This is an excellent piece with a lot to unpack. The "Slifkin affair" stands out as one of the most significant events during the peak of Jewish blogging.
In my opinion, it's tied into the broader trend of the New Atheist movement, and 9/11.
Interestingly, and revealingly, R' Kamenetzky's Making of a Godol was also banned around the same time. Check out Marc Shapiro's article on that, as well as my selected bibliography on the topic of 21st-century heresy, doubt, and criticism by disaffiliates of ultra-Orthodox Judaism in the US:
I'm glad that you pointed out that Slifkin is tied to the broader influence of the New Atheist movement. I couldn't have summed it up better myself, and I think most frum Jews who know the parsha would agree.
You think it was just a freudian slip? No, look at this guy Ezra Brand's writings. He's at least as big of an apikores as Slifkin. Probably bigger, and is much more open about it. He meant what he said and he said what he meant.
My personal beliefs are irrelevant here, no need for ad hominems. I was simply making the point that the early 2000s was a time of greater criticism of fundamentalist religion. Very simple, no need to overthink it
Exactly, a time of greater criticism of religion from an atheist angle. This explains the intellectual background where Slifkin was coming from. Thanks for clarifying.
PS- I think it's funny you say your personal beliefs are irrelevant when the entire subject is beliefs. Oh yes, you are a totally neutral observer. Nothing to see here, folks!
Orthodox Judaism (as a concept) was invented in reaction to Reform. Charedism and Daas Torah was invented in reaction to Religious Zionism. Nothing to see!
Nope, that's not what I'm saying, no matter how much you want me to be saying that. New Atheism was simply the most extreme manifestation of the critique. R' Slifkin's critique always has been more moderate.
And again, the discussion is about R' Slifkin, not about me
I think there's a huge gulf between fundamentalist proto-cults like Charedi 'Judaism' and religion. Religion is about belief in something greater than humankind. It tends to emphasize the transcendental and eternal nature of the soul.
Fundamentalist proto-cults like the one you follow are about obedience to other humans and the exercise of power. They have little interest in religion per se and rather emphasize correct behavior and thought. That is why trolls like you are totally incapable of ever engaging in sincere debate and are blind to the religious yearning for truth. You cannot understand religion because you are utterly irreligious.
My goal is to learn enough Torah that when someone calls me an apikoros, that the criticism would be taken seriously. As the old joke goes, better to be an apikoros than an am haaretz. ;)
The old joke is that a yeshiva bochur in Eastern Europe hears about a famous apikores and decides he wants to learn from him. So he travels all the way to a faraway city, tracks him down, and tells him he wants to be an apikores.
"You do? Have you learned the whole Tanach?"
"Well, um, no, not all of it."
"The Yerushalmi?"
"No, I've never really learned it."
"Have you finished the Bavli?"
"Well, no, I've just learned a few masechtot."
"OK, here's what you do: Go back to yeshiva. Learn all of Tanach, finish Bavli, learn the Yerushalmi, Midrashim, Tosefta, Rishonim, Achronim...when you're done, come back and we'll talk about you becoming an apikores."
Haha, classic. But of course, the reverse never happens. No kiruv yeshiva ever says to a secular person interested in learning more about becoming frum, as Yisro famously wanted for his grandson: "Have you read all the materialist philosophers? Come back to us when you have". So it's just the classic heads we win, tails you lose
Right. My point is that "get educated" it's not a real gotcha, since it only goes one way (get educated about classic Jewish literature, and nothing else)
The version of the "old joke" I heard was: Ben Gurion lamented to Golda Meir, "Golda, we thought we were founding a country of apiqursim. But we only built one of amharatzim." (Translated from the Yiddish. Had the "quote" been in Hebrew, it would have been "amei haaretz". BG knew Hebrew better than that.)
