avakesh

Kosher signs

A kosher animal can be distinguished by two signs: completely split hoofs and chewing its cuds. Animals with one characteristic but not the other are specifically excluded. The hoof must be completely split, so that there is a crack running through the hoof from front to back. For example, a rabbit has a split in the front but not in the the back of its foot and is not kosher.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe offered a homiletic explanation.

The hoof must be split entirely, from the top to the very bottom. The hoof is divided into two, to indicate that our walking on this earth, i.e., our mundane involvements, must include two basic principles: drawing near to oneself that which is good and proper and pushing away that which is not.

But the sign of a split hoof by itself is not sufficient. There must also be the sign of chewing the cud.

One must very carefully "chew over" every mundane activity which one intends to undertake. One must clarify and determine, once and again, whether to do it altogether, and if so, how to do it. Only then will the action itself be a "pure animal" - something which can and is used for our spiritual mission in life.

The distinction between "right" and "left" is very important. One cannot hope to obtain goodness without shunning evil. Good and evil must never be confused, just as the kosher animal's hooves are split into two distinct halves.

The second characteristic of a kosher animal is that it chews its cud. Likewise, a Jew must "chew over" his every step and consider it carefully before acting. When we subject our behavior to this scrutiny, all our actions will be pure ( I combined different versions).

It seems to me that one can explain these "signs" as representing the two activities that must occupy a servant of Hashem: Birur and Tikkun. Hoofs represent our lower activity - distinguishing good form evil, grasping the former and rejecting the latter. In this regard, evil and good must be completely separated in our minds and our actions. Confusion or uncertainty as to what is good and what is evil is a rabbit's foot and such an animal is not kosher. However, this is not enough. Pig possesses a fully split hoof but is still not kosher. What is important is what one does to elevate the good that is accomplished to a higher level.Chewing the cud is the process of return and elevating.

Chewing the cud represents the repeated steps of return, refinement and purification that follows Birur. As one rises in spiritual stature, there must be a continued process of review. Each accomplishment must be grasped and raised to a  yet higher level and the levels of Tikun are infinite.

This means that at the time of the exile of the Shechinah ...at this time the main spiritual task of man, and the main purpose of being engaged in Torah and the commandments, is to disencumber and elevate the sparks, as is known from the teachings of R. Isaac Luria, of blessed memory...

But when the Shechinah will emerge from kelipat nogah after the extraction of the sparks will be completed, and the evil of the kelipot will be separated from the good of holiness, “and all the workers of evil will be dispersed,” then people will engage in the study of Torah and in the observance of the commandments not in order to extract the sparks, as in the present, but in order to bring about the consummation of yichudim (“unions” or “marriages” of Sefirot) more sublime than those which are effected through our present Torah study —in order to call forth more sublime lights, transcending Atzilut.

This is why the pig is not kosher at this time for it forever is destined to stay on the ground. After the Messianic revelation, when the work of separating good and evil ends, however, it will also be able to rise and become kosher.

Knowing what is good and what is bad without attempting to elevate the good is not enough. Not only is it not enough it is deceptive.

And Cain went out... Whence did he go out? Rabbi Aibu said: "It means that he threw the words behind him and went out, like one who would deceive the Almighty." Rabbi Berekiah said in Rabbi Eleazar's name: "He went forth like one who shows the cloven hoof, like one who deceives his Creator." (Midrash Rabbah Genesis 22:13)

Esau is a pig and so also does Western Civilization recognize and delineate clearly what is good and what is not.

Rabbi Isaac said: "[God declared]: 'You have given a name to your swine [Esau]; then I too will name My firstborn, as it says, Thus says the Lord: Israel is My son, My firstborn'" (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis 63:8)

Why does he compare it [the Roman State] to a swine? For this reason: when the swine is lying down it puts out its hoofs, as if to say, "I am clean," so does this wicked State rob and oppress, yet pretend to be executing justice. So for forty years Esau used to ensnare married women and violate them, yet when he attained forty years he compared himself to his father, saying, "As my father was forty years old when he married, so I will marry at the age of forty." (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis 65:1).

