9 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Torah and Science that was universally believed for over a thousand years, and then HAKIRAH SHOULD BE congratu- replaced by the very different lated on another wonderful issue heliocentric theory? (no. 17). In the issue, Nathan Aviezer criticizes R. Moshe Meisel- The answer is “no!”. The geo- man’s recent book on Torah and centric theory was universally Science. While his points are con- accepted for a millennium on re- vincing, I would like to correct one ligious grounds alone. The beliefs error in this review. Aviezer writes: of the Church demanded that man’s place must be at the center Finally, a word should be said of the universe. about the failed geocentric the- ory of the solar system, in which This is incorrect. First of all, the it was erroneously assumed that Ptolemaic system of geocentrism all planetary orbits could be de- was as much science as the Coper- scribed as circles revolving nican system, and had nothing to do around the Earth. Is that not an with theology. 1 Secondly, geocen- example of a scientific theory ————————————————————————————— 1 Rather than refer to any number of extremely subtle), stellar parallax was books on the history of astronomy, not detected until the 19th century. here is what the Wikipedia entry on Therefore, the Greeks chose the sim- “Geocentric Model” has to say: pler of the two explanations. The lack “Adherence to the geocentric model of any observable parallax was consid- stemmed largely from several im- ered a fatal flaw of any non-geocentric portant observations. First of all, if the theory. Another observation used in fa- Earth did move, then one ought to be vor of the geocentric model at the time able to observe the shifting of the fixed was the apparent consistency of Venus' stars due to stellar parallax. In short, if luminosity, thus implying that it is usu- the earth was moving the shapes of the ally about the same distance from constellations should change consider- Earth, which is more consistent with ably over the course of a year. If they geocentrism than heliocentrism. In re- did not appear to move, the stars are ei- ality, that is because the loss of light ther much further away than the Sun caused by its phases compensates for and the planets than previously con- the increase in apparent size caused by ceived, making their motion undetecta- its varying distance from Earth. Once ble, or in reality they are not moving at again, Aristotle's objections of helio- all. Because the stars were actually centrism utilized his ideas concerning much further away than Greek astron- omers postulated (making movement Ḥ akirah 18 © 2014 10 : Hakirah,̣ The Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought trism long predates the second-cen- Miller quotes comments I made in tury Ptolemy. Aristotle was a geo- an online class. In this class I re- centrist, and in Aristotle’s view the ferred to R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik’s most important part of the world is doubt that real Hasidism could ever not the center. “For the medieval take root in the United States. I mind, under the influence of Aris- misspoke when I said that the tape totle, the earth as the center of the of the Rav was from the 1970s. In world was not a position of honor. fact, he made this comment in the On the contrary, as Prof. Lovejoy 1950s. By the 1970s it was clear to put it, it was ‘the place farthest re- all that Hasidism had become a suc- moved from the Empyrean, the cess in America. bottom of creation, to which its dregs and baser elements sank. The Marc B. Shapiro actual center, indeed, was Hell; in University of Scranton the spatial sense, the medieval world was literally diabolocentric.’”2 Aviezer “blames” geocentrism Professor Nathan Aviezer responds: on the Church, and yet Maimonides (and every other Jewish and Islamic Professor Marc Shapiro’s thought- thinker of his day) was a geocentrist. ful letter correctly points out that Maimonides also had a strong anti- the geocentric theory was sup- anthropocentric view, as he did not ported by many seemingly sound regard man as the central purpose “scientific” reasons. However, I of the universe. This view of Mai- cannot agree with his statement that monides was an important source the geocentric theory “had nothing for Norman Lamm in his famous to do with theology.” In fact, this article “The Religious Implications theory had everything to do with theol- of Extraterrestrial Life.” Only those ogy, as I will show by several exam- who are convinced that they are the ples. center of the universe would be 1. One must surely wonder why troubled by the discovery of other the Church took such a strong po- inhabited worlds, and that is why sition concerning the