Peshat: Is There Science in the Creation Story?

Transcription

1 בס"ד Peshat: Is There Science in the Creation Story? David Derovan Jerusalem A First Word Some years ago, a major Israeli manufacturer of milk products was threatened with loss of its Rabbinical supervision if it did not remove the pictures of dinosaurs from its fruit yogurt labels. Why? Because dinosaurs are antithetical to Torah beliefs. The world is only 5,757 years old (as of this writing) and the Torah does not accept the scientific "facts" that the earth is billions of years old or that such creatures as dinosaurs roamed the earth millions of years ago. This and similar arguments were used as the ideological basis for the application of economic pressure which resulted in the redesign of the fruit yogurt labels. Putting the religious economic-politics issues aside, does the Torah truly reject modern science? Are the discoveries of modern geology, astronomy and paleontology truly unacceptable from a Torah perspective? One answer to these questions which has become very popular in recent years is the attempt to reconcile these divergent opinions. This argument usually begins by accepting the factual data supplied by science, for instance the age of the earth expressed in billions of years or the existence of the dinosaurs. The next step is to reinterpret the Biblical text. Even though the first chapter of the Torah describes events which took place over the six "days" of creation, the word "Yom - day" is not to be taken literally. Each "Yom - day" really represents a vast period in time of millions of years. Indeed, since a day is measured by the rising and setting of the sun, how can the Torah describe the events of the first three days of creation as "days," the sun and the other astronomical bodies were only created (according to the Torah's own account) on the third day!?! While the answer to this question must reside in some interpretation of the word "Yom - day" in a non-literal fashion, it is not my purpose here to deal with this specific problem. Rather, there is another way to resolve the seeming conflict between scientific "facts" and the Torah, meaning both its text and its beliefs. Defining Terms Before tackling the central problem head-on, it is necessary to have a clear understanding as to the true nature of the Torah text. The Chumash 1 is the foundational source of Jewish beliefs. For centuries, we have mined the textual richness of the text to give texture and substance to those beliefs. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to fully realize how that text is understood. The Chumash, as well as the rest of the Bible and the Oral Law in its various genres as well, 2 has several levels of meaning coexist simultaneously in the text: 1. Peshat - פשט - The explicit meaning of the text as it appears with all of its complexity and sophistication. 2. Derash - דרש - The implicit meaning of the text. 3. Remez - רמז - The meaning which is only hinted at by the text. 1 I.e. the Pentateuch, and by extension what is written here applies to the rest of Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim, the Hebrew Bible as well. 2 These genres includes Mishnah, Gemara and Midrash in all of their various forms David Jay Derovan Please feel free to share this essay with friends and colleagues Your comments, criticisms and suggestions are always welcome

2 4. Sod - סוד - The esoteric meaning of the text. All four levels of meaning are interpreted based on the same literary cues used to create the complexity and the sophistication of the text. 3 At the same time, there are "the Torah has seventy faces -,"שבעים פנים לתורה 4 which coexist on each and every level of meaning. This means that there is no one, single interpretation that is correct to the exclusion of all the others. Even if the halacha is decided in favor of one of the interpretations, that does not preclude the possibility of other acceptable interpretations. Rashi, for instance, sometimes will interpret a Chumash text according to the opinion which is not accepted as the final halachic decision. 5 The Concept of Peshat and Its Relationship to History and Science The concept of Peshat is also related to the idea of fact, whether it be historical or scientific. Because of this connection of Peshat to fact, there arises a possible conflict between the creation story and science. The current views of astronomical, geological and paleontological science seem to contradict the Peshat of the story of the creation. According to science, the world is far older than Berayshit would have us believe and the way the world came into being according to science bears very little relationship to the Biblical account. The Derash, Remez and Sod levels of meaning understand the text and utilize analytical methods that have little or no relationship to the "facts" as presented in the text. On each of these levels, we encounter an ever deeper conceptual meaning of the text which reveals theological, philosophical, psychological, even mystic truths, but certainly not historical or scientific facts. Therefore, if there is a conflict between the Torah and science, it must exist on a Peshat level. However, Peshat in Chumash is neither historic nor scientific fact. To say that is to make an error in conception. The Bible does not present us with history in the pure sense. An historical text is supposed to be a correct presentation of the facts pertaining to past events. While a great portion of the Bible is devoted to the presentation of history, the historical purpose of the text is a tertiary goal vis a vis the primary goal of presenting a theological understanding of past events and the secondary goal of understanding the ethical and moral implications of those events. This accounts for the very spotty and selective nature of Biblical biography and history. The relationship between Peshat and science is even more tenuous, if not non-existent altogether. The Bible has nothing to say regarding science. Indeed, There are no scientific statements whatsoever in the Bible and that includes the creation story. It is difficult to describe the statement, "God said, 'Let there be light!' and there was light" 6 as scientific! When all is said and done, there is still a relationship between Peshat and history and science. History and science (as well as historical and scientific texts) exist only on the Peshat level. There is no Derash, Remez and Sod in science or in history. Even if we derive a lesson or moral from a historical or "דורש - "Doraysh scientific text, we are really only interpreting the facts, not the text itself. When we are the Torah text, thereby deducing ideas on the levels of Derash, Remez and Sod, we are working with the words of the text itself, over and above the actual content, i.e. the "facts." In this sense, it is the literary nature of the Torah text which becomes the source of the idea. In the Torah, the way the "facts" are presented determines not only the deeper meaning (Derash, Remez and Sod), but also the explicit meaning, the Peshat, which is also more than a mere set of facts. 3 The very essence of studying Jewish texts, beginning with the Bible and Talmudic literature, is to discern each and every textual glitch and hiccup. It is assumed that these textual anomalies and enigmas are not coincidental of the result of scribal sloppiness. Rather, they are integral to the text itself. Therefore, once discovered, they must be explained. This is the basis of all textual exegesis. 4 See Midrash Oti'yot derabbi Akiva; Teshuvot HaRadbaz vol. 3, end of responsa 643 ( "ג ;(תרמ and Bamidbar Rabbah 13:15. 5 See Rabbi Yehudah Copperman, "Rashi KeParshan Shelo Alibah DeHilchatah" in Lifshuto Shel Mikra, Haskel: Jerusalem 5734, pp Berayshit 1:3. 2