Why is it [i.e. Edom or Rome] compared to a swine? To tell you this: Just as the swine, when reclining, puts forth its hooves as if to say, 'See that I am clean,' so too does the empire of Edom [Rome] boast as it commits violence and robbery, under the guise of establishing a judicial tribunal. This may be compared to a governor who put to death the thieves, adulterers, and sorcerers. He leaned over to an advisor and said: 'I myself did these three things in one night.'" (Midrash Rabbah - Leviticus 13:5)

Unlike Ishmael, for whom the good and the bad remain inextricably confused, for whom violence and worship of God are linked and intertwined, Esau has used philosophy and sciences to clearly delineate the borders of moral behavior (even if he does not always agree with us on where to place these borders), However, he does not aspire to go beyond this-earthly abode and to raise the good to Heaven.

A number of authorities, including Rav Menachim Azarya DeFano, Rav Chaim Ibn Attar, and the Chatam Sofer, suggested that the pig will undergo what may be called an evolutionary process and develop a cud, rendering it kosher! I suggest that this means that after Moshaich comes Esau will also learn how to elevate the good.

Being kind only to ones own

The list of non-kosher birds in Vayikra 11:13 and Deuteronomy 14:12 includes "chasida", usually identified as stork (According to some authorities, however, the chasida is not the stork, because the stork is a kosher bird (Rabbenu Yerocham, Toledoth Adam VeChavah 15:21, 132b).

Why is it called "chasidah"?  The gemorra in Chullin
63a queries why the stork is called chassida - and answers that it is
because osah chasidut im chavroseah - it deals kindly with its friends (and Rashi comments, there and on the posuk in Shmini,  that she divides her mezonot).

Why is chasidah then not a kosher bird. One answer that is often quoted in the name of the Kotsker Rebbe and others of his school is that it is not kosher because it does kindness only with its friends.

However, the stork is a nasty bird. Although it is gregarious and storks often congregate where they seee other storks feeding, in their "personal life" they are stingy and uncaring. The male will not only not share food with his mate but will take away her portion and, while both the male and female bring up the young, they will kill and eat any of their offspring that is slower or in some way weaker of disabled.

Rabbi Presworsky in his excellent work, Birds of the Torah offers an alternate explanation from a Dr. Mendelson. He suggests that "ose chesed im chavruseah" should be understood as "she does good in concert with her fellows". Ths refers to the fact that large groups of migrating storks going north to south over Eretz Yisroel sometimes encounter locust swarms travelling in the opposite direction and can substantially reduce their hordes, as a group impacting positively on human welfare.

It is interestring that storks have a good reputation in folklore as well. It is common among Americans to use a customized stork yard sign in order to announce the arrival of their child. Usually the sign is placed on the front lawn portion and is used to send the message to visitors and neighbors. Today this process has become a part of tradition especially since it has been prevalent for so many ages. There are reasons why this particular bird has been selected in a lawn greeting sign. These birds are white in color, migratory and there are more than 20 species present today. Other characteristics include the practice of monogamy, the large size of this bird as well as its loyalty to a nesting site. These qualities help in making the storks especially appealing to expecting couples who would like a symbol of loyalty, faithfulness and childbirth for announcing their new child. They are of course false as storks kill and devour their "imperfect" children.

I would suggest that there is a lesson in this for us all. Stork is treif. Stork shares and is gregarious in its own group but nasty and unfriendly, sometimes deadly, to those who are different. This is not true kindness and we learn from this that the test of true kndness is not that which we do to those who are just like us but how we treat those who are different.

God's Work: The New York Magazine article on the Holtzbergs, H'YD

Download G-d's Work

or here

Comment: My impression is that the author of this article was simply blown away by the world of spirituality, giving and self-transcendence that that he discovered during the research for this article. We should be proud of what we have that others cannot even fathom.

Of physical and spiritual hungers!

"After 10 years of studying the rabbinic texts that went into composing the Seder, after reading numerous studies on the development of the Haggada, and after writing (and rewriting, and rewriting) a critical commentary on the Haggada, I can safely say that at least one thing has changed in my life - my family no longer has to starve before the main meal is served at our Seder. "

Comment: A perfect example of self-delusions of academic scholarship. Does anything else need to be said?

