A Former Skvere Hasid Speaks Out

"Eighteen years ago, as a Hasidic student at the yeshiva of New Square, I found myself swept up one morning in the frenzy of a mob. I, along with around two dozen young men…We broke open the door, smashed the lock on the bedside cabinet, scattered the contents of dresser drawers across the floor, and ripped blankets, sheets and mattresses from the bed in a desperate search for…"

 Originally published at 11:01 pm CST Monday, 5-30-11.

Opinion: What Is Really Happening in New Square?
By Shulem Deen • Forward

Eighteen years ago, as a Hasidic student at the yeshiva of New Square, I found myself swept up one morning in the frenzy of a mob. I, along with around two dozen young men, ransacked the private dormitory room of a fellow student. We broke open the door, smashed the lock on the bedside cabinet, scattered the contents of dresser drawers across the floor, and ripped blankets, sheets and mattresses from the bed in a desperate search for… well, we weren’t sure what we were searching for. There had been rumors in the study hall that the student in question was in possession of items forbidden by the rules of our austere Hasidic lifestyle. We’d heard rumors of portable TVs, of audiocassettes of secular music, of secular newsmagazines; we didn’t know for certain nor did we care. The important thing was that we demonstrated our willingness and ability to commit violence against those who violated our community’s code of conduct.

In the end we found only several photographs of our friend wearing a baseball cap and a t-shirt, and we thought his adoption of the vulgar sartorial habits of common Americans enough to vindicate our vigilantism.

Our behavior was publicly condemned by yeshiva officials. In private they commended us.

This incident came to mind after the recent events in New Square in which eighteen-year-old Shaul Spitzer, a yeshiva student and attendant to the community’s grand rabbi, attempted to firebomb the house of a dissident member of the community. He ended up inflicting third-degree burns on over 50% of the body of Aron Rottenberg, whose home was the target of the attack. Rottenberg’s crime: he prayed at the wrong synagogue. Instead of the main synagogue, which belongs to grand rabbi David Twersky, Rottenberg attended services at a synagogue a short distance outside the village.

To some, the conflict sounds like the oldest story in the Jewish book: Jews fighting over which synagogue they do or don’t want to worship in. But in New Square there’s a more sinister component. The similarities between the latest incident and that of my teenage years lie in the extra-legal vigilantism that characterizes the enforcement of communal norms within Hasidic communities in general and among the Skver Hasidim of New Square in particular.

Compared to the recent incident in New Square, the one I was involved in was mild. We made a big mess, caused our friend some agitation, but there was little actual damage done to person or property. But over the years, especially once I had abandoned the rigid lifestyle of Skver Hasidism in which I’d spent the bulk of my thirty-six years, I’ve reflected on that incident with a great sense of shame. One image stands out most in my memory: before we took action we sought approval from one of the community’s leading rabbis. “‘Be rid of the evil in your midst,’” he quoted the Bible in solemn approbation of our intentions, and off we went with balled fists. It is easy for me to imagine far greater damage if the conditions were right; if, say, we’d discovered more incriminating evidence of our friend’s deviance, or if, worse, our friend had put up resistance to our attack. Our cause was righteous. Niceties, legalities, and conventional notions of human decency were of little consequence. And the recent attack in New Square shows the real life-threatening extremes to which such vigilantism can be taken.

There was a time, decades ago, when the all-Hasidic village of New Square was known for its hospitality, its generosity, its simple lifestyle revolving around Torah study and adherence to cherished Hasidic values. Twerksy, the rebbe, has, since his father’s death in 1968, served as the dynastic heir to the leadership of the Skver sect, a Hasidic community with its origins in the Ukrainian town of Skvyra. But as New Square has grown, so have the institutions of power and privilege, and dissidents who sought in full or in part to lead lives outside the rebbe’s orbit found themselves harassed and hounded. In recent decades, those who refused to submit to the will of the rebbe have been subjected to having rocks thrown through the windows of their homes and cars, being spat upon in the streets or in the synagogue, their children harassed in their classrooms by both teachers and classmates.

The Skver Shtetl, as New Square is known to the Hasidic world, is today characterized not by piety but by a cult of personality, the worship of the rebbe, who lives in gilded opulence while the majority of his community lives in poverty. The rebbe eats his meals on silver platters with golden utensils, owns a number of latest model Cadillacs for himself and his family, and lights his Hanukkah candles on a massive six-foot-tall sterling silver menorah that community members told me cost tens of thousands of dollars. Most of his followers, some with families consisting of a dozen or more children, rely on food stamps and Section-8 housing vouchers for basic subsistence.

There is something profoundly perverse about a religious community — which also happens to include a legal municipality (New Square is an incorporated village within the Town of Ramapo, in Rockland County, N.Y.) — where a single man acts as autocratic ruler, complete with the trappings of royalty, with extra-judicial powers over the population that include the administering of real physical and psychological pain.

Skver Hasidim are adamant that the latest incident was the work of a lone zealot, an aberration that was neither ordered nor condoned. But that misses the point. It isn’t the act alone that warrants condemnation but the conditions that allowed for it to occur, conditions that include the belief that coercive measures are valid tools in the battle to preserve their unique brand of Hasidic practice. There is no evidence at this point that the attack was ordered by or committed with the approval of the New Square leadership, at the head of which stand’s New Square’s grand rabbi. But that doesn’t absolve them of culpability. The Skver Rebbe has in the past made no public statements condemning violent attacks, and his comments about this recent incident appear weak and unconvincing, made only to appease the fury of the broader Jewish world, on which New Square relies for various forms of support.

Unless the Skver Rebbe issues a clear and unequivocal condemnation of all forms of harassment in “his” village, further crimes will be committed in his name and for his honor. And the broader Jewish community will rightly place the blame squarely on his shoulders.

Shulem Deen is the founding editor of Unpious.com, a journal for voices on the Hasidic fringe. He is a former Skver Hasid who once lived in New Square.