Off-topic, but guessing which Nachum this is -- if I'm right it would be of interest:
Avraham Even-Shoshan (author of the dictionary and concordance) and his chavrusah in cheder wrote a peirush of several books of Tanakh together as kids. (ES's father taught Ivrit there.) At age 12, they tackled Mishlei and Daniel -- a book of metaphors and one largely in Aramaic! But in those days they were known as Avraham Rosenstein and...
I knew about the connection- R' David was my parents' mesader kiddushin, and my parents treasure their old multi-volume Even-Shoshan. We were just talking of getting one for ourselves. (A newer one.)
In the new Koren English Tanakh, Daniel was translated by someone we know from Jerusalem, the daughter of R' Michel Bernstein, who was a rebbe of my father as well. His son and her brother, MJ Bernstein, was my teacher in YU.
Mazal tov on this milestone anniversary! I remain gobsmacked at your brilliance, have loved following you on this journey, and admit to having been also influenced in the direction we have taken by the ongoing blogging of your experiences. With much kavod, wishing you continued hatzlacha and can't wait to read the next book!
Are you familiar with Rabbi Dr. Raphael Zarum ? His book “Questioning Belief” which was published by Maggid Press makes the case for not taking the Torah literally when it comes to Bereishit, the flood, the exodus etc etc. This book won the Rabbi Sacks Book Prize. No one had banned this book as far as I know. Rabbi Slifkin lead the way for this! Mazel Tov on your anniversary!
Maggid Press is a Modern Orthodox publisher, so it wouldn't be subject to a ban. Charedim only ban publications from within their own community, meaning the publisher is charedi or the author is a well known charedi figure
Actually, the fight against Sacks was led by the British MO rabbinate. Most Charedi Rabbis scoffed at the idea that anything the CR wrote was worth the paper it was written on. As one Chassidic Rabbi said, 'CHief Rabbi? SHteef Rabbi!'
I've had rebbeim, including at YU, men far, far frummer and righteous than I, who quietly told us much the same. Some of them believed in the literal truth of all or most of that, they just didn't think it heresy to think otherwise.
Biblical literalism is itself heretical for Jews because it denies the authoritative Rabbinic interpretations. The Catholic Church has a similar position. Some Protestants claim to hold by it and it is really easy to get them stuck in logical contradictions or having to explain away things that are contradictory to basic dogma.
Well, I'm not sure if "happy anniversary" is appropriate, but...twenty years, wow.
I think you're spot-on about how these things are connected. And a yasher koach to the gedolim and machers for setting so many people on the right track. :-)
Allow me to share a memory: In 2003 the Orthodox blog world (remember that?) was getting started, and charedi book bans were getting more common. And with YU's annual sefarim sale starting, someone wrote a post, "Which book at YU's sale this year is the most likely to be banned? My money is on Nosson Slifkin's 'Mysterious Creatures'." And I thought, "Oh, come on, *that* book?" My charedi rabbi owned a copy, after all.
Well, it took another year and half, but he was right.
I am glad that you stated explicitly the words "deification of Daas Torah". The Haredim all are כופרים בעיקר. They all worship multiple gods: the Real One plus at least one "Rabbi".
I attended the funeral of a wonderful rabbi with whom I had studied. A number of charedi rabbis praised him as a great supporter of Daas Torah.
But he had personally told me that he did not believe in Daas Torah. He said he didn't have any problem with people who did, but that it was not his belief. At the time, I didn't realize the significance.
That is actually a welcome development. It removes the connotation of great Torah authorities having some Divine insight, and just means that they asked their local Rav or Rosh Yeshiva for a pesak or advice.
I don't think so. The doctrine of da'as Torah is that the very greatest of talmidei chachamim should decide klal issues because of the Divine insight they have as a result of their Torah knowledge. I think (or at least I hope) that no one believes that when they ask their rabbi what to do about their fight with the neighbor, he is giving them Divine insight.
Ironically, the hated Medina is actually the biggest supporter of Torah learning in Jewish history. More people are sitting and learning, with extensive support from the state, than ever before. Where is the hakarat hatov?