Foot Enclosures

 The discovery of gigantic foot-shaped enclosures in the Jordan Valley may shed light on ancient Jewish holiday practices, according to University of Haifa researchers (from Jerusalem Post).

 The sites, identified with what the Torah terms "gilgal" (a camp or stone structure), were used for assemblies, preparation for battle, and rituals, according to a press release the university put out last week.

The researchers, led by Prof. Adam Zertal, found five such structures, each shaped like an enormous foot.

 

The term "gilgal" is mentioned 39 times in the Bible, the press release said - the most famous referring to the site where Joshua and the Israelites encamped after crossing the Jordan River into Israel. However, no archeological site had yet been identified with it. The five enclosures, presumed to have been established in the 13th-12th centuries BCE, were excavated between 1990 and 2008.

In at least two cases, archeologists found paved circuits around the structures, believed to have been used to circle the sites during ceremonies.

"Ceremonial encirclement of an area in procession is an important element in the ancient Near East," Zertal said.

He added that the Hebrew word "hag" (festival) in Semitic languages originated from the verb "hug," meaning "encircle."

According to Zertal, the foot shape would also explain another holiday-related term: aliya la'regel - the pilgrimage to Jerusalem on Pessah, Succot and Shavuot - literally translated as "ascending to the foot."

"The discovery of these 'foot' structures opens an entirely new system of linguistic and historical perceptions," Zertal said. "Identifying the 'foot' enclosures as ancient Israeli ceremonial sites leads us to a series of new possibilities to explain the beginnings of Israel, of the People of Israel's festivals and holidays."

He said the constructions had been used for assemblies during the first Iron Age, and when the religious center was moved to Jerusalem, the command of "aliya la'regel" (pilgrimage) became associated with the city.

Zertal also noted that the foot traditionally symbolized ownership of territory, control over an enemy, connection between people and land, and the presence of a deity.

The Bible alludes to some of these, as does ancient Egyptian literature, he said.

Comment: A perfect example of an interesting finding which is then overinterpreted into ridiculous. Aliya L'Regel related to these "foot enclosures"? My foot!

Avos 1:8: Bad Waters

 

 Atalyon said: Sages, be careful with your words lest you deserve to be exiled and are exiled to a place of bad waters. The students who come after you will drink of these waters and die, and G-d's Name will be desecrated.

We noted in the last lesson that every saying from Avtalyon that had been preserved deals with "water". Today we will attempt to resolve this fascinating conundrum. We will show that "bad waters" is linked to death and "exile".

We start with Kings II ;2:-18-19.

יט  וַיֹּאמְרוּ אַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר, אֶל-אֱלִישָׁע, הִנֵּה-נָא מוֹשַׁב הָעִיר טוֹב, כַּאֲשֶׁר אֲדֹנִי רֹאֶה; וְהַמַּיִם רָעִים, וְהָאָרֶץ מְשַׁכָּלֶת.	19 And the men of the city said unto Elisha: 'Behold, we pray thee, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord seeth; but the water is bad, and the land miscarrieth.
tכ  וַיֹּאמֶר, קְחוּ-לִי צְלֹחִית חֲדָשָׁה, וְשִׂימוּ שָׁם, מֶלַח; וַיִּקְחוּ, אֵלָיו.	20 And he said: 'Bring me a new cruse, and put salt therein.' And they brought it to him.
כא  וַיֵּצֵא אֶל-מוֹצָא הַמַּיִם, וַיַּשְׁלֶךְ-שָׁם מֶלַח; וַיֹּאמֶר כֹּה-אָמַר יְהוָה, רִפִּאתִי לַמַּיִם הָאֵלֶּה--לֹא-יִהְיֶה מִשָּׁם עוֹד, מָוֶת וּמְשַׁכָּלֶת.	21 And he went forth unto the spring of the waters, and cast salt therein, and said: 'Thus saith the LORD: I have healed these waters; there shall not be from thence any more death or miscarrying.'

