[Avodah] eye pains on shabbat

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:50:54AM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
: I heard from Dr. Steinberg many years ago (and I believe is in his
: encyclopedia) that #3 implies evolution. Furthermore, evolution on a
: scale much faster than scientists would agree. i.e. no scientist would
: agree to evolution in the human body over a period of 2 thousand years
: not to be speak of decades and centuries. This is one of the reasons
: (among others) that scientists speak in terms of millions of years for
: natural evolution. For some halachot nutrition can explain changes. In
: many others we have to assume the gemara should not be interpreted
: literally but as aggadah/metaphorically
: 
: What all this assumes is based on Rambam, RAbhR, and Geonim...

According to RAbhR, the gemaros can be taken literally. He is saying that
Chazal were simply doing what rabbis today do -- use the best science
at their disposal. But they are literally correct.

The discussion of the gestation periods of variosu animals is aggadita,
and thus metaphor (as per the Rambam, Maharsha, Maharal et al), and
therefore the wrongness of the science has nothing to do with the validity
of the mashal-nimshal.

But when halakah is decided on the basis of the science, it's hard to
say they meant what looks like scientific assertions as metaphor.

Replying to RnTK, RET writes:
: > Some recent studies show that common eye problems are linked to heart
: > disease. An international group of researchers found that diabetic
: > retinopathy, a leading cause of blindness in the U.S., is also a warning
: > sign of heart failure....

: Rbn Katz has defended Chazal and shown one should not be quick to be
: machmir against them Nevertheless, I assume R. Elyashiv was talking
: about some external injury to the eye and not internal problems that
: affect the eye.

I don't know why you assume the gemara RYSE (yehi Ratzon that he continue
to progress to a a refu'ah sheleima) relied upon was speaking about
injury over illness.

But in any case, it presents a rule about eye problems, not that one
particular condition (limited to diabetics) that is a mi'ut of such
issues. A horse voice is NOT considered piquach nefesh, but at times
it's pre-cancerous or even ch"v not "pre-"! Finding one particular case
where chazal's words stand up is insufficient as a defense.

I have a similar problem with R' Dr Josh Backon's post of many years back
that showed some sort of link between the liver processing both fish
(in particular eicosapentaenoic acid) and meat (stearic acid) at the
same time and many of the symptoms of psoriasis (assuming it's related
to tzora'as). <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol03/v03n091.shtml#03>
Even if you dug up some causal connection, it's obviously not a common
effect. Chazal don't speak of things far more likely and far more
obvious. I have a hard time believing this is what they're talking about.

We have to do more than dig up theories that appear to match.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is a drop of intellect drowning in a sea
micha at aishdas.org        of instincts.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507