Comments

[netflix]

nice

[Rochel]

Is this the first mainstream Jewish news source to print something about this incident? Bravo!

[David]

Nice story but the English seems too good for a person "educated" by the Charedim. Did he have a ghostwriter?

[JBN]

Anonymous Blogger 'Hasidic Rebel' Goes Public As Sholom Deen Former Skver Chasid, Now Lives In Brooklyn Among Artists
http://ping.fm/kKUxo

[Yoily Weiss]

Yeah. Sell the Rebbe's menorah. That could help feed the poor.

[Friar Yid]

I was wondering when Shulem might chime in on the Skver attack. Valuable background for people on the community-- and the sickness permeating it.

[Nickidewbear]

He probably hightailed from the "Hasid"ic community (about where there is nothing "hasid") and looked for the UJAFed of NY to help him. Where there's a will, there can be a derech.

[bukin86]

Im SURE the Forward will ALSO run a piece about all the chesed and tzeddakah that happens in and comes from New Square!

[Adam Neira]

Interesting take.

[shlomo zalman]

I agree with David, the level of writing here is incompatible with a chassidic upbringing. In any case, the writer should have known that Reb Yitzchak of Skver was the son of the famous Reb Yisroel of Rozhin (died 1850). Reb Yisroel was the leading founder of the Royal system of chassidut. This paradigm strongly encouraged vulgar opulence among the Rebbe's family members, and even more so the Grand Rebbe himself. The media was the message. The chassidic sheep were requested to support this extravagant lifestyle and did so willingly. So the fact that this rebbe continues the tradition is not surprising. After all, it's good to be King.

[Agunahahaha]

Wrong Skvere. There were two Skverer rebbes in Skvira. The one whom you describe whose Chassidus ended with the war - and the Twersky/Chernobyl dynasty branch in Skvere from which New Square is descended.

[Critical minyan]

Great editorial shulem. Probably he knows everyone involved and is very knowledgable about the issues.

[seymour]

nothing shattering but it did come from one of the insiders

[former masmid]

Many young chassidim have left the Chassidim world and enrolled in community college. Contrary to popular perception, Chassidic rebels are often educated (sometimes self-educated) and highly intelligent.

[western jew]

Alot of people in these 'sheltered' communities feel that they are "immune to the evil" of the rest of the world. Instead, evil finds a completely different bed in these communities that is not even present in any form in the other secular or other less than orthodox communities.
This is a very imporant topic that merits more attention and discussion. To keep separate from another community is one thing, but to make yourself a fortress of "self-righteousness" is a another thing altogether. I sense that there is much evil in our most pristine communities and one might even wish to consider that its inherent rather than the "fault of the secular".

[critical minyan]

Im sure failed messiah's readership is spiking nowadays. The chasidic news aggregators are too chicken to publish this editorial.

[Garnel Ironheart]

> Our behavior was publicly condemned by yeshiva officials. In private they commended us.

So they were mekabel loshon horo, they raised their hands in violence against a fellow Jew, they damaged his property without any official judicial authorization, and so on. And they think they were in the right?

When did Skver go so off the derech?

[WoolSilkCotton]

If you're determined to improve your English skills, you can visit the public library, take out books, read voraciously, take a course at a local high school or community college, and soon English you'll be speaking and writing so nice it will be like a regular Hyman Kaplan.

[william e emba]

You mean, like a regular H*Y*M*A*N K*A*P*L*A*N.

[Moshe aron Kestenbaum, Williamsburg ODA]

דרמה בסקווירא • האדמו"ר עצר את הלימודים בכל הת"תים של החסידות והורה: "התפללו עבור חיים רוטנברג" • הסיבה: ניתוח חירום שנערך לאיש ה'שרוף'

I say בנתיים אף אחד ממוסדות סקוורא לא הלך
לבקר את החולה,
ובטח אף אחד לא מבניו של הרבי, אם לא הרבי עצמו.......!!!

יותר מדי מאוח

[Moshe aron Kestenbaum, Williamsburg ODA]

this is whats called

נבלות ברשות "החסידות" המזוייפת

[WoolSilkCotton]

Emba, LOL, thanks!

[David]

If you're determined to improve your English skills, you can visit the public library, take out books, read voraciously, take a course at a local high school or community college, and soon English you'll be speaking and writing so nice it will be like a regular Hyman Kaplan.

Posted by: WoolSilkCotton | May 31, 2011 at 07:17 AM

All in secret of course, otherwise they'll burn you.

[seymour]

Im sure failed messiah's readership is spiking nowadays. The chasidic news aggregators are too chicken to publish this editorial.

Posted by: critical minyan | May 31, 2011 at 07:00 AM

they are not even posting rottenburg utube video

[seymour]

We broke open the door, smashed the lock on the bedside cabinet, scattered the contents of dresser drawers across the floor, and ripped blankets, sheets and mattresses from the bed in a desperate search for…"

this is very troubling

when i was in a ultra Orthodox dormitory I would sneak in the NY POST in a paper bag
the most that happened was that my roommate just asked me not to leave it around so he is not tempted to read it.
I respected that.

But never ever anything like this guy is explaining

[jancsipista]

this behaviour isnt new to me as a child in heider our rebbi used fear to tottaly dominate and control us he was very sadistic one git with his stick on our back and we went up the wall from the pain, this was when we were children but in the hassidihse world og which i am no more prt of use violence and fear to control the flock its insanity at its height their ultimate weapon is fear since the day they are born this is how they live fear from one another they are mentally disturbed the reason is freight all their lives .

[Yechiel]

Although I commend Shulem for his bravery in toughing it out in the secular world, he should not be applauded but shunned for what he is currently occupying himself with...
In my eyes his hate is blinding him from seeing any good within the community he was once part and parcel of.
His articles are self serving as a wannabe journalist. It serves as good practice of his recently attained. In his quest to flaunt his scholastic achievements he started a blog where he can let loose his horde of pet words. To gain popularity he resorts to attacking an entire lifestyle that he could not cope with (due to his weak nature) and ran from like a coward.
I do not associate his actions with high intelligence; sorry guys. Rather I see a miserable misfit with a high vocabulary.
I know everyone will be all over me for this but this is my perception of the matter.
There are many avenues one can take to become successful and an accomplishe individual. Those who have the need to live and breath hatred 24/7 and strive on the weaknesses of others are insecure and pathetic.
Ummm: for whatever its worth; he now lives with artists...