So bad waters cause the earth to miscarry and its inhabitants to die and require a healing. This enigmatic acccount is the only place in Tanach in which the exact expression "Mayim Rayim" that is used in our mishna is also used (Numbers Ch.5 uses the expression "waters of bitter things", see also Shemos 15:23). Significantly the healing of bad waters reported in this passage is also the first miracle that Elisha performs after he takes over the prophetic mantle from Eliyahu. Why are the waters "bad"?  "Waters are bad because in them are mixed in particulates that are foreign, salty, not drinkable, such as (for example is the case of) seawater, and its healing is if they become purified and the salt is removed from them (Malbim). "  In other words, what makes the waters "bad" is admixtures of foreign materials within them. As in our mishna, in this Biblical passage drinking these "bad" waters leads to death.

The symbolism of "water" as representing Torah is well known.

The words of Torah are likened to water, as it is written,

O all who thirst, come for water, (Is. 55:1)

Just as water goes from one end of the earth to the other, so does Torah go from one end of the earth to the other;

Just as water is a life source, so is Torah a source of life;

Just as water is free to all, so is Torah a free commodity;

Just as water comes from heaven, so too is the Torah's origin in heaven;

Just as water makes many sounds, so is the Torah heard in many voices;

Just as water quenches one's thirst, so does Torah satisfy the soul;

Just as water cleanses the body from impurity, so does Torah cleanse the soul;

Just as water originates in tiny drops and accumulates into mighty streams and rivers, so the Torah is acquired word by word today, verse by verse tomorrow;

Just as water descends from a high altitude, so does Torah depart from haughty individuals and remain in individuals who are humble and modest;

Just as water is not kept in silver or gold vessels, but the simplest [clay], so Torah is retained by those who are simple;

Just as a scholar is not embarrassed to ask a student, 'pass me some water,' a scholar is not embarrassed to learn from a student a chapter, a verse, a word, or even a letter;

Just as someone who does not know how to swim is drowned in water, so is Torah - if one doesn't know how to 'swim' one can drown in it. (Shir HaShirim Rabbah I:19)

See also Bava Kama 82a, Taanis 7a etc.

It appears then that "bitter waters" can symbolize Torah which has another element mixed into it, an element that makes it bitter.( I am assuming now that "bad water" and "biter water" carry the same inner meaning.)

"The holy book Degel Machane Efraim writes in parshas Masai that he heard from the Besht...that in our Holy Torah there is "sweet waters" and "bitter waters".  See, all the Tannaim and Amoraim and tsaddikim from the time of Moshe Rabbeinu and that will yet be until Moshaich comes, all learn from the Torah in the way upon which light dwells. On the other hand, heretics.. bring proof from the Torah itself for the opposite (of what it really means)....so this is how Torah contains also "bitter waters".(AL Hageula v'al Hatemurah, 55)

Torah which is not purified from its admixtures, to take out the bad within it and to remain with only good within it, is said to be in exile. Tanya explains that in our time Torah is in exile in the sense that any question or concept contains within it different possibilites. Let's for example consider a halachic question of whether an item is permitted to be eaten or not. At first the correct conclusion and the potentially mistaken conclusion are mixed together. Until it is resolved and the two are separated and a clear conclusion is reached , Torah is a prisoner within kelippah of Nogah, in which good and bad is intermixed. Only after a halachic conclusion is accomplished, can we say that the "forbidden" has been separated from the "permitted" and this piece of Torah has been redeemed.

To summarize, Avtalyon warns the teachers, the wise ones, to be careful in how they transmit their knowledge. They must be careful to explain everything, lest inaccurate wording will lead their students to leave sections of the Torah unclarified and allow incorrect conclusions, a state of internal exile, that leads to death.

 Atalyon said: Sages, be careful with your words lest you deserve to be exiled and are exiled to a place of bad waters. The students who come after you will drink of these waters and die, and G-d's Name will be desecrated.

We noted in the last lesson that every saying from Avtalyon that had been preserved deals with "water". Today we will attempt to resolve this fascinating conundrum. We will show that "bad waters" is linked to death and "exile".

