FailedMessiah.com

The Text Of The Ban

Deiah v'Dibur, the online edition of the Israeli haredi rag Yated Ne'eman, has published a translation of the new (second) ban against Rabbi Nosson Kamentsky's revised book, Making of a Gadol:

    Daas Torah
    BS"D, 14 Adar 5766

    On Rosh Chodesh Kislev 5763 a statement prohibiting the book, The Making of a Godol, was issued. Since a new book has now been printed with the claim that the matters that needed rectification were indeed rectified, after Hageonim Hatzaddikim R' Y. Rosenbloom and R' D. Segal examined the matters, this [claim] has been found to be untrue — kema'aseihu borishonoh kein ma'asehu be'achronoh — and therefore the ban remains in force.

    Yosef Sholom Eliashiv

    Aharon Yehuda Leib Shteinman

    Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz

    Chaim Pinchos Scheinberg

    Nissim Karelitz

    Tzvi Markovitz

    Chaim Kanievsky

    Shmuel Auerbach

    The Following Letter was Issued three years ago and reaffirmed now.

    Condemnation of the book "The Making of a Godol"

    We were appalled to hear from reliable talmidei chachomim about the distribution and sale of a book called The Making of a Godol, which is full of severely debasing remarks, derisiveness, degradation and hotzo'as sheim ra against several figures among gedolei horabbonim, the leading lights of Yisroel in recent generations and the rishonim kemal'ochim whose words guide the lives of all Beis Yisroel, whose elucidations of the Torah we imbibe and whose greatness, veneration and holiness are rooted in the hearts of all Jews with a fear of Heaven. This is what the book seeks to negate, by discrediting, disgracing and debasing their illustrious honor, which is also the honor of Hashem yisborach and the holy Torah, as explained in Rabbenu Yonah, Shaar 3, The Tenth Madreigoh.

    Moreover, the book casts doubt and creates confusion by infusing spurious opinions and incorrect hashkofoh regarding learning chochmos chitzoniyos and various types of literature, implying falsely that there is no contradiction to Torah study if certain approaches are followed, all in the name of gedolei Yisroel. By so doing it blemishes the proper hashkofoh that we have received from our rabbonim, gedolei hadoros, who raised loud and bitter cries, and wholly dedicated themselves throughout the last fifty years to the task of uprooting the terrible breach of blending external studies together with the pure study of our holy Torah as given at Sinai. Herein lies an awful danger, particularly for the young abroad, many of whom [in any case] face great pressure from their families and their environment in this matter and are liable to fall into the traps set by those who seek to distance them from the eternal springs of devoted Torah study.

    Therefore we hereby state our opinion that such an aberration cannot be tolerated in the holy nation of Am Yisroel and therefore this book is prohibited from entering kehal Hashem, whether by bringing it into the home, reading from it or dealing with it commercially, and every man of prudence who wishes to keep his fear of Heaven and purity of heart intact and is concerned to educate his family properly will keep it at a great distance from both himself and his household, with the realization that it poses a great danger to all who have a fear of Heaven in their heart. This is not a book of tales about gedolei Yisroel, but just the opposite. It is wholly filled with a chilling spirit that distances one from the true purpose in life that can have unforeseen and grave consequences.

    He who heeds our words will be blessed by Hashem Yisborach, and together with his household will rise to higher and higher levels of Torah and yir'oh, cleaving to the Tree of Life, the holy Torah, and will cover himself with the dust from the feet of gedolei hadoros, the conveyors of Torah, who pass it on for eternity throughout the generations until the arrival of the Messiah speedily, in our days.

    Upon this we have signed for the honor of the Torah Hakedoshoh, and the honor of the Chachomim and those who pass it on in purity.

    Yom Shlishi, Rosh Chodesh Kislev, 5763

    Signed,

    Yosef Sholom Eliashiv

    Aharon Yehuda Leib Shteinman

    M.S. Shapira

    Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz

    Chaim Pinchos Scheinberg

    Nissim Karelitz

    Tzvi Markovitz

    Chaim Kanievsky

    Shmuel Auerbach

    Shlomo Wolbe

The lesson from this? Haredi Orthodox Judaism and truth do not mix. If you write the truth, you will be banned – no matter what you have been promised by gedolim.

Our response should be clear and strong: Disinvestment from the haredi world and its institutions. Speak with your wallet and with your feet.

[Hat top: Calvin not Hobbes.]

The Association Of Orthodox Jewish Scientists Goes Over The Edge

The association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists, once the proud home of giants like Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, ztz"l, has apparently morphed into a bizarre collection of haredi apologists and wannabees. As GodolHador notes (hat tip: me, yours truly, the anti-Mendel), calling this rank propaganda may be giving AOJS too much credit:

Evolution is not "only a theory"; it is a hypothesis, and not more. And according to the rules of logic, the opposite of any hypothesis is as valid as its original statement. The dictionary states that "a hypothesis implies insufficiency of presently obtainable evidence and, therefore, a tentative explanation; theory implies a much greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth," (Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1949).
Rabbi Meyer Lublin, Intercom, Vol XXV, Issue 3, Fall 2005 AOJS.

The rules of logic eh? I’m impressed. Of course we cannot ignore the rules of logic, that would be very bad indeed. And since it’s only a hypothesis, any opposite theory is just as valid? Amazing! So my theory that Zoboomafoo created all humanity from a cup of Tradition Noodle Soup (Beef & Vegetable flavor no less) is just as valid too! I think the AOJS needs to be informed of this development.
GodolHador, about a half hour ago.

Think rational Orthodoxy is standing up to the Rabbi Slifkin Ban? Think again.

[It should be noted that it is hard for mere scientists to stand up for the truth when so many rabbis have remained so conspicuously silent. I think it's time for the RCA to issue a statement on Torah and Science. It's long overdue, as is a parallel statement from the leaders of the YU beit midrash.]

Marc Shapiro On The Age Of The Universe

[T]he entire received body of knowledge in just about every field of human study is dependant on the fact that the world is not 5000 years old and that there was not a flood. These facts are the fundamentals of biology, physics, astronomy, history, anthropology, geology, paleontology, zoology, linguistics, etc.

Belief in a 5000 year old world and a flood which destroyed the world 4000 years ago is a denial of all human knowledge as we know it.

Rabbi Moshe Tendler Backs Intelligent Design Quid-Pro-Quo Deal To Save Son Accused Of Abuse?

Mariah Blake of the Miami New Times reports :

On a recent Tuesday evening, Moshe Tendler, an influential Orthodox rabbi and Yeshiva University biology professor, ambled onto the stage at Kovens Conference Center in North Miami. A stately figure with a wispy white beard and heavy glasses, he surveyed the 300-strong crowd of scientists and intellectuals — most clad in yarmulkes and dark suits with tallith tassels dangling about their waists — and urged them to spread the word that Darwin was wrong. "It is our task to inform the world [about intelligent design]," he implored. "Or the child growing up will grow up with unintelligent design.... Unintelligent design is our ignorance, our stupidity."

This may seem an unlikely message from a prominent Jewish biologist. After all, intelligent design theory — which holds that life is too complex to be a fluke of evolution — has been crafted primarily by evangelical Christians and spurned by most scientists.

But some Jewish leaders, like Tendler, have begun to quietly embrace the theory. And several of them went public with their support during the Sixth Miami International Conference on Torah and Science, which ran from December 13 to 15 and was hosted by Florida International University's religious studies department, the Shul of Bal Harbour, and B'Or Ha'Torah journal of science. In an area with the second highest concentration of Jews after New York — there are 113,000 in Miami-Dade alone — the event attracted about 1000 Jewish researchers, intellectuals, teachers, and students. There was also one prominent evangelical: Intelligent design luminary William Dembski was among the event's featured speakers.

The conversation proved divisive. Tendler kicked off the conference by attacking the idea that complex life could flow from "random evolution." "That is irrational," he said.

As soon as Tendler finished speaking, biologist Sheldon Gottlieb rushed to one of two microphones perched in the aisles. "We all know evolution is not random," he grumbled. "It goes through the filter of natural selection.... You cannot use those arguments with this audience." Tendler and Gottlieb sparred for about five minutes. Meanwhile long lines began to form at the mikes. But the moderator cut the question-and-answer session short and sent the crowd home.

Dembski, a slender man in a tweed blazer and a forest green oxford shirt, spoke the following morning, and more than 400 people packed in to see him. Besides Jewish scientists and intellectuals, the crowd included students from the Hebrew Academy and the Lubavitch Educational Center, as well as a busload of girls from Orthodox Beis Chana School, who arrived with Pumas and Nikes tucked beneath their ankle-length skirts.

Much of Dembski's talk concentrated on the evidence of design in nature. He offered the classic example of the tiny flagella that bacteria use to propel themselves through their environment. "They can spin at 100,000 rpm," Dembski marveled. "And then in a quarter-turn, they're spinning the other direction. Imagine if a blender could do that.... Is it such a stretch to think a real engineer was involved?"

After about 45 minutes, Dembski wrapped up his talk, and dozens of attendees swarmed the microphones again, many of them eager to air their objections. "Our speaker has fuzzied the main issue," complained Nathan Aviezar, who teaches physics at Bar Ilan University in Israel. "The whole enterprise of science is to explain life without invoking supernatural explanations. Intelligent design is not science, it's religion, and it shouldn't be taught in science class."

The contentious Q&A lasted 25 minutes. When it was done, dozens of scientists rushed to the front to pelt Dembski with questions. The hubbub lasted so long that Sholom Lipskar of the Shul was pushed off the agenda.

Lipskar, a soft-spoken man with a thick charcoal beard and wire-rim spectacles, ranks among Miami's most influential rabbis. And like Tendler, he believes Jews should back the intelligent design movement. "The fundamental question the theory answers is, accidental or intentional?" he explains. "If it's accidental, then what's the point? But if there's design, we're here for a reason." Lipskar also advocates bringing intelligent design into Jewish classrooms. "It should be taught together with chemistry and physics," he says.

In fact much of the debate at Torah and Science turned to whether intelligent design should be integrated into Jewish-school science classes; Miami's Center for the Advancement of Jewish Education even signed on as a sponsor. The organization's president, Chaim Botwinick, says the event is a harbinger. "Many Jewish schools are beginning to discuss making intelligent design an integral part of their curriculum," he explains. Among them, he adds, are a handful of schools in Miami, a city that has long been a stronghold of traditional Judaism.

What do the students think? Many of those who heard Dembski speak said they would like to study his ideas in class. "His words make sense," commented Annale Fleisher, a seventeen-year-old senior at Miami Beach's Hebrew Academy. "Saying life comes from evolution is like saying a library was made by someone spilling a bottle of ink."

Nathan Katz, who heads the Center for the Study of Spirituality at FIU and was one of the conference organizers, says the enthusiasm some Torah devotees express for intelligent design reflects a growing alliance between traditional Jews and evangelical Christians. The two groups have found themselves on the same side of many culture war battles. And evangelicals have funneled tens of millions of dollars into Israel. "The monstrous evangelical support for that country has led some Orthodox Jews to be willing to listen to evangelicals on other issues," Katz explains.

For his part, Dembski hopes the conversation that began at the Torah and Science conference will continue, and that some Jewish scientists will eventually lend their talents to the intelligent design movement. "It would be huge in terms of PR because it would give lie to this idea that this is just a conservative Christian thing," he explains. "It would also expand our talent pool immensely."

But critics in the audience at the conference chafed at the prospect of Jewish scientists contributing to a movement that has stated as its goal the "overthrow" of "scientific materialism." "We would be helping to eliminate science as a discipline," said Aviezar. "And that would put us back in the Fifteenth Century. It would be a disaster."

The Rabbinical Council of America just issued a statement in support of evolution. Rabbi Tendler was a member of the RCA but has distanced himself from the group because of the RCA's expulsion of Rabbi Tendler's son after multipile sexual abuse allegations were made against him. Rabbi Tendler and his brother-in-law Rabbi Dovid Feinstein have worked to damage the RCA in any way possible. Could these two issues be linked? After all, Rabbi Feinstein was a leader of the ban (start from bottom of page and read upward) against Rabbi Slifkin and Rabbi Tendler did not speak up in Rabbi Slifkin's behalf. Perhaps we have a kind of quid-pro-quo here.

Rabbi Tendler did not answer my earlier request for comment on Intelligent Design and his participation in this conference.

RCA: Evolution Compatible With Judaism

The Rabbinical Council of America, the largest Orthodox rabbinic organization in America, has issued a statement saying that Judaism and evolution are compatible:

Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design:
The View of the Rabbinical Council of America

December 22nd 2005
21 Kislev 5766

In light of the ongoing public controversy about Evolution, Creationism and Intelligent Design, the RCA notes that significant Jewish authorities have maintained that evolutionary theory, properly understood, is not incompatible with belief in a Divine Creator, nor with the first 2 chapters of Genesis.

There are authentic, respected voices in the Jewish community that take a literalist position with regard to these issues; at the same time, Judaism has a history of diverse approaches to the understanding of the biblical account of creation. As Rabbi Joseph Hertz wrote, "While the fact of creation has to this day remained the first of the articles of the Jewish creed, there is no uniform and binding belief as to the manner of creation, i.e. as to the process whereby the universe came into existence. The manner of the Divine creative activity is presented in varying forms and under differing metaphors by Prophet, Psalmist and Sage; by the Rabbis in Talmudic times, as well as by our medieval Jewish thinkers." Some refer to the Midrash (Koheleth Rabbah 3:13) which speaks of God "developing and destroying many worlds" before our current epoch. Others explain that the word "yom" in Biblical Hebrew, usually translated as "day," can also refer to an undefined period of time, as in Isaiah 11:10-11. Maimonides stated that "what the Torah writes about the Account of Creation is not all to be taken literally, as believed by the masses" (Guide to the Perplexed II:29), and recent Rabbinic leaders who have discussed the topic of creation, such as Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch and Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, saw no difficulty in explaining Genesis as a theological text rather than a scientific account.

Judaism affirms the idea that God is the Creator of the Universe and the Being responsible for the presence of human beings in this world.
Nonetheless, there have long been different schools of thought within Judaism regarding the extent of divine intervention in natural processes. One respected view was expressed by Maimonides who wrote that "we should endeavor to integrate the Torah with rational thought, affirming that events take place in accordance with the natural order wherever possible.” (Letter to the Jews of Yemen) All schools concur that God is the ultimate cause and that humanity was an intended end result of Creation.

For us, these fundamental beliefs do not rest on the purported weaknesses of Evolutionary Theory, and cannot be undermined by the elimination of gaps in scientific knowledge.