I regret that we chose to remove some of your more controversial emails from the Avodah archive. It seems a couple of guys were mining the archive for things to show "the gedolim" for round 2 of the ban. It ended up not making a difference, and now they're out of Google's reach.
As I've said many times, any Rabbi whose books are banned is a Rabbi I want to get to know better and understand. Rav Slifkin, you're in excellent company. Didn't people burn Rambam's books back in the day? He seems to have come out of that pretty well.
I think that your statement about Charedi culture "believing that they believe that learning Torah is a replacement for military effort" is far too kind. It should read "pretending that they believe..."
I also think that you are far too kind in ascribing to Charedi culture any core beliefs whatsoever, beyond perhaps political aims.
Baruch Hashem, you survived and flourished, and I am proud to have been one of the people who defended you in print.
Just re Rav Elya, while Rabbi Ribner makes the statement about Rav Elya and you, are we certain that Rav Elya actually holds that? It seems to be hearsay.
Leib, I my recall may not be perfect here. But YU individuals were definitely involved, including Rav Moshe Tendler, who wrote a book defending the wearing of techelet. Baruch Sterman, a key player, is Hebrew U educated and not chareidi.
Nothing against chareidi participation in the techelet revolution. Anyway, this is small stuff, let's not get caught up in it.
As a side note, in general the chareidi books supporting techeiles are misinformed on numerous issues. Tavger though is one of the more honest chareidi techeiles supporters.
Sterman is quite misinformed as well, (and he really shouldn't be discussing chemistry which is clearly not his expertise.) His disagreements with Professor Koren make him look like a fool sometimes.
Those of us who wear techeilet do not do so because we are 100 percent certain it is the "correct" techeilet (keeping in mind that there may be more than one sea animal that fits the bill). We do so because we think there is a very good chance that we are fulfilling the mitzvah in a more elevated way. Or as I told someone who does not wear techeilet, "I am unsure that mine is the correct techeilet, but I am sure that yours is not!"
Even in the chareidi world, there are gedolim who wear techeilet. These include, to my knowledge, Rav Yisroel Belsky, zt'l, Rav Chaim Pinchus Scheinberg, zt'l, and yibadlu l'chaim, Rav Wachtfogel, Rav Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg, and Ra Yitzchok Meir Morgenstern (I am unsure which techeilet he is wearing). And of cours Rav Herschel Schachter does, as did Rav Moshe Tendler, zt'l. There are more, this is just a sample.
Your non typo, "believing that they believe," I think is missing a qualifier. It should be "wanting to believe that they believe."
In practice I'm not sure everyone puts this belief into practice, if they did, bein hazmanim would be fully canceled, and there would be full sedarim even during chol hamoed... just like vacation and time off has been cancelled for IDF soldiers.
Surprisingly, the haskamot industry survived this incident. I assume that the haskamot on Slifkin's books were argued away by suggesting that they didn't actually read the book. And then ironically the bans get loaded with haskamot.
So do names on books and paskevilim retain any value today???
Both of the Rashei Yeshiva who gave me haskamos definitely read at least parts of the book. I got back suggested edits! I am sure R Aharon Lopiansky (Y' of Greater Washington) read cover to cover, his feedback was copious. R Kalman Espstein (Yeshivas Shaar haTorah - Grodno, and great-grandson of R Shimon Shkop, whom the book is based on) only gave me two suggestions, so it is possible he skimmed the rest.
Rav Aharon Lopiansky has a letter where he describes in great detail what is wrong with Slifkin's view, and why he regrets his haskamah. Did you know that?
When the Science of Torah (or one of Natan's other science-related writings, can't remember) came out, I read around 80 percent of it and then told my rosh yeshiva, HaRav Yechiel Perr, zt'l, "I can't find any kefirah in it." He responded emphatically, "And you won't!"
Maybe you wouldn't, but the Gedolim were able to tell that he was kofer from the very beginning. And here we are 20 years later, he is a flagrant, open kofer, who spends all his time trying to stir up hatred against Torah Jews and lead people of the derech. It's only because of the Gedolim's foresight to kick him out of the community that he is not successful.
