INSIGHT NATURAL
AND SUPERNATURAL The
events of Yetziat Mitzrayim, the
Exodus from Egypt, and Kriat Yam Suf,
the Splitting of the Reed Sea, demand of us to confront the concept of the
supernatural.1 I state that it is the concept that we
must confront and not the supernatural itself for, in our present time, we
don’t truly experience the supernatural; our only real encounter with it is
conceptually in our Torah literature. This, of course, is not to say that there
are no miracles today for, of course, there are and God’s On
a simple level, it would seem that the answer to any such question would be
pretty straightforward. Through reading about the reality of supernatural
events in history, we are to recognize that there is a Force above nature. Yet,
what is highlighted by such a recognition is also the
reality of nature and the need to further question its role. We can understand
a world bound by certain natural laws and we could possibly understand a world
not bound by any such laws but directly governed openly by the Will of God; it
is the co-existence of the two realms that is most difficult to comprehend.
This is not simply a reflection of the question of why there are no longer any
open miracles although this fact is part of the issue. An immense difficulty in
our confrontation with the concept of the supernatural is that it always
co-existed with the realm of the natural. To perceive the supernatural demands
a prior perception of the natural but once one perceives the supernatural, how
is it possible to again perceive the natural as natural? In Shemot 14:31, we are told that the
Jewish People saw all the remarkable, supernatural events of Kriat Yam Suf and fully believed in Hashem, above nature. Shortly
thereafter, though, in Shemot 15:22-16:4,
we are told that the nation was concerned about hunger and thirst, seemingly
approaching the matter solely from the realm of the natural. How are we to
comprehend the supernatural if those who experienced it still felt so bound by
nature?2
Rabbi Avishai David, Darosh Darash Yosef, Beshalah: Hallel over the Miraculous and the Ordinary
presents Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik
as maintaining that there are two kinds of Shirah,
of song in praise of God. “The first is recited over miraculous and
supernatural events in which the Divine Will transcends the laws of nature…On
the other hand, there is a shirah that is recited over nature’s cyclical patterns.” According
to the Rav, although both are necessary, the latter one is the better one. In a
certain way, there seems to be values perceivable in the God in nature that are
not ascertainable through an encounter with God’s supernatural activities. The
realm of the natural is, as such, not just simply a realm of laws and
principles by which the world normally functions. The realm of the natural is
its own unique presentation of God. From the supernatural activities of Hashem, we are to gain one set of
insights into the Divine. From His activities in nature, we are to gain another
set of insights. We are to acquire both sets. Our further challenge is to
create a bridge between these two realms by which we can also protect ourselves
from the perils of the chasm between them. The Dor De’ah, the Generation of the Desert, could not forsake the
realm of the natural even as they experienced the reality of the supernatural
for they knew that there were aspects of the Divine that were only manifested
in the natural realm. They, as such, even as they experienced the supernatural,
were most causally affected by the natural. The challenge -- one in which they
sadly failed -- was to determine how to combine the two realms into one
consciousness, both in terms of how to behave and how to relate to God. We
are thus to understand that the realm of the natural is one specific
presentation of God and the realm of the supernatural is a decisively different
presentation. When God acted in a supernatural manner, it was not meant to
supplant the understandings of the Deity that emerged from an encounter with
the realm of the natural but it was intended to add another perspective. The
challenge was, thus, how to incorporate this new perspective with the already
existent one. How does one, thereby, relate to both the natural and the supernatural
since both, in tandem, reflect God? This was the tension that faced the desert
generation. This
is also the tension that we encounter as we confront the concept of the
supernatural. Our dominant encounter with God is obviously through the realm of
the natural and it is through this realm that we gain our greatest insights
into our relationship with and understanding of the Deity. It is the realm that
we experience. Nonetheless, in acknowledging the supernatural in history, we
recognize that God’s presentation in nature is not because He is bound by
nature but because He chooses to present Himself in this world in this manner. We
cannot say how we would respond to the open, revelation of the supernatural. We
cannot say how our minds would attempt to incorporate both realms of the
natural and supernatural into our daily lives and daily decisions.
Acknowledging the concept of the supernatural, as presented through our study
of Torah, however, does change our very perception of the natural. The laws of
nature are not simply what exist but they are what were created to exist. They,
thus, inherently are a reflection of God’s Will.3
We may still not be able to comprehend the supernatural but through the
recognition of its existence in history, we are further driven to see God
within the natural. Rabbi
Benjamin Hecht Footnotes 1 This
is clear according to Ramban, Shemot 6:2
who maintains that the essence of what occurred at
these events was clearly outside of nature. There are those who present Rambam, Moreh Nevuchim 2:29, however,
as maintaining that all these events could actually be explained through the
laws of nature; the result being an absence of the supernatural and thus no
need to confront it. A close reading of the Rambam, though, does not truly
support such a conclusion. It would seem, rather, that, according to Rambam, supernatural
events do occur but such cessations of nature are only temporary. Furthermore, it
is God’s primary desire for the world to exist solely pursuant to the laws of
nature without any need for supernatural intervention. Nevertheless, at certain
times in history, though, God did have to act supernaturally. Yetziat Mitzrayim and Kriat Yam Suf were examples of such
instances. As such, even according to this view, there is a need to confront
the supernatural. 2 Of
course, T.B. Arachin 15a includes
these events in God’s criticism, in Bamidbar
14:22, of ten tests to which the Jewish People subjected Him prior to the
sin of the Spies. As such, this clinging on to the realm of the natural may
have actually been a weakness, even a culpable weakness. My problem, though, is
how was it even possible to maintain such an allegiance? Supernatural events
occurred even as the nation complained. Given the open reality of the
supernatural, how could there have even been any allegiance to the realm of the
natural? 3 Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot
Teshuva 10:6 may, thus, be stating that the study of the natural with such
a recognition will develop a love of God. Return to top |
© 2010 NISHMA