Judaism has always preferred to see science and Torah as two aspects of the "Mind of God" (to borrow Stephen Hawking's phrase) that are ultimately unitary in the reality given to us by the Creator. As the Zohar says (Genesis 134a): "istakel be-'oraita u-vara 'alma," God looked into the Torah and used it as His blueprint for creating the Universe.

___________
For articles and sources on this subject, see Aryeh Carmel and Cyril Domb eds., "Challenge: Torah Views on Science and its Problems," Feldheim, N. Y. 1976; and Rabbi J. H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs (Soncino Press 1960), Additional Notes to Genesis.

The statement also supports a world far older than 6000 years. These were key points found to be heretical by the haredi 'gedolim' who banned Rabbi Nosson Slifkin and his works. Will these 'gedolim' ban the RCA as well, perhaps using the Tendler case as a starting point?

If the 'gedolim' do not do so, their silence will be further proof of their duplicity. If they do act, it will force many in the right wing Modern Orthodox and left wing haredi worlds to take sides. Neither of these outcomes bodes well for the haredi world and for those small men who lead it.

Yated Ne'eman On The Renewed Rabbi Slifkin Ban

Under a headline reading "Why We Censor," the Internet version of the Israeli Yated Ne'eman explains why it was necessary to ban Rabbi Nosson Slifkin:

…Many books include ideas mentioned by Slifkin, but only his were condemned. Why? Because of "the impudent and audacious spirit of throwing off the yoke (prikas ol) of the mesorah miSinai and our sages (rabboseinu hakedoshim) who are its bearers (maggidehoh)," that is not found in those others.

Are the rabbonim asking or telling us to stop thinking? Do they wish us to be intellectual wimps who cannot and do not evaluate critically what they hear?

What an absurd suggestion! If we close down our minds we will not even be able to understand the Torah that they transmit to us daily, not to mention the holy words of our Sages of previous generations back to Sinai. No intellectually honest person could say that our rabbonim do not want us to think! The often-heard response that pronouncements such as this one are anti-intellectual betray a desire to ridicule us and our rabbonim, not a serious charge.

Free, serious and deep inquiry is our goal, constantly pursued. But — yes there is a "but" — it must be within the spirit of Torah and not in the spirit of the secular world which is deeply, unremittingly hostile to Torah.…

When we faced the Greeks in the time of the Maccabim, the issues were clear and in the open. They said, "Write on the ox horn that you have no part in the G-d of Israel." You cannot get more direct than that. They did not let us learn Torah and do mitzvos. The violated our money and our daughters and our Sanctuary.

Now they leave our daughters alone (except for once-in-a- while attempts in the State of Israel). They shower us with wealth. They allow us to learn and to do mitzvos with hiddurim that were undreamed of by earlier generations.

Yet the spirit of the Western world, in its media, in its science, in its art, in its politics, is a challenge to the authentic Torah spirit from the floor to the rafters.

Just pick up a Mesillas Yeshorim and consider the catalogue of things that the Ramchal lists as inimical to the very first step of the Path of the Righteous (Chapter 5), and it is clear that modern society has raised the difficulty of overcoming them to new heights: 1] Dealing with distractions and necessities of the world; 2] Laughter and ridicule; 3] Pressures of an evil society.

The mass of modern media and communication make the temptations of excess in the first area stronger than they ever were, even as it has increased greatly the amount of information that we really have to deal with. The amount of comedy and ridicule has increased tremendously compared to any previous period, even as its prestige has grown, making it harder to dismiss. Finally, society is so intrusive, even as it is free, that it exerts tremendous pressure to conform to its increasingly decadent values.…

It is hard to know who is for us and who is against us. Our rabbonim do not reject modern society wholesale, but they draw lines for us: This is ok. Stay away from that.

Whoever wants to, is free to go it alone. He or she can plunge in to the treacherous waters of the modern world alone, and try to reach the truth heroically alone. It is a big task for an individual.

The rest of us will take shelter under the banner of gedolei Yisroel. As in the generation of Chanukah, so too in our generation — the gedolei veziknei hador cry out to us all: Mi laSheim eilai!

Whoever wants to reach Hashem should join them!

Rabbi Slifkin had rabbinic endorsement for his works, including the endorsement of at least one gadol who now bans him. But truth has never been an issue for haredim. Neither has decency or respect for the work of others. Rabbi Slifkin's mistake was to try to make the haredi world fit with modern science. That cannot be done. Science is by definition an unrelenting search for truth. Harediism is a constant attempt at hiding from that truth, and is itself a lie.

The time has come to reject the haredi world, to stop "showering" them with money and respect. Do not fund their yeshivot and summer camps. Do not attend their dinners and fundraisers. Do not refer with honor to the men who banned Rabbi Slifkin, and do not follow their halakhic decisions.

Choose life.

Idiocy In The Name Of Torah

On The Main Line has posted a section of a fundrasing brochure from a Bnei Brak-based nonprofit describing the visit of a gadol (haredi rabbinic leader), a leading signer of the Rabbi Slifkin Ban, to the nonprofit's offices:

Why are so many stations necessary?" he asked. The telephones at the stations of the steady operators were ringing non-stop...."But how is it that a person contributes over the phone? How does the money come in?" he asked. The gabbai [assistant] briefly explained how a credit card works.

"But the contributor doesn't even sign anything... he's contributing over the phone!" Harav Steinman asked again. "But what if he changes his mind?" he went on....It was astounding to see to what extent maran, shlit"a, who is immersed in Torah study day and night, is cut off from the financial nature of our daily lives in the modern world. At the same time, it was fascinating to see how quickly he caught on when the matter was outlined in the briefest detail.

The man did not know how a credit card works. Earth To Haredim: GET NEW LEADERS! YOUR SHIP IS SINKING!

Aish HaTorah On Creationism

Aish HaTorah's Rabbi Yakov Salomon has made a short flash video on creationism in the classroom.  His basic thesis is as follows:

1. "Evolutionists" only allow one way of teaching – Darwinian evolution.
2. "Creationists" are flexible – teach evolution and other opinions like creationism side-by-side.
3. "Evolutionists" hold creationism in the classroom is unconstitutional.
4. "Benjamin Franklin" wrote in the Declaration of Independence that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights …" (He actually garbles the quote. See the video.) "Is the Declaration of Independence unconstitutional?" Rabbi Salomon asks.

Of course, Rabbi Salomon is very poorly informed (or he's lying – take your pick). In order:

1. Scientists will allow any scientific, peer-reviewed theory to be taught as science.
2. Creationism and Intellegent Design are not peer-reviewed because they are not science.
3. Scientists hold Creationism is a religious teaching and not science, and therefore cannot be taught as science. (It could be taught in a compararative religion class, though.)
4. Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration, not Benjamin Franklin. The Declaration is not now, nor was it at the time of its signing, science, and no one is attempting to have it taught in the classroom as such.

Stupidity and deceit seem to be dominating the outreach business in this post-Rabbi Slifkin ban era.

Toronto Orthodoxy In "Uproar" Over New R. Slifkin Ban

The Canadian Jewish Tribune reports:

Toronto’s Orthodox community was in uproar this week following the circulation of a letter by one of the city’s leading Rabbinic authorities, Rabbi Shlomoh Eliyahu Miller, head of the Kollel Avreichim (an advanced institute of Talmud study for married men).

The letter condemned the books of Rabbi Noson Slifkin, the ‘Zoo Rabbi’ as “words of heresy and denial…and ignorance,” for apparently suggesting that scientific knowledge could ever take precedence over rabbinic lore in explaining the origin of the world, astronomy or the laws of nature. Rabbi Slifkin lectured to capacity audiences in the city this weekend as a guest of the ‘Torah in Motion’ program.

Rabbi Slifkin’s books, which discuss various aspects of zoology, evolution and the animal kingdom in the light of rabbinic tradition, stress the rabbinic authorities through the ages who have welcomed scientific thought as illuminating – not contradicting – traditional Judaism. As such, he has been under sustained attack for more than a year by ultra-Orthodox leaders in Israel and the United States.

The attempt to ban his books and ostracise him, further fanned by what have been identified as clumsy attempts to attack modern science, provoked a huge crisis of confidence in Orthodox circles. The attacks on Slifkin were criticized as attempted ‘thought control’ in the Orthodox community, aimed at enforcing one interpretation of tradition, and intimidating anyone holding – or approving – alternative views. The Internet, and particularly the ‘blogs,’ were major forums in publicizing and discussing the unfolding of events.

Local orthodox leaders expressed concern regarding both the content and the tone of Rabbi Miller’s letter. Rabbi Miller criticizes Rabbi Slifkin’s views, defines him as a heretic, compares him to the ‘wicked son’ of the Pesach Haggadah, and explains that it is obligatory for Jews to believe in Rabbinic traditions, giving as an example the belief that Cain and Abel were born on the sixth day of creation, without any gestation period.

He then says that he will “strengthen the hearts of those who may have heard the words of denial (divrei kefirah)” by giving examples (apparently unrelated to Slifkin) of how the Torah has proven astronomy wrong, and how the Talmudic rabbis knew advanced science from biblical exegesis.

He further points out that in discussing the nature of light, the rabbis define darkness not as the absence of light, but as a real substance, and that in this “scientists are wrong.” In the letter he refers to Galileo, Quantum Mechanics, ‘Non-local reality’ and Bell’s Theorem as perhaps offering confirmation of his views. A local Orthodox Jewish scientist termed the scientific content of the letter “perplexing.”

Rabbi Elyashiv Opposes Rabbis Who Banned Book Without Reading It – The Same Thing Rabbi Elyashiv And His Henchmen Did To Rabbi Slifkin

In a bizarre move, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv criticizes other rabbis for banning a book on marriage without first reading it. Does that mean Rabbi Elyashiv apologized to Rabbi Slifkin for banning him and the books he wrote on Torah and Science – books Rabbi Elyashiv did not read before banning them? No chance.

Krum  reports:

As reported in this letter by R' Aharon Feldman printed in the Israeli papers, R' Elyashiv criticized rabbonim for opposing a book regarding marriage because they hadn't read it. Isn't this precisely the conduct he is reported to have engaged in with respect to R' Slifkin?

Note also the striking contrast between the "book review" process described in the letter and the process that Slifkin's writings were subject to. R' Feldman reports that:

1. R' Elyashiv rendered an opinion only after the book was checked by a bes din of experts

2. The writer was given an opportunity to correct the errors that were found.

Of course, Rabbi Slifkin was given no such courtesy by Rabbi Elyashiv or any other so-called gadol.

Gil Student Thanks God For Modern Orthodoxy

R. Gil Student, exasperated with pronouncements of gedolim disparaging science, thanks God for Modern Orthodoxy. The crux of Gil's journey begins in high school with a question: Was the entire text of the Talmuds and Mishna given to Moses at Mount Sinai, or were the principals of the Oral Law given without the text itself, a much more tenable proposition. Gil notes that he has been told in the name of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, that the entire text of the Mishna and the Talmuds were given by God to Moses at Mount Sinai. Perhaps Chabad would like to discuss this point at their upcoming conference on Torah and Science.

To A Fool His Due – Quackery In The Name Of God

A Montreal-based rabbi has written a new book of Torah "codes":

… Rabbi Mordechai Bulua attempts to demonstrate that verses in the Torah allude to major events in Jewish and world history that occurred in the corresponding year of the Hebrew calendar.

Rabbi Bulua claims that his method is unique. By comparison, “equidistant letter sequence” (ELS), the usual method of deciphering supposed secret messages, involves taking letters from the text at equal intervals. It was the basis of Michael Drosnin’s best-selling 1997 book The Bible Code, which popularized a computer-aided technique discovered by Israeli mathematician Eliyahu Rips.

According to Rabbi Bulua, almost every significant event will have some hint or connection to it – some more vague than others, he concedes – in the Torah verse that corresponds to the Jewish year.

Rabbi Bulua says each verse corresponds to a Jewish year in a straight linear order, a notion ascribed to by the Kabbalists of Safed, Israel. He learned about it from Rabbi Benjamin Blech, his professor of Talmud at Yeshiva University, where he earned his undergraduate degree.

Using only a calculator, Rabbi Bulua begins with the Jewish year that an event occurred and counts that number of verses from the first verse of the Torah in Bereshit (Genesis), with year 0 being the days before the creation of Adam and Eve in year one. It works most reliably in a Torah in the original Hebrew, although English translations often produce the same results.

He uses the timeline of Jewish history contained in Rabbi Zechariah Fendel’s book The Legacy of Sinai to date the biblical events. With major Jewish events, he said he has found his method to be at least 95 per cent accurate.

In some instances, he has had to turn to Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki) or other traditional commentators on a particular verse to find the allusion.

Here are some examples Rabbi Bulua shared with the Canadian Jewish News:

For example, the founding of the State of Israel occurred in 1948 – 5708 on the Hebrew calendar. The 5,708th verse of the Torah is Deuteronomy chapter 30, verse 2, which reads: “You shall return to the Lord your God.”

Rabin’s murder in 1995 (or 5756) corresponds to Deuteronomy chapter 31, verse 30: “Moses spoke the words of this song into the ears of the congregation of Israel until the end.”

“The last thing that Rabin did is sing a song for peace on stage,” Rabbi Bulua said. More eerily, the Aramaic for “until the end” is “shlimu,” which has the same letters as “shalom,” he adds.

Another striking example, according to Rabbi Bulua, is the birth of Maimonides in 1138 (or 4898), which corresponds to Deuteronomy chapter 1, verse 5: “On the other side of the Jordan, in the land of Moav, Moses began explaining this Torah,” referring to the commandments in that Book.

“Maimonides’s magnum opus was the Book of Commandments, explaining the 613 commandments,” Rabbi Bulua said. “Deuteronomy is also called the Mishna Torah, which is the name of another of Maimonides’s great books. Moses was also Maimonides’s first name.”

Using this standard of "proof," one could "prove" anything to be true. So who is this rabbi who has "revealed" these secrets for us all?

Rabbi Bulua studied at the Yeshivat Sha’alvim in Israel, under Rabbi Meir Schlesinger, and received smichah from the late Rabbi Pinchas Hirschprung, who was chief rabbi of Montreal. He has been a teacher at Jewish day schools and currently gives classes in Judaism to lawyers and other professionals.

Ah! But fear not, dear readers – the book has an approbation from a rosh yeshiva:

The Secret Code of Jewish Years, published by Machon Beer HaTorah Publications of New Jersey, includes a blessing from Rabbi Menachem Katz, dean of Bais Medrash l’Horah of Montreal.

The Roots Of Anti-Modernity?

Do the roots of the Rabbi Slifkin Book Ban and the anti-modernity views of haredim (ultra-Orthodoxy) go back to the dispute between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai? Perhaps they do.