So my dear friend, you may not love this answer, but I think it may have had an effect. I have long felt that the ban kind of pushed you philosophically toward what you call Rationalist Judaism. I am uncertain that one's hashkafah should be influenced by personal events such as the ban.
On the other hand, it is conceivable that the ban had a net positive effect for you. You have moved forward with some wonderful endeavors, including the Museum (I and my family were early visitors) and the wonderful encyclopedia of Biblical animals.
Yeah, it's amazing isn't it? Look at their incredible vision! It gives me chizuk every time I think about it. Sure, the ban probably had an effect on you, but from your reaction it's clear you were already 90% "new atheist".
", but the Gedolim were able to tell that he was kofer from the very beginning. "
Fabrication. You made this up.
Go back 20 years and dig up a quote from one of the banners stating that while there was no explicit heresy in the volumes, they are to be banned because RNS was a heretic. Bonus points if you could explain how they knew he was a heretic, if there was no heresy in the books.
No excuses, hand-waving or דיוקים. Provide explicit evidence that the banners admitted that there was no explicit heretical content, but somehow "knew" he was a heretic.
Huh? Why would I dig up an idiotic quote that you made up? The Gedolim said what they said and meant what they meant, and they were right that his books were full of minus and kefira, even if a layperson couldn't tell, it's obvious in hindsight.
That's part of the story, but the main mistake was mine, in seeking haskamos in the first place from people who are not experts in the topic and who are not of a rationalist orientation. Contrast R. Lopiansky with R. Aryeh Carmell, who stood by his haskamah.
He needed to appease whoever his 'boss' was in this matter. Clearly a 'long tearful letter' was part of the process of making clear he was not a wayward heretical rabbi to whoever runs the show.
No, his retraction was sincere. Though it wasn't "tearful" to the Gedolim - if anything it was tearful to me. He decided that if all the charedi Gedolim felt a certain way, even if the ban was engineered by a bunch of lowlifes, it must be a sign from God.
Interestingly, Rav Moshe Feinstein was careful to give an approbation for the author (haskamat gavra) while noting that he had not had the time to review the content (haskamat cheftza)
This is an excellent piece with a lot to unpack. The "Slifkin affair" stands out as one of the most significant events during the peak of Jewish blogging.
In my opinion, it's tied into the broader trend of the New Atheist movement, and 9/11.
Interestingly, and revealingly, R' Kamenetzky's Making of a Godol was also banned around the same time. Check out Marc Shapiro's article on that, as well as my selected bibliography on the topic of 21st-century heresy, doubt, and criticism by disaffiliates of ultra-Orthodox Judaism in the US:
https://www.academia.edu/99905079/21st_century_heresy_doubt_and_criticism_by_disaffiliates_of_ultra_Orthodox_Judaism_in_the_US_a_selected_bibliography
I'm glad that you pointed out that Slifkin is tied to the broader influence of the New Atheist movement. I couldn't have summed it up better myself, and I think most frum Jews who know the parsha would agree.
That's not at all what he meant, and you know it.
Or maybe you don't, which would be telling.
You think it was just a freudian slip? No, look at this guy Ezra Brand's writings. He's at least as big of an apikores as Slifkin. Probably bigger, and is much more open about it. He meant what he said and he said what he meant.
My personal beliefs are irrelevant here, no need for ad hominems. I was simply making the point that the early 2000s was a time of greater criticism of fundamentalist religion. Very simple, no need to overthink it
Exactly, a time of greater criticism of religion from an atheist angle. This explains the intellectual background where Slifkin was coming from. Thanks for clarifying.
PS- I think it's funny you say your personal beliefs are irrelevant when the entire subject is beliefs. Oh yes, you are a totally neutral observer. Nothing to see here, folks!
Orthodox Judaism (as a concept) was invented in reaction to Reform. Charedism and Daas Torah was invented in reaction to Religious Zionism. Nothing to see!