structure of Maimonides’ outlook came in so the solar system. Why did the handy for Lamm. Church care whether or not the ge- Also, on p. 224 n. 15, Chaim ocentric theory was correct? The ————————————————————————————— the natural tendency of earth-like ob- (such as birds or clouds) would be left jects. The natural state of heavy earth- behind.” like objects is to tend towards the cen- 2 Norman Lamm, “The Religious Im- ter of the earth and not move unless plications of Extraterrestrial Life,” Tra- forced by an outside object. It was also dition 7 (Winter 1965) pp. 27-28. believed by some that if the Earth ro- tated on its axis, the air and objects in it Letters to the Editor : 11 reason for their great interest in as- When this model failed to ex- tronomy was that the Church had plain the details of planetary mo- developed a theological paradigm tion, medieval astronomers did not for the structure of the universe, abandon circles. Rather, they in- based on their understanding of vented the epicycle, which is a circle Scripture, and the linchpin of the revolving around another circle. Church paradigm was the geocen- The epicycle introduces two arbi- tric theory. Therefore, when Galileo trary parameters, the radius of the publicly mocked the geocentric the- epicycle and its speed, whose values ory and supported the opposing he- can be chosen to fit the data. When liocentric theory, the Church roared the addition of an epicycle proved into action. Galileo was hauled be- insufficient to explain the accurately fore the Court of the Inquisition, known planetary orbits, the astron- forced to publicly recant the helio- omers introduced additional epicy- centric theory on pain of death, sen- cles. In the course of time, eighty ep- tenced to life imprisonment, and icycles were introduced, providing had his books placed on the Index, 160 completely arbitrary parameters, all forbidden reading for all good in the futile attempt to explain plan- Catholics. It was only the interces- etary motion in terms of an incor- sion of Pope Urban VIII, who com- rect theory. The astronomers never muted his sentence to house-arrest, abandoned circular motion and that saved Galileo from languishing they never abandoned constant in prison for the rest of his life. This speed because of theological considera- is what happens when the argument is tions that decreed that the orbits of about theology by those who take their the- all heavenly bodies must be de- ology very seriously. scribed in terms of circles moving at 2. The geocentric theory of the constant speed. solar system consisted of several as- 3. When Nicolaus Copernicus sumptions. Not only was it assumed introduced the heliocentric theory, that all heavenly bodies move he emphasized that his theory had around the Earth, it was also as- nothing at all to say about how the planets sumed that they move in circular or- actually moved. That subject was un- bits with constant speed. The rea- der the sole jurisdiction of the Church. son for this latter assumption was Copernicus, who lived in Catholic the belief of the Church that the Poland, stated that he was merely motion of the heavenly bodies is proposing a “model” on the basis of under the direct control of G-d and, which one can calculate planetary therefore, this motion must be orbits. Therefore, Copernicus was “ideal.” Since the circle is the not put on trial by the Court of the “ideal” geometric figure and a con- Inquisition. Political correctness stant speed is the “ideal” speed, was as important then as it is now. these features must characterize In fact, the heliocentric model planetary motion. of Copernicus did not explain plan- 12 : Hakirah,̣ The Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought etary motion any better than the ge- These individuals are actually un- ocentric model with its 80 epicycles. dermining observance and bear a The reason is that Copernicus still heavy burden for it. assumed circular orbits moving at Millions of our brethren have constant speed, as the Church re- separated themselves from ob- quired. However, Copernicus servance in no small measure be- pointed out that his model had the cause they perceive that the discov- very important advantage of not re- eries of science (and history and ar- quiring a whole slew of arbitrary pa- chaeology) have discredited the rameters. It wasn’t until the non- foundations of Judaism. Prominent Catholic Johannes Kepler intro- rabbis and leaders of orthodoxy are duced elliptical orbits for the plan- seen as the ‘face’ of observant Juda- ets moving at variable speeds, ac- ism. When this ‘face’ insists that cording to his famous three laws, certain ideas are inherent to proper that the planetary orbits were finally observance and belief, and that ne- explained.