Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Where You Least Expect To Find It

Last week, I posted about my surprise in discovering that Ramban subscribed to the ancient belief in the sun passing behind the sky at night. But I also made a surprising discovery in the other direction.

R. Eliezer Lipmann Neusatz of Magendorf was one of the leading disciples of Chasam Sofer, who referred to him as his “son, pupil and bracelet” in his 1839 approbation to his book Betzir Eli’ezer. Kesav Sofer called him "the one of a kind and unique" of Chasam Sofer's talmidim. That should firmly establish his Orthodox credentials!

But sounding just like Rambam, R. Neusatz observes that the Sages were mistaken in their belief about the sun’s path at night, and that they accepted the opinion of the gentiles, just as “one accepts the truth from whoever says it.” It should be noted that another of Chasam Sofer's disciples, Maharam Schick, also accepted that Chazal were mistaken in this regard. But R. Neusatz also notes that this was not the only instance of their making statements about the universe which are now known to be incorrect, and explains that the Sages were simply putting forward their own beliefs, which they occasionally attached to Scriptural verses by way of asmachta. And even more interestingly, he says that there are pesukim in the Torah that are scientifically inaccurate, but "the Torah spoke as in the language of men" - an approach which was also developed by Rav Hirsch and Rav Kook in this context, but which I was not expecting to see proposed by a disciple of Chasam Sofer. This is a theme that Dr. Marc Shapiro has been discussing in a recent series of fascinating posts at the Seforim blog (see the latest installment here), and he informed me that he is also planning to discuss R. Neusatz.

All this is in Mei Menuchos (Pressburg 1884), pp. 36a-39a. You can see the sefer online at HebrewBooks.org.


  1. Is the student of the Chasam sofer more surprising than the son of the Solevetchiks?

  2. Ah, so he's the aberrant disciple who forsook the ways of his mentor! I should have realized that it was impossible for him to actually be authentic.

  3. "Ah, so he's the aberrant disciple who forsook the ways of his mentor!"

    I never would have heard of brisker method if it wasn't for that aberrant disciple :)

    But how does that change his authenticity?

  4. asmachta is not "mesorah" ie it doesn't come from Sinai.

  5. About as famous as R. Dovid Leib Silberstein...

    I don't really understand your excitement. Even if you would find a brand name, nothing would change.

    Even if Moshe Rabbeinu himself would come to testify, the Chareidi world wouldn't move one inch. It is simply not part of their mesora (that was formed in the late 20th century and on).

  6. I can't remember if this was brought up in any of the many comments re: brain death, but I noticed an interesting tidbit in Ramban's long discussion at Vayikra 1:9 regarding the reasons behind the commandments for offering korbanos.

    After some rough words regarding Rambam's theories put forth in Moreh Nevuchim, Ramban states approvingly (in the paragraph starting with "v'yoser ra'ui lishmoa") that the reason the innards and kidneys are burned in fire is because they are the vessels of thought and desire ("kli hamachshava v'hataavah").


Comments for this blog are moderated. Please see this post about the comments policy for details. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED - please use either your real name or a pseudonym.