End of drivel.

[Yechiel]

Correction:
It serves as good practice of his recently attained knowledge.

[Devorah]

Better he should live with artists than terrorists.

[seymour]

Yechiel

you have it wrong a weakling stays because of peer pressure

it takes courage to leave

[jancsipista]

yechiel- youre a true idiot, you write he left a lifestyle that he could not cope with, of course sec.8 medicaid and lies no normal person can face himself and live a life of deception and fraud, it looks like you can the life of a hassid is mostly lies on top of lies lying to himself and everyone around him, he at least is honest to himself not like you, honesty is the best policy.

[Jeff]

Ummm: for whatever its worth; he now lives with artists...

Oh, the horror.

Shulem is blinded by hatred. Shmarya is blinded by hatred. Is there anyone who disagrees with you who isn't blinded by hatred?

[S.]

For people questioning Shulem Deen's authenticity because of his level of writing, get real. A person can't be an autodidact?

He has been writing online for 7 or 8 years, and readers have seen his progress as a writer.

And who says he doesn't know about the Rizhiner?

[Ichabod Chrain]

Yechiel 9:46
What's your point? You came out punching but when the "drivel" as you called it ended, you didn't so much as lay a finger on Deen. What's wrong with being a wannabe journalist? What cowardice did he display? What's wrong with attacking a dysfunctional lifestyle?

[Yoel Mechanic]

Many young chassidim have left the Chassidim world and enrolled in community college. Contrary to popular perception, Chassidic rebels are often educated (sometimes self-educated) and highly intelligent.

Posted by: former masmid | May 31, 2011 at 05:31 AM
---------------------------------------------
Community Colleges fill an extremely important role for students who are not quite in the box, as well as students simply looking to cut costs. And the teaching is often first class if one is
careful what course they enroll in, and are ready to ignore the non-serious students.

It would be good is All or MANY Yeshivah students spent a few years in Community College so they would NOT HAVE to leave Torah mitzvot (ie. they actually take Pirke Avot, "learn a trade" seriously).
One should never think of Community College as the course of action for one who wants to leave. Rather it should be
the course of action for one who wants to
stay, and stay successfully.

[Yoel Mechanic]

you have it wrong a weakling stays because of peer pressure

it takes courage to leave

Posted by: seymour | May 31, 2011 at10:03 AM
===========================================

And it takes EVEN MORE courage to stay,
go to community college, and then stay
successfully, paying your own bills and
doing just like recommended in Pirke Avot.

[ah-pee-chorus]

To gain popularity he resorts to attacking an entire lifestyle that he could not cope with (due to his weak nature) and ran from like a coward.

hes just like the people that left david koresh in waco. they were too weak to cope with the lifestyle there. those that left waco were cowards filled with hate.
yechiel, its too bad you werent around to provide counseling to the sinners who escaped. you could have explained how courageous it is to be emotionally enslaved and morally crippled just as they are in new square.

[Yoel Mechanic]

>left david koresh in waco.

Unless there is evidence otherwise, I do not believe Hassidism in general is anywhere in a league, l'havdil, with Waco. I doubt that New Square is in that league either. Therefore, one should be reform minded here. The goal: culture change, and fix the problems.

[Yoel Mechanic]

I must clarify: When I say "stay" I mean "stay with Torah Mitzvot". that may or may not imply stay with your same Yeshivah, or stay with the same community. That would depend on the circumstances.

[ah-pee-chorus]

I do not believe Hassidism in general is anywhere in a league, l'havdil, with Waco

at least koresh got gullible suckers as followers on his own merit. the hassidic rebbes just inherit their flock of sheeple from daddy. thats about the only significant difference. and do you think your use of the word "l'havdil" makes for any real differentiation between cults? is a jewish cult holy ??

[Yoel Mechanic]

>and do you think your use of the word "l'havdil" makes for any real differentiation between cults?

I put that phrase in for the humor challenged.

Um, perhaps a little reading on David Koresh is needed. I think there is a difference, but that opinion is open to review in light of further research.

[Yoel Mechanic]

ps: as for Waco, I actually have some of their literature (actual authentic stuff. on occasion I do do my own research. It is pretty waco doodle, pun intended)

[Shulem Deen]

"I agree with David, the level of writing here is incompatible with a chassidic upbringing."

Why, thank you. :)

"In any case, the writer should have known that Reb Yitzchak of Skver was the son of the famous Reb Yisroel of Rozhin (died 1850). "

In fact, you're mistaken about that: Reb Itzikel Skverer (present rebbe's great-grandfather) was the Ruzhiner's son-in-law, not his son. (Married the Ruzhiner's daughter Malka in his 2nd marriage, who bore him no children.)

[talking stam]

While it is commendable for someone to see the truth in Torah hidden in a culture of oppression and terrorism, it should never be expected. In New Square, the fear of the Rebbe is equated with fear of G-d. You cannot expect someone who has been raised with this idea since he was born to see the difference.

[former masmid]

Yechiel, you're an idiot and a shmuck.

Shulem is only one of thousands that have left the cesspool of Chassidism.

All your chesed and supposedly good deeds are only there as a fig leaf to cover your nakedness and your moral bankruptcy. there is nothing good in the Chasidish world and I applaud Shulem for leaving it. I only hope that the rest of the Chassidic youth will follow in his footsteps.

[former masmid]

By the way, where is that white supremacist Skvere "baal teshuva", "Rabbi" Schiller?

[ah-pee-chorus]

Um, perhaps a little reading on David Koresh is needed

um....perhaps a little reading on new square and their rebbe is needed.