Nope, that's not what I'm saying, no matter how much you want me to be saying that. New Atheism was simply the most extreme manifestation of the critique. R' Slifkin's critique always has been more moderate.
And again, the discussion is about R' Slifkin, not about me
I think there's a huge gulf between fundamentalist proto-cults like Charedi 'Judaism' and religion. Religion is about belief in something greater than humankind. It tends to emphasize the transcendental and eternal nature of the soul.
Fundamentalist proto-cults like the one you follow are about obedience to other humans and the exercise of power. They have little interest in religion per se and rather emphasize correct behavior and thought. That is why trolls like you are totally incapable of ever engaging in sincere debate and are blind to the religious yearning for truth. You cannot understand religion because you are utterly irreligious.
What's an "apikores"? Be specific.
Rambam, Hilchot Tshuvah 3:8
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/911896/jewish/Teshuvah-Chapter-Three.htm
Well, that's too specific. (As it proves a point and doesn't obfuscate matters)
He Prob means one who doesn't accept the יג עיקריים of the rambam
The term "New Atheist" post-dates the controversy.
"21st-century heresy"
My goal is to learn enough Torah that when someone calls me an apikoros, that the criticism would be taken seriously. As the old joke goes, better to be an apikoros than an am haaretz. ;)
The old joke is that a yeshiva bochur in Eastern Europe hears about a famous apikores and decides he wants to learn from him. So he travels all the way to a faraway city, tracks him down, and tells him he wants to be an apikores.
"You do? Have you learned the whole Tanach?"
"Well, um, no, not all of it."
"The Yerushalmi?"
"No, I've never really learned it."
"Have you finished the Bavli?"
"Well, no, I've just learned a few masechtot."
"OK, here's what you do: Go back to yeshiva. Learn all of Tanach, finish Bavli, learn the Yerushalmi, Midrashim, Tosefta, Rishonim, Achronim...when you're done, come back and we'll talk about you becoming an apikores."
Haha, classic. But of course, the reverse never happens. No kiruv yeshiva ever says to a secular person interested in learning more about becoming frum, as Yisro famously wanted for his grandson: "Have you read all the materialist philosophers? Come back to us when you have". So it's just the classic heads we win, tails you lose
Well, look what happened to the grandson. :-) (Great-grandson, actually.)
Right. My point is that "get educated" it's not a real gotcha, since it only goes one way (get educated about classic Jewish literature, and nothing else)
On the other hand, the joke implies that apikorsim are better educated than the frumme.
The version of the "old joke" I heard was: Ben Gurion lamented to Golda Meir, "Golda, we thought we were founding a country of apiqursim. But we only built one of amharatzim." (Translated from the Yiddish. Had the "quote" been in Hebrew, it would have been "amei haaretz". BG knew Hebrew better than that.)
Ben Gurion wrote a perush on Tanach. You can still find it in used bookstores. (Moshe Dayan wrote one too.)
Off-topic, but guessing which Nachum this is -- if I'm right it would be of interest:
Avraham Even-Shoshan (author of the dictionary and concordance) and his chavrusah in cheder wrote a peirush of several books of Tanakh together as kids. (ES's father taught Ivrit there.) At age 12, they tackled Mishlei and Daniel -- a book of metaphors and one largely in Aramaic! But in those days they were known as Avraham Rosenstein and...
... Dovid Lifshitz!
I knew about the connection- R' David was my parents' mesader kiddushin, and my parents treasure their old multi-volume Even-Shoshan. We were just talking of getting one for ourselves. (A newer one.)
In the new Koren English Tanakh, Daniel was translated by someone we know from Jerusalem, the daughter of R' Michel Bernstein, who was a rebbe of my father as well. His son and her brother, MJ Bernstein, was my teacher in YU.
Mazal tov on this milestone anniversary! I remain gobsmacked at your brilliance, have loved following you on this journey, and admit to having been also influenced in the direction we have taken by the ongoing blogging of your experiences. With much kavod, wishing you continued hatzlacha and can't wait to read the next book!