The Observant Astronomer has a post reviewing Menachem Fisch's book Rational Rabbis. He sums up Fisch's work as follows:

… Fisch is a philosopher of science, which has led him to what I find to be fascinating reflections on the methodology and intentions of the Babylonian amoraim.

The first part of his book explains what he means by "rational inquiry". It is a process characterized by testing and troubleshooting both the subject matter of field of study and its methodology. As an example, he gives the field of science which endeavours to understand and explain the functioning of the world. Certain problems present themselves, and science produces theories to resolve these problems. In turn, these theories make predictions, and should the predictions be born out, the theory is strengthened. On the other hand, theories whose predictions are contradicted by observation are rejected. But, more than this, a rational study is one where the standards themselves by which success in solving problems are measured, are themselves subject to such troubleshooting.

It is Fisch's thesis that the Talmudic sages were engaged on just such a rational endeavour. This is not to say that they were doing science. Far from it. Rather, they applied the rational approach to Torah.

In the Tannaitic material recorded in the Bavli, especially the material relating to the Yeshiva in Yavne, Fisch discerns a dispute between two schools of thought, or attitudes, towards the development of Torah shel b'al peh. The first, exemplified, or stereotyped, by R. Eliezer ben Hyrqanus, is what he calls traditionalist. The traditionalist holds that the strongest support for a viewpoint is that it was learned from one's teachers extending back to Moshe b'Sinai. In the traditionalist's view, precedent is absolute.

Opposing the traditionalist, is the anti-traditionalist who, in Fisch's view, is a rational actor. Tradition must be tested against new cases and more developed thoughts, and, where necessary, refuted and overturned. For the anti-traditionalist, everything is open to question.

In Fisch's reading, the Bavli's version of the Yavne stories clearly supports the anti-traditionalists, most tellingly in the famous dispute regarding the tanuro shel acknai (Bava Metzia 59a-b), the story where we learn Lo be shamaim he, that the Torah is not in heaven, but decided by the Beis Din in this world.

This strikes me as a workable theory. It becomes even stronger when one realizes that Eliezer ben Hyrkanus was a member of Beit Shammai known for refusing to adopt the halakha as determined by the majority, Beit Hillel. He would eventually be excommunicated for this.

The Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 1:4 tells a story of those times. The sages were meeting at the home of a prominent supporter, on the roof of his house. Beit Shammai appeared armed, murdered several members of Beit Hillel, and blocked the exit from the roof. No member of Beit Hillel was allowed to leave until he agreed to uphold the halakha of Beit Shammai, the minority. Beit Hillel – fearing for their lives – gave in. The sages then passed 18 gezerot (decrees) proposed by Beit Shammai. Most were aimed at separating Jews from Gentiles, and included kashrut gezerot that exist to this day. The Jerusalem Talmud calls this day the blackest day ever to befall the Jewish people since the day the Golden Calf was made and worshipped.

Beit Shammai was traditionalist. Its halakhot (laws) were restrictive. Its worldview was anti-modern and anti-rational. We carry the effects of Beit Shammai's intransigence to this day.

If Beit Shammai had been met with arms, if Beit Shammai had been expelled from normative Judaism, our halakhot would be less strict and our reaction to the Gentile world – and its science – would be more open.

But on a Jerusalem day 2000 years ago, fanaticism won, crushing the democracy the sages used to guide the Jewish people in the process. The 18 gezerot were left in place – removing them meant more violence, more terror, more death.

With the destruction of the 2nd Temple, caused largely by the fractured polity of the Jewish people – it is not surprising that many zealots and sicariim appear to be from families associated with Beit Shammai – it became clear that Jewish unity must take precedence over doctrinal disputes. It was in that atmosphere that Eliezer ben Hyrqanus was excommunicated and the mantra "The Torah is NOT in Heaven!" entered Jewish discourse as a response to his zealotry.

Fast forward 2000 years.

Today's ultra-Orthodox rabbis are traditionalists. The historical lessons of the Beit Hillel / Beit Shammai dispute are largely lost on them. Their version of unity means caving in to the most extremist of traditionalists' halakhic and theological views. Moderates are pushed out of the debate; liberals, out of Orthodoxy all together. Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, the leader of today's ultra-Orthodoxy and his supporters may not use arms to enforce their views – although threats and physical violence are not unheard of in that world – but their methods of operation mirror those of Beit Shammai, who 2000 years ago proved that in Judaism the sword is in fact more mighty than the pen, and terrorist acts and threats more persuasive than democracy and the rule of law.

2000 years ago we lost the Temple as a result of this type of thuggish behavior. What will we lose today?

[Reprinted from July.]

Gerald Schroeder Interviewed On Dennis Prager's Show

Gerald Schroeder was on Dennis Prager's radio show (third hour) today and I caught the final 2/3 of the interview. Schroeder's understanding (under questioning from listeners) is that everything post Big Bang is explainable without God. Only the Big Bang itself – creation of matter from nothing, in Schroeder's parlance – cannot be explained naturally and that allows for belief in God.

Schroeder was unable to forcefully address the cogent argument that we do not know what we will know 50 years from now. Just as it was absurd to man living 300 years ago that devices like the telephone, television, computers and the Internet would ever or could ever exist, we simply do not know what advances in technology and science will be made in the future, and how much light those advances will shed on what we call creation of something from nothing.

In short, God is not provable or disprovable until He is proved or disproved. That is how we have free will. If either happens, the world as we now know it will cease to exist.

Schroeder was asked when the dinosaurs lived and if they lived with man or before man. Schroeder answered "65 million years ago," but hastened to add his spin on that – it all depends on what perspective you view that time from, ours or God's. Schroeder's theory is nothing more than a dressed up and spun version of Shitat Sefer Temunah as publicized and explained by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, zzt"l, who was Schroeder's better in both physics and Torah. As usual, Schroeder did not credit Rabbi Kaplan or admit that there is an old Jewish concept of an ancient universe, far older than 6000 years. I believe Schroeder does not do so for two reasons: 1) Most of his books are sold to Christian fundamentalists, who would not in any way be happy to learn that the universe and this world really are far older than 6000 years, no matter whose perspective it is being viewed from. 2) Today's gedolim (ultra-Orthodox Orthodox rabbinic leaders) follow the lead of Christian fundamentalists with regard to this question. These gedolim ban books and authors far too easily and could put Schroeder out of business in moments.

But the bottom line is this: Past believing that God created the world at the beginning, the Big Bang, (and perhaps coded into the world its specific development – and, perhaps not), and still watches over us today, nothing else must be believed. Evolution and other scientific advances do not need to be rejected.

God does not demand our stupidity, He demands or fidelity. Sadly, today's ultra-Orthodox rabbinic leaders have a hard time dealing with that fact.

Chabad Conference On Torah And Science To Feature Discredited Christian Proponent Of Intellegent Design

Chabad becomes more and more 'Christ-like' every day. The latest proof of this is Chabad's upcoming conference on Torah and Science, sponsored by Professor Herman Branover's B'Or HaTorah and the Chabad's Shul of Bal Harbor (Florida).

Branover is a very public messianist. But he won't be the most Christian presenter at the conference. According to this article on Chabad's official PR site, Lubavitch.com, a featured speaker at the conference will be William A. Dembski, the leading Christian proponent of Intellegent Design:

Day two of the conference will be devoted to the discussion of teaching the origins of the universe, an issue still under fierce debate, particularly among those whose scientific background is significantly at odds with their biblical beliefs. Conference organizers expect a large turnout of teachers, educators, and students from both Jewish and non-Jewish schools for this day’s sessions in particular. Addressing the theme will be Rabbi Professor Moshe D. Tendler, one of today’s most respected voices in Jewish medical ethics, Professor Eliezer Zeiger, Biology Professor at University of California in L.A., Rabbi Shalom Lipskar, Professor Branover, and others. Professor Dembski, considered by many to be the most articulate advocate of Intelligent Design, will address the place of intelligent design in the natural sciences, followed by an interactive question and answer period with the audience.

So who is William A. Dembski? Wikipedia reports:

Peer-review controversy

Critics of the intelligent design movement frequently object that ID proponents have published no papers in the peer-reviewed scientific literature in support of the conjectures of intelligent design. The same criticism has been levelled at Dembski's Design Inference. However, Dembski claims that the book has in fact been peer reviewed [3]. Dembski states: "this book was published by Cambridge University Press and peer-reviewed as part of a distinguished monograph series, Cambridge Studies in Probability, Induction, and Decision Theory". In fact, The Design Inference was reviewed by mathematicians and philosophers; the book does not apply Dembski's argument to biology and evolution, the battleground in which ID stakes its claim. The book's content is limited to examining the question of how to recognize intelligent design, Dembski's "explanatory filter"; it does not provide scientific evidence or justification for concluding that life was designed. Thus, while it is true to say that The Design Inference has been published in a peer-reviewed journal for mathematics and philosophy, it is false to claim that any work actually providing specific and detailed evidence for the existence of intelligent design has been so published in the arena of scientific press in which the topic is debated, which is what Dembski implies.
[edit]

Baylor University controversy

In 1999, Dembski was invited by Robert Sloan, President of Baylor University, to establish the Michael Polanyi Center at the university. Named after the Hungarian theologian and scientist Michael Polanyi (1891–1976), Dembski described it as "the first intelligent design think tank at a research university". Dembski had known Sloan for about three years, having taught Sloan's daughter at a Christian study summer camp not far from Waco, Texas. Sloan was the first Baptist minister to serve as Baylor's president in over 30 years, had read some of Dembski's work and liked it; according to Dembski, Sloan "made it clear that he wanted to get me on the faculty in some way."

The Polanyi Center was established without much publicity in October 1999, initially consisting of two people — Dembski and a like-minded colleague, Bruce L. Gordon, who were hired directly by Sloan without going through the usual channels of a search committee and departmental consultation. The vast majority of Baylor staff did not know of the center's existence until its website went online, and the center stood outside of the existing religion, science, and philosophy departments.

The center's mission, and the lack of consultation with the Baylor faculty, became the immediate subject of controversy. The faculty feared for the university's reputation – it has historically been well-regarded for its contributions to mainstream science – and scientists outside the university questioned whether Baylor had "gone fundamentalist". Faculty members pointed out that the university's existing interdisciplinary Institute for Faith and Learning was already addressing questions about the relationship between science and religion, making the existence of the Polanyi Center somewhat redundant. In April 2000, Dembski hosted a conference on "naturalism in science" sponsored by the broadly theistic Templeton Foundation and the pro-ID Discovery Institute, seeking to address the question "Is there anything beyond nature?". Most of the Baylor faculty boycotted the conference.

A few days later, the Baylor faculty senate voted by a margin of 27–2 to ask the administration to dissolve the center and merge it with the Institute for Faith and Learning. President Sloan refused, citing issues of censorship and academic integrity, but agreed to convene an outside committee to review the center. The committee recommended setting up a faculty advisory panel to oversee the science and religion components of the program, dropping the name "Michael Polanyi" and reconstituting the center as part of the Institute for Faith and Learning. [4] These recommendations were accepted in full by the university administration. The committee also considered the legitimacy of research into intelligent design and gave it a lukewarm endorsement: "research on the logical structure of mathematical arguments for intelligent design have a legitimate claim to a place in the current discussions of the relations of religion and science."

In a subsequent press release, Dembski asserted that the committee had given an "unqualified affirmation of my own work on intelligent design", that its report "marks the triumph of intelligent design as a legitimate form of academic inquiry" and that "dogmatic opponents of design who demanded that the Center be shut down have met their Waterloo. Baylor University is to be commended for remaining strong in the face of intolerant assaults on freedom of thought and expression." [5]

Dembski's remarks were criticized by other members of the Baylor faculty, who protested that they were both an unjustified attack on his critics at Baylor and a false assertion that the university endorsed Dembski's controversial views on intelligent design. Charles Weaver, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Baylor and one of the most vocal critics of the Polanyi Center, commented: "In academic arguments we don't seek utter destruction and defeat of our opponents. We don't talk about Waterloos."

President Sloan asked Dembski to withdraw his press release, but Dembski refused, accusing the university of "intellectual McCarthyism" (borrowing a phrase that Sloan himself had used when they first tried to dissolve the center). He declared that the university's action had been taken "in the utmost of bad faith ... thereby providing the fig leaf of justification for my removal." [6] Professor Michael Beaty, director of the Institute for Faith and Learning, said that Dembski's remarks violated the spirit of cooperation that the committee had advocated and stated that "Dr. Dembski's actions after the release of the report compromised his ability to serve as director." [7] Dembski was removed as the center's director, although he remained an associate research professor until May 2005. He was not asked to teach any courses in that time and instead worked from home, writing books and speaking around the country.…

Dembski became the Carl F. H. Henry Professor of Theology and Science at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky in June 2005, and also plans to establish a new Center for Science and Theology. According to Russell Moore, dean of the seminary's School of Theology, Dembski will help train ministers to counter the idea that "human beings are accidents of nature" with no spiritual character and no purpose other than to seek sex and power. The seminary teaches creationism but its professors vary on the details, with most adhering to the Young Earth creationist viewpoint of a relatively recent creation which occurred literally as described in Genesis; Dembski does not hold to Young Earth creationism. Despite such "acceptable" differences, Dembski noted in a statement when he was hired that "this is really an opportunity to mobilize a new generation of scholars and pastors not just to equip the saints but also to engage the culture and reclaim it for Christ."

Of course, Chabad is being very open-minded here. The late Rebbe was a big proponent of Young Earth Creationism, a view recently adopted by many 'gedolim,' and a theory Dembski claims to reject.

But both Dembski and the late Rebbe share a common educational background. Both were trained primarily as philosophers of science, not as actual scientists. (In the Rebbe's case, this training consisted of a couple of audited classes at the University of Berlin and an EE degree from a small tech school, somewhat like a vocational school in America. The Rebbe was never enrolled in the Sorbonne. In Dembski's case, no peer-reviewed is very telling.) Chabad's endorsement of Dembski at a conference on Torah and Science is troubling.

[Footnote: Does Rabbi Dr. Moshe Tendler have any idea who he is sharing a stage with?]

Haredi-Think: Ban In Order To Survive?

Mississippi Fred MacDowell reports on a ban issued two years ago by Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and other haredi rabbis, many signers of the Rabbi Slifkin ban, some of whom added their signatures only this late this Summer. This ban, issued as a "Pesak Halakha" (legal decision), forbids the playing of computer games and the watching of DVD movies on computers, even if there is nothing halakhicly objectionable about the game or the movie.