[am echod]

g-d is here to stay...........

Obama cracks down on abuses by big-city police departments

http://www.salon.com/news/department_of_justice/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/05/30/justice_department_civil_rights_police

[Barry]

Yechiel, you remind me of Avi Shafran's 'Baby Einstein' essay of 3 years ago.

'So it is ironic that Einstein considered religion “childish.” What prevented him from not only understanding light but seeing the Light may well have been his own childishness, the self-centeredness that he retained from babyhood.'

[WoolSilkCotton]

The nonJewish cults usually claim to be patriotic, unlike the frumma.

But like the frumma, they hate the government interference, and develop a hate for the government, even though they want government handouts.

And of course, the women need to be kept under control, all in the name of 'modesty' or how 'highly' they esteem women.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Yeah, Einstein was childish, but all the frumma rabbis I've heard talk about the science and the universe were clear, able to examine all the facts and opinions, weren't afraid of opposing views, etc., but they call Einstein 'childish'.

I have yet to hear a black hatted rabbi lecture on any science without sounding like an idiot.

[Isa]

The perfect metaphor for this New Square is...

The People Democratic Republic of [North]Korea with Kim Jung Il as leader

[raisy]

WoolSilkCotton,

I don't know where you've been hiding out, have you read The Science of Torah by Yehudah Levi, and the books by Gerald Schroeder--Genesis and the Big Bang, The Science of G-d, The Hidden Face of G-d? Check out Aish.com's science site.

Many if not most Ba'alei Teshuva come to religion from a rational standpoint rather than an emotional one. Why not brush up on your Torah learning/reading?

[Shmarya]

You realize that most of those Torah and Science books are BS or take very big leaps of faith to believe, don't you?

[ah-pee-chorus]

raisy -

have you read these books?

i read genesis and the big bang and even as a layman with only basic physics knowledge found myself laughing. heres a review as well as unanswered questions by a physicist....

http://www.talkreason.org/articles/reply_to_Schroeder.cfm

""In this respect, I have a few specific questions to Schroeder. To wit:

Does Schroeder admit now that in his first book he provided an incorrect chronology of Cain's descendants (counting Yuval and Yaval as the father and grandfather of Tuval-Cain while in fact they were, according to the Torah, Tuval-Cain's half-brothers)? Does he admit that this error led to his erroneous conclusions regarding the time of the Flood?
Does Schroeder admit now the error of his assertion that Tuval-Cain was the inventor of bronze, and that therefore the onset of the bronze age, as per the biblical story, has been miscalculated in his first book? (As is clearly written in the Torah, Tuval-Cain used tools made of iron, which means he must have lived much later than the beginning of the bronze age)
Does Schroeder admit now that his assertions (made several times) about the cooling of the universe, allegedly caused by the heat dilution in ever expanding volume, are contrary to thermodynamics and therefore absurd?
Does Schroeder admit now that his statement asserting than masers emit atoms was preposterously false?
Does Schroeder admit now that his statement asserting that kinetic energy is proportional to velocity was wrong?
Does Schroeder admit now that his statements asserting that mass is the same as weight were absurd?
Does Schroeder admit now that centrifugal force is a fictitious force, contrary to what he wrote in his book?
Does Schroeder admit now that his description of the photoelectric effect was faulty (as explained in my critical comments)?
Does Schroeder admit now that the equation on page 38 of his third book is absurd, as it equates a constant to a variable (as explained in my critical comments)?
Does Schroeder admit now that his explanation of "zero time interval" (in his second book) in a frame of reference attached to photons is meaningless because there is no such frame of reference wherein photons are at rest? (Photons, according to the special theory of relativity, move in vacuum with the same speed in all inertial frames of reference).
I could add more questions, but I'd be glad to hear Schroeder's answers just to the above 10 questions. If he admits his errors, then why does he not say so frankly, as would suit a scientist? If he continues to stick to his assertions, why does he not try rebutting my critique?

Until Schroeder provides some reasonable answers to my critique, my assertions regarding his errors, amazing for a PhD in physics, remain in force and Schroeder's output, for all its popularity among gullible readers, has to be construed as pseudo-scientific piffle. ""

heres the review...
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/schroeder.cfm

[seymour]

Many if not most Ba'alei Teshuva come to religion from a rational standpoint rather than an emotional one. Why not brush up on your Torah learning/reading?

and Aish. has been discredited because they use false science to proof the Torah
Posted by: raisy | May 31, 2011 at 04:17 PM

As the saying goes if the genesis story is so rational one would not say I belive or what would amunha be worth.
If the torah would not have religious meaning many people would say it is a poorly written story that nobody proof read.

[seymour]

many years ago i discovered that chocolate and peanut butter goes together.

at the same time in yeshiva I discovered rational/logic and religion
is like water and oil.

they cannot be mixed

[Jack]

Leaving aside the content of his article and just looking at his rich vocabulary, good sentence structure, grammar etc, I think he writes very well indeed. He certainly would not have received an education within the Chasidic community that would have enabled him to write at that level (in any language including Yiddish or Hebrew!).

If these are all his own words he has certainly caught up with (and surpassed) most of those who benefited from a decent secular education.

Perhaps this is a shining example of the contribution to society that could be made if the Chasidic leaders allowed their youngsters to receive a proper secular education. I am particularly thinking of the situation in Israel where tens of thousands of Chasidim sit around 'learning' instead of doing anything useful for themselves or society at large.

Unfortunately though, allowing them a peek at the outside world will mean that the numbers leaving the fold will increase exponentially so I guess things will stay as they are for the moment.

[copycat]

LIPA the singer was from square

I think he got some problems

[shlomo]

APC you should read "The Challenge of Creation" by R' Slifkin if you want a reasonable explanation of the Jewish view science.
I realize that you have a different take on the subject but you shouldn't reject his hashkofa out of hand or ridicule those that accept these views.

