Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, known as the Netziv, was a giant in Torah study. Unlike some great scholars of the 19th century who were recognized as geniuses in their youth, the Netziv was rather unremarkable as a young man, but because of his tremendous dedication and hard work, he became one of the greatest scholars of his generation. He led the famous Yeshiva of Volozhin for its last 40 years, until it was closed by the Russian authorities in 1892. In his introduction to his Torah commentary HaEmek Davar, he made a stunning claim comparing the inevitablity of living with incomplete scientific knowledge to living with incomplete Torah knowledge.
| It is easy to understand that just as it is impossible for a scientist to claim that he knows all of nature’s secrets . . ., there is also no assurance that the conclusions from his investigations will not be invalidated by a colleague or by someone in a later generation. Similarly, it is impossible for the student of the Torah to claim that he has paid adequate attention to each and every detail that deserves attention, and even that which he does explain—there is no assurance that he has discerned the actual truth of the Torah! Nonetheless, it is incumbent upon us to do what we can. |
קדמת העמק ה וְנָקֵל לְהָבִין, כִּי כְּמוֹ שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לֶחָכָם בְּסִתְרֵי הַטֶּבַע לְהִתְבָּרֵךְ בִּלְבָבוֹ כִּי עָמַד עַל כָּל סִתְרֵי הַטֶּבַע. [. . .] וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ מָה שֶׁהֶעֱלָה בַּחֲקִירָתוֹ, אִם אֵין לוֹ בְּחִינָה בְּרוּרָה כִּי כָּךְ הוּא, יָכוֹל לִהְיוֹת שֶׁיָּבוֹא רֵעֵהוּ אוֹ בַּדּוֹר שֶׁאַחֲרָיו וְחָקְרוּ בְּאֹפֶן אַחֵר וְיִסְתֹּר בִּנְיַן קוֹדְמוֹ, כָּךְ אִי אֶפְשָׁר לְהִתְבָּרֵךְ לְחוֹקֵר בְּטֶבַע הַתּוֹרָה וְלַעֲמֹד עַל כָּל הַשִּׁנּוּיִים וְהַנִּדְרָשׁ שׂוּם לֵב וְלוֹמַר כִּי עָמַד עַל כֻּלָּן, וְגַם מָה שֶׁבֵּאֵר אֵין הוֹכָחָה שֶׁכֵּיוָן לַאֲמִתָּהּ שֶׁל תּוֹרָה. וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם עָלֵינוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת מָה שֶׁבְּיָדֵינוּ. |
These words of the Netziv echoed in my mind as I walked around, looking at the work of our student scientists, listening to their interactions with our adult “visiting scientists.”. Some of our students were confident in their results. Some had the humility to recognize that truth is established (at least somewhat more securely) when the results of an experiment are replicated.
The Netziv’s comment makes a huge demand on us. Continue to study, continue to explore continue to experiment, continue to look at each and every detail that deserves our attention, even though we know that a colleague or a later investigator may “tear apart what has been built by his predecessor” (which I translated contextually above as “invalidated”). We still present the results of our study. That is what the Netziv meant when he said aleynu la’asot mah she’b’yadeinu עָלֵינוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת מָה שֶׁבְּיָדֵינוּ, we have to do what we can (literally, “what is in our hands”). As the Netziv indicates, one’s research and study is only a contribution to an ongoing conversation, an ongoing effort to establish truth that is good enough to act upon.
If it is true of science, the Netziv claims, it is just as true of Torah. We study Torah for its truths, not its Truth. We aren’t going to ever have broad enough of a conception of Torah that we will be assured that we understand its singular Truth, but we can, and must, do what we can. We can try to account for the diversity of voices and indications and subtleties, we can work on our skills, and we can ultimately add our voice to the ongoing conversation of Torah (my preferred way of translating the phrase Torah she’b’al Peh תּוֹרָה שֶׁבְּעַל פֶּה which is often translated as oral Torah). We can recognize that if someone contradicts our understanding, that that is part of growing Torah, especially if we listen and respond. Sometimes, the truth we uncover will stand alongside someone else’s truth, and sometimes our truth may be displaced. But if we don’t have the willingness to share our truth, we may lose the opportunity to spur along someone else’s insight. So we have to do, as the Netziv tells us, mah she’b’yadeinu מָה שֶׁבְּיָדֵינוּ what we can.
Living with a sense of appropriate humility, knowing that what we learn may be challenged and rejected, is not easy. Living with a sense of appropriate self-worth and willingly placing our research out into the world and therefore subject to challenge or rejection, is also not easy. Balancing our humility and our sense of self-worth is not just the challenge of a science fair, it is the challenge of everything that HACD is trying to do. Confirmation bias, the tendency to only “learn” that which already confirms what we already believe, is a failure of humility. The Netziv said that knowing that we won’t find complete truth is easy to understand, and cognitively, that may be true, at least for an adult. Emotionally and psychologically, however, it is not so easy.
Our task, as students of science, as students of Torah, and as students in general, is to continue to study and to raise our voice and our conclusions, not because we will have uncovered the final or complete truth, but because we know that without our ongoing efforts, we won’t get closer to the truth. We also have to protect the voices that contradict or poke holes in our scientific hypotheses or our readings of Torah because their voices may indeed may be closer to the truth or at least spur us to a greater understanding of the truth.
Of course, learning to live with incomplete knowledge isn’t easy in normal circumstances, but under exceptional circumstances, it is even more difficult. A few days before the science fair, we celebrated Shushan Purim at HACD. Did Mordechai and Esther know that what they were doing was going to work? Clearly not. Esther calls upon the people to fast with her because she was afraid of what might happen. They didn’t know whether their response to Haman was going to succeed, but they knew that they had to take a stand and act. As it was in those days, may it continue to be so in our own days, bayamim hahem uvazman hazeh בַּיָּמִים הַהֵם וּבַזְּמַן הַזֶּה.
I want to thank our visiting scientists for their care and interest in the work of our student scientists: Marissa Barlaz, Eitan Barlaz, Neil Gildener-Leapman, Barry Pollack, Susan Scharfstein, Elin Shaddox, and our own Elliot Saavedra. Thank you for sharing with our students and asking them good questions. Thank you also for your contributions to increasing human understanding of ourselves and of the world which we have been given and from which we learn.
Shabbat Shalom,
Jeffrey Spitzer