This ban provides a wonderful look into the minds of haredi gedolim (leading rabbis). Especially interesting is this bit of 'logic' from the ban highlighted by Mississippi Fred:

The gemora (Brochos 28b) teaches us: "Prevent your children from [engaging in] higoyon." Rashi explains this saying of Chazal to mean: "You should not accustom them to study Chumash too much since it appeals to them."

If Chazal instruct us to deter children from studying Hashem's Torah in an easy and appealing way since it prevents them from laboring over Torah study, surely they forbid children's playing various sorts of valueless games that cause them to detach their thoughts from Torah study. Playing such games cause a tremendous decline in the child's level of spirituality.

Of course, there is no logic here. The gemara in question urges parents to prevent their children from spending all or most of their allotted time for Torah study on Humash (the Five Books of Moses) because this study is easier than the study of Gemara, which can often involve deep, arcane logic. In the  era of the Talmud (Gemara), children worked before and after school. And those were the lucky few. Most children worked all the time and studied – if they were very lucky – for an hour or so each night before bed, and on Shabbat. The Gemara is telling us not to let our children waste most of their precious study time on the fun but less intellectually demanding study of Humash. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Enter the unhistorical 'sages' of today's haredi Orthodox world. The Gemara's recommendation on how to study is shifted to a demand to limit all "frivolous" forms of recreation for children. But today's children spend far more time learning than their counterparts of 1500 years ago. Hazal (the sages of the Talmudic and Mishnaic eras) would be amazed by how much time is devoted to study.

The challenge of our generation is not to carefully divide our children's meager study time. The challenge of this generation is to use the abundant recreation time of our children wisely.

Forbidding what is permitted is not the answer to the woes of haredi society. Such hyper-piety often leads to consequences unforeseen by the hyper-pietists. (The Rabbi Slifkin Ban is a good example of this. It, as well as this flawed effort, were both lead by the same man – Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv.)

Bans won't save the haredi world; new leadership might. Perhaps finding some new gedolim to lead it would be the right place to start.

The English-language translation of the above "Pesak Halakha" was printed in the Internet-edition of Yated Ne'eman. It follows immediately below:

Psak Halochoh

With Hashem's help, 1 Iyar, 5763

In response to the halachic query from the Modi'in Illit— Kiryat Sefer rabbonim about playing games and looking at all sorts of movies on computers, the following is our opinion:

1) Use of Computer for Playing Games

The gemora (Brochos 28b) teaches us: "Prevent your children from [engaging in] higoyon." Rashi explains this saying of Chazal to mean: "You should not accustom them to study Chumash too much since it appeals to them."

If Chazal instruct us to deter children from studying Hashem's Torah in an easy and appealing way since it prevents them from laboring over Torah study, surely they forbid children's playing various sorts of valueless games that cause them to detach their thoughts from Torah study. Playing such games cause a tremendous decline in the child's level of spirituality.

2) With Regard to Looking at Movies on Computers:

Even if the movies do not contain anything that is specifically forbidden to see, it is still forbidden to look at it based on what the Shulchan Oruch Orach Chaim  (307:16) rules: "It is forbidden to read war stories on Shabbos, and even in the middle of the week it is forbidden since it is a moshav leitzim (occupation of frivolous people), and by reading them one transgresses, "Do not turn to the elilim" (Vayikra19:4) — "You should not remove Hashem from your mind" (Shabbos 149a).

The Mogen Avrohom (par. 22) writes: "This includes visiting theaters and circuses that are types of entertainment as we find in Avodoh Zorah 18b." The  Meiri (Shabbos 149a) writes: "These things [pictures of people fighting wars and the like] appeal to his heart, cause him to waste time and make him despair of avodoh to his Creator."

The Chayei Odom (Hilchos Shabbos 61:1) writes: "These things appeal to a person's heart and annul his yiras Shomayim."

What difference is there if he goes to see a movie somewhere or instead he sits at home and looks at it, like those people who waste their time? See the gemora (Avodoh Zorah 18a) that teaches us that the punishment for this is tremendous, that Hashem torments him, and that his livelihood decreases, Rachmono litzlan.

3) Women and Girls:

Doing this harms even women and girls and distances them from  yiras Shomayim. (See Tosafos, Avodoh Zorah 19a, that teaches us what is included as prohibited in the  posuk, "How fortunate is the man who walked not in the counsel of the wicked . . . and sat not in the session of scorners" (Tehillim 1:1) does not exclude women from the prohibition.

4) The conclusion from all the above, is that halochoh forbids using a computer for playing games and looking at movies even if they do not contain anything that is intrinsically forbidden for us to look at.

5) Educators of boys and girls are well aware of the fact that computers distance the soul of the children from Torah and yiras Shomayim. We therefore warn parents and educators not to use the computer for entertainment purposes at all.

I join the above appeal,

HaRav Yosef Sholom Eliashiv

We hereby sign on the above,

HaRav Nissim Karelitz,

HaRav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner

* * *

Menachem Av, 5765

And also I join,

HaRav A. Y. Shteinman

HaRav Shmuel Auerbach, HaRav Chaim Kanievsky

*

The Torah writes the obligation to study Torah in, "If you follow My decrees" (Vayikra 26:3), and Rashi cites the teaching of Chazal (Toras Cohanim  26:2), "You should toil over it." Besides this command itself that is the Creator's will that itself obligates us, without toil over one's studies and investing efforts one cannot attain depth and understanding of them, since this depth is attained only as a gift from  HaKodosh Boruch Hu, as Chazal (Nedorim 55) expound on the posuk, "And from Midbar to Matonoh . . . " (Bamidbar 21:18).

It is therefore obvious that halochoh forbids using a computer for playing games and seeing movies even for those that are intrinsically permitted. Through being careful in this matter one will be zocheh to fulfill what Chazal (Avodoh Zorah 5b) write: "Tana Dvei Eliyahu teach: `For Torah learning a person should always put himself like an ox with a yoke [on its back] and a mule carrying a burden.'" And even with regard to women it is cited above what Tosafos in Avodoh Zorah write, that these things distance them from yiras Shomayim.

Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz

Gedolim Color War, The Threequel – Barney Must Die!

New Lakewood Rap

Rap For Gil Student
(Heard just this week around Lakewood and Boro Park.)

What you gonna' do
when Rabbi Belsky flips?
When Rabbi Willig hides
and Rabbi Schachter schvites?

You gonna' tear your coat?
You gonna' wear sackcloth and ashes?
You gonna' take Slifkin's books
and dump 'em in the trashes?

You gonna say you're sorry?
You gonna' crawl in da' snow?
You gonna' close your blog?
You gonna' say you don't know?

We spit you out
We step on your glory
No matter how black the hat
you're still an M.O. whore-y.

Gedolim Color War – The Sequel!

Gedolim Color War

Rabbi Shmuel Kamentsky Flips Out

                                            [Please click on images to enlarge.]

Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky, the rosh yeshiva in Philadelphia and a supporter of the banned Rabbi Nosson Slifkin, has changed his mind and is now condemning Rabbi Slifkin and his books. From the appearance of his signature on a letter that he did not himself write, and from the dating on the letter (which closely corresponds with the dating on the letter condemning Rabbi Slifkin written by the Novominsker Rebbe), it appears Rav Shmuel was a reluctant signatory* forced to give in by pressure from Rabbi Elyashiv and the Israeli 'gedolim.'

All the vitriol hurled at Rabbi Slifkin is misdirected. The 'gedolim' created this mess by their boorish behavior, disregard of halakha and downright ignorance of science, history and Jewish theology. Any animus on their part should be wholly self-directed.

Make no mistake about it. Being a haredi now means believing the entire universe is less than 6000 years old and that all of science is an elaborate fraud. And this applies to Aish HaTorah, Ohr Somayach, Discovery and Chabad just as much as it applies to Lakewood, Mir and Ponevitch.

The 'gedolim' have killed Judaism.

[First seen on GodolHador, and Maven Yavin.]

*UPDATE: Rav Shmuel is claiming to be concerned about a new article posted by Rabbi Slifkin on his website. The books and original views were not the object of his signature appended to Rabbi Schechter's letter. The problem is the letter stands by the ban of the books and of Rabbi Slifkin. The other problem is Rabbi Slifkin's only new piece is on elephants and contanins nothing different from his earlier work. In other words, Rav Shmuel is apparently lying. Reports are also coming in that point out that Rav Shmuel did not give Rabbi Slifkin a chance to respond to charges against him before Rav Shmuel made them public, and that Rav Shmuel violated other aspects of halakha by issuing this letter.

Such little men with such big hats.

Rabbi Aaron Feldman's Untruthful New Letter

Rabbi Aaron Feldman, Rosh Yeshiva of Ner Israel in Baltimore, was an early supporter of the now-banned "Zoo Rabbi" Rabbi Nosson Slifkin. He wrote a disgusting essay distributed several months ago in which he blamed Rabbi Slifkin for the damage done to the reputations of the foolish rabbis (known as gedolim) who banned him. Why? Rabbi Slifkin's defense was to tell the truth, cite his sources and point out the errors of the rabbis who banned him. He did this so well that the gedolim looked bad.

Now, Rabbi Feldman has written an untruthful letter (reproduced here) to Moment Magazine criticizing its accurate coverage of the issue.

Just another reason why Orthodoxy is no longer a viable or accurate representation of Judaism. Sad.

Haredi Compass

An e-mail from TES trumpets a new invention – a compass that always points toward Jerusalem. Here is GodolHador's take on this new invention. Mine is immediately below:

Darwin: "Moses Can Take Care Of Himself"

From today's New York Times:

The basic objections to evolution - the ones trumpeted by the proponents of so-called intelligent design - are essentially the ones Darwin described in the sixth chapter of "Origin." They have been given a new language, and new examples have been adduced. But Darwin did a surprisingly good job of forestalling his critics. He showed that most of the objections to his theory, then as now, were based on a misunderstanding of the evidence or the nature of his argument, or were owing simply to the fact that so much remains to be discovered about the workings of life on Earth.…

Darwin presented the strongest, most detailed argument and evidence for evolution that he could. He also carefully presented the strongest objections to his theory that he could. Under a century and a half of close examination, his theory has grown more and more solid - with refinements, of course. Under the kind of scrutiny that Darwin bestowed on himself, the notion of intelligent design vanishes in a puff of smoke like the bunkum it is.

"I do not attack Moses," Darwin once wrote, "and I think Moses can take care of himself."

He could, if the fundamentalists and the so-called 'gedolim' would let him.

Abraham Was Wrong: The Logic Of Aish.com

After reading this article on Aish.com, I thought it important to reprint a more accurate version here:

ABRAHAM WAS WRONG
by Rabbi Nechemia Foofersmith

A CHILLING EXPERIMENT

Do you think basically good, mentally healthy people could murder innocent human beings?

The film "Obedience" documents a chilling experiment done at Yale University some years ago by Dr. Stanley Milgram. It paints a sobering picture about human nature.

Volunteers are told they're participating in an experiment on how punishment affects one's ability to learn. They are introduced to a man who will attempt to memorize a list of words. In an adjacent room where he can be heard but not seen, this man is strapped to a chair, his arm hooked up to electrical wires. Every time he makes a mistake in memorization, the volunteer is asked to push a button that will give increasingly strong electric shocks. Just before they begin, the man warns the volunteer of his heart condition.

(Unbeknownst to the volunteers, this man is in fact Milgram's collaborator in the experiment. No actual shock will be given.)

The experiment begins. A few mistakes in memorization -- and the volunteer administers some shocks. The volunteer nervously laughs as he hears grunts of pain. The experiment's administrator, a man in a white lab-coat, encourages him to continue with intensifying shocks.

As the dosage increases, screams come from the adjacent room, accompanied by desperate pleas to stop the experiment. He cries this is hazardous to his heart.

Yet this volunteer -- and the majority of other volunteers -- continue to give electric shocks to the point where they believe they've severely harmed the man. In many cases the volunteers continue to give deadly shocks even after the screams fall silent. When the laboratory administrator instructs the volunteers to continue giving shocks, they submit to the authority figure rather than defy him.

The experiment demonstrates that you don't have to be sadistic or deranged follow irrational or corrupt leaders. You can be completely normal and just not be independent enough to question the morality of what you are doing. Why, you can even be a haredi, just like me!

CONDITIONING AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY

No one is born and raised in a vacuum.

Why should a 17-year-old haredi youth be criticized for blindly following our gedolim? After all, he has been socially conditioned right from the start to act like a sheep. He has never been exposed to any other belief system. All his friends are sheep!

Yet the world does criticize us haredim for this. But why? If everyone is affected by social conditioning, how can anyone be morally responsible for his or her actions?

ABRAHAM: THE FALSE PARADIGM OF INDEPENDENCE

Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, confronted these issues head-on.

A young Abraham examined the physical world and, relying on his best scientific judgement, reasoned there must be a single Creator of the universe, rejecting his upbringing. He discovered monotheism for himself and embarked on his mission to educate mankind, risking his life in the process.

After many years of faithful commitment, God finally speaks to Abraham for the very first time:

And God said to Abram, Lech-Lecha ... Go for yourself -- away from your land, from your birthplace, and from the home of your father, to the land which I will show you. I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you and make you famous... (Genesis, 12:1,2)

God's initial command to Abraham is riddled with difficulties. Obviously one cannot leave his land without leaving his father's house and birthplace. Let the text simply say, "Leave your land and go to the land which I will show you."

Furthermore, one first leaves his father house, then his birthplace and then his country. Why list these in reverse order?

The Torah's primary message here is not Abraham's physical departure from his country. Otherwise it would have sufficed to say, "Leave your country." Abraham's challenge was to make a spiritual departure, to leave behind the influences, practices, and emotional support of his family and society in order to become truly independent.

These three boundaries (country, birthplace, and father's house) represent three different spheres of influence upon each individual, in ascending order of intensity.

Abraham is first commanded to leave his country -- to break away from the idolatrous influence of his land. Then his birthplace -- to abandon the customs and mores that are instinctive. Finally, he is challenged to shake loose from the most intense bond of all -- his father's house -- his primal source of identity and self-esteem.

Surmounting this challenge is Abraham's first step in the development of spiritual independence. This is the meaning of the Hebrew term lech lecha -- to go to yourself. God is telling Abraham to strip away the outside influences in order to emerge as a true individual.

Of course, both God and Abraham were wrong.

ABRAHAM WAS WRONG

Rabbi Yehuda says: The entire world stood on one side, and Abraham stood on the other side. (Midrash Rabba, Genesis 42:8)

This fierce independence labels Abraham the first Hebrew, a term derived from the word "side." Abraham stood alone on the other side.

The key to independence? Break out of the confines of society and re-examine the foundations of your convictions. This is the primary challenge for anyone on the road to becoming a true thinking individual. Because without verifying the validity of ingrained values, one can never know if his positions are correct.

