4

Can one assume that there is a perfectly rational approach to superstitious ideas? May one go out of one's way to come up with rational approaches if these ideas bother him? My thinking is, LeHavdil, along the lines of being Dan LeChaf Zechuth - judging someone favorably - when you are pretty sure someone is doing something wrong.

Instead of assuming the sages meant exactly what it sounds like they said, even if it offends my rational consciousness, and facing the painful choice of A) The sages got it totally right or B)The sages got it totally wrong, can there be a C)I've got a really good explanation that perhaps nobody's ever thought of before?

Inspired by the following questions (and many others):

What can a pregnant woman do if she already stepped on nails?

Good and Bad Omen - on something that can be calculated in advance

Community
  • 1
Seth J
  • 41,606
  • 7
  • 85
  • 245
  • 1
    If we're going to have both [tag:rabbis] and [tag:sages-chazal], we're going to need good tag-wikis explaining when to use which. – Double AA Jun 07 '12 at 21:33
  • Related (thematically if not topically): http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/4037 – msh210 Jun 07 '12 at 21:37
  • depends which branch of orthodoxy you ask. – Menachem Jun 08 '12 at 02:05
  • @Menachem, does any branch just allow/encourage people to just come up with explanations of their own? Conversely, does any branch say that this is absolutely inconsistent with our beliefs, that we must say Nishtaneh HaTeva', or that we are missing some knowledge that the sages had? – Seth J Jun 08 '12 at 02:18
  • @SethJ: Look at the reaction to Slifkin's books – Menachem Jun 08 '12 at 02:33
  • 1
    @Menachem, look at the reaction to RaMBa"M's. – Seth J Jun 08 '12 at 02:49
  • @SethJ Absolutely there are forms of Judaism that allow and encourage people to come up with explanations of their own. – Charles Koppelman Jun 08 '12 at 14:25
  • @CharlesKoppelman, Wait, don't misunderstand - I'm talking about mainstream Orthodox groups. If Reform encourages people to explore their beliefs freely (I'm not sure that's accurate or inaccurate, btw), that is not what I'm asking. If one shul on the south side of Chicago that runs as traditionally Orthodox but for survival's sake has an open-door policy and the rabbi has a study group once a month to present off-beat ideas to attract more members, I'm not sure I'd buy that either. – Seth J Jun 08 '12 at 14:32
  • On the other hand, isn't Nishtaneh HaTeva' a 12th century version of this very idea? – Seth J Jun 08 '12 at 14:33
  • @SethJ Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "come up with explanations on their own". Independent thought has been valued in traditional Judaism since the Talmud (at the latest). See this article on chiddush by orthodox rabbi, R' Julian Sinclair. And I've always learned that we don't hold by Chaza"l on science and midrash anyway. – Charles Koppelman Jun 08 '12 at 16:33
  • 2
    How is accepting the science of today any different than accepting the science held to by the Rambam or l'havdil the statements of Chazal (according to the opinion that they were just going off the science of their day by mistake c'v)? What is the basis within Judaism for concluding that today's science is certainly correct to the point that we need to bend Divrei Chazal to fit it? – yoel Jun 12 '12 at 19:42
  • @yoel re the credibility of modern science vs historical science: I'll take something that is safek right over vadai wrong any day. – Double AA Jun 13 '12 at 00:12
  • @DoubleAA over Divrei Chazal that they obviously thought significant enough to include in Gemara? – yoel Jun 13 '12 at 01:25
  • @yoel I stated that I was responding to the first question you asked. As for your second question above, the answer is Kavod HaTorah. I have enough Kavod for Chazal to make sure that all their words which I know they deliberately chose are meaningful and not gibberish. – Double AA Jun 13 '12 at 03:33

1 Answers1

2

One shouldn't lightly dismiss a statement of chazal that seems outdated without trying to understand something from it. Sometimes there's another level to what they are saying and sometimes the idea can be understood within modern science also. For example, some of the statements about demons can apply to other hidden harmful forces, such as bacteria (see https://judaism.stackexchange.com/a/9746/369). I think it is worth being "dan l'chaf zechuth" to see what explanation one can find in a puzzling statement. However, even if there isn't another explanation, there's no reason to view them negatively for following the 'science' of their time. Also, some superstitions may in fact be forbidden, and the Rambam forbids some of the cures mentioned in the gemara.

Community
  • 1
Ariel K
  • 10,999
  • 34
  • 53
  • Following your answer on that page (and something I've wondered about), is it then logical to state that the custom to wash with a cup after using the bathroom is mostly outdated now that we have soap and hand sanitizers? – Seth J Jun 12 '12 at 19:20
  • see Netilat Yadayim: Ritual of Crisis or Dedication? here: http://www.atranet.co.il/gordon/netilat.pdf – josh waxman Jun 12 '12 at 23:19
  • 1
    @SethJ It probably has to do with how much you view it as a takkana or not. Tosfot Pesachim 7b for example seems to take it as obvious that one makes an Al Netillat Yadayim when washing after leaving the restroom. – Double AA Jun 13 '12 at 00:09