Why Am I Biased That Chazal Are Right
Do they deserve the benefit of the doubt?
Kind of overwhelmed by how many comments this post is getting:
Holistic Medical Knowledge in the Talmud and Tosfos
I: Ancient Talmudic Bloodletting Cures are still practiced today for the same conditions
But at the heart of one of the many convoluted threads going on, is the question of how to question Chazal from a rational, traditional perspective (which I claim to promote in this forum).
The consistent trend you see OVERALL in classic rabbinic scholarship1 is to assume Chazal were accurate in their statements.
The Rambam repeats the obligation to judge the words of Chazal favorably and try to reinterpret their words to conform to the truth in three2 different3 contexts4. 5
And the last one deserves special attention because the Rambam tells us what to do if you CANโT manage to fit their words to conform with what you know to be true.
You say โtzaruch iyunโ. They couldnโt mean it โkโpshutoโ.
ืึผืึฐืฉืึถืึผึดืึฐืฆึธื ืคึผึธืกืึผืง ืึดืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึทื ึผึฐืึดืืึดืื ืืึน ืึผึธืึธืจ ืึดืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึฒืึธืึดืื ืืึนืึตืง ืขึทื ืขึดืงึผึธืจ ืึถื ืึฐืกืึนืชึตืจ ืขึดื ึฐืึธื ืึถื - ืึดืึฐืจึนืฉื ืึดืืึทืงึผึตืฉื ืึผึฐืขึตืื ืึดืึผืึน, ืขึทื ืฉืึถืึผึธืึดืื ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึทื ึผึธืึดืื ืืึน ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึถืึธืึธื: ืึดื ืึตืฆึฐืืึผ ืึผึดืึฐืจึตืืึถื ืึฐืึปืึผึธื ึดืื ืึผึธืขึดื ึฐืึธื ืึทืึฐืคึนืจึธืฉื ืึผึทืชึผืึนืจึธื - ืึฒืจึตื ืืึผืึธื, ืึฐืึดื ืึธืื - ืึนืืึทืจ: ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึทื ึผึธืึดืื ืึทืึผึถื, ืืึน ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึธืึธื ืึถื, ืึตืื ึดื ืืึนืึตืขึท ืึผึฐืึธืจึดืื ืฉืึถืึผึฐืึทืึผึธื*, ืึฐืึตืื ึธื ืขึทื ืคึผึฐืฉืืึผืึธื.
I believe this obligation holds ESPECIALLY hard if Chazal were simply conveying everyday observations of what they directly experienced. We donโt assume they were gullible and accepted everything and anything that was told to them without verifying it. They were super critical of each other and even of their predecessors. We donโt assume they shelved their critical thinking and analytic skills just because someone of authority told them something was true. ESPECIALLY if it had halachic implications.
When later Amoraim come across a statement of Tanoim that they find difficult, they donโt 1) say the Tanoim were flat out wrong. 2) merely accept it and move on. They raise all the relevant questions and try to resolve the problems. Sometimes the resolution comes from supplementary Tannaic clarifications from braisos that were brought into the discussion. Sometimes the difficult statement has to be creatively reinterpreted. And at last resort, sometimes there is missing text that was assumed to be lost or lacking from the original quote.
But the point Iโm making is that they looked at these statements criticallyโeven when they came from the greatest authorities (like G-d). They didnโt immediately accept it on authority without question. Especially if there was an internal, logical inconsistency.
With all this in mind:
When it comes to medical treatments and remedies for illnesses, I think it makes no sense for Chazal to accept somethingโand then publish it in the Talmudโif they could have easily found out that it is in fact uselessโlet alone harmfulโby doing a little checking first.
It really pushes the limits of credulity to suggest that Chazal were so deeply influenced by the โscience of their timesโ that they couldnโt eke out a little independence of thought and skepticism to first try and see if something worksโin their own times and circumstancesโbefore they recommended it. Nope, they just went along with every primitive and superstitious belief and practice even though it was easily verifiably false.
One reason I canโt believe it is because then it would crash โthe Kuzari principleโ (which should really be renamed โThe Emunos VโDeos principleโ)6 which I hold so close to my heart. If you can get the Chachmei Hamesorah to believe in something so clearly and OBVIOUSLY false, and have them propagate it for you in their most religiously definitive book of law, then you can fool them to believe almost anything!
So, no. Heck, no.