[shlomo]

I forgot to add happy Yom Yerushalayim to everyone

[Moshe aron Kestenbaum, Williamsburg ODA]

When comparing the skvere dictator rebbi to the world's worst dictators Who do you think he compares to or looks like the most similar? Robert Mugabe , Zimbabwe Omar al-Bashir, Sudan Kim Jong-Il, North Korea
Than Shwe, Burma
King Abdullah, Saudi Arabia
Hu Jintao, China
Sayyid Ali Khamenei, Iran
Isayas Afewerki, Eritrea
G. Berdymuhammedov, Turkmenistan
Muammar al-Qaddafi, Libya

I say Isayas Afewerki,The Eritrea dictator cause Tewersky and Afewerki sound the same

[Yoel Mechanic]

>Um, perhaps a little reading on David Koresh is needed

um....perhaps a little reading on new square and their rebbe is needed.

Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | May 31, 2011 at 12:26 PM
------------------------------------------
agreed.

[Yoel Mechanic]

I have yet to hear a black hatted rabbi lecture on any science without sounding like an idiot.

Posted by: WoolSilkCotton | May 31, 2011 at 01:54 PM
-----------------------------------------
I can provide you with a black hatter (sans semicha) who can lecture on science w/o
sounding like an idiot; if you're interested. Shmarya is welcome to relay my email address to you. (Send me email in any event :)

[Yoel Mechanic]

Unfortunately though, allowing them a peek at the outside world will mean that the numbers leaving the fold will increase exponentially
========================================
Rather than leave, it would mean the fold would change. Hopefully for the better.

[seymour]

APC you should read "The Challenge of Creation" by R' Slifkin if you want a reasonable explanation of the Jewish view science.
I realize that you have a different take on the subject but you shouldn't reject his hashkofa out of hand or ridicule those that accept these views.

Posted by: shlomo | May 31, 2011 at 05:49 PM

you can belive if you want but to call science in any fashion is a lie

[ah-pee-chorus]

APC you should read "The Challenge of Creation" by R' Slifkin if you want a reasonable explanation of the Jewish view science-Posted by: shlomo

shlomo- can you paraphrase some of the key points contained therein? because i have read portions of another of slifkins books and found i couldnt continue due to its dishonesty. i have also read reviews of the book you mentioned and his rehashing of the argument from first cause would only impress children.

[Yoel Mechanic]

http://www.talkreason.org/articles/schroeder.cfm

Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | May 31, 2011 at 05:08 PM
--------------------------------------
I have found useful things at talkreason. However I was unhappy to see the way they made short shrift of R. Slifkin (simply because he doesn't fit their view) and called his writing "piffle". The writer there was not principled but simply didn't find the book interesting to someone who wants to sneer at religion. Fine, then just don't review the book

[ah-pee-chorus]

yoel- you have GOT to be joking. schroeder wrote a book purporting to show how his writings can reconcile the torah with known science, and then he makes so many mistakes in the science that when asked to answer the ten questions posed to him in which he seemingly is mistaken he simply refuses to answer. that can only lead to the conclusion that he knows he is wrong, and doesnt desire to be made a fool of.
and your problem was with the REVIEWER??
while you pretend to be objective, your posts constantly expose you as being so biased that apologists everywhere are proud.

[Rochel]

The Jewish week now has a small article - it is short and gives space to Scheinkopf.

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/brief/new_square_arson_victim_seeks_fed_hate_probe

[Yoel Mechanic]

and your problem was with the REVIEWER??
while you pretend to be objective, your posts constantly expose you as being so biased that apologists everywhere are proud.

Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | May 31, 2011 at 08:14 PM
-----------------------------------------

Pretend to be objective? I was writing about their review of R. SLIFKIN! The reviewer (their regular Mark Perach) for Schroeders book was fine, but I wasn't talking about that. However, they had some other reviewer for Slifkin's book. There is nothing biased in any of my posts.
But I don't hold this remark against you. Shmarya is welcome to relay my email address to you also, if you care to write :)

[WoolSilkCotton]

Shmarya, please do not relay any private e-mails to me regarding the above matter.

[ah-pee-chorus]

Yoel-

i apologize. i now see that you werent talking about schroeder.
however i think the review of slifkin was fair and accurate based on my recollection of what i read of slifkin as well as the quotes brought down by the reviewer.

[ah-pee-chorus]

yoel-
as the reviewer shows, slifkin dishonestly portrayed einsteins stance by quote mining. and the only thing new in his approach is that he took the old "intelligent design" christian creationism excuse and adapted it to judaism as an ortho rabbi, since haredi stance is that even the intelligent design-not the part that advocates tried to stick in public school classes, but the concept that evolution guided by god is what breishis means- theory is pure heresy and counter to the mesorah version of creation. on this the rabbis are correct. there is no room for slifkins approach according to any branch of judaism which accepts the mesorah.
so slifkins books fail on 2 levels. they are not consistent with ortho judaism AND evolution does NOT in any way fit in with the words of breishis.

[Shlomo]

APC and Seymour You actually need to read the book to appreciate who R' Slifkin is. His whole point is that Torah is not antithetical to science and in many ways created the environment for science. For instance the belief in one G-d rather than numerous forces promotes the idea of their being universal laws of physics which apply universally and in all framesof reference rather than the world being ruled by numerous opposing forces whith some applying here and not in other circumstances, he makes a point that G-d's intervention in this world can happen without miracles on a quantum level where outcomes are unpredictable and unknowable and also chaos theory shows that we cannot predict outcomes - the universe is not purely deterministic and cannot be. Rambam and others write that so called miracles have been placed within the original laws of nature (even the splitting of the Red Sea is talked about in rational terms (of the day) i.e. East wind and that G-d doesn't like to break the laws of nature that he created if it is avoidable.
Also no where are we asked to believe how old the world is and that the Torah is written in the language of the time it was given but it is not a history or science text but a moral pathway that G-d is trying to show mankind.
I don't expect you to be swayed by all this especially since my writing abilities are not that great but you shoukld keep an open mind read that book and atleast don't condemn others for their honest belifs.
I haven't read thge review but reviewers bring their own belief system to bear and it is easy to pick statements out of an entire book and denigrate them R' Slifkin himself saysthere are many areas which are difficult to understand but hey so is life

[Yoel Mechanic]

Hi APC. Quite OK. As for Slifkin, I felt his book is primarily a Torah book, or a philosophy book about Torah, with a small amount of science, and therefore it was unseemly to dismiss it as piffle for being a Torah book. But it is not easy now to get into that issue. I personally felt the review there (maybe there was more than one review) did not critique the book within the context of the book, which didn't seem quite fair. I am neither defending or detracting from Slifkin here, but just wanted to make a point about "fairness".