Are you familiar with Rabbi Dr. Raphael Zarum ? His book “Questioning Belief” which was published by Maggid Press makes the case for not taking the Torah literally when it comes to Bereishit, the flood, the exodus etc etc. This book won the Rabbi Sacks Book Prize. No one had banned this book as far as I know. Rabbi Slifkin lead the way for this! Mazel Tov on your anniversary!
>Are you familiar with Rabbi Dr. Raphael Zarum?
A little... he's my first cousin.
Maggid Press is a Modern Orthodox publisher, so it wouldn't be subject to a ban. Charedim only ban publications from within their own community, meaning the publisher is charedi or the author is a well known charedi figure
Not quite. R' Sacks had a book banned, and it was published by a totally secular publisher. But generally, you're correct.
Part of that may have been his official position and the British charedi rabbinate chaffing under it.
Actually, the fight against Sacks was led by the British MO rabbinate. Most Charedi Rabbis scoffed at the idea that anything the CR wrote was worth the paper it was written on. As one Chassidic Rabbi said, 'CHief Rabbi? SHteef Rabbi!'
I've had rebbeim, including at YU, men far, far frummer and righteous than I, who quietly told us much the same. Some of them believed in the literal truth of all or most of that, they just didn't think it heresy to think otherwise.
Biblical literalism is itself heretical for Jews because it denies the authoritative Rabbinic interpretations. The Catholic Church has a similar position. Some Protestants claim to hold by it and it is really easy to get them stuck in logical contradictions or having to explain away things that are contradictory to basic dogma.
Well, I'm not sure if "happy anniversary" is appropriate, but...twenty years, wow.
I think you're spot-on about how these things are connected. And a yasher koach to the gedolim and machers for setting so many people on the right track. :-)
Allow me to share a memory: In 2003 the Orthodox blog world (remember that?) was getting started, and charedi book bans were getting more common. And with YU's annual sefarim sale starting, someone wrote a post, "Which book at YU's sale this year is the most likely to be banned? My money is on Nosson Slifkin's 'Mysterious Creatures'." And I thought, "Oh, come on, *that* book?" My charedi rabbi owned a copy, after all.
Well, it took another year and half, but he was right.
I am glad that you stated explicitly the words "deification of Daas Torah". The Haredim all are כופרים בעיקר. They all worship multiple gods: the Real One plus at least one "Rabbi".
You do not know all the chareidis
Charedim also take your pet cats and dogs and barbecue them.
I attended the funeral of a wonderful rabbi with whom I had studied. A number of charedi rabbis praised him as a great supporter of Daas Torah.
But he had personally told me that he did not believe in Daas Torah. He said he didn't have any problem with people who did, but that it was not his belief. At the time, I didn't realize the significance.
Charedim use the word "daas torah" as almost a proper noun today. "I consulted my daas torah..."
That is actually a welcome development. It removes the connotation of great Torah authorities having some Divine insight, and just means that they asked their local Rav or Rosh Yeshiva for a pesak or advice.
Advice on non-halakhic matters.
They use the expression for both pesak halacha and advice.
One may argue that it is an *expansion* of the supposed powers to every rav out there.
I don't think so. The doctrine of da'as Torah is that the very greatest of talmidei chachamim should decide klal issues because of the Divine insight they have as a result of their Torah knowledge. I think (or at least I hope) that no one believes that when they ask their rabbi what to do about their fight with the neighbor, he is giving them Divine insight.
Ironically, the hated Medina is actually the biggest supporter of Torah learning in Jewish history. More people are sitting and learning, with extensive support from the state, than ever before. Where is the hakarat hatov?
This post should be referenced as the thesis statement for virtually every post you've ever written.
I regret that we chose to remove some of your more controversial emails from the Avodah archive. It seems a couple of guys were mining the archive for things to show "the gedolim" for round 2 of the ban. It ended up not making a difference, and now they're out of Google's reach.