3 The Interrelation between Peshat, Derash, Remez and Sod in the Torah Text The Torah is a work of literary art, albeit Divine art, which shares the same characteristics with all other works of art. Thus, it is possible to understand the interrelation of the four levels of meaning, Peshat, Derash, Remez and Sod, as musical notes that exist in harmony in a musical composition, or as hues and colors that are woven together in a painting. Therefore, the primary meaning of a particular text will reside in the Peshat level, while another text will have little to say on the Peshat level, but will have a great deal to communicate on the Derash level. Another metaphor for the same idea is the set of knobs on a sophisticated stereo system which allows us to regulate the bass or the treble according to our own taste. We can lower the bass and raise the treble or raise the bass while lowering the treble. That is exactly what happens in the Torah text. Usually the Peshat is raised to the higher levels and the Derash is lower. However, sometimes the Peshat is turned down low while the Derash is turned up high. The clearest example of this is The Song of Songs. The Peshat level is almost nonexistent in this Megilah. We do not read it at all as a poem expressing the sexual love between a man and a woman, rather The Song of Songs is the most sanctified of all the books of the Bible -- "the Holy of Holies - קדשים "קודש -- because it is one long metaphor expressing the sublime love between God and his people, Israel. The Creation Story Having established the true nature of Peshat and its relationship, on the one hand to Derash, Remez and Sod, and to science and history on the other hand, we can now turn our attention to the creation story, to the cycle of narratives which form the first few chapters of Berayshit. If we are truly sensitive readers of the Torah text, then we will soon realize that the Creation Story cannot be properly understood on the Peshat level. Indeed, the Mishnah in Chagigah 7 gives us the impression that the true interpretation of the Creation Story exists on the level of Sod! If that is where the greatest emphasis is in the text, then where does Peshat fit in? The answer comes from the greatest Peshat commentator of all time, Rashi. If the first comment which Rashi makes on the first verse in the Torah is an introductory statement, then the second comment is the beginning of his interpretation of the Creation Story: בראשית ברא. אין המקרא הזה אומר אלא דרשני. "In the beginning God created." This Biblical text only says, "Darshayni - understand me using Derash." This is the first thing Rashi has to say about the Creation Story. Forget the Peshat, this text says loudly and clearly that its message is to be found on the Derash level. Obviously, Rashi is not going to explain the text on the Sod level, however, he does proceed to explain the details of the story of the Creation according to the Derash found in Rabbinic literature. According to Rashi, the entire creation story has little or no meaning on the Peshat level, only on the Derash level (or deeper, since Rashi was well aware of the Mishnah in Chagigah). The significance of Rashi's opinion cannot be overstated, for it removes almost all the seeming conflicts between historical/scientific fact and the Creation Story. It reduces the relationship between science and Torah to nil. The two are talking on totally different wave lengths. A Closer Look at Rashi on Genesis 1:1 Rashi, himself, makes a number of points similar to those above. Let us peruse what Rashi has to say: 7 See the Mishnah in the beginning of Chapter 2. 3

