One of my first substantive explorations into the Torah blogosphere was with regards to the ban of R’ Slifkin’s books. This essay is not intended either to condemn or defend the ban which many have written about almost to the point of ad nauseum. However, in my surfing of the Torah blogosphere, I was struck by the fact that so many people’s emunah seemed so fragile because of a perceived irreconcilable conflict between Torah and science.
There are a number of approaches available. I use the term “approaches” because IMO, there may not be any real answers that solve every problem relating to one’s degree or level of Emunah. FWIW, this issue is not a 21st Century issue but can be found in Hilchos Teshuvah where we find that the Raavad champions “Emunah Pshutah” or “simple faith” as opposed to a faith based upon a scientifical or philosophical basis. Echoes of this dispute can be found in writings of the Ramban and Rashba. One can postulate that the development and flourishing of Kabbalah under the Ari was in reaction to a rationalistic system of viewing hashkafic issues that had no answer for such cataclysmic events as the expulsion from Spain.
That being said, RYBS commented in many different contexts that our challenge is to be a Shomer Torah UMitzvos despite the presence of doubts. IOW, the challenge is neither to walk away from Torah observance because of the presence of real doubts on many issues or to believe that one’s responsibility is to solve issues that not even Moshe Rabbeinu received answers to such as Tzadik vRah Lo, Rasha vTov Lo..Simply stated,-one should not water down Torah to make it palatable to science and those who believe in “scientism” or water down legitimate scientific discoveries or questions to make science palatable to Torah. There are some conflicts that cannot be resolved. OTOH, many of the books authored by militant athesists such as Dawkins, Gould and Hitchens strike me as displaying less knowledge of Torah Judaism than a graduate of an elementary day school, yeshiva or Beis Yaakov. IMO, such books are hardly a threat to Torah. R D Lamm has an excellent essay on this issue as well where different levels of doubt are set forth. I don’t have the title in front of me, but it is worth reading just on what constitutes a legitimate sense of doubt.
Given the above, I would argue that our responsibility is to gain as much an understanding of what Chazal viewed as the Ikarie Emunah which are set forth in Chumash, the Siddur and Machzor. Basic concepts such as Bchirah Chofshis, Akedah. Am Segulah, Bris Avos, Yetzias Mitzrayim, Bris Sinai, Kabbalas HaTorah, TSBP, Malchuyos, Zicronos and Shofaros and Teshuvah seem IMO the concepts that Chazal stressed in developing a bedrock sense of Ikarie Emunah. As a corollary, I would maintain that a study of the Taryag Mitzvos and how they apply differently to a Kohen, Levi Yisrael, woman and minor would show that our Mesorah presented and demands different levels of Kedusha for different people. From what I have seen, we need to work more on these Ikarie Emunah and to be able to believe in them-even if there is no physical or archaeological evidence that would support them. I strongly believe that a belief that would be predicated solely or primarily on the evidence supporting these events is susceptible to a human challenge.
Guide to abbreviations:
IMO – In my opinion
FWIW – For what it’s worth
RYBS – Rav Yosef Ber Soleveitchik
IOW – In other words
OTOH – On the other hand
TBSP – Torah She Baal Peh
Hi Dave.
>> Maybe the Torah and science can’t be completely reconciled. If that is true, then there are two possibilities: 1) science is wrong; and 2) Torah is wrong. If one is inclined to believe that #2 is more likely, how, then does one continue to approach one’s Judaism?
Maybe they can. This is a quite vague sentence. When searching for truth, inclination (watch out for the evil one!) can be quite dangerous.
>> This seems to me to skirt the issue– the real question is WHY one should believe in Judaism. Of late, Judaism has seemed little more than an endless series of pointless requirements that ruin meals, interrupt work, and generally take me away fromt things I’d rather be doing. All that may be a sacrifice I’d be willing to make if I believed that there was a real purpose to it, or that God really wanted me to do any of those things.
These are profound, interesting and most important questions. Some suggestions of approach: Have you investigated the origin of the western society’s moral values ? The history/survival of the Jewish People ? The Torah and its (infinite) depth ?
The concept of emunah is not really like “faith” or “belief” that we learn in western society. Rabbi Akiva Tatz’s book “Letters to a Buddhist Jew” has a very interesting chapter on belief. You would probably enjoy this book. Have you read “Living up to the Truth” by Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb (available for free online) ? Have you searched the audio sections at simpletoremember, aish, … for topics of your interest?
The Maharal (16th century Prague) explains that the only way to teach anything is to first get the student to ask a question. Because a question creates a lack and a need — a space that the answer can then come and fill. But without first a question, there is no room for the answer. (read from Rabbi Shraga Simmons).
So, I guess you are on the right path.
all the best on your journey !
If you don’t ask specifically about the why, you won’t get answers about it. Go right to the top, to the major Jewish thinkers today.
Thanks for the response. Plenty of experts seem to be willing to give me lots of advice on how to believe. This seems to me to skirt the issue– the real question is WHY one should believe in Judaism. Of late, Judaism has seemed little more than an endless series of pointless requirements that ruin meals, interrupt work, and generally take me away fromt things I’d rather be doing. All that may be a sacrifice I’d be willing to make if I believed that there was a real purpose to it, or that God really wanted me to do any of those things.
A search for truth can mean disregarding your inclinations or even going against them.
If you’re in doubt about something, go to the most available high-level experts in that thing (in this case, Judaism) to try to get some clarity. Many such experts are glad to respond, even to phone calls or emails from total strangers.
Don’t assume, for example, that your own understanding of a specific Torah view in relation to a specific scientific view is accurate and complete. Don’t assume that all apparent contradictions can’t be harmonized or resolved.
It’s also helpful to make a spreadsheet with the large and small details of what you want to understand. Putting it on paper helps you formulate the right questions to the right people.
The point of this article seems to be how to deal with doubts and continue believing. What about when the doubts bring you to the point where you really don’t believe?
Maybe the Torah and science can’t be completely reconciled. If that is true, then there are two possibilities: 1) science is wrong; and 2) Torah is wrong. If one is inclined to believe that #2 is more likely, how, then does one continue to approach one’s Judaism?
Nice article Steve.
Though I am quite drawn to this subject and consider myself to be a rationalist, over the years I’ve been able to make my own peace with it. I’ve done this in two ways.
Firstly, neither our knowledge and/or understanding of the biblical creation narrative nor of the science of creation is complete. So, there’s really no expectation on my part that they need to fit perfectly together.
Secondly, because I have strong emunah it’s easy for me to openly accept and entertain scientific understanding that *seems* to contradict more traditional thinking. This may sound simplistic but it goes like this: I can accept that the universe is billions of years old, the Earth is millions of years old, and there was some sort of divinely guided evolutionary process *because* I believe that Hashem can do anything. And because I believe he can do anything I’ll have no loss of emunah if, when Moshiach comes, he hands out a Spielberg produced DVD showing that the universe was created in 6 days.
Good points, Steve (IMO FWIW)!
Those who are involved in formal or informal kiruv efforts need to take this to heart. The idea of initially waving off or explaining away all conflicts to get the seeking Jew’s attention, and only later introducing emunah, appears misguided. People who are taught things like “Creation/nature and the Big Bang according to a Jewish scientist” and later see the technical problems with these ingenious fixes can be worse off than when they started.
We know that rapid assimilation has created an emergency, but that is not a reason to be panicked into shaky kiruv methods. Only methods fostering true emunah can have lasting effects.