Rabbi Nisson Wolpin

Rabbi Nisson Wolpin

The Jewish Observer

42 Broadway

New York, NY 10004

Dear Rabbi Wolpin,

Rabbi Joseph Elias in “Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch and Evolution---The View from His Commentary” (Jewish Observer, September 2006) contends that Rabbi Hirsch’s essay “The Educational Value of Judaism” (1873), in which evolution is discussed, “was written in a gingerly manner that could easily be misunderstood.” In contrast, Rabbi Elias states that “the final edition of the Hirsch Chumash was printed in 1883, ten years after the essay on the ‘Educational Value of Judaism,’ and thus represents his definitive views on the creation of man and of all species of plants and animals.” To support his contention that the essay is a less definitive source for Rabbi Hirsch’s teachings, he notes that the essay “was omitted from the Collected Writings” and he quotes Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer who wrote in an introduction to the essay’s separate publication that “the somewhat unusual title as well as the author’s presentation with regard to style and content reflect the purpose of these graduation essays to acquaint a wider non-Jewish public…”

In the essay, Rabbi Hirsch states that the evolutionary process (“adaptation and heredity”) only comes to confirm and reaffirm the Divine principle of lemino---“for its species”--- which is the norm for the world and is operative in the form of heredity and genetics [molecular biology]. He unequivocally states that this does not contradict the Divine creation of the species or our belief therein. Accordingly, there is no contradiction or apparent inconsistency whatsoever between the essay and the Commentary [“Hirsch Chumash”].
If Rabbi Hirsch intended with the second edition of the Commentary to recant or clarify the views expressed in the essay, he would have so stated; he corrects or clarifies himself when necessary in the Commentary (e.g., Bamidbor 17:23). Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer’s introductory note to the essay states its purpose: “to acquaint a wider non-Jewish public with the nature of the Jewish day school and of other Jewish institutions. Though this essay was written over six decades ago, it should stimulate thought and discussion among thinking Jewish readers today.” The omission --- unexplained but otherwise of no import --- of the essay from the original 1911 Gesammelte Schriften (Collected Writings) was corrected by its publication in the Nachlas Tzvi (publication (1930-1938) of the Samson Raphael Hirsch Society^*, Frankfurt-am-Main) in 1937. “The unusual title as well as the author’s presentation with regard to style and content” refer to the fact that the essay was given out at the annual graduation exercise of the Realschule [Rabbi Hirsch’s school] with non-Jewish government officials in attendance; accordingly, in contrast to his usual practice, there is a paucity of Hebrew expressions and he deliberately selected a topic which would be understood even by non-Jews. Rabbi Breuer’s words are explicit: the essay is of particular significance and a valid reflection of Rabbi Hirsch’s teachings. One can note that as the Frankfurt community was diminishing and the adherents to Rabbi Hirsch’s teachings were re-locating elsewhere, it was felt that this essay was of such value that it was published at the time.
A clear reading of the words of Rabbi Hirsch and Rabbi Breuer obviates misunderstanding.
Sincerely,
Elliott Bondi

October 4, 2006

cc. Rabbi Yaakov Perlow

* The Society’s Board members were Dayan Eliezer Posen, Chairman (Frankfurt), Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld (Jerusalem), Rav Yeshaya Fuerst (Vienna), Rav Yitzchak Hirschowitz (Wirbalis, Lithuania), Rav Yonasan Horowicz (Jerusalem), Rav Pinchas Kohn (Vienna-Ansbach), Dr. Isaac Breuer (Frankfurt-Jerusalem), Dr. Salomon Ehrmann (Frankfurt-Zurich).