If we follow Abraham's incorrect example, we haredim who follow gedolim like sheep are responsible for our actions, despite our social conditioning. But, instead of recognizing the necessity to question our society, we chose to remain passive.

God's first command to Abraham, and to every human being, is to become independent. So it may appear as if we need to develop the intellectual and moral courage to live by what is true. Without it, it would seem, we are nothing more than a submissive product of society.

But, again, Abraham was wrong.

Author Biography: Rabbi Nechemia Foofersmith is the co-editor of Raishut.com and director of Research and Development for Raishut In The Name Of Torah in Jerusalem. He is the author of Follow Like Sheep: The Purpose Of Jewish Existence and Sheeple: An Autobiography. He lives in Jerusalem with his ewe and his small flock of lambs.

Godol Hador Shuts Down

GodolHador closes his blog. He will be sorely missed.

The Lying God

Gil Student continues to descend further into haredi madness. For those tracking the NYU Rebbe conference (post 1, post 2, post 3 – same graphic for each post) you may want to keep in mind that the first rabbi to tout Gosse's 1857 theory of a world created old, with fossils implanted in the earth, etc., was Menachem Mendel Schneerson. As Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan noted, there is no classical Jewish source to support Gosse's theory and, worse yet, it makes God a liar.

Genesis As Mythology

This is the best brief treatment of why Genesis is mythology. It should be mandatory reading for all Jews, especially all 'gedolim.' Say, maybe the kanaim could translate a some of this for them!

Another Haredi Book Ban

Haredi rabbis have banned another book. Isn't it about time we banned them?

Heresy From The Holy Land! World Is Older Than 6000 Years!

Arutz Sheva's Chanan Morrisson writes about Rav Kook's views on evolution and the age of the universe:

… In a letter written in 1905, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook responded to questions concerning evolution and the geological age of the world. He put forth four basic arguments:

1. Even to the ancients, it was well known that there were many periods that preceded our counting of nearly six thousand years for the current era. According to the midrash, "God built worlds and destroyed them" before He created the universe as we know it. Even more astonishing, the Zohar states that there existed other human races, in addition to the 'Adam' who is mentioned in the Torah. …

To summarize:

    •      Ancient Jewish sources also refer to worlds that existed prior to the current era of six thousand years;
    •      One should not assume that the latest scientific theories are eternal truths;
    •      The purpose of the Torah is a practical one - to have a positive moral influence on humanity, and not to serve as a primer for physicists and biologists. It could very well be that evolution, etc., are the tools by which God created the world; and
    •      Some ideas are intentionally kept hidden, as the world may not be ready for them, psychologically or morally.
                                                [Adapted from Igrot HaRi'eya vol. I, pp. 105-7]

According to Rabbis Solomon, Elyashiv, Berenbaum, Wachtofgel, Shapiro and their minions of kanaim and hangers-on, what you have just read is heresy. (Especially this part: "Even more astonishing, the Zohar states that there existed other human races, in addition to the 'Adam' who is mentioned in the Torah." Wow! My screen is melting!) According to the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, at the very least it is simply wrong and should not be believed. Please burn your computer screens immediately. Either that or view the above-named 'gedolim' for what they really are (or were) – pious fools.

HaModia Banned In Williamsburg

Chakira reports on the newest Satmar cause – protests calling for the banning of HaModia (an ultra-Orthodox newspaper) from Williamsburg.

Truth Is As Strange As Fiction

What happens when you cross the Toldos Ahron hasidim?

One person called and said, "If you don't kill the book, you'll be killed."

Wait until you read about the mice …

[Hat tip: Chakira]

Rabbi Gil Student And The Art Of Censorship

This is Banned Books Week. Fittingly, Rabbi Gil Student has written another post on Blogs And Lashon Hara. In it, R. Student lays out Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir's views on the halakhot involved, especially those involved if (or ever!) an Orthodox rabbi is criticized. I analyzied Rabbi Meir's position here. Rabbi Meir sent me an e-mail early yesterday expanding and clarifying his views. I responded by asking him for his permission to reprint his e-mail. Rabbi Meir did not respond to that request. Five hours later, R. Student's post appeared. R. Student had been corresponding with R. Meir. It is on that correspondence that R. Student bases his post.

I have previously noted problems with R. Meir's approach. In part, R. Meir posits the following:

If we apply the exact same criteria to a politician, we find that reasonable criticism will generally meet them. Having a bad political leader can result in great damage to the community, and having timely knowledge of the abilities and character of candidates is of benefit because these people typically stand for election at fixed intervals and the information is of practical use to the community. No one has a right to a political office, so if someone gets voted out because of an item revealed in a blog, this is not "undeserved."…

In response to R. Student's post, I left the following comment on R. Student's blog:

[A}s long as rabbis are involved in politics, and as long as they issue bans* w/o interviewing the author first, refuse to meet w/the author and then refuse to talk with questioners or the press – there is NO REASON to give them the benefit of the doubt. Rabbis – like Ovadia Yosef and Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, for example – are politicians and should be treated as such.

R. Student censored that comment, even though it follows R. Meir's guidelines – guidelines R. Student claims to endorse. R. Student has again proved himself to be a base censor, a rabbinic coward who deletes any comment that he is not man enough to answer.

*[This is a reference to the Rabbi Slifkin Book Ban, and to a Moment Magazine article R. Student called "probably the best article I've seen so far on the subject." That article notes:

It was a September morning in 2004, midway between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, when Slifkin’s phone rang.…The voice on the other end belonged to a rabbi from the religious enclave of Bnai Brak, and he was calling to deliver an ultimatum.

He informed Slifkin that four prestigious rabbis had opened his “Torah Universe” series and found three of its four books to contain heresy. …The man on the phone informed Slifkin that he had until the end of the day to retract his books. If he didn’t, the charge would be made public and other prominent rabbis would join the campaign against him.…

Within the next few hours, Slifkin received four faxed letters. Their authors represented both the Israeli and American ultra-Orthodox communities: Rabbi Elya Ber Wachtfogel and Rabbi Yitzchok Sheiner were yeshiva leaders in New York, while the others, Rabbi Michael Lefkowitz and Rabbi Elya Weintraub, were among the leaders of the Bnai Brak community. Slifkin spent the rest of that day trying to arrange discussions with each of them, hoping to find out exactly which of his statements had caused such fury. None would agree to discuss the matter with him. Three days later, hours before Kol Nidre, the rabbis’ condemnations were posted on synagogue walls in Slifkin’s neighborhood.

The article later notes that none of the 23 rabbis who signed the ban would speak with the reporter about it.]

UPDATE: Rabbi Student has now banned all comments from me. Why? He claimed my above comment violated this policy:

Important Policy: This blog is intended only for the interchange of ideas for the purpose of Torah study, promoting enlightened public policy and/or the refinement of character. Comments in that spirit are welcome but those that entail denigration of character are not welcome and if they appear will be deleted upon discovery. Since editing is rarely feasible, comments that are deemed inappropriate will be deleted entirely or, if possible, edited.

I pointed out my comment did not violate that policy and I again pointed out that R. Student's real purpose in deleting the comment was his inability to answer the challenge it posed. I further noted that failing to answer challenges is a pattern demonstrated by his teachers, and that R. Student's censorship is a sign of that.

For those of you who do not know, R. Student's teachers are YU's Rabbi Hershal Schachter and Rabbi Mordechai Willig.

Rabbi Schachter is known for making Rabbi Ovadia Yosef-like public remarks that are often hurtful to whole segments of Jews (like his infamous "monkey" remark that so irritated many women) and then refusing to answer public questions about his remarks or to publicly clarify them. He also refuses to speak with reporters.

Rabbi Willig is best known in non-Orthodox circles for his role in covering up the Lanner child abuse affair that rocked the OU several years ago. Rabbi Willig intimidated witnesses against Rabbi Lanner and behaved in a reprehensible manner. When his role was exposed, and after much pressure built, Rabbi Willig apologized for his actions. He then spent the next several years refusing to help abuse victims or to do anything else concrete to atone for his protection of Rabbi Lanner. Like Rabbi Schachter, Rabbi Willig also refuses to speak with the press.

Neither Rabbi Schachter or Rabbi Willig are fit to lead Jews. It is becoming increasingly clear that this applies to their students as well.

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.

The Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir Flip Flop

Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir of the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem wrote a column a few weeks ago endorsing public criticism of public figures. This week, Rabbi Meir has 'modified' his message – Rabbis are lagely exempt from such criticism. Why? follow Rabbi Meir's 'logic':

If we apply the exact same criteria to a politician, we find that reasonable criticism will generally meet them. Having a bad political leader can result in great damage to the community, and having timely knowledge of the abilities and character of candidates is of benefit because these people typically stand for election at fixed intervals and the information is of practical use to the community. No one has a right to a political office, so if someone gets voted out because of an item revealed in a blog, this is not "undeserved."…

But why not rabbis?

1. "[Rabbis have a] reputation for upstanding conduct, then giving [rabbis] the benefit of the doubt is not merely a good deed, it is simply good judgment."

2. "[A] person can't exactly phone up the governor and schmooze with him or her over the way to improve their failings. [I do not recall Rabbi Elyashiv taking any calls from the masses over the Rabbi Slifkin Book Ban. The same holds true for Dovid Feinstein and a number of other'gedolim.']"

3. "Compare this to the average spiritual leader. Even if we are convinced that they have made mistakes, revelation doesn't always make the most sense. Many of these people are surprisingly accessible [sic], and so often it is much more practical and ethical to merely confront them with any concerns. And it is worth asking if letting followers know about shortcomings will ultimately be of benefit.

"Due to their great moral authority of these leaders [sic], undermining their status can do immense damage to the community -- perhaps more than the damage resulting from having authority in the hands of an imperfect individual."

In other words, Rabbi Meir should believe that if the governor would take your phone call, publicly noting that he had failed as a leader would be wrong, especially if it would lead the masses to distrust other political leaders and our poitical system as a whole. But he does not believe this. Why?

Having a bad political leader can result in great damage to the community [and a bad rabbi cannot?], and having timely knowledge of the abilities and character of candidates is of benefit because these people typically stand for election at fixed intervals and the information is of practical use to the community. No one has a right to a political office, so if someone gets voted out because of an item revealed in a blog, this is not "undeserved."

Therefore, because rabbis are not democratically elected and are not responisble to their communities, and because they have a self-ordained "right" to retain their office (in perpetuity, no less) no matter how flawed their leadership is, rabbis are above criticism.

Rabbi Meir's point is clear:  If Jews are going to leave Orthodoxy because they learn the truth about our 'gedolim,' or if they will shift Orthodoxy's worldview to the religious Orthodox left, then the truth must be hushed up.

If Haza"l had used Rabbi Meir's standards, much of Nakh would have been censored.

It is also important to note that 'gedolim' are political leaders, their followers often vote in blocks, and that 'gedolim' are regularly and actively involved in the political process. Yet Rabbi Meir ignores these facts in order to shield 'gedolim' from public scrutiny.

Let's face it, people. Orthodox Judaism is anti-democratic, anti-modernity, anti-science and anti-rationalist, and no amount of kiruv-based apologetics and sugar coating can hide that fact. We are Islam but without a theocracy. God forbid we should ever aquire one.

Science For Fundamentalists

Godol Hador has this post on a new Feldheim book for "older" children, which he has aptly titled "Science For Fundamentalists." (Bet this one is a big seller in Crown Heights.)

The Next Haredi Ban? Pork Of The Sea

The Jerusalem Post reports on what may very well be the next haredi ban – pork of the sea:

A kosher fish mentioned in the Talmud that tastes like pork has been identified by Bar-Ilan University researchers and brought here surreptitiously from Iran.

Called shabut in Arabic, the fish lives in the rivers of Iraq and Syria as well as Iran.

The fish was brought over from Iran, preserved in formaldehyde, by Dr. Zohar Amar of BIU's department of Eretz Yisrael studies and archeology and Dr. Ari Zivotofsky [and here, here, here, and here] of the Inter-Disciplinary Center for Brain Studies. They, along with experts from the Agriculture Ministry, are now studying the possibility of raising shabut (known scientifically as Barbus grybus).

Making the fish available here, they say, should gladden the hearts of immigrants from Iran as well as Israelis who keep kosher but would like to know what pork tastes like.

The Babylonian Talmud, which contains numerous discussions about the fish, specifically notes that some of its organs taste like pork (although how the sages were able to make the comparison is not clear).

The great commentator Rashi wrote that it was the brain of the fish that tasted like pig meat, and that it served as a kosher option for people who yearned to eat the forbidden meat.

Most modern researchers believed that the shabut, which can grow to up to two meters and 60 kilograms, was one of several species of fish surviving in the Mediterranean Basin and in Europe. But the BIU researchers, who specialize in the study of animals mentioned in Jewish holy books, maintain that their fish is the shabut. Rabbi Yosef Haim, known as the Ben-Ish Hai, and other Iraqi sages of recent generations recognized it as kosher.

According to Midrash Shimoni, a compilation of rabbinic writings, "Seven hundred pure [permitted] fish were exiled with Israel to Babylonia, and all returned except for the shabut – and in the future it will return."

An anonymous resident of Iran served as the liaison for the researchers, who spent six months finding and researching the fish. Fish farmers in the Beit She'an Valley are already investigating the possibility of breeding the species.

Look for Rav Ovadia Yosef to permit the fish and the 'leaders' of Modern Orthodoxy in America to 'defer' to the position of haredi leader Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, who will most certainly ban the fish on the grounds that "we" (i.e., elderly sheltered Ashkenazi rabbis frightened of the world, who have the pallet development of your average three-year-old and who regularly dine on anything once healthy cooked in copious amounts of chicken fat and salt, and washed down with the Israeli version of Tang and an occasional piece of dry sponge cake) do not have a mesora (tradition) of eating it. That the fish will be proven to be the fish the Ben Ish Hai and other Sefardic rabbinic leaders ate will not be enough to allow its consumption today.

Why The Chofetz Chayim Was Wrong

The Chofetz Chayim Heritage Foundation held its annual Tisha B'Av event yesterday. The leading speaker? Rabbi Mattisyahu Solomon of Lakewood Yeshiva. As noted by GodolHador, a thrust of Rabbai Solomon's talk was the need to speak with someone before judging them. Yet Rabbi Solomon signed the ban against Rabbi Nosson Slifkin without speaking to Rabbi Slifkin. In fact, all the 'gedolim' who signed that ban did the same.