Excluding the fake, debunked outliers like the essay attributed to Rav Avraham ben HaRambam
From Hakdomo to Pirush Hamishnayos here:
ืืขื ืื ืจืืื ืฉื ืืื ืืืจืฉืืช ืืื ืืืฃ ืืืืช ืื ืืื ืืขืืื ืืื. ืืื ื ืืืจ ืืืจืืืง ืืืจ ืืื ืืื ืืฉืืจืืง ืืขืื ืื ื ืืืจ ืืืืจืืื ื ืจืืื ื ืคืฉื ื ืืืืืืช ืขื ืฉื ืืื ืขื ืื ืืื ืืืืจ ืืืื ืื ืืืืื ืืืืื ืืืืชืื ื ืืืืจ ืืืืื ืืื ืฉืืจื ืืืืืื ืืข"ืค ืฉืืื ืืื ืื ืืชืืื ืืืืื ืืืื ืืจืขืืื ืืืืืืขื ืืืืจืช ืืืกืืืื ืื ืืืืื ืืืจืืงืช ืืขืืื ืืื ืื ืฉืืฉ ืื. ืืื ืืืืกืื ืืืกืจืื ืื ืคืฉื ืืฉืื ืืขืจืืืื ื ืคืฉืืชื ืืคื ืื ืฉืงืื ืืืชื.
And therefore it is fitting that we judge these homilies favorably and that we investigate them well. And we should not hasten to distance any of their matters, but [rather] when one of their words is far-fetched in our eyes, we should train ourselves in the wisdoms until we can understand their content in that thing โ if our hearts can encompass this great thing. As behold, the sages โ even though they had a desire to learn and they were good in thought and effort, the company of pious and honored men and the distancing of everything that there is in the world โ would attribute the lack to themselves, when they evaluated themselves according to [those who were] before them.
ืืืื ืื ืฉืืืจื (ืขืืจืืืื ืืฃ ื ื:) ืืื ืฉื ืจืืฉืื ืื ืืคืชืื ืฉื ืืืื ืืฉื ืืืจืื ืื ืืคืืื ืืืื ืกืืงืืช.
And that is [the meaning of] what they said (Eruvin 53b), "The hearts of the early ones are like the opening of a hall, and of the later ones are [not] even like a needle for crevices."
ืื"ืฉ ืื ืื ื ืฉืืืืื ื ืขืืจื ืืื ื ืืืืฉืจ ืืืืืขื ื ืืงื"ื ืืืืื ืืืืช ืืืืื ืืืื ืช ื ืืื ืื ืชืกืชืชืจ (ืืฉืขืื ืื.) ืืื
From Moreh Hanevuchim 3:14 here: (Yes itโs one of the famous ones)
6 ืืขืืงืจืื: ืืืืช ืืคืจืฉื ืืช ืืกื) ืื ืชืืงืฉ ืืื ื ืืืชืืื ืื ืื ืฉืื ืืืจื ืื ืืฉืื ืืกืืจืื ืืืื ืืืืจืื ืืคื ืฉืื, ืื ืืืชืืืืงื (ืืืืืื ืืืกืืจืื ืืืื) ืืืชื ืืงืืื ืืืืชื ืืื ืื, ืืื ืื ืื ื ืืื ืืงืืื ืื ืื ืืืืื, ืืื ืืืฉืจ ืื ืืื ืืืื ืืืชื ืืืจืืช ืืืืชื ืชืืืืื, ืื ืฉืืขื ืืืช ืืืืื ืืืชื ืืืจืืช. ืื ืื ืืคื ื ืื ืืืืจ ืขื ืืืืจืืช ืฉืืื ืฉืื ื ืืืฆืืื ืฉืื ืชืืืืืช ืืืืช โ ืฉืืื ืื ื ืืื ืืช, ืื ืฉืืื ืื ืืืงืจื. ืืื ืื ืืืืช ืฉืืคืฉืจ ืืคืจืฉ ืืช ืืืจื ืืืื ืื ืฉืืืื ืชืืืืื ืืืฆืื ืฉืืฆืืืืชื ืืืืื โ ืืื ืืขึธืืืฃ ืืื ืืื ืืืชืจ ืืืืฉ ืืืขืื ืืืืื ืืืืขื.
You must, however, not expect that everything our Sages say respecting astronomical matters should agree with observation, for mathematics were not fully developed in those days: and their statements were not based on the authority of the Prophets, but on the knowledge which they either themselves possessed or derived from contemporary men of science.
But I will not on that account denounce what they say correctly in accordance with real fact, as untrue or accidentally true. On the contrary, whenever the words of a person can be interpreted in such a manner that they agree with fully established facts, it is the duty of every educated and honest man to do so.