As for Schroeders book..that *was* a "science" book, so fit well into the purview of that website. There was only a tiny problem with that book: it had tons of mistakes, so nothing in it made much sense. I couldn't discern anything cogent there, and it was nice to see a list of the boo boos on talk.reason. Nor did the book provide any sort of cultural insight into the mentality that produces such "argumentation". At least if there was cultural insight there might be some usefulness. But even there I could not find anything at all to get a handle on.

[ah-pee-chorus]

. His whole point is that Torah is not antithetical to science and in many ways created the environment for science.Posted by: Shlomo

and thats the problem. the torah IS antithetical to science and has no connection whatsoever to the advancement of science.
heres just one insurmountable problem. the torahs words in breishis must fit with the reality of a 15 billion year old universe, and evolution. they do not. the only excuse which can be attempted is the favorite of apologists, that god illucidated his words to moshe verbally, and that is why certain things in the torah dont have to fit the words plain meaning. however, even that would require 2 things which are missing. the first is that there were breaks in the oral laws transmission chain thereby rendering the entire oral law man-made. but with ma'ase breishis there is an additional problem. the mesorah doesnt contain ANYWHERE that evolution was how we got here. not a single source anywhere. and as far as the earths age, there was near unanimity amongst the major sources that the 6 days were in fact 24 hour days. there is also an obligation to acknowledge that the creative process stopped on day 6, otherwise there would be no shabbos. and evolution is constant and never-ending, stars are created every day. so even setting aside the transmission issue, the mesorah cannot honestly be said to include the age of earth nor evolution.
and as if that werent enough, even allowing slifkins concession to evolution and his claim that it doesnt go against the mesorah, it still does NOT FIT the order of creation in breishis by any means. and man was created from dust. so i cant help but to lack respect for any opinion that wishes to be pacified by these claims which are so utterly dishonest and illogical.

[Yoel Mechanic]

so slifkins books fail on 2 levels. they are not consistent with ortho judaism AND evolution does NOT in any way fit in with the words of breishis.

Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | May 31, 2011 at 10:34 PM
------------------------------------------
That sounds like a fair enough assessment. Maybe some day I will have time to look more into that issue. ps. I do find his books *useful* and occasionally visit his blog rationalistjudaism. I think we should give him much credit for what he is attempting, and since his project is worthwhile failure is an ever present possibility.

[ah-pee-chorus]

Yoel -

i just today started looking at his blog and would like to engage him in a discussion of the issues. unfortunately his statement as to what types of posts he will allow and respond to would indicate that he will not permit posts along this line of questioning, and has no desire to fully explain how his position fits the torah and mesorah nor how it can be called "rationalist".
regarding whether his endeavor is worthwhile, we will agree to disagree.

[Yoel Mechanic]

regarding whether his endeavor is worthwhile, we will agree to disagree.

Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | May 31, 2011 at 11:46 PM
========================================
a clarifying point about Slifkin: when he says rationalist, i think he means a medieval rationalist.

Also, even though he has his *own* goals; i think the endeavor worthwhile simply because it is talking about issues that hardly ever get talked about in the frum world. Is it shocking??? I rarely hear topics about biology (evolution...) or physics (time, relativity, planetary motion, dating methods..) talked about for the sake of the topic themselves. hard to believe, but its true. So the fact he is even willing to talk about these issues is great (and i can put my own opinions aside, i am just happy to hear about it b'klal)

[Shlomo]

APC you are doing what chareidim do - taking the Torah literally the Torah is not teaching science or history G-d left that for man it is just trying to say that the universe was created by G-d not talking specifically about evolution giving us lessons and teachings for life. Look at some of the Midrashim they are contradictory and completely unbelievable some even according to chareidim so the whole Torah is to be taken for what it is intended to be life, moral etc teachings how we relate to man and to G-d.
It seems to me your issue is you cannot break away from (I imagine) your chareidi upbringing
I don't think this is the best forum for this discussion

[Yechiel]

Thank you all for the personal attacks and name calling...
Contrary to your assumptions, I am well aware that change is long since due, and may need a partial overhaul. But in my book running is the way of a coward. Those who claim that staying implies weakness are, in my case, outright wrong. There was a time in my life that my religious practices began to dwindle and focused on living it up... but later renewed my commitment. I was not coerced by anyone; I did so free willingly. Also note: I work for a living and encourage others to do the same. I promolgate being a mensch. Education is of some importance too...
However, I gauge people by their actions; not by their ability to unload an arsenal of fancy wording. You guys here are so impressed with Shulem's ability to write that no matter what crap oozes from his pen will be applauded. It is unfortunate that in this country we prioritize the ability to express oneself with high vocabulary over qualities of greater importance.
Anyone with an ounce of brains will agree that learning a trade to sustain oneself is first and foremost. Yeah, sounding 'edjimicated', by shooting off fancy phraseology and proper syntax sure gives the talking subject a sense of superiority, but should not be an element in sizing up a person.
Command of the language, if it is an integral part in the mechanism of one's profession, so be it. Most of us however, can get by just fine with basic language skills. Many very successful people have very basic language skills. On the flipside, some individuals with great abilities in expression are total losers who can barely eke out a living...

Yoel Mechanic: ditto

Anyway, too tired to continue; good night to all.