The mabbul one is still there AFAIK
Maybe one of them. We went through the archives together and could easily have missed one.
As I've said many times, any Rabbi whose books are banned is a Rabbi I want to get to know better and understand. Rav Slifkin, you're in excellent company. Didn't people burn Rambam's books back in the day? He seems to have come out of that pretty well.
I think that your statement about Charedi culture "believing that they believe that learning Torah is a replacement for military effort" is far too kind. It should read "pretending that they believe..."
I also think that you are far too kind in ascribing to Charedi culture any core beliefs whatsoever, beyond perhaps political aims.
I think that some pretend that they believe it, and some believe that they believe it.
Baruch Hashem, you survived and flourished, and I am proud to have been one of the people who defended you in print.
Just re Rav Elya, while Rabbi Ribner makes the statement about Rav Elya and you, are we certain that Rav Elya actually holds that? It seems to be hearsay.
It makes perfect sense. After all, he was the driving force behind the ban.
interesting, i did not know that.
BTW, he is one of the few in his circle who wears techeilet. So I guess not everything about YU is unkosher.
What does YU have to do with techelet. The people who really revived the whole thing 35 years ago were chareidim in Israel.
Leib, I my recall may not be perfect here. But YU individuals were definitely involved, including Rav Moshe Tendler, who wrote a book defending the wearing of techelet. Baruch Sterman, a key player, is Hebrew U educated and not chareidi.
Nothing against chareidi participation in the techelet revolution. Anyway, this is small stuff, let's not get caught up in it.
As a side note, in general the chareidi books supporting techeiles are misinformed on numerous issues. Tavger though is one of the more honest chareidi techeiles supporters.
Sterman is quite misinformed as well, (and he really shouldn't be discussing chemistry which is clearly not his expertise.) His disagreements with Professor Koren make him look like a fool sometimes.
Lots of this is discussed in חותם של אמת' which I helped edit. You can see it here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mBgLGJEvD3TqfAoLpz0TJH6ZIiyVoYZn/view?usp=drive_link
New Username I see.
Those of us who wear techeilet do not do so because we are 100 percent certain it is the "correct" techeilet (keeping in mind that there may be more than one sea animal that fits the bill). We do so because we think there is a very good chance that we are fulfilling the mitzvah in a more elevated way. Or as I told someone who does not wear techeilet, "I am unsure that mine is the correct techeilet, but I am sure that yours is not!"
Even in the chareidi world, there are gedolim who wear techeilet. These include, to my knowledge, Rav Yisroel Belsky, zt'l, Rav Chaim Pinchus Scheinberg, zt'l, and yibadlu l'chaim, Rav Wachtfogel, Rav Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg, and Ra Yitzchok Meir Morgenstern (I am unsure which techeilet he is wearing). And of cours Rav Herschel Schachter does, as did Rav Moshe Tendler, zt'l. There are more, this is just a sample.
I'm well aware, but Tavger was the first and he is chareidi. But yes, not an important point.
Your non typo, "believing that they believe," I think is missing a qualifier. It should be "wanting to believe that they believe."
In practice I'm not sure everyone puts this belief into practice, if they did, bein hazmanim would be fully canceled, and there would be full sedarim even during chol hamoed... just like vacation and time off has been cancelled for IDF soldiers.
Great point!
That's a point you made yourself countless times rabbi.
I think that's what's implied by "believe they believe."
Indeed. "Belief in belief" is a known phrase, that's become popular recently
Recently? You mean since the period of..... the New Atheists? https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/CqyJzDZWvGhhFJ7dY/belief-in-belief
Hmmm, I wonder where Slifkin got it from?
Or it can be mean that the belief is not well thought out.
Like how to incorporate into that belief system all those individuals in תנ"ך who were both Torah scholars and warriors.
Surprisingly, the haskamot industry survived this incident. I assume that the haskamot on Slifkin's books were argued away by suggesting that they didn't actually read the book. And then ironically the bans get loaded with haskamot.
