tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21083596.post4908476567512882479..comments2023-07-01T06:21:23.426-04:00Comments on Torah, Science, Et Al.: III-A-1Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21083596.post-31553393622181946432011-08-31T22:46:34.937-04:002011-08-31T22:46:34.937-04:00I disagree. You have badly misunderstood the text....I disagree. You have badly misunderstood the text. Please read it again carefully.<br /><br />First, I can't have misquoted R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach because I quoted the entire thing verbatim. For the reader's convenience I have quoted him again below.<br /><br />R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach says that he does not know whether anyone ever disagreed, or even whether anyone could have disagreed with R. Avraham ben Harambam about the sages' imperfect scientific knowledge. That's a pretty strong statement. With regard to R. Avraham ben Harambam's position, R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach is not even sure that a dissenting opinion exists.<br /><br />There are two distinct questions at play in his discussion: (1) Why do we not follow Chazal's medical pronouncements? (2) In general, might Chazal have erred scientifically?<br /><br />He says that multiple answers have been given to question (1). Note that those answers need not be mutually exclusive. It is perfectly possible, for example, that aspects of nature have changed since Chazal's time, and that Chazal made scientific errors.<br /><br />Regarding question (2), he says that he is not aware that anyone argues with R. Avraham ben Harambam; he is not sure whether anyone even<i> could </i>argue.<br /><br />He never says that the halacha does not follow R. Avraham ben Harambam. I don't know where you're getting that from.<br /><br />Your assertion that "he does not remember an exact source" for "the view of the majority" is nowhere found in the text. What he actually says he doesn't remember is why he had earlier advised that R. Avraham ben Harambam's opinion be presented as a view that "some say," rather than being presented without those words of introduction.<br /><br />Here's the quotation in full:<br /><br />הלום ראיתי בס' נשמת אברהם פי"ד ס"ד שמביא דברי רב שרירא גאון ור' אברהם בן הרמב"ם ומנה ענין זה כאחד מן הטעמים שאין להשתמש ברפואות המובאות בתלמוד. והגרש"ז איוערבאך שליט"א העיר ע"ז (בריש הספר) דנכון היה להביא שיטה זו בשם "יש אומרים" והעיקר הוא כשאר הטעמים. ושאלתי להגרש"ז שליט"א מי הוא זה שחולק על דברי רב שרירא גאון ור' אברהם בן הרמב"ם. וכתב לי וז"ל: כעת אינני זוכר אם יש מישהו שממש חולק או אפילו אם יש מישהו שיכול לחלוק עליהם, אך יתכן שכוונתי דהואיל ורבים כתבו הטעם של שינוי הטבע ולא הזכירו כלל מפני שיפור הידע בדרכי הרפואה בזמנינו, לכן העירותי שראוי לכתוב בשם "יש אומרים", ובפרט שבעניני שבת יש שמתירים מלאכת שבת אף שלדעת הרופאים אין שום סכנה, עכ"ל. עכ"ל<br /><br />[Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach was asked why the views of R' [sic—HWMNBN] Sherira Gaon and the Rambam's son – that the medical and scientific knowledge of our Sages was that of their times – should be listed as a minority view. He replied:] "At the present I don't remember whether there was anyone who actually disagreed with their views or even whether anyone has the authority to disagree with them. However, rabbinic authorities typically explain disparities in medical and scientific understanding [between the views of our Sages and contemporary science] as the result in [sic—HWMNBN] change in nature. They do not utilize at all the reason that medical knowledge has advanced from the time of our Sages. That is why I commented that this view should be classed as a minority view. Especially since concerning the laws of Shabbos, there are rabbinic authorities that permit violating the Shabbos [in certain circumstances that our Sages say are medically dangerous] despite the fact that contemporary doctors assert there is no danger at all.["—HWMNBN] [translation in Daas Torah, by Daniel Eidensohn (Jerusalem: Emunah, 2005), p. 138]DEShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02795113792190583167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21083596.post-64185591848487132522011-08-31T20:04:44.869-04:002011-08-31T20:04:44.869-04:00This list is hogwash, anyone looking at it should ...This list is hogwash, anyone looking at it should NOT be impressed by its length! Make sure to look up each source individually. Just for example this quote from R' Shlomo Zalman (as I wrote above is the OPPOSITE of what he held!)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21083596.post-32155878426915302472011-08-31T19:53:11.190-04:002011-08-31T19:53:11.190-04:00You entirely misquoted R' Shlomo Zalman Aurbac...You entirely misquoted R' Shlomo Zalman Aurbach. He said there WERE shitos that held that, however the halacha does NOT follow them because of the "view of the majority" for which he does not remember an exact source!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com