4 בראשית ברא. אין המקרא הזה אומר אלא דרשני, כמו שדרשו רבותינו ז"ל בשביל התורה שנקראת ראשית דרכו (משלי ח,כב), ובשביל ישראל שנקראו ראשית תבואתה (ירמיה ב,ג). "In the beginning God created." This Biblical text only says, "Darshayni - understand me using Derash," as our Rabbis, of blessed memory, explained, through Derash, [the world was created] for the Torah which is called "the beginning of His path," 8 and for Israel, who are called, "the beginning of His grain." 9 While we interpreted Rashi's statement as a comment on the entire creation story, which indeed it is as we shall see soon, in context, it begins as a statement regarding the first verse of the Torah. This first verse, says Rashi cannot be part of the story itself. Rather, it is here to imply that the creation of the universe has a dual purpose: It was created by God as a place where the people of Israel can observe the Torah. While this comment seems to be reserved for the very first verse only, it truly has much broader implications. If the goal of creation is to create an environment where the people of Israel can thrive and the grand design of Torah can be achieved, then this verse and all the entire creation story that follows are the beginning of a continuum of events which lead up to the Exodus from Egypt and the giving of the Torah at Sinai, which form the first significant pair of landmarks in a historical trek ending with the coming of the Mashi'ach. Rashi says as much in his comment on the last two words in chapter 1 of Berayshit: יום הששי. הוסיף ה"א בששי בגמר מעשה בראשית לומר שהתנה עמהם על מנת שיקבלו עליהם ישראל חמשה חומשי תורה. דבר אחר, יום הששי, כולם תלוים ועומדים עד יום הששי הוא ו' בסיון המוכן למתן תורה. "The sixth day." The text adds the letter Hay to the sixth day at the end of the Creation Story to say that He made a stipulation with them (the days of creation) that [creation will live on only if] Israel accepts the five books of the Torah. Another explanation: "The sixth day." Their (i.e. the days of creation) existence is dependent upon the Sixth Day, i.e. the sixth of Sivan which is set aside for the giving of the Torah. Why does Rashi give us two explanations for the added letter Hay in the word "the sixth -?"הששי The answer is rather straight-forward: Since Rashi opens his commentary on the six days of creation with the idea that the world was created for Israel and for the Torah, then his closing comment on those six days is that everything was created in anticipation of the giving of the Torah and the acceptance of the Torah by Israel. Notice that Rashi explains a textual anomaly through Derash, ignoring the possible Peshat answers completely. Rashi continues his discussion on the first verse: ואם באת לדרשו כפשוטו כך פרשהו: בראשית בריאת שמים וארץ והארץ היתה תוהו ובוהו וחשך, ויאמר אל-הים יהי אור. ולא בא המקרא להורות סדר הבריאה, לומר שאלו קדמו, שאם בא להורות כך היה לו לכתוב: בראשונה ברא את השמים וגו', שאין לך ראשית במקרא שאינו דבוק לתיבה של אחריו, כמו בראשית ממלכת יהויקים (ירמיה כו,א), ראשית ממלכתו (בראשית י,י), ראשית דגנך (דברים יח,ד), אף כאן אתה אומר בראשית ברא אל-הים את השמים, כמו בראשית ברוא, ודומה לו תחילת דבר ה' בהושע (הושע א,ב), כלומר תחילת דבורו של הקב"ה בהושע ויאמר ה' אל הושע וגו'. If you wish to explain it according to the Peshat, explain it this way: At the beginning of the creation of the heaven and the earth; and the earth was without form and void and dark. Elokim said, "Let there be light." The text does not intend to teach the order of creation, to say the these came first, for if it did intend to teach this, it should have written, "At first, He created the heaven, etc." because every "beginning - "ראשית in the Bible is connected to the word that 8 Mishlay 8:22. The basis of this Derash is a pun on the word Berayshit which the Rabbis of the Midrash connect with Rayshit in the verse in Mishlay. 9 Yirmiyahu 2:3. This Derash is also based on a pun similar to the one made on the verse in Mishlay. 4