When the Chofetz Chayim published his book on the laws of lashon hara, some gedolim were concerned that the emphasis on the laws of lashon hara without commensurate emphasis on laws of social justice would cause discrimination against the poor and weak by the powerful, rich and well-connected. Mattisyhu Solomon's behavior – in the name of the Chofetz Chayim Heritage Foundation, no less! – is another in a long line of proofs that those gedolim who feared the approach of the Chofetz Chayim were correct.

Do you give money to Lakewood or the Chofetz Chayim Heritage Foundation? If you do, stop giving – and make sure both institutions know why you are no longer funding them. Also make sure to let your synagogue know that you do not appreciate programs from the Chofetz Chayim Heritage Foundation or Lakewood Yeshiva.

Mattisyahu Solomon is promoted as a moral leader. But a leader who lies, who abuses the weak, who uses double standards of justice, cannot be moral. He is by definition immoral and, unless and until he publicly apologizes to Rabbi Slifkin for what he has done, he must not be allowed to lead.

The Thugs Of Lakewood

From Ha'aretz:

… Three times over the last three years, [Lakewood] yeshiva leaders have lent their names to bans on books published by writers from Lakewood or elsewhere within the ultra-Orthodox world. Each book had crossed a different boundary, tested different waters. One book, co-written by scholar and writer Rabbi Yosef Reinman, who lives in Lakewood, recorded a sharp but ultimately friendly polemic with Reform leader Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch. It was banned, and Reinman was forced to apologize and cancel a book tour, because it violated the ultra-Orthodox taboo against dialogue with official representatives of non-Orthodox Jewish movements. Rabbi Matisyahu Salomon, Lakewood's popular mashgiach ruchani (spiritual supervisor, whose role is to lecture and advise students on their path to spiritual growth), a friend and ally of Reinman who had initially supported the book, was forced to recant his support as well.

Another book, "ZooTorah" by Rabbi Nissan Slifkan, was banned, in Lakewood and elsewhere, because, relying on earlier accepted authorities, it presented biological evolution as a legitimate possibility and argued that the pronouncements of Talmudic sages on scientific subjects need not be considered authoritative. Yet another banned volume, "The Making of a Gadol" by Rabbi Natan Kamenetsky, offered a detailed and intimate account of the relationships between various gedolim, or sages, in pre-war Lithuania, including anecdotes about rivalries and frictions between Torah greats. In a world where the Torah sages of earlier generations have been raised to the level of virtual infallibility, this kind of disclosure was considered threatening and unacceptable. The bans, I was told, were the result of pressure exerted on the ultra-Orthodox leadership by purists in Israel, who found allies within the Lakewood community itself. "The leadership is aware that it is walking a tightrope," I was told by one Lakewood intellectual, whose shelves hold books on Biblical archaeology and the latest scientific theories. "There are many different layers to the Haredi community. Here in Lakewood you have a community with thousands of people but no TV, no radio, no free press, and no magazines. Some people are very sophisticated intellectually - for them that won't work. But other people need the insularity - they couldn't handle things that might undermine their faith. So how do you balance a sophisticated worldview with the need to keep things under wraps? This balancing act requires a certain amount of control, to protect the general public from harm. One result of this is that you don't have the checks and balances you need. It would be healthy for the Haredi world to have more freedom of press to check the unlimited power of the leadership. But a totally free press - you can't have it. So you have an official line, and reality, and they balance each other out."

Another Lakewood scholar, who considers himself a moderate, told me that people like him have to learn to express themselves with caution. "There is a certain amount of intimidation. If you get a groundswell of people against you, calling you a kofer (a heretic), it can be a problem."

Youth in crisis

Ideology is only one area in which the leaders are being called upon to make fine-tuned decisions, balancing the needs of different segments of the community. An even more urgent challenge is developing a strategy to deal with the increasing number of Lakewood teenagers in rebellion against the strict ethos of the society in which they grew up. Some fall into a pattern of drug or alcohol abuse.

Chaim Abibi is the founder and director of The Minyan, a gathering place for marginal Lakewood teenagers where they can come to pray, hear a Torah class, or hang out - even if they are wearing jeans and have a tattoo on their forearm. These teenage dropouts from the strictures of Haredi life, a well known phenomenon in Israeli ultra-Orthodox society, are a burgeoning problem in Lakewood today, he says: "These kids come from every kind of family - they're the children of rosh yeshivas [heads of yeshiva] as well as kids from ba'alei teshuva [newly religious] homes or divorced families."

One longtime Lakewood resident comments, "The problem of marginalized kids is a volcano waiting to erupt." In some cases, the demand of total dedication to Torah learning that the system has long promoted can itself create the conditions for rebellion. "The problem is with people who are living this life not because they want to, but because of social pressure," a prominent Lakewood rabbi told me. "If the children feel the parents are trapped in this poverty-stricken kollel life they really don't like, then there will be trouble."

Increasingly, Lakewood's yeshiva heads are being called upon to decide between those factions within the yeshiva that are pressing them to wield a strong hand against any signs of disaffection and those who believe that the community must find a place for those who are unable to adapt to its regimented way of life. One flashpoint is Lakewood's kosher pizza shop, where on Saturday nights teenagers gather to sip sodas and ogle the teenage girls. The extremist factions have demanded that the pizza shop be closed, or at least limited to take-out orders, but advocates for the disenfranchised youths have so far successfully argued that if the shop is closed, the teenagers will hit the pool halls or bowling alleys, outside the reach of the Jewish community.

Most observers agree that one of the roots of the problem are the elementary and high schools, run by Lakewood alumni, which have become increasingly elitist and regimented in their approach. Children with learning disabilities, or who are just not potential talmudic stars, are often shunted aside, and there is little emphasis on individual expression.…

The answer for many of the schools has been to become even more selective. Dozens of prospective high school students, boys and girls, have been left stranded, without a school this year, and even gentile real estate agents have begun warning house-hunters that they'd better line up a school for their children before they buy in the community. And some of the prejudices that have haunted the Israeli Haredi world are finally hitting Lakewood - one prominent high school for girls which for years admitted students of Mizrahi (Middle Eastern) origin has now changed its policy and announced it will admit only Ashkenazim.

The delicate web of relationships between the yeshiva and the town can create murky - and potentially explosive - situations. Josh (not his real name) grew up in a family shaped by Lakewood ideals. His father taught in a Lakewood satellite yeshiva, and five of his siblings live in Lakewood, where they either study in the yeshiva or help support a husband who does. Josh was the family's black sheep; he was thrown out of several ultra-Orthodox high schools because of disciplinary problems. Two years ago, at the age of 20, Josh moved to Lakewood in order to work in one of the dozens of new businesses serving the expanding population. He was in an unstable period in his life, eventually quit his job and spent most of the day in his room, where he was often visited by a friend - the grandson of one of Lakewood's yeshiva heads.

They would watch videos and smoke marijuana - provided, Josh told me, by the friend - until one day Josh got a caller ID-blocked call on his cell phone. "I have a message for you from Rabbi Schenkolewski," the voice at the other end of the line said. Josh immediately recognized the name. Yisroel Schenkolewski is a Lakewood-ordained rabbi, founder of a yeshiva high school for girls that serves the Lakewood community, a chaplain in the Lakewood police force, and a self-described askan or political activist, who works to advance the interests of the yeshiva community within Lakewood city politics.

"You're not wanted in Lakewood anymore," Josh was told. "You're corrupting one of the rosh yeshiva's kids. You should get out of town. And by the way," the caller added in a friendly and concerned tone, "I'd be very careful, because there are some hotheads here that want to break your bones." According to Josh, it was unclear whether Rabbi Schenkolewsi himself was behind the threat of violence. Enraged, Josh called Rabbi Schenkolewski and demanded to know how he could advise someone to leave Lakewood without even speaking to them directly and finding out what their situation was. Schenkolewski, Josh says, was unrepentant.

Reached by Haaretz, Rabbi Schenkolewski denied ever having issued a physical threat. Nor, he said, would he deliver a hostile message except in person. He did, however, confirm the essence of the story. "Have I ever told people to leave town, people who I thought were hurting the community?" Rabbi Schenkolewski asked. "Yes, I certainly have."…

The Root Of The Slifkin Affair

Do the roots of the Rabbi Slifkin Book Ban go back to the dispute between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai?

Perhaps they do.

The Observant Astronomer has a post reviewing Menachem Fisch's book Rational Rabbis. He sums up Fisch's work as follows:

… Fisch is a philosopher of science, which has led him to what I find to be fascinating reflections on the methodology and intentions of the Babylonian amoraim.

The first part of his book explains what he means by "rational inquiry". It is a process characterized by testing and troubleshooting both the subject matter of field of study and its methodology. As an example, he gives the field of science which endeavours to understand and explain the functioning of the world. Certain problems present themselves, and science produces theories to resolve these problems. In turn, these theories make predictions, and should the predictions be born out, the theory is strengthened. On the other hand, theories whose predictions are contradicted by observation are rejected. But, more than this, a rational study is one where the standards themselves by which success in solving problems are measured, are themselves subject to such troubleshooting.

It is Fisch's thesis that the Talmudic sages were engaged on just such a rational endeavour. This is not to say that they were doing science. Far from it. Rather, they applied the rational approach to Torah.

In the Tannaitic material recorded in the Bavli, especially the material relating to the Yeshiva in Yavne, Fisch discerns a dispute between two schools of thought, or attitudes, towards the development of Torah shel b'al peh. The first, exemplified, or stereotyped, by R. Eliezer ben Hyrqanus, is what he calls traditionalist. The traditionalist holds that the strongest support for a viewpoint is that it was learned from one's teachers extending back to Moshe b'Sinai. In the traditionalist's view, precedent is absolute.

Opposing the traditionalist, is the anti-traditionalist who, in Fisch's view, is a rational actor. Tradition must be tested against new cases and more developed thoughts, and, where necessary, refuted and overturned. For the anti-traditionalist, everything is open to question.

In Fisch's reading, the Bavli's version of the Yavne stories clearly supports the anti-traditionalists, most tellingly in the famous dispute regarding the tanuro shel acknai (Bava Metzia 59a-b), the story where we learn Lo be shamaim he, that the Torah is not in heaven, but decided by the Beis Din in this world.

This strikes me as a workable theory. It becomes even stronger when one realizes that Eliezer ben Hyrkanus was a member of Beit Shammai known for refusing to adopt the halakha as determined by the majority, Beit Hillel. He would eventually be excommunicated for this.

The Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 1:4 tells a story of those times. The sages were meeting at the home of a prominent supporter, on the roof of his house. Beit Shammai appeared armed, murdered several members of Beit Hillel, and blocked the exit from the roof. No member of Beit Hillel was allowed to leave until he agreed to uphold the halakha of Beit Shammai, the minority. Beit Hillel – fearing for their lives – gave in. The sages then passed 18 gezerot (decrees) proposed by Beit Shammai. Most were aimed at separating Jews from Gentiles, and included kashrut gezerot that exist to this day. The Jerusalem Talmud calls this day the blackest day ever to befall the Jewish people.

Beit Shammai was traditionalist. Its halakhot (laws) were restrictive. Its worldview was anti-modern and anti-rational. We carry the effects of Beit Shammai's intransigence to this day.

If Beit Shammai had been met with arms, if Beit Shammai had been expelled from normative Judaism, our halakhot would be less strict and our reaction to the Gentile world – and its science – would be more open.

But on a Jerusalem day 1950 years ago, fanaticism won, crushing the democracy the sages used to guide the Jewish people in the process. The 18 gezerot were left in place – removing them meant more violence, more terror, more death.

With the destruction of the 2nd Temple, caused largely by the fractured polity of the Jewish people – it is not surprising that many zealots and sicariim appear to be from families associated with Beit Shammai – it became clear that Jewish unity must take precedence over doctrinal disputes. It was in that atmosphere that Eliezer ben Hyqanus was excommunicated and the mantra "The Torah is NOT in Heaven!" entered Jewish discourse as a response to his zealotry.

Fast forward almost 2000 years.

Today's rabbis are largely traditionalists. The historical lessons of the Beit Hillel / Beit Shammai dispute are largely lost on them. Today, unity means caving in to the most extremist of traditionalists' halakhic and theological views. Moderates are pushed out of the debate; liberals, out of Orthodoxy all together. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and his supporters may not use arms to enforce their views – although threats and physical violence are not unheard of in that world – but their methods of operation mirror those of Beit Shammai, who 1950 years ago proved that in Judaism the sword is in fact more mighty than the pen, and terrorist acts and threats more persuasive than democracy and the rule of law.

The Rebbe Refuted

Mark Perakh published an extensive article refuting many of the positions taken by members of the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists in its book Challenge.

He has this to say about the Rebbe's letter on science and Torah:

… The second section contains papers which deal more specifically with the controversy between the Genesis, geology and evolution. It opens with a paper by Rabbi M. Schneerson which in a certain sense stands alone, for its level of discourse is well below the majority of articles in the collection. Since, however, the author of that paper was acclaimed as a great thinker of this century, let us take a closer look at his article.…

Haredism = Lies & Deceit

An important piece of disturbing information surfaced during the Rabbi Slifkin Book Ban.

It seems that some haredi gedolim permitted ideas like Rabbi Slifkin's to be taught, but only for 'outreach' purposes in kiruv (outreach) seminars and at ba'al teshuva yeshivot and seminaries, but not in regular haredi yeshivot, seminaries or communities. God forbid their own children should be perverted by such heresy.

In other words, haredim practice a double standard, the use of deceitful tactics to missionize the unchurched, to lure in the unsuspecting, just like real cults.

Learn from this ban.

Haredim will lie to you to get what they want, be it a donation or another 'saved' soul – especially if that soul is yours.

Why The So-Called Gedolim Are Wrong: Truth>Dogma

Haredim have turned belief in the Ari's system of Kabbala into a litmus test for membership in Orthodoxy. This is a shame for many reasons, not the least of which is the misunderstanding of the Ari's place in history inherent in that litmus test.

The Ari lived during the Renaissance, a time of intellectual enlightenment and rationalism. Universities were springing up throughout Europe, and Humanist culture was king.

Judaism had a long tradition of what was then viewed as irrational thought – worlds created and destroyed before this one, 974 generations of men who lived before Adam and the idea that this world was very much older than 5500 years. These propositions were very alien to European and Muslim thought, whose rationalist tendencies were filtered through literal reading of Scripture. Midrashim that spoke of generations before Adam were viewed – and derided – as fairy tales.

The Ari took these midrashim, aggadot and kabbalistic works and rewrote them. He – without Jewish sources to base himself on – turned the 974 physical generations  that lived before Adam into spiritual generations that existed only in God's thought, not in the physical world. In doing so he rectified so-called "primitive'" aspects of Judaism with Renaissance thought. This change was very appealing to young intellectuals, many of whom joined the Ari's circle or the circles that later formed around his disciples. Because it did not involve changing any practical Halakha or abrogating the midrashim and aggadot in question – after all, the Ari's system was simply hashgafic thought, a philosophy of creation, if you will – there was no reason to oppose the Ari's new views. The Ari's new system, a hybrid of mysticism and Renaissance rationalism, took hold.

