Avot265

1:
The author of our present mishnah is the most enigmatic, the most intriguing and the most complex of all the sages of the Tannaitic period. He is also the most vilified. In a certain sense he is also the most modern of all the sages. It is perhaps the greatest monument to the honesty and integrity of the sages that they saw fit to include in this tractate a teaching attributed to the only sage known to us who left the Sanhedrin, forsook his learning and quit Judaism altogether. The story of Elisha ben-Avuyah is more interesting and more fascinating than the rather bland teaching that is quoted in our mishnah in his name. We shall begin to tell that story in our next shiur.

To be continued.

There are so many items for discussion that have piled up on my desk that, in an effort to reduce the backlog, I am devoting the major part of this shiur to a topic that evoked three responses.

In Avot 259 I responded to a query from Amnon Ron'el and I referred to contemporary man's ecological sins, including our responsibility for global warming. My comment prompted in indignant messages from two participants: Daniel Burstyn and Steve Jacobs (who also kindly attached a newspaper article). The gist of both messages was that there is substantial scientific opinion that decries what I wrote and claims that global warming and similar phenomena have natural causes and are not caused by human malfeasance.

I respond:

Thank you for your learned comments, which nevertheless have failed to convince me. The scientific community seems to be split into two camps: those who hold that global warming, the greenhouse effect, and so forth have a distinct human contribution, and the other camp which holds otherwise. Broadly speaking the members of the latter group are American and the members of the former group are "the rest of the world". Members of the former group also sometimes imply that American opinion is often influenced by non-scientific considerations.

Be that as it may, it is quite clear that very many Western governments recognize the human element in our ecological situation and are taking active steps – severally and collectively – to try to remedy the situation. (The US government has stubbornly refused to support all such efforts for many years now.)

I found the following article online which, I think, describes the thinking of one representative European government:

Britain has been issued with a stark warning over climate change – as it faces higher temperatures, rising sea levels and 'boom or bust' rainfall patterns. The Environment Agency says there is "no choice" but to adapt to unavoidable changes in weather patterns. This will be necessary to protect lives, property, the economy and environment, according to chief executive Barbara Young. The statement came ahead of the second report from the IPCC – the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Environment correspondent Robert Nisbet says after blaming fossil fuels for driving climate change, the world's pre-eminent scientists will warn of its devastating effects. The second report from the IPCC is published later – and campaigners argue policy makers can't ignore its troubling conclusions:

"I think it's a wake up call," said Keith Allott of WWF. "We've got to get global emissions on a downward curve steeply – that's down to individuals but it's also down to world governments to get their act together this year and show they mean business and are listening to the scientists."

The IPCC is expected to predict global warming will cause sea levels to rise. Tens of millions living near coasts will be forced to move. Salt water will swallow land and contaminate drinking supplies.

While North America and northern Europe might initially benefit from longer growing seasons and milder weather, it is likely to be the world's poorest in Africa and Asia who will bear the brunt. The report is also likely to suggest countries must learn to adapt to the changing climate. The Maldives, for example, has built a sea wall to protect its main island Male from rising sea levels. Barbara Young said we will see the impact much closer to home as well. "We already see our south and east coasts heavily threatened by sea level rise and by increased storminess," she said. "We've already seen our water supply in the last two years threatened by the worst drought in over a hundred years, so these conditions are going to become more frequent and we need to act now." But the IPCC are delivering a stark message: the industrial revolution may have changed the way we live but now we face living with the consequences.

Amnon Ron'el, whose query prompted the discussion wrote:

I accept your claim with pain and a sincere heart.

This topic is now closed.