5 follows, e.g. "In the beginning of the reign of Yeho'yakim," 10 "the beginning of his kingship," 11 "the first of your grain." 12 Here too, you must say that "In the beginning, Elokim created the heaven, etc." is like "At the beginning of God's creating. This is similar to "The beginning of the word of HaShem to Hoshe'a, HaShem said to Hoshe'a." 13 Rashi makes two points here which are intertwined. The first is that the opening verse of the Torah and of the creation story is an introductory verse. Therefore, the opening words must be reworded according to the Peshat: "At the beginning of the creation of the heaven and the earth," i.e. the first thing which God did when He began to create the heavens and the earth was to create light. The second point is that the Torah is not teaching us the "order" of the creation process. The order of anything relates to facts as they are perceived. First came X, second came Y, third came Z. This is the correct, factual order. Rashi says that if the Torah was interested in making such a factual statement, then the grammatical construction of the opening phrase would have been different. Rashi then proceeds to prove the same point in a different manner: ואם תאמר להורות בא, שאלו תחילה נבראו, ופירושו בראשית הכל ברא אלו, ויש לך מקראות שמקצרים לשונם וממעטים תיבה אחת כמו כי לא סגר דלתי בטני (איוב ג,י), ולא פירש מי הסוגר, וכמו ישא את חיל דמשק (ישעיה ח,ד) ולא פירש מי ישאנו, וכמו אם יחרוש בבקרים (עמוס ו,יב) ולא פירש אם יחרוש אדם בבקרים, וכמו מגיד מראשית אחרית (ישעיה מו,י) ולא פירש מגיד מראשית דבר אחרית דבר, אם כן תימה על עצמך שהרי כתוב ורוח אל-הים מרחפת על פני המים ועדיין לא גילה המקרא בריית המים מתי, הא למדת שקדמו המים לארץ. And if you want to say that it does come to teach that these were created first and that the explanation is "In the beginning of everything, He created these," and that there are Biblical texts which are elliptical, omitting a word or two, like "For it did not close the doors of my womb" 14 and it does not explain who should close them, or like "He will carry away the wealth of Damascus" 15 and it is not explained who will carry it off, or like "if he will plow with oxen" 16 and it does not say if a man will plow, or like "Declaring from the beginning to the end" 17 without explaining from the beginning of one thing to the end of another. If so, ask yourself: It says, "The spirit of Elokim was hovering over the surface of the water" 18 and the Biblical text has yet to reveal when the water was created, thus teaching you that [the creation of] the water preceded that of the earth. Even if the grammatical problems could be solved by assuming that the verse is simply missing an element which you the reader is meant to provide, it still would not solve the problem. The reason lies in the incorrect presentation of the facts. How can the Torah describe that God's spirit is hovering over something whose creation has yet to be announced. What might look like facts are not facts, says Rashi, they are literary earth which must be mined using a spade called Derash to reveal the gemstones hidden inside. Finally, Rashi talks about science: ועוד שהשמים מאש וממים נבראו, על כרחך לא לימד המקרא בסדר המוקדמים והמאוחרים כלום. Furthermore, the heaven [was created] out of fire and water. You must say, the Biblical text does not at all teach the order of what came first or last. 10 Yirmiyahu 26:1. 11 Berayshit 10: Devarim 18:4. 13 Hoshe'a 1:2. 14 Job 3: Yeshayahu 8:4. 16 Amos 6: Yeshayahu 46: Berayshit 1:2. 5

6 According to Rashi's medieval understanding of science, everything was created out of four basic elements: fire, water, earth and wind. Since the heavens are formed by combining fire and water (don't you get a cloud of vapor when water boils?), then the Torah can't be dealing with facts of any kind, even simple facts like the order of things, for the first verse mentions the heavens but does not mention fire or water. Indeed, the Torah does not describe the creation of water or fire at all. They are just there. The conclusion is obvious. The entire creation story cannot be understood on the Peshat level. It must be interpreted on the three deeper levels of meaning: Derash, Remez and Sod. A Final Word About Science The Torah is not science. Indeed, the Torah is not concerned with science at all. The Torah is eternal, scientific facts are not eternal. Usually, when we release our grip on something, it falls. Sometimes, the same action results in the item rising. When we let go of a pencil, it falls, but when we let go of a balloon it rises. Science understands these events using a combination of theories. Until we have a better, demonstrable explanation, we accept these theories as fact. The same is true regarding the explanation of data relating to the age of the earth or the existence of dinosaurs. What we fail to remember is that scientific theories are constantly being challenged and modified or even rejected, in the very hallowed halls of science itself. That is the very nature of scientific inquiry. Scientists are currently engaged in a heated debate as to why the dinosaurs died and disappeared off the face of the earth. Scientists are also modifying their understanding of the "Big Bang Theory" for recent data indicates that the universe is not expanding at the rate previously thought to be true. And this re-evaluation affects the determination of the age of the universe, i.e. creation itself! 19 To attempt to reconcile these ever-changing "facts" with Torah by somehow reading them into the Torah text is folly. The Torah does not change. The Torah is eternal and is concerned with truths which are eternal. The Creation Story is an artistic masterpiece on the highest level, communicating to us the most sublime theological and moral truths, which have nothing to do with science. To reject the existence of dinosaurs is to deny reality. To read science into the Torah where it does not exist or belong is to try to change the reality of Torah. Indeed, one can be a firm believer in the truths told by the Creation Story and accept scientific theory and fact as well. Torah and science need not be seen as antithetical to each other, once we understand the facts. 19 The issue of the world being only 5,757 years old requires much fuller treatment. Suffice it to say that this number is more symbolic than historical. See the commentary of the Ramban at the very end of the Creation Story, on Berayshit 2:3, s.v. Asher Bara. 6