Fast forward to the Rabbi Nosson Sifkin ban. 'Gedoloim' like Rabbis Elyashiv, Wachtofel, Shapiro and Feldman now mandate belief in the Ari's system even though today's rationalist thought backed up by reams of empirical scientific evidence now knows that the world is in fact billions of years old.

If the Ari were alive today, it is highly unlikely he would construct a system that mandates belief in a 6000 year old world. If anything, he would trumpet the teachings of Yitzhak mi Akko. But today's 'gedolim' know nothing of history, nothing of theology, nothing of pre-Ari kabbala and nothing of science. They are small men in the worst sense of the word, and they are destroying Judaism. Some, like Rabbis Elyashiv and Wachtofel, are truly evil men. Others are simply pious fools. A few, like Rabbi Aharon Feldman, really should know better.

The 'gedolim' have drawn a line in the sand and dared us to cross.

For the sake of our future generations, for the sake of Judaism itself, we must take that dare.

Truth is more important than dogma.

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's View On The Age Of The Universe

Because of the renewed controversy over the banning of Rabbi Nosson Slifkin and his works, I thought it would be helpful to again summarize the position of Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, z"l on the age of the universe.

Rabbi Kaplan was both an illui (genius) in Torah and an illui in physics, and was arguably the most qualified individual of the previous generation to discuss the interface of Torah and science.

PART 1: Background.

    1. As long as no halakha is involved, there is no reason to paskin on (decide) an issue.
    2. In his Guide to the Perplexed, the Rambam builds several shitot (philosophies) based on da'at yachid, an individual view of a sage that is not upheld by the majority. As long as this is done for hashgafah (philosophy, outlook) and not for legal issues, this is perfectly fine.
    3. One cannot label an idea heretical until one has surveyed the sources. Perhaps Gedolim from earlier generations held the same view. If so, the view is not heresy.
    4. Sefer Temunah, an early kabbalistic work attributed to the 1st century Tanna Nehunya ben ha-Kanah, is a work that discusses the kabbalistic import of the shapes of the Hebrew letters. Sefer Temunah is quoted in many different Halakhic sources (including the Beit Yosef) that deal with sofrut – writing Torah scrolls, mezuzot and megilot.
    5. Sefer Temunah also comments on the Shmita Theory, the idea that sabbatical cycles existed before the creation of Adam, and that those cycles – those years – were actual physical years.
    6. Sefer Temunah states that we are in the 6th 7,000-year sabbatical cycle and that the world is 42,000 years old.
    7. The Shmita Theory became known as the Shitat Sefer Temunah.
    8. Many pre-ARI kabbalists accepted the Shitat Sefer Temunah, including the Ramban, his close student Yitzhak of Akko, and the RADBAZ.
    9. The Ramban's position is difficult to understand if you have not first learned Shitat Sefer Temunah.
    10. The ARI (Rabbi Isaac Luria) rejected Shitat Sefer Temunah and taught that these cycles were not physical years but were instead spiritual, non-physical years. Rabbi Moshe Cordevero agreed with the ARI.
    11. Because of the spread of Lurianic Kabbalah, Shitat Sefer Temunah became less and less known. For the most part, only those few scholars who studied ancient kabbalistic works were aware of it.
    12. In 1838, when the Tiferet Yisrael wrote his essay on the age of the universe  that advocated a universe much older than 6,000 years, his works were banned by some hasidim. Others simply ripped the essay out of the larger work.
    13. The Tiferet Yisrael's 'crime' ? Not accepting the ARI's opinion as binding. (See #1, #2 and #3 above.)

PART 2: Could The World Have Been Created 'Old'?

    1. No Jewish source exists to support this contention.
    2. To make the world appear to be billions of years old when it is really 6000 years old is problematic:

        a. It makes G-d appear to be deceptive.
        b. If one accepts the idea that G-d created an 'old' world, why not say the world was created 5 minutes ago and we with it, with all of our memories, etc. ready-made?
        c. Again, there is no Jewish source for this idea. [It was invented by the 19th century Christian apologist Philip Henry Gosse.]

    3. One can believe it it one desires. Such a belief – even absent Jewish sources to support it – is not heresy.

PART 3: The Shita of Yitzhak of Akko.

    1. He was a student and a colleague of the RAMBAN.
    2. Was one of the foremost kabbalists of his time.
    3. Investigated and authenticated the Zohar, which was then published in his lifetime.
    4. Is often quoted in the Mussar classic, Reishit Hokhmah.
    5. In his work Otzar HaHayyim, Yizhak of Acco writes that, because the sabbatical cycles referred to in Shitat Sefer Temunah existed before Adam, they must be measured in Divine years, not human years.
    6. Therefore, Sefer Temunah is speaking of Divine years when it states that the world is 42,000 years old.
    7. According to midrashic sources, a Divine day is 1,000 earth-years long.
    8. A Divine year would therefore equal 365,250 earth years.
    9. So, according to Yitzhak of Acco, the universe would be 42,000 x 365,250 earth-years old.
    10. That calculation comes out to 15.3 billion years, very close to current estimates for the Big Bang.

Part 4: Conclusion.

    1. There does not have to be a conflict between science and Torah on the age of the universe.
    2. Pre-Ari Torah-teachings have in fact been confirmed by modern science.

Rabbi Aharon Feldman's Letter Embarrassment

Rabbi Aharon Feldman's letter on the Rabbi Nosson Slifkin ban appears below.

Rabbi Feldman – who defended Rabbi Slifkin – has completely changed his postition and now opposes Rabbi Slifkin. He blames Rabbi Slifkin for the shame brought on the so-called gedolim when the blame belongs squarely on their shoulders, not Rabbi Slifkin's. They banned a man without proper hearing, due process or investigation. They refused to hear his point of view. They smeared him. They labeled him a heretic.

Yet Rabbi Feldman now adopts the view of the evil one from Jerusalem:

R. Yosef Shalom Eliashiv, a signatory to the ban, was asked: if he considers Slifkin’s approach wrong how could so many earlier authorities have held it? He answered: “They were permitted to hold this opinion; we are not.” In other words, they were authorities in their own right qualified to decide matters of Jewish law. We are not permitted to do so. We are enjoined to follow the majority opinion and our tradition as to how we are to approach Torah.

Understand this well: Even though major rabbis who lived 700 to 1000 years ago held that the world was very old – far, far older than 6000 years – we are now mandated to believe the world is no more than 6000 years old. Why? We must follow the errors of (some, but not all, of the) more recent rabbis.

What is really behind this coercion? This:

One of the most powerful reasons why R. Avraham’s [and the Rambam his father's] opinion was rejected by most opinions, is the introduction of the wisdom of Kabbalah of the Ari Zal in the sixteenth century. This cast the Sages in another dimension. Before then, many authorities had held that the esoteric wisdom described in the Talmud as Ma’aseh Breyshis and Ma’aseh Hamerkava was science and philosophy. After the introduction of Kabbalah it became clear that these were the Sefer HaYetzira, the Zohar and the Tikkunim. This was accepted by the overwhelming majority of Torah scholars since then. Kabbala made it clear that when the Sages spoke, they based themselves on their knowledge of the mysteries of creation. This would give them an accurate knowledge of matters of natural science as well.

In other words, the Ari held that the Talmud referred to spiritual, not physical, worlds when it spoke of worlds created and destroyed before this one or the generations who lived before Adam. Science has now proven the pre-Ari sages to be correct and the Ari and his followers – the hasidic movement and  much of the haredi rabbinate – to be wrong. But the Judaism of Rabbi Aharon Feldman cannot accept that. In his pathetic world, the Ari must be correct and the pre-Ari sages incorrect. This is the crux of the ban.

Know this well: Science has proved haredi Judaism wrong. Science cannot be rectified with haredi Judaism nor can haredi Judaism be rectified with science.

Rabbis Elyashiv, Wachtofel, Shapiro, Feldman, Barenbaum, etc. have turned Judaism into a cult, a place where one must believe fantasy to belong.

Rabbi Feldman is a perversion, a sick, deceitful, dishonest man and his Judaism is also a perversion, sick and dishonest.

May God save us.

Gedolim World

And, Gedolim Color War returns! (Funny, you can find it here, too!)

Rabbi Aharon Feldman Sells Out Rabbi Slifkin

Rabbi Aharon Feldman, a one-time defender of Rabbi Nosson Slifkin, has sold out and now backs the ban against Rabbi Slifkin and his books.

GodolHador has written extensively on this.

My thoughts on the duplicity of Rabbi Feldman, the Rosh Yeshiva of Ner Yisrael are made clear in the post above.

As for Orthodoxy, it is moving rapidly into the Dark Ages. For all interested in truth and light, it's time to jump ship.

Evolution Meets Judaism – A.K.A., Rabbi Slifkin Gets Mugged By The 'Gedolim'

The Scientist has a piece on the recent controversy surrounding Rabbi Nosson Slifkin:

…  "Intelligent design usually involves arguing that there are structures in living creatures which cannot be explained by naturalistic processes," [Rabbi Slifkin] writes via E-mail. "I think that this is a potentially problematic approach, certainly from a Jewish perspective. Judaism has always focused on seeing God in the design of the laws of nature, not in creating phenomena that can't be explained by natural laws – yet."

… "Jews are generally less insistent than Christians on literal readings of scripture (due to a long tradition of rabbinic deeper interpretations of the Bible). In addition, miracles and supernatural acts are much less significant in Judaism than in Christianity."

Slifkin's views – see more at [http://www.zootorah.com] – have not been without their opponents in the Jewish community.

… "I knew that these ideas were regarded with deep loathing in certain insular circles, amongst people who have had no exposure to modern science," he says. "But I did not think that my books would penetrate these circles ... and indeed they didn't, which is why for years there was no uproar [until] certain troublemakers brought them to the attention of people who would not have noticed them otherwise."

"What was interesting is that those who strongly opposed my books totally underestimated how widely these ideas are accepted in the Orthodox Jewish world," Slifkin says. "The overwhelming majority of the community, including many rabbis and community leaders, were sympathetic to my views."…

Yes, but they are too cowardly to publicly stand up and say so.

Rabbi David Orlofsky Continues To Lie

Rabbi David Orlofsky has written a public letter on the Rabbi Slifkin Ban. While blaming those who released his earlier letters, he fails to mention that the first of those letters contained lies about Rabbi Slifkin, and that Rabbi Orlofsky clearly knew those parts of his letter were not true. Yet he circulated the letter to many friends, students and other rabbis. One of them released the letter, appalled by the lies and the viscious tone. Subsequently the second letter was released to show that Rabbi Orlofsky had – under pressure – removed the lies and moderated the tone somewhat.

Why anyone trusts this man is beyond me. He's the worst type of unapologetic party hack and a poster boy for what is wrong with today's Orthodoxy. He should be retired from public life – and teaching life – immediately.

Letter is posted after the jump.

Schneur From NYC Writes – Rabbi Dovid Feinstein Judged A Case In Which He Had A Financial Interest, Stood Gain Hundreds Of Thousands Of Dollars

The Rabbi Dovid Feinstein Nepotistic Two-Step: What Is Good For R. Slifkin Is Bad For R. Feinstein's Nephew R. Mordechai Tendler

********** STRAWBERRIES BANNED! ********** No Joke – British Ultra-Orthodox Ban Strawberries Due To Fear Of Bugs

Ohr Somayach "Luxury" Passover Features Unrepentant Liar, Cultlike Deception

Is This Rabbi David Orlofsky's Letter Smearing Rabbi Slifkin?

Rabbi Berel Wein: Bans Don't Work In Modern World – If You Want To Do Outreach, That Is

NY Times Reports On Slifkin Book Ban – Agudah Spin Behind The Story?

R. Mattisyahu Solomon: Those Who Seek To Reconcile Torah With Science "ARROGANT" – We Must Believe In The Lowest Common Denominator Understanding Of Torah With "Simple Faith"

Jewish DIS-Unity: Siyum HaShas Turns Into Anti-Slifkin, Anti-Tendler Battleground

Tampa Tribune: Katherine Harris Refuses To Return Rubashkin-Balkany $$$ – USDA Report Missing In Action

Gedolim Color War

NY State Kosher Food Database Is Up And Running – With A Pregnant Double Standard From Agudath Israel Of America And Nathan Lewin

Another J-Blog Down – Bnei Levi, In Forefront Defending R. Slifkin – Disappears Without A Trace

Bnei Levi, a J-blog that was in the forefront of defending Rabbi Nosson Slifkin, has disappeared without a trace. Was Bnei Levi hacked? Was he threatened? Did he simply give up?

So far, we don't know for sure – although it appears that Godol Hador, another J-blog in the forefront of the R. Slifkin scandal, has been heavily pressured to get out of the blog business.

The thugs are winning.

Slifkin Censors Website – Controversy No More

Yated Ne'eman: Throat-Ripping At Rubashkin, Oral-Genital Contact During Circumcision Both Religious Freedom Issues – Government Has No Right To Tell Us What To Do – Links US Government Action To 'Czarist Russia' , Cooperation With Govt Sin

Slifkin Book On e-Bay – Starting Bid $100

Rabbi Nosson Slifkin's banned book, The Science of Torah is being offered on e-Bay with a starting bid of $100.

Bid away here.

(Hat tip: Felicity Lerner.)

Rabbi Dovid Feinstein Retracts His 'Retraction' – The R. Slifkin Ban Still Stands

Godol Hador and others in the know are reporting that Rabbi Dovid Feinstein's 'retraction' of the Rabbi Slifkin Ban is not true. The ban stands.

As FailedMessiah.com reported yesterday, this is hardly a surprise.

New Letter From Rabbi Elyashiv Translated

Rav Elyashiv Strikes Back – Ban Still Stands No Room For Questioning

Rabbi Dovid Feinsten "Rescinds" His Ban On Rabbi Slifkin – Has Not Apologized – Will He?

Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch Speaks – You Are Almost Absolutely Without Question A Heretic, A Kofer And A Min – Slifkin Ban Expands To Include Almost All Of Orthodoxy, Including You

Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch, a 'gadol' of note, has declared almost every Torah-observant Jew who believes the world is older than 6000 years to be a heretic: [Hat tip: Bnei Levi.]

