9866 —על גבולות מכונים מדעיים בפסיקת הלכה

B"H, 3 Adar II, 5730.

Brooklyn, NY.

Shalom u'Vrachah!

Vavac"h iy"a nu"n active in communal needs, a man of many accomplishments etc. Rabbi Moshe Munk

Shalom u'Vrachah! I hereby confirm, though belatedly, receipt of your letter as well as the booklet "Torah with Derech Eretz." Thank you for your attention in sending it to me.

Regarding your letter about the scientific institute, given its current state and since it is tied to a plan for continued studies in an atmosphere that is entirely unsuitable—as we discussed at length during your visit—and since I do not wish to elaborate on this distressing matter which is not to Israel's merit, for now I cannot participate in a program that would ultimately lead to what was mentioned above. Please accept my apologies. Surely a better solution can be found for the problem we discussed and which you also mention in your current letter.

On a related note, though I am unsure if it pertains to you directly, since you are acquainted with the management of the science institute, I feel obligated to point out another crucial matter which I have discussed orally with their associates and representatives in other countries: It is absolutely necessary to firmly establish that the institute has no authority whatsoever to issue halachic rulings or practical decisions; this remains solely within the jurisdiction of rabbis as rabbinic decisors—not engineers or doctors—even if they hold rabbinic ordination when acting as scientists in their field.

Besides many reasons for this, there is also a very simple one that requires no textual proof: There is practical precedent—institutes that tried to engage in halachic rulings (even with good intentions from their founders) ended up, after a year or so (the exact time is unimportant), with disastrous results when new leadership took over. Therefore it is certain and obvious that if the institute assumes such authority, it will have generational consequences—ultimately causing tears for generations.

I am aware that the institute has a special department called "Rabbinic," but in my opinion no department—even Rabbinic—has authority to rule on halacha. It does not help to announce that these are only theoretical rulings and practical questions should be asked of a rabbi; once a leniency is publicized by Professor So-and-so who is also a rabbi, people will not think to consult another rabbi because his opinion suffices—and wise people will understand this hint.

Of course my intention is not to diminish the importance of the institute but rather to emphasize its role: clarifying all sides—positive and negative—but not deciding which side carries more weight either way. In every question it must be stressed that they are not answering but only clarifying all aspects involved—like a court where parties present arguments but judgment belongs solely to the judge "who will be in those days," and "Yiftach in his generation like Shmuel in his generation"—the rabbi whose profession is rabbinics—not someone considered an expert merely due to technical knowledge. As is well known: all wisdoms are only assistants and preparers for Torah—not vice versa.

This would be an appropriate place to elaborate on your booklet about Torah with Derech Eretz—especially as I saw this myself in Berlin at Artillerie Street 31—which was already then a stronghold of piety for this approach. Yet everyone eventually recognized reality and began sending their sons exclusively to yeshivas devoted entirely to holiness without any secular studies at all—despite initial opposition—but ultimately realized there was no other way. I do not wish to mix topics here.

With honor and blessing.

P.S. Allow me to add regarding what was mentioned above: see Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat siman 3 se’if katan 13 (cited in Netivot HaMishpat there): "Do not sit with laymen on any case; for I know that laymen’s rulings and scholars’ rulings are opposites." Clearly this does not refer simply to an ignoramus or someone without ordination or learning—for then what would be novel? Certainly Maharshal would not need advice or proofs for such advice; rather it refers even where there seems no reason not to include such a layman—and yet comes this warning. The language itself makes clear: this is not just an extra stringency or concern for leniency/strictness where there’s doubt; rather—as he writes—the ruling will be opposite from that of scholars—and lighter.

Summary

The Rebbe teaches that halachic authority must remain solely with qualified rabbis; scientific institutes may clarify issues but must never issue practical rulings themselves. Mixing roles leads to confusion and negative outcomes for generations.