We start with Kings II ;2:-18-19.

יט  וַיֹּאמְרוּ אַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר, אֶל-אֱלִישָׁע, הִנֵּה-נָא מוֹשַׁב הָעִיר טוֹב, כַּאֲשֶׁר אֲדֹנִי רֹאֶה; וְהַמַּיִם רָעִים, וְהָאָרֶץ מְשַׁכָּלֶת.	19 And the men of the city said unto Elisha: 'Behold, we pray thee, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord seeth; but the water is bad, and the land miscarrieth.
tכ  וַיֹּאמֶר, קְחוּ-לִי צְלֹחִית חֲדָשָׁה, וְשִׂימוּ שָׁם, מֶלַח; וַיִּקְחוּ, אֵלָיו.	20 And he said: 'Bring me a new cruse, and put salt therein.' And they brought it to him.
כא  וַיֵּצֵא אֶל-מוֹצָא הַמַּיִם, וַיַּשְׁלֶךְ-שָׁם מֶלַח; וַיֹּאמֶר כֹּה-אָמַר יְהוָה, רִפִּאתִי לַמַּיִם הָאֵלֶּה--לֹא-יִהְיֶה מִשָּׁם עוֹד, מָוֶת וּמְשַׁכָּלֶת.	21 And he went forth unto the spring of the waters, and cast salt therein, and said: 'Thus saith the LORD: I have healed these waters; there shall not be from thence any more death or miscarrying.'

So bad waters cause the earth to miscarry and its inhabitants to die and require a healing. This enigmatic acccount is the only place in Tanach in which the exact expression "Mayim Rayim" that is used in our mishna is also used (Numbers Ch.5 uses the expression "waters of bitter things", see also Shemos 15:23). Significantly the healing of bad waters reported in this passage is also the first miracle that Elisha performs after he takes over the prophetic mantle from Eliyahu. Why are the waters "bad"?  "Waters are bad because in them are mixed in particulates that are foreign, salty, not drinkable, such as (for example is the case of) seawater, and its healing is if they become purified and the salt is removed from them (Malbim). "  In other words, what makes the waters "bad" is admixtures of foreign materials within them. As in our mishna, in this Biblical passage drinking these "bad" waters leads to death.

The symbolism of "water" as representing Torah is well known.

The words of Torah are likened to water, as it is written,

O all who thirst, come for water, (Is. 55:1)

Just as water goes from one end of the earth to the other, so does Torah go from one end of the earth to the other;

Just as water is a life source, so is Torah a source of life;

Just as water is free to all, so is Torah a free commodity;

Just as water comes from heaven, so too is the Torah's origin in heaven;

Just as water makes many sounds, so is the Torah heard in many voices;

Just as water quenches one's thirst, so does Torah satisfy the soul;

Just as water cleanses the body from impurity, so does Torah cleanse the soul;

Just as water originates in tiny drops and accumulates into mighty streams and rivers, so the Torah is acquired word by word today, verse by verse tomorrow;

Just as water descends from a high altitude, so does Torah depart from haughty individuals and remain in individuals who are humble and modest;

Just as water is not kept in silver or gold vessels, but the simplest [clay], so Torah is retained by those who are simple;

Just as a scholar is not embarrassed to ask a student, 'pass me some water,' a scholar is not embarrassed to learn from a student a chapter, a verse, a word, or even a letter;

Just as someone who does not know how to swim is drowned in water, so is Torah - if one doesn't know how to 'swim' one can drown in it. (Shir HaShirim Rabbah I:19)

See also Bava Kama 82a, Taanis 7a etc.

It appears then that "bitter waters" can symbolize Torah which has another element mixed into it, an element that makes it bitter.( I am assuming now that "bad water" and "biter water" carry the same inner meaning.)