[Yoel Mechanic]

Yoel Mechanic: ditto

Anyway, too tired to continue; good night to all.

Posted by: Yechiel | June 01, 2011 at 02:08 AM
----------------------------------

Nu?

[Shlomo]

I forgot to add that apart from this issue I agree with most
of your posts and appreciate your input

[Moshe]

as the reviewer shows, slifkin dishonestly portrayed einsteins stance by quote mining.

Actually the review is dishonest. slifkin did not quote einstein for anything other than what he said, and did not misrepresent him in any way.

and the only ting new in his approach is that he took the old "intelligent design" christian creationism excuse and adapted it to judaism as an ortho rabbi

Actually slifkin has a whole chapter explaining why the Intelligent Design movement is wrong.

even allowing slifkins concession to evolution and his claim that it doesnt go against the mesorah, it still does NOT FIT the order of creation in breishis by any means

Actually slifkin writes at length that evolution does not fit the order of creation in bereishis by any means, and concludes that bereishis is not correct from a scientific perspective.

you know, for a person so enthusiastic to criticize slifkin, you seem to be really ignorant of what he actually writes...

[Yechiel]

Yoel M
By ditto I meant that I agree to your take on things.

[New Circler Rebbe]

I am not a Skverer and I believe things in NS are in need of serious repair. I condemm the attack in NS and wish the victim full health and hope he does take legal action in civil court.There is much reform that needs to be undertaken in all Chasidic communities and that includes Satmar, Lubavitch, Ger, Bobov Vishnitz etc etc in other words the institution of REBBE was always subject to corrupt tendencies and continues to be so.
That said I wish that the writer for the Forward Mr. Shulem Deen wrote an article about the cult his owb=n father ran in the 1970s and 1980's in Brooklyn and the Upper West Side and the total fraud he imposed on his followers.
Children are certainly not responsible for their parents actions , but since he is ready to take on the issue of NS and attack Rabbi Twersky personally and as a supposed cult leader and a person totally corrupt , how about a discussion of the cult his own father ran and the many lives he screwed up and who knows what else !!! !
The writer's father played the role of Chasidic New age Guru and controlled people's lives and even sent them for intensive therapy with Roman catholic therapists . I do not claim expertise in that cult , but much went on there that has not been documented and has fallen under the radar. And when the guru died the secret came out.

[Zalman Alpert]

Just for the record there rae several other gents walking about with the title Skverer rebbe namely the Skverer Rebbe of Boro Park who leads a small community on 47th Street and a cousin who leads an even smaller community in Flatbush.
It is of little impot as to who is the legitimate holder of the title as the one who has the msot followers and best known is the Rebbe de facto.
In Europe the 1st American rebbe of New Skver was known as the Kularszer rebbe after the town in Eastern Rumanai he lived in. there most of his followers as was the case with most Eastern Rumanain rebbes were superstitious Jews who were not seriously religious or learned.
In America his charisma, Belzer relationship and personality attracted aan audience of Hungarian orthodox survivors to his court.

[Yoel Mechanic]

Yechiel, thanks for the 'ditto'. Now your earlier comments should be underscored: are they based on personal experience with the individuals you criticize, or just based in circumstances? This should be clarified. Also, whatever the case may be, this whole topic is very problematic to discuss, and requires a lot of care. One's attention should be directed towards fairness, and reform (in my opinion. the problems are fixable. That is, the community will remain, but in a better situation)

[ah-pee-chorus]

moshe-

Actually the review is dishonest. slifkin did not quote einstein for anything other than what he said, and did not misrepresent him in any way.

you should look up the term 'quote mining'.
since i dont have the book, why dont you post the part where slifkin quotes einstein so that we can all judge for ourselves. i'm pretty confident that the reviewer was right.

Actually slifkin has a whole chapter explaining why the Intelligent Design movement is wrong.

as i said, slifkins claim is an adaptation of the same theme. christian ID says that we must invoke god even while accepting parts of evolution since some things are too complex for science to explain without god. slifkin says that BECAUSE evolution works so well to explain life we must invoke god as its cause. they are both variations of the claim that while we previously understood from the bible that creation of all beings took place separaely and from nothing (or dust), now that we see it isnt true we will claim that god was still the creator but used evolution as his method. and of course neither can provide any evidence of that.

Actually slifkin writes at length that evolution does not fit the order of creation in bereishis by any means, and concludes that bereishis is not correct from a scientific perspective.

thanks sherlock holmes. since slifkin is an ortho rabbi who hasnt gone OTD , its pretty obvious he maintains that the torah is compatible with his knowledge of cosmology and evolution despite that the words of breishis tell a completely different tale.
and youre happy to point out that slifkin agrees that his theory is unsupportable? so your point here was what?

[ah-pee-chorus]

APC you are doing what chareidim do - taking the Torah literally the Torah is not teaching science or history G-d left that for man Posted by: Shlomo

as i posted | May 31, 2011 at 11:27 PM

there are parameters for accepting torahs non-literality, while also believing that we can understand the torah in any meaningful way. two prerequisites are:
1. unbroken transmission of the oral torah in which non-literal parts are explained by god to be non-literal as well as what these passages really mean.
2. that the current explanation being claimed for the passage, in this case creation via a 15 billion year process using the big bang and evolution, was indeed known and passed down from har sinai through the mesorah.

slifkins attempt at such fails on both counts. and while the haredi establishment wouldnt agree with me on point 1., obviously, they DO agree as far as point 2.
and that is why they banned his books. they admit there is no reconciliation of evolution with the mesorah.
furthermore, the entire "allegory" defense is dishonest and comical. here is a repost which explains why....