BREAKING! Rabbi Elyashiv Makes Entire Kosher Wing Of Judaism Treife By Fiat – No Basis In Jewish Law For His Action – Welcome To The Dark Ages

I received the following from JJ, a reader, who claims this is an e-mail from R. Ahron Feldman explaining his visit last week to Rabbi Yosef Sholom Elyashiv on behalf of Rabbi Nosson Slifkin. Read correctly, it means that the 'gedolim' will not be standing up to Rabbi Elyashiv anytime soon:

The Bnei Brak Flat Earth Society Wants You!

But be warned – don't fall off the edge!

[Click on the graphic for an enlargement.]

JWB Reports: Slikin Ban Still On, Widening

BREAKING! Bnei Levi Is Exclusively Reporting That The Slifkin Ban Is Off – Rabbi Ahron Feldman Representing The Leadership Of American Haredi Judaism Has Flown To Jerusalem And Confronted Rabbi Elyashiv

Everything He Learned About Torah He Learned At The University Of Berlin?

Chabad Skeptic has posted a telling link to a letter written in 1971 by the late Chabad-Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson to an unnamed member of the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists.

[The scientist is most likely Yehuda (Leo) Levi, who is now rumored to be the subject of Jerusalem street posters calling for his excommunication.]

The problems with the letter?

Bad science and bad Torah:

[F]or example, the attempt to ‘reinterpret’ the text of the first section of Breishis4 to the effect that it speaks of periods or eons, rather than ordinary days, or to apply indiscriminately the dictum the ‘the Torah speaks in the language of man,’ etc., is not only uncalled for, but it means tampering with the Mitzvah [commandment] of Shabbos itself, which ‘balances’ all the Torah. For, if one takes the words “one day” out of their context and plain meaning, one ipso facto abrogates the whole idea of Shabbos as the ‘seventh day’ stated in the same context. The whole idea of Shabbos observance is based on the clear and unequivocal statement in the Torah: “For in six days G-d made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He ceased from work and rested”—days, not periods.

Such attempts at reinterpreting the Torah are, of course, the outmoded legacy of the 19th century and before, when in the face of the dogmatic and deterministic view of science prevailing at the time, a whole apologetic literature was created by well-meaning religious advocates and certain Rabbis, who saw no other way of preserving the Torah heritage in their ‘enlightened’ communities except through tenuous and spurious reinterpretations of certain passages of the Torah in order to accommodate them to the prevailing world outlook. No doubt they knew inwardly that they were suggesting interpretations in Torah which were at variance with Toras Emes[the infallible Torah]. But, at least, they felt they had no alternative. It was conceivable, in those days, that if one approached a student who dabbled in science and told him that according to the Torah-hashkofo [Torah outlook], the sun revolves around the earth, he might well repudiate Torah altogether. So, in an effort to encourage the student to put on Teffilin [ritual prayer boxes], the well-meaning Rabbi did not mind conceding that the earth revolved around the sun. But surely there is no longer any justification whatever to perpetuate this ‘inferiority complex!’ Certainly there is no basis for holding on to views which have come down in outdated elementary and high school textbooks on science.

This matter of the sun and the earth is a further case in point. To declare categorically in the name of science, that the earth revolves around the sun, and not vise versa, is, as noted above, turning the scientific clock back to the 19th century and Medieval science. It is also at variance with the theory of relativity, which has likewise been universally accepted. Science now declares—as categorically as it is permissible for contemporary science—that where two bodies in space are in relative motion, it is scientifically impossible to determine which is at rest and which in motion.

The Rebbe – who, after all, was supposed to be a kabbalist of stature – shows complete ignorance of a major kabbalistic view on the age of the universe and creation.

Known as Shitat Sefer Temunah, this view was first noted by the 1st century rabbi, Nehuniyah ben HaKaneh in his work Sefer Temunah and was held by many, if not most, of the pre-Ari (Rabbi Isaac Luria, 16th century, Egypt and Tzefat) kabbalists.

In a different letter, published in Challenge (AOJS/Feldheim, 1978) the Rebbe accounted for dinosaurs, other fossils, and all other data pointing to a very ancient world by positing that God created the world to look old, with dinosaurs and other fossils already buried in the ground, and with light from distant stars already reaching the earth.

The problem with this view?

There is no source in traditional Jewish texts to support it.

So did the Rebbe invent this idea out of whole cloth?

No. He 'borrowed' it (unattributed, of course) from Philip Henry Gosse, the mid-19th century Christian apologist who invented it.

Where did the Rebbe learn this Christian view on the age of the universe?

At the University of Berlin in a Natural Philosophy class.

For the past forty years, the Rebbe's followers have been pushing this un-Jewish view, preaching it on college campuses and publishing it in newsletters, newspapers and on the internet.

But, if the Slifkin Ban has taught us anything, it is that ignorance – both of science and of Jewish history – is not unique to Chabad.

You can read the entire letter here.

Slifkin Ban – Make Your Voice Heard!

An online petition regarding the R. Slifkin Ban:

To be delivered to those rabbis who signed the ban.

All In The Family

Paul Shaviv has a fascinating post on Sir Isaiah Berlin and Slifkin-gate.

It seems that Sir Isaiah, Yehudi Menuhin and the 7th Lubavitcher rebbe were all equal Schneerson cousins and the rebbe's wife, Chaya Mushka (and daughter of the 6th rebbe, Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn) used to travel to London to see Sir Isaiah's mother and attend the theater with her.

By the way, Sir Isaiah – an infrequent synagogue attendee – inherited from his mother the tefillin of the Alter Rebbe, Shneur Zalman of Liady the founder of the Chabad dynasty. It was not uncommon for Lubavitch hasidim to make a pilgrimage of sorts to Sit Isaiah's home just to catch a glimpse of them.

Does anyone know where they are kept today?

UPDATE: The Times They Are A Changin'?

After two weeks of complete censorship, Aish HaTorah has returned a censored version of Dr. Gerald Schroeder's article, The Age of the Universe to the Aish.com website and made it an Editor's Pick in this week's Aish.com e-mail.

What prompted this 'change'?

Perhaps it was the reduced web traffic, disgust shown by (former) donors, and difficulty conducting Discovery Seminars when participants are aware of the Slifkin Ban and its repercussions.

Or, it could be a sudden fit of altruism.

You choose.

UPDATE: A reader has pointed out that significant changes have been made in Dr. Schroeder's article.

Searching the web, I found the original version. The new, censored version on Aish.com has this added paragraph inserted as the second paragraph:

Let me clarify right at the start. The world may be only some 6000 years old. God could have put the fossils in the ground and juggled the light arriving from distant galaxies to make the world appear to be billions of years old. There is absolutely no way to disprove this claim. God being infinite could have made the world that way. There is another possible approach that also agrees with the ancient commentators' description of God and nature. The world may be young and old simultaneously. In the following I consider this latter option.

In other words, Dr. Schroeder has been forced to add the theory of a 19th century Christian apologist, Philip Henry Gosse to his article without noting its Christian source or the fact that there are no classical Jewish sources that agree with Gosse.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are in a new Dark Age and R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv is our new black pope. May G-d save us.

Both versions of the Schroeder article can be read after the jump.

Burning Books, Ruining Lives, Destroying Truth – The Slifkin Ban In Perspective

Jeffery Woolf of Bar Illan University has this to say about the Slifkin ban:

800 years ago, the kind of witch hunt this ban has generated led 'Frummer Yidn' to invite the Holy Office of the Inquisition to burn the writings of the heretic from Cairo. They did so in the center of Montpellier. That act of fanatical mesira provided the legal precedent for the burning of 24 cartloads of Talmudic Manuscripts in the Place de l'Hotel de Vosges in Paris in the Spring of 1242.

I suggest the 'gedolim' learn some history.

And then, this:

There is, in Jerusalem and New York, a group of highly sophisticated Ba'ale Teshuva who entered the Torah World because they had been shown that one can be educated and Torah observant as well. The vicious attacks on Rabbi Slifkin, which are themselves heretical as they contradict the words of literally dozens of Rishonim and later authorities, are creating an atmosphere which will drive these wonderful people from Torah.…What do we have to offer these fellow Orthodox Jews, when the Roshe Yeshiva they so admire deny them their place in the World to come?

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, z"l On The Age Of The Universe

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's, z"l, position of the age of the universe based on early Kabbalistic sources is highlighted after the jump.

Cross-Currents Skewered

The best satire of the thinly-veiled, Pravda-like Agudath Israel 'blog' Cross-Currents can be found here. Enjoy!

Ladies And Gentlemen, Welcome To The Dark Ages

Mordechai Plaut, editor of Deiah Vedibbur, the online mouthpiece of the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) Jewish world, has left a telling comment on House of Hock.

Highlights:

1. "[T]radition (mesorah) is a much more powerful and better path to knowledge than sensory observation based on induction."
2. "[S]cience has altogether nothing to do with truth."
3. "Only Torah can even claim to be discussing truth."

Ladies and Gentlemen, please check your faculties at the door before entering HarediLand.

More Slifkin Censorship

Ohr Somayach has pulled most of Rabbi Nosson Slifkin's work from the Ohr.edu website. (Hat tip: reader Bob.)

How The Slifkin Ban Explains Rubashkin's Rabbis, Part 1

If you want to understand why Rubashkin is (largely) getting a free pass from right-wing Orthodoxy, it is important to understand the right-wing Orthodox view on science.

Scientists and veterinarians have clearly stated that the animals shown on the PETA video suffered unnecessarily. Orthodox rabbis who have made statements on the Rubashkin-PETA issue have disagreed with them:

It's just like "a chicken running with its head cut off," said one prominent rabbi. Another repeatedly claims that the animals are just like a "drunk trying to stand" on wobbly legs, and we all know a drunk does not feel anything.

As several animal scientists have told me, the ignorance of simple biology needed to make these statements is overwhelming.

Here's a primer on science and right-wing Orthodoxy, courtesy of Da'as Hedyot.

As you read this post please remember that in rabbinic eyes, animals walking three minutes after shechita are insensate, do not feel and may very well already be dead.

The Forward Reports On Book-Banning

Steven I. Weiss has written a piece for the Forward on the Slifkin book-banning. Strangely, he fails to mention the blogs – Chakira, House of Hock, and Hirhurim prominent among them – who broke this story and have done much of the reporting that SIW (the founder of the now-shuttered Protocols blog) heavily relies on for his report.

To understand the development of this ban, see here and here.

The OU On Slifkin-gate

The  OU's Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb on Slifkin-gate.

The Real History Behind The Ban

Luke Ford has an amazing post on Slifkin-gate, essentially a long e-mail from Rabbi Ari Kahn, formerly of Aish HaTorah, now director of the overseas students program at Bar Illan University.

Rabbi Kahn hired Dr. Schroeder to lecture in Aleynu,the Aish outreach program. He describes the process of that hire – and the subsequent Din Torah – this way:

Retraction

Rabbi Yaakov Menken's Torah.org has not intentionally removed Rabbi Slifkin's and Dr. Schroeder's articles from its website.

It appears that the Torah.org search engine does not index features, although it indexes other parts of the site. (Nowhere on Torah.org is this made clear.)

I apologize for any misrepresentation or inconvenience my reporting error may have caused.

Rabbi Menken owns and manages Team Genesis, a webhosting and design firm that does the design and hosting for Torah.org. It should not be difficult for Torah.org to have this apparent technical glitch repaired so its readers can correctly search its site.

Again, I apologize for my mistake.

What Else Is Missing From Torah.org?

What else is missing from Torah.org?

1. Age of the universe.
2. Billions of years.
3. Science of Torah.
4. Science and Torah.

UPDATE:
Please see retraction here.

BREAKING! Torah.org: More Slifkin Censorship – This Time Dr. Gerald Schroeder

Torah.org has also banned all of Dr. Gerald (Genesis And The Big Bang) Schroeder's articles (except for one article they missed that mentions him) from its website, just as they have done with all of Rabbi Nosson Slifkin's work. (Please see the post immediately below this.)

Here is Google's list of the missing articles.

UPDATE:
Please see retaction here.

BREAKING! Torah.org – More Slifkin Censorship?

Rabbi Yaakov Menken's Torah.org has apparently banned all of Rabbi Nosson Slifkin's work from its website.


(Here are the now-censored articles as found on Google.)

The censorship continues.

UPDATE:
Please see retraction here.

The Prophet Of YU?

Chakira has written an insightful post about Slifkin-gate. Most importantly, though, Chakira notes that he was on to the Slifkin book-banning one year ago.

Have we a new prophet at YU?

A Few Thoughts On Monkey-gate – Why Was Rabbi Slifkin Banned?

Why were Rabbi Slifkin and his books banned by a large number of Haredi rabbinic leaders?

Rabbi Slifkin's 'crime' seems to be that he takes science seriously. The 'Gedolim' (great rabbinic leaders) involved in the ban do not and find it an affront to the "Honor of the Torah" that any Orthodox Jew would and would publish a work stating so – hence the ban.

Two main questions swirl around this tragic case:

1. Did the 'Gedolim' agree to hear R. Slifkin or did they refuse?
2. Did a Beit Din  (religious court) hear the case?

We may never know the truth about the first question, but the answer to the second is resoundingly clear – no Beit Din heard the case.

When you see the statements that got R. Slifkin banned, and you see those very same statements were made by Gedolim of previous generations – from R. Hirsch to R. Yitzhak mi Akko, from the Tiferet Yisrael to the RAMBAN and RAMBAM – it is very difficult to argue that the benefit of the doubt in this case should go solely (or even partially) to the 'Gedolim' who issued the ban.

The facts seem to be uniformly on R. Slifkin's side.

Unfortunately, in today's version of Orthodox Judaism, the facts do not matter.

Rise Of Orthodox Fundamentalism

Da'as Hedyot has a great post on history of the rise of Orthodox fundamentalism in light of the banning of Rabbi Slifkin's books.

How Long Will This One Last?

Here's another article Aish.com may soon ban. (If it's not found on the Aish.com website, you can read it here after the jump.)

Dr. Gerald Schroeder Banned?

Aish.com has removed all but one of Dr. Gerald Schroeder's articles.

Banned

In response to the latest Haredi book-banning / excommunication Aish.com, the highly successful and widely read website of Aish HaTorah, has pulled a number of articles by various authors from its site for "review" by "today's leading [ultra-Orthodox] Torah scholars."

In the spirit of free inquiry, we print one of those now-banned articles in its entirety after the jump.

Rabbi Slifkin's Books Banned

Many of you already know that Rabbi Nosson Slifkin's books have been banned by a list of rabbis that includes Dovid Feinstein and Yosef Shalom Elyashiv. Rabbi Slifkin's 'crime' seems to be his argument for the earth being more than 6,000 years old.

You can read about the ban here.

See the best satire on this (if I don't say so myself!) here.