"The holy book Degel Machane Efraim writes in parshas Masai that he heard from the Besht...that in our Holy Torah there is "sweet waters" and "bitter waters".  See, all the Tannaim and Amoraim and tsaddikim from the time of Moshe Rabbeinu and that will yet be until Moshaich comes, all learn from the Torah in the way upon which light dwells. On the other hand, heretics.. bring proof from the Torah itself for the opposite (of what it really means)....so this is how Torah contains also "bitter waters".(AL Hageula v'al Hatemurah, 55)

Torah which is not purified from its admixtures, to take out the bad within it and to remain with only good within it, is said to be in exile. Tanya explains that in our time Torah is in exile in the sense that any question or concept contains within it different possibilites. Let's for example consider a halachic question of whether an item is permitted to be eaten or not. At first the correct conclusion and the potentially mistaken conclusion are mixed together. Until it is resolved and the two are separated and a clear conclusion is reached , Torah is a prisoner within kelippah of Nogah, in which good and bad is intermixed. Only after a halachic conclusion is accomplished, can we say that the "forbidden" has been separated from the "permitted" and this piece of Torah has been redeemed.

To summarize, Avtalyon warns the teachers, the wise ones, to be careful in how they transmit their knowledge. They must be careful to explain everything, lest inaccurate wording will lead their students to leave sections of the Torah unclarified and allow incorrect conclusions, a state of internal exile, that leads to death.

Leaving the fold

* Caution: There are a few seconds that are less than tsniusdig at about 0.42 to 0.50 secs.

Erasing the ladies

A pair of ultra-orthodox Jewish newspapers altered a photograph of the new Israeli Cabinet, removing two female ministers from the shot....In one of the newspapers, female ministers Limor Livnat and Sofa Landver were replaced by two men in the inaugural photo of Israel's new 30-member Cabinet, which is headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The other publication blacked out the women.

 

link

 

Comment: This is the policy and one does not relax the policy for anyone.

Chumros on Pesach

An interesting attack on "senseless" chumros on Pesach from an unlikely source.

Download Chumra

Comment: I find this surprising because on Pesach, above all other days of the year, there is an inyan to be machmir on searching after chometz. R. Blumenkrantz in his Pesach book traces this to the Avudraham who explains that chometz symbolizes Yetser Hara. Of course anger and contentiousness must be avoided unless it is lshem shomaim, which I agree is a pretty rare commodity these days (Tanya, Igeres Hakodesh, 25)

See:

The Chumra Syndrome: A Halakhic Inquiry , M. Weinberger

Jewish Action 48, 1988

Does the sun go around the earth?

For the past several weeks, as Birkat Hachama had approached,  I have been observing, with amusement, the ongoing debate in the Chareidi media about whether the sun goes around the earth or vice versa. Letters pro and con various positions, have appeared in Mishpacha, Hamodia and the Yated, while various articles on the topic of Birchat Hachama skirt, explain away or attempt to render this question irrelevant. I first noticed the preoccupation with geocentrilc versus non-geocentric positions when my son showed me an article in Yiddish in the Monsey Community Connection that explained Birchas Hachama and also said that "some people believe that the earth goes around the sun". Other expositions use euphemisms such as, "it doesn't really matter", or say things like, "it appears to an observer that the sun travels around the earth", or some other such expression.

The issue was finally tackled head on by this week's Hamodia, in an article by Harav Binyomin Lndau, the Tosher Dayan of Borough Park. He starts off by explaining the obvious: " As a young child, I remember knowing with certainty that the sun travels around the earth. This principle was a simple fact, universally accepted by Yidden, according to the poskim and woe to any Jew who dared to claim otherwise. He was immediately labeled an apikores, who had cut himself from Klal Yisrael. However, as one grows older and studies this astronomical issue extensively, it becomes clear that this topic is not so clear-cut or straightforward".

Copyright by Hamodia Download Tosher Dayan

Indeed, it is not.

It appears that Chareidi astronomers fall into one of three groups: those that know little astronomy and who are convinced that the Torah demands adherence to a geocentric position, as "codified by Rambam", those who have been touched by greater knowledge and accept the heliocentric explanations, and those who waffle. The Tosher Dayan afifirms at the end that it does not matter which theory one affirms because it all depends on the observer (I elaborate on this later).

