New Moment Magazine Article On Rabbi Slifkin

Moment Magazine has published a new article about the Rabbi Nosson Slifkin Book Ban. Perhaps the best quote in the piece comes from Rabbi Ahron Feldman, the 'godol' who first backed Rabbi Slifkin but then sold him out:

None of the rabbis who signed the ban was willing to speak with me, but I reached [rabbi Ahron] Feldman this summer while he was vacationing in Israel. I asked him to explain how the ban’s signers differ from fundamentalist Christians: Both groups believe that Darwinism is heretical and that the world is 6,000 years old. Feldman, who speaks English with strong Yiddish inflections, replied that he was not familiar with Christian ideas but was reasonably sure that they were nothing like Jewish ones. “We rarely can converge with Christians on anything,” he said, “so I doubt we agree with them on this matter.”

Actually, Young Earth Creationism, the idea that the earth was created old with fossils of dinosaurs buried under layers of earth, the idea that Rabbi Feldman and his cronies support, was invented in the mid-1800's by a Christian theologian and apologist named Gosse. It has no source in Jewish tradition. That Rabbi Feldman could be so ignorant about the idea is frightening. When one takes into account the thuggish manner in which the 'gedolim' imposed their ban, and add in their ignorance of both science and history, one is left with a sad and inescapable conclusion. May God protect us.

Comments

[Herman Douchebag]

This was an excellent article-Yet another reason for intelligent Jews who are proud of their heritage and understand the importance of the bible as literature and to some extent history to oppose the Orthodox stranglehold on Judism in Israel and in teh US for that matter. Like we should belive that God almighty wants dirty old rabbis to suck little boys dicks-or that she destroyed New Orleans because the Blacks don't study Torah. Chabad's efforts orthodox us and its slimy efforts to get funding from the mainstream community need to end. What we really need is a coutner Chabad to try and deprogram the ultra orthodox community kids.

[Rebtsvi]

The concept is far older than that. See Kaplan's book on the age of the universe.

Jews did not adapt this from 19th century xtians.

[Shmarya]

No. Reread Kaplan's book. He is quite clear. There is ***NO BASIS IN JUDAISM FOR YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM.*** Further, the talk Kaplan's book is based on, to the AOJS convention, uses this as a focal point. Kaplan argues that a Jewish source must be used. and that there is ***NO JEWISH SOURCE FOR YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM.*** Jews, the Rebbe first among them, ***DID*** "adapt this from 19th century xtians."

[Rebtsvi]

I was at the AOJS convention with Aryeh who was a good friend of mine. As I recall - the book is not in front of me - the topic was Torat Hasmhmita with emphasis from the Sefer Temunah.

According to this theory - the dinosaur bones are from previous worlds. I seem to recall him quoting "Malchutcha Malchult Kol Olamim."

I recorded the AOJS presentation and didn't know any other tapes existed until I saw it in print.

I can tell you the edited version left off the good stuff about dealing with his kid's Yeshivas in Boro Park.

Don't know if I still have the tape.

I will look up the book when I get home.

[David Kelsey]

I learned about the previous worlds idea in Moad Katan. Why wouldn't they claim that instead this?

[Shmarya]

David –

Because the Ari Zal held that those worlds were purely spiritual and not physical. Although he was the first to hold this way all modern kabbala and hasidut is based on the Ari Zal's work, and all hasidim therefore hold that those worlds were spiritual only. Science has proved the Ari Zal wrong.

[sandman]

a
'yiddish" english? feldman speaks apure american -- not sure what this reporter was smoking,or maybe he got the wrong feldman...
'

[David Kelsey]

But isn't Ner Israel Litvish? What do they care what the Ari or the Hassidim say?

[sparky the wonder dog]

R. Ashlag, Baal HaSulaam taught a version of Ari that his successors interpreted as permitting both pre-existent spiritual worlds and an "old Earth"--from their website:

-------

"Question: What existed before the material world began to form fifteen billion years ago?

Matter did not exist before the emergence of the world. After all, the matter of our world is located within our perception. There is a problem: how does reality appear when there is no one to perceive it? We always say that there is no reality without a person who perceives it. For example, you say that there is a star in the sky. How do you know? Let’s suppose someone saw it. But if he did not see it, then would this star exist or not? It would not exist, because it only exists in relation to the one who perceives it.

[sparky the wonder dog]

and, btw, the midrashic explanation of many physical universes created and destroyed only partially overlaps science and only trivially to the extent that it does

[Shmarya]

David –

Litvaks also hold like the Ari.

Sparky –

The Ashlag bit does not answer the question or contradict the Ari.

[rebeljew]

I think that Feldman's letter shows that he does not hold "Young Earth" exclusively. I believe that he argued for alternate interpretations of day / age, and "Breishis not the beginning". He seems more interested in protecting the Torah from falsification than from proposing anything positive.

Here are some quotes from the letter:

"The apparent age of the universe is based on observations made after the laws of nature came into being, and applying these observations to nature as it existed during the days of Creation is therefore illogical; for perhaps during Creation time passed at a greater speed, or perhaps natural reactions proceeded at a faster pace.

"In spite of these considerations, several explanations have been offered by the great commentaries of the previous generations. Basing themselves on Midrashim which say that G-d created many worlds before ours and destroyed them, some say that the earth upon which these worlds were built was not destroyed.[2] Accordingly, the world is as old as the first world created while the six days of creation of the Torah refer to our present world. Along the same lines, sources in Kabbala state there are seven cycles in creation and that we are in the third cycle or, some say, in the fifth. Leshem Shevo VeAchlama,[3] basing himself on Kabbala, states (without addressing the issue of the age of universe) that each of the 24 “hours” of the day during the days of Creation was at least a thousand times the length of present day hours.

"In fact, he says, longer “hours” continued, albeit at a reduced pace, until the Generation of the Mabbul (Flood). Still others have explained that though there were 24 of our present day hours in each day, but that time flowed at a different, more compressed speed during the days of creation; in other words more events occurred during the course of a day even though a day lasted from the light of one day to that of the next.[4] According to all these explanations, the world could appear to be vastly old and yet would still not be older than the age which the Torah gives it. All of these interpretations do not distort in any way the plain meaning of the Torah.

[sparky the wonder dog]

Shmarya, if you mean Ashlag's successor's are not clear how they glue together Etz Chaim + an old Earth--I dunno either. It might be that the Lurianic writings and interpretations as a whole do not, as you think, consistently reject "many worlds" 100% or B'nei Baruch teaches this without explanation--stam. I just don't know.

[rebeljew]

IMO, the whole "worlds before theis world" teretz is not viable. You cannot use medrashim, kal v'chomer vague disputed medrashim, to shtim Torah and science. Pshat, perhaps, but not torah and science. This question is not one of pshat because there is no Torah source that DEMANDS the Earth is billions of years old. Hence, there is no source to question from and we are left with the pashuta pshat in the Chumash. Attempts to answer from these "prior world" medrashim are futile and poor apologetics.