https://www.torahmusings.com/2006/06/age-of-universe/
I received this via e-mail from R. Daniel Eidensohn, with permission to post:
This Shabbos (June 17, 2006) I had the opportunity to ask Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky about the issue of the age of the universe. As some of you are aware, the issue is heating up again. There are some who would claim that Rav Shmuel has changed his position on the matter or deny that he ever permitted belief in a greater than 6000 year old universe. I had only a short time to speak to him so I limited myself to this issue.
I asked him, “Is it permitted to believe that the world is more than 6000 years?”
He responded that it was permitted since we don’t have a clear understanding of the view of Chazal in this matter. He supported this assertion by citing a number of medrashim e.g., that there were worlds before this that were created and destroyed. Consequently we simply don’t know how much time the original process of creation took. I mentioned that there are gedolim who have asserted that since the majority of gedolim reject the view that the world is more than 6000 years old that is is kefira to assert such a position today. He said he was aware of such an assertion but disagreed with it. He noted that in fact the discussion about the age of the universe is not a new topic. He said that Rav Avraham ben HaRambam disagreed with the approach of these gedolim and that after Techiyas HaMeisim these gedolim would have to explain to Rav Avraham ben HaRambam why they disagreed with him.
In sum, I have recently asked two gedolim [Rav Shmuel and R. Yisroel Belsky – GS] about whether it was permitted to believe that the universe is more than 6000 years old and both unequivocally responded that it was permitted. Both based themselves on
the fact that we don’t have an unambiguous mesora regarding the meaning of relevant statements of chazal and rishonim. Both of them also acknowledged that the majority of gedolim today disagree with them.Daniel Eidensohn
Here's the problem - Rav Daniel is applying religious technique to science. That doesn't work. In science, there is no belief. There is just proof or lack of proof. I don't believe that there's oxygen in the atmosphere or that gravity 9.8m/s2. These are all testable and verifiable. Similarly, I don't believe that dinosaurs walked the Earth millions of years ago. Consistent scientific investigation has proven that. So to say it's allowed to "believe" that the universe is over 6000 years old is foolish. The only way to disprove it is to attribute characteristics to God that are definitely not flattering and turn Him into a cosmic con man. Chas v'shalom!
ReplyDeleteProblem is the nitrogen in the atmosphere. Zohar and Rambam say that there are only four elements and one of them is air. Since we breathe oxygen then nitrogen is heretical.
ReplyDeletelWhen I studied Physics I was taught that the calculations of the Age of the universe was dependent on a number of nonscientific assumptions. If those assumptions were different the Age would also be different
ReplyDeleteScience is not based entirely on facts as Karl Popper and Kuhn have asserted it is not simply the search for facts ot Truth.
Medicine is a good case - The "empirical" medicine as practiced today uses a lot of unproven treatments
remember bypass surgery or knee surgery
If there was a big Bang, there was no objective system of time to measure it. No day or night. Gravity at that point was not the same as on earth today.
ReplyDeleteAll valid points but also a bit misleading
ReplyDeleteYes, there are different ways to evaluate the age of the universe but even using those different assumptions, you still wind up with a very old universe. Even accepting variations in the rate of C14 decay, dinosaur fossils are still many of millions of years ago. The "frum" retort has always been "Well you see! Scientists disagree so we can ignore everything they say!" That just doesn't work.
What we need to remember is that science and religion are different systems. Science is the study of "how" and religion is the study of "why". If you're getting your morals from science, well we know plenty how badly that can turn out. But if you're getting your science from the first chapter of Bereshis, you're also pretty ignorant.
We have to remember - the Torah was written for people living 3500 years ago and also for us. 3500 years ago it was fine to think that the Sun revolved around the Earth which was a disc with a dome of atmosphere over it. The historical narratives and poetry in the Tanach could be understood that way. Nowadays we know more about the universe and our place in it. By insisting that we stick with the literal version of the text we demand that the Torah complies with our understanding, not that our understanding should comply with the Torah. That's the real heresy.
Thank you for reminding me of this post
ReplyDeleteHow we understand Time might not be how it actually works.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, there is no heresy - it is not an ikkar of the Rambam.
The 6 days of Creation were not 6 ordinary days by our standards.