While it is true that there were many contemporaries and authors in the generations after Copernicus who opposed him, there were also those who took his side, among them, R. Dovid Ganz and R. Yakov Emden. I find it remarakable that the Tosher Dayan while being unaware of the extensive literature on this topic, and citing only the opposition of R. Yonasan Eybeshutz, and Maase Toviah agaisnt the support of R. Y. Emden and the view of Chasam Sofer that Copernicus' theory is not heresy (but also not scientifically  supported) is still willing to consider the possibility the Copernics may have been right. This takes courage because Shvut Yakov (1:65, see note 246 to the Machon LaMaor edition of Pnei Yehoshusa R"H 20b) and, in out own day, R. Chaim Kanievsky pronounced those who follow Copernicus to be apikorsim. In Bircat Hachamah Betekufoseah, R. Genot brings (p.131) from R. Chaim Kanievseky who says:

כי הנוקט כך הריהו כמכחיש מסורת וכופר באמונתנו.

An excellent review of the entire topic, based on several academic works is found here. I can't resist quoting the following "geocentric" Zohar from this article:

 ובספרא דרב המנונא סבא, פריש יתיר דהא כל ישובא מתגלגלא בעיגולא ככדור אלין לתתא ואלין לעילא וכל אינון בריין משניין בחזווייהו משינויא דאוירא כפום כל אתר ואתר וקיימין בקיומייהו כשאר בני נשא, ועל דא אית אתר בישובא כד נהיר לאלין חשיך לאלין לאלין יממא ולאלין ליליא, ואית אתר דכוליה יממא ולא אשתכח ביה ליליא בר בשעתא חדא זעירא )זוהר, ויקרא, דף י ע"א).

R. Herzog writes about this (translated from English):

תיאוריה הקשורה לשמו של קופרניקוס... הענין מוזכר באופן לא מפורש במקורות התנאיים. ניסוח מלא ישנו בזוהר בפסקה המצוטטת משמו של רב במנונא סבא. שאלת ייחוסו של ספר הזוהר אינה נוגעת לעניין כי רבי משה די לאון שאליו מייחסים המבקרים את החיבור הנפלא נפטר זמן רב לפני קופרניקוס...  (יהדות חוק ומוסר, עמ' 102)

  R. Aron Marcus, writes about this:

יש לציין כי הזוהר מבטל את השיטה הפטולמאית, כבלתי מדעית ונוטה לצד השיטה הקופרניקאית, שהקדים אותה במאות שנים. נוסף על כך לפי דעתו של ר' שמעון בר יוחאי, הרי השקפות של בני דורו בשטח התכונה, אינן אלא סברות של הדיוטות... (החסידות, תל אביב תשיד, עמ' 78.).

Interestingly enough A. Neher claims in his Jewish Thought and the Scientific Revolution of the Sixteenth Century (pp. 104-05) that one could imagine that this was written by a pupil of Copernicus! The truth is that R. Yakov Emden on this Zohar writes:

כל ענין זה הולך על דרך חכמי מחקר לא על דרך רז"ל בתלמוד (מטפחת ספרים, עמ' לז).

However R. Moshe Kuntz (Ben Yochai, p. 81) does not have a problem with Chazal saying this including the Zohar as he has other indications from Chazal like this. But others show that there might be a contradiction in the Zohar about this [see: R. Shpitzer, Nevrashet, Vol.2, p.18a; R. M.M. Gerlitz, Bircas Hachamah KeHilchosah, pp.29-30 and Y. Bloch, Kuntres Hashemesh Begevorso, pp.21-22]. C. Solonski in his introduction to his Kochva Deshvet, (p.14) also brings this Zohar to show that Chazal held like Copenicus. R. P. Hurwitz in his Sefer Habris (p.99) brings the Zohar when dealing with Copernicus but after a lengthy discussion he concludes by disagreeing with Copernicus (pp.98-102). [About this Zohar, See also R. Schick, Seder Haminhaghim, 2:24b; Y. Levi, The Science in Torah, pp.115].

