[Avodah] Evolution, Hashgachah and Tehillah

[Chana Luntz]

RJR writes:

>  I'm not sure if it helps anyone think about this differently, but
> we've had "random" number generators generating seemingly random
> numbers for a long time, yet the numbers are not truly random as they
> are generated by a computer following instructions.

Well I was thinking about something a bit different, but in a way along the
same lines.  Somebody posted a reference on Areivim to this kosher light
switch http://www.kosherlightswitch.com/

On reading the FAQ, to the best of my understanding, this is an attempt to
go beyond mere grama by using randomness, allowing for genuine failure at
any given attempt.  On the other hand ultimately the desired result (ie the
turning on or off of electricity) has to be achieved (otherwise the thing
will not work as desired).  That is, from our point of view, we are only
concerned with result, (eg the ultimate turning on or off of the
electricity) and when we daven, I would have thought we almost always ask
for a result, without a particular concern about the pathways to this
result, and therefore, as with this switch, there can be allowance for
genuine randomness in the particular pathway or attempt.

I am also not quite sure why this question is being posed by evolution
davka, I thought that precisely the same issues were raised by the nature of
quantum mechanics - all options are possible, and indeed coexist, but
ultimately only one option is observed.

But getting back to randomness at a more macro level, I wonder if it would
help to use an example, and not such an esoteric one, one that clearly has
the kind of personal impact that RYK is concerned with, and one that is not
found in the distant past.  Take my son, David, for example.  My son, as
many of you know, suffers from a condition called lissencephaly (smooth
brain), which means in practice that although he is 10 years old, he
functions at about the level of a six to nine month baby, has frequent
epileptic seizures etc etc.  The condition is caused, according to modern
science, by a "random" mutation in the LS1 gene.  This means that there is a
small change (in his case a deletion) in the LS1 gene, that cannot be found
in either my husband or myself (this has been confirmed by gene sequencing,
ie with the advances in modern medicine today, this change between our
genetic makeup and his can be "seen").  Now according to the theory of
evolution, this is precisely the kind of random mutation that drives
evolution.  This one happens to be a very destructive form, as, given that
he is incapable of sitting up, not to mention walking, he is just not going
to have children, thereby preventing this mutation from going into the gene
pool (but note, if he were capable of having children, they would have a
fifty percent chance of having this condition).  On the other hand,
beneficial mutations in other children that serve to increase their survival
chances would most likely be passed on.  Thus my son David, as anybody who
sees him in his fully supportive wheelchair can testify, does not win the
race for survival of the fittest (and note certainly would not have reached
the age of 10 years old without the advances of modern medicine -
particularly peg feeding when necessary - this BTW gets us into the
interesting question as to the extent to which modern medicine is in fact
"anti evolutionary" in the sense that it can operate to negate the survival
of the fittest in the classic sense). 

So the question becomes (and this is independent of the theory of evolution
in the classic sense, ie the development of species), how do you relate to
my son David theologically?  Especially if you believe in hashgacha pratis.
My son David is not just a "failure" of the evolutionary system, he is also
a "failure" of the mitzvah system, in the sense that he may be defined as
Jewish, but he will never become chayav in mitzvos, nor even in chinuch,
because the level of daas is just not there and not ever expected to  be
there. Therefore all these ideas about "asher kidishanu b'mitzvotav
vitzivanu" just do not apply to David, who cannot do any of this.   In the
view of the doctor who first diagnosed him, we as parents have been
"spectacularly unlucky" (figures are somewhere in the vicinity of one in
half a million for this condition).  How you relate to my son David
theologically seems to me to be exactly transferable to questions of
evolution - HaShem is only concerned with the yechudei segula, and hence
mistakes like David happen along the way and are left to mazel.  HaShem is
actually determining the placement of children like David into families like
ours, it just appears random from our perspective because ultimately the
statistics work.  Most of the cases out in the olam are due to bad mazel but
some cases they are due to hashgacha pratis and we can't (or often can't)
tell the difference. We need the random existence of children such as David
so that HaShem can create a particular child in a particular circumstance
for whatever reasons He may have without it appearing an open  miracle.
Tephila might have avoided the placement of a child like David into our
family (or the existence of such children altogether).  Miracles might occur
and David might completely confound medical science (despite him showing no
sign of doing so) if enough tephila was applied. 

Once you have found a theological answer to the question of the existence of
my son David, then it seems to me that your answer to the challenge posed by
the question of randomness versus hashgacha and tephila in respect of the
theory of evolution will follow.  And you cannot avoid giving some sort of
theological answer to the reality of the existence of my son David (even the
atheist perspective that the existence of children like David proves the
lack of existence of a benevolent god is a form of answer) even if you never
engage with the "Theory of Evolution".

Regards

Chana