"any claim of allegory as a defense is pathetically weak.
an allegory is the use of symbolic, fictional figures to recall a true event. it might include the use of metaphor and be meant to teach a moral, as with a fable.
suppose someone was recounting the american revolution and wrote, "the caged eagle screamed for its freedom and finally broke free, vanquishing its captors. the eagle soared proudly thereafter."
that admittedly awful excuse for poetry would be allegory. the point of the author is obvious, and the meaning clearly not meant to be literal. a fictional eagle is just a representation of america(ns).
contrast that with a passage from a book describing the revolution as follows:
the inhabitants of america fought with their chinese imperialists in the year 1639 and defeated them led by general frank lorenzo in the battle of fairbanks. in this example the author is attempting to convey his thoughts as to the facts and is either wrong, or attempting to mislead.
the genesis creation story is definitely an example of the second type. there is NO clear use of metaphor, it was understood to be literal for many centuries, by tannaim and amoraim, by rashi, etc..and rather than speaking in vague terms, or using references to things that any reader would immediately know to be symbolic, like a race between a tortoise and a hare, it uses no such allegory. in fact the author takes pains to be quite specific about the details. he described what preceeded it, gave it time-specific parameters, and even described the order of the creation.
to permit an excuse of 'allegory' in this case is to allow anyone who ever states completely untrue facts to use that excuse.
furthermore, the entire torah appropriately begins with this story since there would be no reason to believe what followed unless you believed the author to be the creator of the world. so the author was certainly trying to elicit that belief when telling over the story of how he created the universe. he was attempting to gain the peoples confidence, and it worked beautifully, just as one would expect for people of that era who had no contradictory evidence or scientific knowldege with which to refute it.
proof that it was understood as literal by most if not all until very recently is....

Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | March 29, 2011 at 04:38 PM

http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2011/03/could-noahs-flood-have-really-happened-123/comments/page/2/

[ah-pee-chorus]

Yoel-

he must be talking 'medieval rationalism' as you say.
the reason i'm unenthusiastic about his 'bring science to the masses of frum jews' approach is that when jews first accepted the torah claim of creation there was no alternative explanation available via science . so it was not dishonest or cognitively dissonant to accept the god as creator story. however with the advent of scientific advances, culminating with evolution, there is an explanation with mountains of supporting evidence. so for slifkin to say he accepts evolution and cosmology while still providing a path to maintain belief in breishis, is to spit in the face of the entire scientific goal of ascertaining truth. it is justifying the concept of entering a supposed search for truth with your conclusion having already been reached prior to any analysis of evidence. and it permits and encourages one to just alter the data as needed in order to confirm the belief you came in with. such tactics are antithetical to truth, science, and advancement of knowledge.

[Moshe]

ah-pee-chorus - I'm just amazed that you clearly have no idea what slifkin's book actually says, and yet criticize it relentlessly. why don't you actually read it?

[ah-pee-chorus]

Moshe-

NO THANKS... if theres anything worthwhile in it why dont you paraphrase his points? or are you afraid you might actually have to defend it?
i listened to an interview he gave online and read lots of stuff from his blog. i also read the long debate between him and RSC . i have quite a good idea of what his position and claims are.
but please step up and explain where you think i have it wrong. or is it more your style to repeat vague assertions with nothing to back them up and no ability to support them? i think i already know.

[Moshe]

You know, I thought you were going to respond that I'm misunderstanding the book, or that you read it a long time ago, or something like that. It never occurred to me that you truly have never read it at all! You certainly don't have "quite a good idea of what his position and claims are" if you think that his approach fails in that evolution doesn't fit with the words or the order of events in bereishis. His whole approach is based on saying that concordism doesn't work!

I'm just amazed that you judged a review of his book as being "fair and accurate" when you admit that you haven't even read his book at all!

[ah-pee-chorus]

His whole approach is based on saying that concordism doesn't work!

you just dont get it. if his whole approach is as you put it, he would know and admit the torah wasnt authored by god. so can you tell me why he stil believes the torah WAS written by the creator?

could it be because he claims there is no need for breishis to match with reality?

[Shlomo]

Sorry APC you can't criticize a book or an approach without reading the book or talking with the Rabbi because you don't know what he is saying. Reading a review of a book which may be biased to begin with is not sufficient.
You're still assuming that Torah is trying to teach us history or science which it is clearly not. It is accepted that it is not written in historical order for instance. It was written in the language and the understanding man had of the world to basically tell us that the world was created by one G-d and not a multitude of competing forces as was then accepted. It isn't historical as in the sense of a history of the American revolution and it has deeper levels which are mainly moral not scientific or historical.
The problem here is that belief is mainly a belief and can't be argued easily and especially like this when we both are coming from different positions and see things differently.

[ah-pee-chorus]

Sorry APC you can't criticize a book or an approach without reading the book or talking with the Rabbi because you don't know what he is saying.

sorry shlomo but i disagree. i have never read the entire book of mormon or the complete set of scientologys important writings. yet i know they are both silly nonsense. the reason i know is from reading what mormons believe, hearing them speak, and reading concise versions of their belief systems. and while i have read extensively on joseph smith and the early days of mormonism, i didnt need to to reject it as silly, i did so because i found it fascinating and illucidating as to how a religion can start and gain wide acceptance despite the preposterous nature of its claims.
as for slifkin, i read parts of a couple of his books and found them filled with so many false and unsupportable claims that i couldnt bear to waste another minute on them.
i have had discussions with many slifkinites including girls who attended the yeshiva hes affiliated with in beit shemesh. i have heard them make his case and i have read his own debate with RSC. i know more than enough of his position to reject it. i assume youve never read the religious books of mormons, muslims,christians,quakers,buddhists.taoists, etc...and yet knowing NOTHING of most of their claims you presumably have rejected them. how?

[ah-pee-chorus]

moshe and shlomo-

i can explain the basics of evolution in just a few sentences. they would cover the main points of the evolutionary theory so that all could have a sense of what evolution claims.
why cant either of you write a brief summary of what slifkins approach claims?
do neither of you understand it? or does it require 50 or 60 presuppositions which each require pages of setup before they can all be jumbled together into a theory?

just a simple question. what is slifkins basic position? we know he accepts evolution(most) , and the old earth . how do you say he makes that jibe with breishis?

[Yechiel]

APC
Please check your heart rate...