 

My objection to all this is that the Zohar appears to be speaking about the Earth's spherical nature, not its rotation around the sun. I would add that the commentary Nitsotsei Zohar discusses all these issues at length, including the statement of the Gro that the earth is really square, based on Chagigah, beginning of Ch.2. An interesting discussion as to why we are not choshesh to Tumah passing through the round earth from it's opposite side is found in Mahari Engel's Gilyonei Hashas to Shabbos 75.

 

Back to our topic. The Slifkin controversy has already exposed how people who live in the same communities, dress in the same manner, and send their children to the same insitutions, can have very divergent positions on the issues of Torah and science. What determines how one approaches such questions is the amount of secular education, whether one had gone to YU or to a "regular" yeshiva, and one's ability to think critically.

 

Some attempt to "straddle the fence" by claiming that everything is relative. Whether the earth goes around the sun, or the sun circles the earth depends on the position of the observer. For us, who live on earth, it is correct to say that the sun goes around the earth, because that is what we see. Often, Einstein's Theory of Relativity is adduced as supporting such a position. This approach is to my knowledge innovated in the Jewish world by the Lubavitcher Rebbe in a letter quoted on p.9 in the Gutnick Chumash on parshas Bareishis.

 

I recently discussed this letter with a prominent Chabad scientist, who did not agree. When the letter was published, he wrote a letter to the Rebbe making the following points:

1.The Theory of Relativity as described was only a preliminary stage in the development of the theory and was quickly abandoned. Current versions of the Theory do not claim that it is completely impossible to determine which observer is in motion and which is stationary and while for some purposes this is true, for others, there is a clearly defined body at rest and a clearly defined body which is in motion.

2.The Theory of Relativity only applies to two objects traveling past each other in a straight line but not to circular motion.

 

Without being a physicist I can add farther objections:

3.Even if true, this can be said when taking the earth and the sun in isolation. However when you consider the earth as a part of the Solar System, what will you say about the other planets? Is it possbile that they rotate around the earth too at the same time that the earth is rotating around the sun? How does an observer in spacesee the earth in relation to the other planets? Are the geocentric and heliocentric sustems completely equivalent when one  accounts for the relative motion of the sun, the earth and the planets around each other?

4. The results of the two systems are not the same- there is a host of observational, philosophical and theologic differences between the two, and the calculations are very different. In one, the earth is the center of the universe; in the other, it is a speck of dust, of little value in comparison to other celestial bodies, stars and galaxies.

 

Whether the heliocentric system is compatible with Torah is another discussion but I believe that it is, see the first Ibn Ezra on Chumash and this quote. "For Maimonides, this holistic cosmology also had direct metaphysical and ethical implications, for “the individuals of the human species, and all the more so the other species, are things of no value at all in comparison with the whole [of creation] that exists and endures” (3:13, 452). "

 

It certainly matters which system you elect to hold true.

 

The Rebbe referred these questions to Professor Herman Branover for response.

 

It is important to note that circular motion of the universe around the earth was predicated on the Aristotelean idea of eternal heavenly spheres being made of different material than the sublunar realm, which, unlike Heavens, is given to and degeneration and becoming. Being perfect, the upper spheres engage in perfect motion in their longing for the First Cause, perfect motion being a circle. The problem was that heavenly bodies did nto seem to travel across the sky in uniform speed, which the Rambam was already aware of in Ch. 11, of hilchos Kiddush Hachodesh. Whereas Copernicus kept circular motion and had the same difficulty in explaining the observed slowing and retrogression of the celestial bodies, and, therefore, was forced to conserve Ptolomian system of epicycles on top of epicycles. Keppler did away with all that nonsense. He posited that the orbits of the planets around the sun were elliptical. With that the heliocentric model "buried" the geocentric model in terms of simplicity, elegance and explanatory power. Yes, it really does matter which model one affirms, and, no, they are not interchageable at all.

 

Why did I write that I find this amusing? Because affirming Ptolomeic theories in the 21st century is amusing. At least the Tosher Dayan tackled the issue head on - more power to him. Attempts to skirt or finesse the central fact of astronomy tells us more about who we are than about the relative positions of the sun and the earth.