[Avodah] Abiogenesis

[Michael Makovi]

>What I find most interesting is that the Gemara believed in
>spontaneous generation which has been scientifically disproven as the
>world was proven not to be flat. What I find to be ironic and
>paradoxical is that only God can create something from nothing. You
>would think this would have occurred to the great minds of the Talmud.
>True, their argument could conceivably have been that God put that law
>into motion, but it still could have raised a red flag.

I disagree. Yes, we say that only God can create ex nihilo. But if you
believe in spontaneous generation, you'll just say that God is creating
maggots and mice every moment. Or you'll say that God set the law in motion
and let it operate - you say it should set off a red flag, but I don't see
why. After all, God created the law, not man. Man cannot create ex nihilo,
but why can't God create an ongoing ex nihilo in nature?

>The following came from a link given in a previous discussion by Reb
>Micha: http://www.aishdas.org/book/bookA.pdf

>My Rebbe, R. Dovid Lifshitz zt"l, used a similar idea to explain
a different
>problem. The Gemara explains that maggots found within a piece of meat
>are kosher. The reason given is that they were born from the meat, an idea
known
>in the history of science as "spontaneous generation". Therefore, halachah
treats the
>maggots identically to the meat.
>Spontaneous generation has since been disproven. Maggots come from
>microscopic eggs, not abiogenetically from the meat. Now that we know
>that the underlying science is wrong, need we conclude that the halachic
ruling
>is also wrong?
>Rav Dovid taught that the halachic ruling is still applicable, because
>the microscopic eggs and maggot larvae are not visible, and therefore
>(like the insects in our first example), lack mamashus. The only cause for
the current presence
>of maggots that we can see is the meat. Viewing the question in terms of
human experience, the meat is the
>only source of the maggots. Bugs or eggs that are too small to be seen,
while we
>might cerebrally know they are there, can?t have the existential impact as
those I could,
>and ought to have, noticed unaided
.
I've never seen this argument as viable. It makes sense to say that if the
creature cannot be seen, it is mutar - thus bacteria are kosher.

But since when should the creature be mutar because its reproduction cannot
be seen? I see absolutely no logic in saying that since we cannot see it
reproduce (but we davka can see the adult), we pretend it spontaneously
generates. By that logic, we could say that whales spontaneously generate,
because I'm going to assume that no one in Chazal's time saw a whale give
birth - ditto for sharks. Therefore, whales and sharks ought to be
considered spontaneously generating and thus kosher. And come to think of
it, I'm sure that there are many other insects and arthropods whose
reproduction we cannot see - why shouldn't they be mutar too?

Besides, if Chazal knew the eggs were there, but just didn't see them, we
have a logical contradiction - how did they know they were there if they
couldn't see them? They'd say they WEREN'T there! And we arrive right back
at spontaneous generation.

Besides, if all the scientists of the day believed in spontaneous
generation, how much sense does it make to say that Chazal say almost the
same exact thing but mean something totally different? That's just
pilpulistic. The simplest explanation is that when Chazal and the Greek
scientists say the same thing, they mean the same thing. And there are SO
many examples of science in the Gemara that matches up completely with Greek
science, it cannot be coincidental. The simplest and most logical
explanation is that the rabbi went to the local scientist to ask a she'elah,
just like they do today.

I'll strengthen this: Rabbi Slifkin asks, what sense does it make to have an
expression "eggs of lice" if they aren't really eggs of lice? Answer:
according to Greek science (Aristotle I think), lice DID lay eggs, but they
believed no lice hatched from them! They believed these eggs were just
little white stupid useless thingies, and actual lice were born from sweat
or whatever. Therefore, we have "eggs of lice" but lice spontaneously
generate nonetheless. It also answers the question asked by every mother,
"What do you mean you can't see lice eggs?"; answer: you davka CAN see them,
but lice don't really hatch from them, so who cares whether you can see them
or not; they're just called "eggs" because they look like little lice eggs,
but not because lice actually hatch from them.

Mikha'el Makovi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071228/efaf7738/attachment-0001.htm>