal")--the primary, usual meaning should be taken as the one understood by the commentator--especially if that commentator does point out other instances where the secondary meaning is the intended one.

Now, the quote from the Sefer HaIkarrim which, interestingly, chooses the word "day" to illustrate the necessity of abiding by the peshuta shel mikreh.

'IKKARIM, CHAPTER 21 (pp.192-194)

"The Torah is called a "testimony" (aidus --Ex. 25:21 and Ps. 132:12). This is to signify that the Torah must be understood by pashtus (the normal meaning of its words), just as the testimony of witnesses:

"When witnesses testify, we do not say, let's tweak the time or interpret the testimony to keep the witnesses innocent of perjury. To illustrate: let's say they testified that Reuven killed Shimon on the first day of the week, and then their testimony is proved false. We do not say, let's interpret their testimony to prevent them from being false witnesses. Let's say that by "on the first day of the 'week' " they meant on the first of the seven-year sabbatical cycle (the "week" of years). Or let's say that by "he killed him" they meant he refused to give him alms, which would support him; or they meant he did not teach him the Torah, [which is, after all,] the true source of life in the World to Come. We do not say any of this because a testimony must be understood naturally, and if witnesses are shown to have given false testimony, they must be put to death, and we do not interpret their words in ways to save them...

"There are many passages in the Torah that, according to all the sages, bear allusion to noble, sublime and intellectual things, such as the story of the Garden of Eden, and the four rivers, and so on. Nevertheless, none of these sages deny the reality of the natural meaning. They hold that while those things do exist in reality, they at the same time also bear allusion to more noble and celestial things. Thus, the Mishkan and its kaylim were real things, although at the same time they bear allusion to sublime and celestial things.

"[Regarding Chazal's describing of the Four River of Eden in metaphysical terms:] The human body shares many things with the lower forms of life. It shares a tongue, a set of teeth, and a pair of lips for eating. But at the same time, these organs exist in man for a nobler purpose: a means of speech and expression for lauding God and speaking His praises -- a nobler purpose than that which they serve in animals. Likewise, in the world of nature, we find four [literal] rivers and so on, which at the same time allude to more noble things.

"[Proof:]The Rabbis say that Jerusalem on earth represents Jerusalem in Heaven (Ta'anis 5a). They [obviuosly]do not mean to deny that Jerusalem exists on earth and serves an important purpose -- namely being the dwelling place of the Shechinah. Nor, just because the Bible says, "Thus shall Ezekiel be unto you as a sign" (Ezekiel 24:24), do we deny that the man Ezekiel actually existed. In the same way, we must understand that the other things in the Torah that allude to nobler and more sublime matters are nevertheless also true in their natural meaning. This is especially true of the commandments. They do allude to noble and sublime things, but at the same time they are important in of themselves, and have a purpose in being [physically] performed. This then is the reason the Torah is called a testimony: to signify that its words are true in their pashtus meaning, and that they must not be interpreted figuratively so as to abolish the pashtus meaning."

Zvi Lampel