A Teshuvah of the Rambam to Ovadia the Convert about the concept of โBashertโ here:
ืึผืึฐืึธืจ ืึดืจึฐืึทืึฐื ืึผ ืึผึฐืขึดื ึฐืึธื ืึถื ืึผึฐืคึตืจืึผืฉื ืึธืืึนืช, ืึฐืึตืึตืื ืึผ ืจึฐืึธืืึนืช, ืึฐืึตื ืึผึดืชึฐืึดืึผึทืช ืึทืึดืึผืึผืจ ืึทืึผึธืืึนื ืึฒืฉืึถืจ ืึดืึผึทืจึฐื ืึผ ืึฐืึนื ืึทืึผึดืฆึฐืืึนืช. ืึฐืึนื ืึทืึผึทื ึผึดืืึท ืึผึฐืึธืจึดืื ืฉืึถืึผึตืึทืจึฐื ืึผ, ืฉืึถืึตื ืึผึฐื ืึผืึดืื ืขึทื ืึฐืกืึนืึตื ืขืึนืึธื, ืึฐืืึนืึตืึฐ ืึผืึฐืึทืคึผึตืฉื ืึผึฐืึทืึผึธืึธื ืืึน ืึผึฐืึดืึฐืจึธืฉื ืืึน ืึผึฐืึดืึฐืจึตื ืึถืึธื ืึดื ืึทืึผึฐืืึนื ึดืื ื"ื, ืขึทื ืฉืึถืึผึดืึฐืฆึธื ืึดืึผึธื ืึทืึทืช ืขึทื ืคึผึฐืฉืึธืึธืึผ*, ืึธืฉืึดืื* ืึผึธืึผ ืขึทื ืึผึฐืึธืจึตืื ืึผ ืฉืึถืึตื ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึผึทืขึทืช ืึผืชึฐืืึผื ึธื - ืึตืื ืึน ืึถืึผึธื ืึฐืึทืึผึตื ืขึทืฆึฐืืึน ืึฐืึทืขึทืช, ืึฐืึทื ืืึน* ืึทื ืฉึผืึถืึผึทืขึฒืฉืึถื ืึผึฐื ึทืคึฐืฉืืึน.
ืึฐืึถื ืฉืึถืึธืึทืจ ืึฐืึธ ืจึทืึผึฐืึธ: "ืึผึดืชึผืึน ืฉืึถืึผึดืคึฐืืึนื ึดื ืึดืคึฐืืึนื ึดื* ืึผืึธืืึนื ืคึผึฐืืึนื ึดื ืึดืคึฐืืึนื ึดื" (ืืืขื ืงืื ืื ืข"ื) - ืึดื ืึผึฐืึตืจึธื ืึทืฉึผืึธืึธื ืึผึทืึผึนื* ืึดืื, ืึฐืึทืึผึฐืึธืจึดืื ืึผึดืคึฐืฉืึธืึธื, ืึธืึผึธื ื ึถืึฑืึทืจ ืึผึทืชึผืึนืจึธื: "ืคึผึถื ืึธืืึผืช ืึผึทืึผึดืึฐืึธืึธื ืึฐืึดืืฉื ืึทืึตืจ ืึดืงึผึธืึถื ึผึธื*" "ืึฐืึดืืฉื ืึทืึตืจ ืึฐืึทืึผึฐืึถื ึผืึผ" (ืืืจืื ื, ื-ื)? ืึฐืึดื ืึตืฉื ืึผึธืขืึนืึธื ืึผึทืขึทื ืึผึตืขึธื, ืึดืกึฐืชึผึทืคึผึตืง ืืึน ืึผึธืึธืจ ืึถื* ืึทืึทืจ ืึทื ืฉึผืึถืึผึธืชืึผื ืึผึทืชึผืึนืจึธื? ืึถืึผึธื ืึผึธืึฐ ืจึธืืึผื ืึฐืึดื ืฉืึถืืึผื ืึตืึดืื, ืึฐืึดืึผืึน ื ึธืืึนื ืึฐืืึผื ืึผึถืจึถืึฐ ืึธืึฑืึถืช: ืฉืึถืึผึธืฉืึดืื ืขึดื ึฐืึธื ืึถื ืึทืึฐืคึนืจึธืฉื ืึผึทืชึผืึนืจึธื ืขึดืงึผึธืจ, ืึดืืกืึนื ืฉืึถืึผึนื ืึตืึธืจึตืก, ืึฐืึธืชึตื ืชึผึฐืงืึผืขึธื ืฉืึถืึผึนื ืชึผึธืึดืืฉื, ืึผืึฐืฉืึถืึผึดืึฐืฆึธื ืคึผึธืกืึผืง ืึดืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึทื ึผึฐืึดืืึดืื ืืึน ืึผึธืึธืจ ืึดืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึฒืึธืึดืื ืืึนืึตืง ืขึทื ืขึดืงึผึธืจ ืึถื ืึฐืกืึนืชึตืจ ืขึดื ึฐืึธื ืึถื - ืึดืึฐืจึนืฉื ืึดืืึทืงึผึตืฉื ืึผึฐืขึตืื ืึดืึผืึน, ืขึทื ืฉืึถืึผึธืึดืื ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึทื ึผึธืึดืื ืืึน ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึถืึธืึธื: ืึดื ืึตืฆึฐืืึผ ืึผึดืึฐืจึตืืึถื ืึฐืึปืึผึธื ึดืื ืึผึธืขึดื ึฐืึธื ืึทืึฐืคึนืจึธืฉื ืึผึทืชึผืึนืจึธื - ืึฒืจึตื ืืึผืึธื, ืึฐืึดื ืึธืื - ืึนืืึทืจ: ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึทื ึผึธืึดืื ืึทืึผึถื, ืืึน ืึผึดืึฐืจึตื ืึธืึธื ืึถื, ืึตืื ึดื ืืึนืึตืขึท ืึผึฐืึธืจึดืื ืฉืึถืึผึฐืึทืึผึธื*, ืึฐืึตืื ึธื ืขึทื ืคึผึฐืฉืืึผืึธื.
