There are others who say that Chazal
did not know the actuality of nature but knew it only via the best science of their era. Among them are Rishonim like R’ Avraham ben HaRambam.
For many of us who have studied both the Talmud and nature
via science at even a minor level the second opinion seems a lot more plausible.
There are too many scientifically based statements on nature in the Gemarah
that are clearly not accurate.
One of the more famous ones is the idea that lice do not
sexually reproduce. This fact impacts on Halacha. One of the 39 forbidden Melachos
on Shabbos is Netilas Neshama – killing an animal. The Gemarah explains that it
is only forbidden to kill an animal that reproduces sexually. One is however
permitted to kill an animal that reproduces asexually . This is the opinion of the
Rabbanim (as apposed to R' Elazar) and this is the Halacha today.
Lice, says the Gemarah, do not reproduce sexually and therefore
one is permitted to kill them.
Rav Yitzchok Lamproti (Pachad Yitzchok) was around during the time the
microscope was invented. He said that now that we know that lice do sexually
reproduce, it is therefore forbidden to kill them on Shabbos. All Achronim
argue with him and say that since the Gemarah says it is permitted, it stays
permitted in spite of our new knowledge.
What is left unsaid in all of that discussion is the apparent assumption Chazal were
mistaken about the actual science. The
only question is whether this new information is relevant.
Now it should be said that there are still ways to allow for
Chazal to not be mistaken about this. One way is to say that the lice that the
Gemarah refers to is not the lice we know of today and that in fact it is that
lice which is permitted to kill. The lice that we know of that does sexually
reproduce is forbidden to kill.
Another way to look at it is that only lice that one can see
with the naked eye sexually reproducing is forbidden. If one needs a microscope
to see it, then for Halachic purposes it is still considered asexual
reproduction.
But it seems to me that the most logical explanation is to
say that they did not know then what we know today simply because they
did not have the means to know it. Microscopes had not been invented yet.
There was a relatively recent Halacha Sefer published called
Orchos Shabbos that discusses this Halacha (14:30) and mentions the position of
Rav Elyashiv (note 47). Rav Elyashiv says that one should be Machmir and not
kill lice on Shabbos as a general rule. But he also says that according to the
strict letter of the law, one may kill lice on Shabbos.
Why be Machmir? It’s possible that the lice of the Gemarah
are not our lice and therefore killing our lice may actually be forbidden. But
the fact that he says that according to the strict letter of the law one may
indeed kill lice on Shabbos, that means that he believes the lice of the
Gemarah are indeed our lice. And yet we now know that they sexually reproduce.
Why then did Chazal say that they don’t? I think there is
really only one way to interpret it. Chazal simply didn’t know that because
they had no way of knowing it in their day. Rav Elyashiv may feels as Rav Eliyahu Dessler
did - that even though Chazal were wrong in their explanation, the Halacha was
indeed transmitted masoretically and remains in effect.
We may kill lice but for reasons other than those stated in
the Gemarah. The point for our purposes being that since Chazal did not have
the means to know they made a mistake
about the reality of nature in this case. One can conclude that even R’
Elyashiv concedes that microscopes have increased our knowledge of nature beyond
that of Chazal. Is there any other way to interpret that? Even if we say that
Halacha follows only what we can see with the naked eye, the fact is that what
they saw with the naked eye did not reflect reality.
It therefore is very troubling that there are those who say insist
that it is forbidden to believe that Chazal were mistaken in matters of
science. There are just too many instances of nature quoted in the Gemarah that
contradict what we know today. That lice produce asexually is just one error.
Avraham Ben HaRambam must have concluded that Chazal were
mistaken for similar reasons. But it isn’t only him. It appears that even R’
Elyashiv may have conceded this point. And yet it is said in his name that it
is forbidden to believe it.
In my view it is a gross error to say that it is heresy to
say that Chazal were mistaken in science. Not that one must have this view. But
to say it is forbidden to believe it is a huge mistake.
