There is a short article in the current Jewish Observer. It was written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. He was in fact my elementary school principle in Detroit. He is a man I greatly respect and admire. But he is controversial figure in the greater Orthodox world in the sense that many feel his expertise on Rabbi Hirsch’s philosophy is biased towards a Charedi interpretation. But he is entitled to that interpretation, as are those who disagree with him as I do.
The current article was written as a response to many criticisms he received about an earlier article he wrote on the subject of the Theory of Evolution. In defending his position that Rabbi Hirsch rejected it, I would note with a bit of irony he actually ends up quoting something by Rabbi Hirsch that shows his complete support for science …even to the extent that if the Theory of Evolution were ever proved, then he would accept it within a Torah framework.
This was made clear by what Rabbi Elias also mentions at the end of his essay in the context of why Rabbi Hirsch rejects evolutionary theory: “(I)t is accepted by most scientists - but only because it is the sole theory that dispenses with a Divine role in the origin of our earth – not a reason that Rabbi Hirsch would ever accept.”. There is an extra-ordinary statement later added in brackets that should not be glossed over: “until there will be proof for evolution”. This statement is very huge. It implies that if evolutionary theory were ever to be proven, then according to Rabbi Hirsch we would have to accept it.
If memory serves me correctly, I have never seen such a view espoused by any serious defender of the literal interpretation of the Sheshes Yimei B’reshis. The view almost universally espoused by them is that if science contradicts the Torah narrative, reject the science. Period.
Now I am not an expert in Rabbi Hirsch’s approach to science and Torah in general nor am I an expert in his approach to the Theory of Evolution in particular. But this lone statement by Rabbi Elias is indeed very telling and raises questions about those who so easily reject science if it contradicts the Torah narrative. There is no point in denying that Rabbi Hirsch would resort to allegory if he had to. We know that Rabbi Hirsch respected science greatly. And went to the trouble of saying the following: ( S.R. Hirsch. Collected Writing, volume 7, page 57):
"The bible does not describe things in terms of objective truths known only to G-d, but in terms of human understanding… The Bible uses human language when it speaks of the "rising and setting of the sun" and not of the rotation of the earth, just as Copernicus, Kepler, and other such scientists, in their words and writings, spoke of the rising and setting of the sun without thereby contradicting truths they had derived from there own scientific conclusions. Loshon Bnei Adam, "human language", which is also the language of the Bible, describes the processes and phenomena of nature in terms of the impression they make on the human senses, without thereby meaning to prejudice, in any manner, the findings of scientific research."
He was very clear about that. It makes me wonder what Rabbi Hirsch would say about the scientific proofs… not about evolution which indeed still has many unanswered problems… but about the ancient age of the universe. Surely he would accept the science on that issue. Surely he would not reject the famous Tifferes Yisroel on this subject.
Would Rabbi Hirsch be critical of those who banned Rabbi Slifkin’s books? Or would he “get on his hands and knees” and beg Mechila for his views? I think the latter is untenable.
So even though all the questions about evolution are legitmate, if science were to somehow prove that evolution occurred, it seems as though Rabbi Hirsch would reconcile the Torah narrative where a literal interpretation would become an allegorical “Lashon Bnei Adam”. This is quite a remarkable revelation about Rabbi Hirsch and it totally counters the approach by much of current rabbinic leadership on this issue who like Rabbi Chaim Dov Keller reject almost any science presented on issues like this, no matter how clear the evidence might be.
I believe that this is Rabbi Hirsch’s approach and in my view any articles that imply otherwise are misleading.