Yeah, itโs annoying that the footnote numbers didnโt line up.
โHe has also assured us of the impossibility of the unbelievers having a [valid] argument against our Torah or the skeptics a proof against our faith. [All this is to be found] in [Godโs] statement in which he told us that all things had a beginning, that he is the creator who started [their causal chains] and that he is one with no partner. This is as he said, "Thus says Hashem the King of Israel and its redeemer, Hashem of Hosts, I am the first and the last and besides me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6) He after this tells us what he has commanded us to do or forbidden to us and tells us that he always has been and always will be. This is as he said (Ibid. 7) , "Who like me can proclaim? Let him declare it and match me this way. Let him tell the future of an ancient people, Let him relate events yet to occur." Additionally, he removed our fear of those who disagree with us for it is unsensible to assume they should prevail in argument or that they should show us a logically necessary argument [against our faith]. โฆ
โฆ As for His statement, "Did I not tell you from that time?"; he means the traditions concerning what is to come. [As for] "relate it", by this he means the traditions about that which has already happened as He said, "The first things have come and I am now relating new things." (Isaiah 42:9)
When he said, "You are my witnesses," this relates to what the people saw through the wonderous signs and great wonders. These were of many sorts from the coming of the ten plagues upon Egypt to the splitting of the Sea to the revelation at Mount Sinai. As I see it it, the sign of the Manna was the most wonderous sign of them all, for an enduring thing is more amazing than a temporary one.
Indeed, no scheme will come to mind [naturally] by which to sustain a people numbering something close to thousands of thousands for forty years in the desert with nothing but created food that the Creator made for them from the air. Were there any means to produce even a part of such a scheme the philosophers of old would have been the first to take advantage of it and would thereby have provided for their disciples and teach them wisdom and allowed them to have no need to work or to request help from others.
Now, the masses of the children of Israel would not have agreed on this [were it not true]. Such [proof], then is sufficient for an authentic tradition. Besides, when they would have told their kids, "We were in the desert for fourty years eating the manna," when this statement had no basis in fact their children wouldโve said to them: "You are lying to us. You, mister, is this not your field? You, mister, is this not your garden? Have you not always dervied your subsistence from these?" Thus, the children would not have accepted it at all.
When he said, "Is there a God beside me?" he meant [something like,] "If you happen to be afraid that some of the things I told you that have already happened or that I have told you will happen are untrue,[your worry may be justified were] if creation were effected by a creator besides I. Perhaps in that case I would not know what he had did. Since I am One my knowledge includes all that I have done and all that I will do." Regarding his statement, "there is no rock that I do not know," subsumed under it are the greatest of men and their sages for the term "rock" is applied to great men as in, "Look to the rock you were hewn from and the hole of the put from which you were dug out. Look to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you. (Isaiah 51:1-2) Additionally, [it also says], "Thou hast also turned back the edge of his sword, and hast not made him to stand in the battle."(Psalms 89:43) Therefore what is meant [by the original verse is that] "there are no sages or great men who I did not know about [that will have a successful argument] and it is therefore impossible that there should be a [successful] argument against you regarding your Torah nor a crack in your faith because my knowledge includes everything and I have made it known to you."
Here's something cool: A cryptic pregnancy: Where women are pregnant with regular periods. That may have been more common in Chazal's era.
https://nypost.com/2025/08/15/lifestyle/i-had-no-idea-i-was-pregnant-until-i-gave-birth-on-the-toilet-2/
Oh God. I wrote a whole post bashing you and now you write this. I now need to edit stuff. Oh well.