So do names on books and paskevilim retain any value today???
Both of the Rashei Yeshiva who gave me haskamos definitely read at least parts of the book. I got back suggested edits! I am sure R Aharon Lopiansky (Y' of Greater Washington) read cover to cover, his feedback was copious. R Kalman Espstein (Yeshivas Shaar haTorah - Grodno, and great-grandson of R Shimon Shkop, whom the book is based on) only gave me two suggestions, so it is possible he skimmed the rest.
Rav Aharon Lopiansky has a letter where he describes in great detail what is wrong with Slifkin's view, and why he regrets his haskamah. Did you know that?
When the Science of Torah (or one of Natan's other science-related writings, can't remember) came out, I read around 80 percent of it and then told my rosh yeshiva, HaRav Yechiel Perr, zt'l, "I can't find any kefirah in it." He responded emphatically, "And you won't!"
Good thing you didn't show him "challenge of creation"
Maybe you wouldn't, but the Gedolim were able to tell that he was kofer from the very beginning. And here we are 20 years later, he is a flagrant, open kofer, who spends all his time trying to stir up hatred against Torah Jews and lead people of the derech. It's only because of the Gedolim's foresight to kick him out of the community that he is not successful.
The Gedolim were truly amazing, some of them could tell even without reading my books!
By the way, I'm curious. Do you think that the ban had an effect on me?
So my dear friend, you may not love this answer, but I think it may have had an effect. I have long felt that the ban kind of pushed you philosophically toward what you call Rationalist Judaism. I am uncertain that one's hashkafah should be influenced by personal events such as the ban.
On the other hand, it is conceivable that the ban had a net positive effect for you. You have moved forward with some wonderful endeavors, including the Museum (I and my family were early visitors) and the wonderful encyclopedia of Biblical animals.
Yeah, it's amazing isn't it? Look at their incredible vision! It gives me chizuk every time I think about it. Sure, the ban probably had an effect on you, but from your reaction it's clear you were already 90% "new atheist".
", but the Gedolim were able to tell that he was kofer from the very beginning. "
Fabrication. You made this up.
Go back 20 years and dig up a quote from one of the banners stating that while there was no explicit heresy in the volumes, they are to be banned because RNS was a heretic. Bonus points if you could explain how they knew he was a heretic, if there was no heresy in the books.
No excuses, hand-waving or דיוקים. Provide explicit evidence that the banners admitted that there was no explicit heretical content, but somehow "knew" he was a heretic.
Huh? Why would I dig up an idiotic quote that you made up? The Gedolim said what they said and meant what they meant, and they were right that his books were full of minus and kefira, even if a layperson couldn't tell, it's obvious in hindsight.
Looks like a mega failure of da'as torah then. Obviously he was just put under pressure to retract. Chareidi leadership (not) in a nutshell.
That's part of the story, but the main mistake was mine, in seeking haskamos in the first place from people who are not experts in the topic and who are not of a rationalist orientation. Contrast R. Lopiansky with R. Aryeh Carmell, who stood by his haskamah.
Even Rav Aharon Lopiansky wasn't rationalist enough for you! You should have just stuck with haskamos from Dawkins.
What do you mean by "even"? He's a talmid of Rav Moshe Shapiro, he has no science background, of course he's not a rationalist.
He obviously meant his retraction, because he has a long tearful letter describing exactly what is wrong with Slifkin's philosophy.
He needed to appease whoever his 'boss' was in this matter. Clearly a 'long tearful letter' was part of the process of making clear he was not a wayward heretical rabbi to whoever runs the show.
No, his retraction was sincere. Though it wasn't "tearful" to the Gedolim - if anything it was tearful to me. He decided that if all the charedi Gedolim felt a certain way, even if the ban was engineered by a bunch of lowlifes, it must be a sign from God.
So why write the haskamah in the first place??
He said he regrets his haskamah. What is your question?
Could you post a link to that letter?
The question is right there, with a small typo.
Interestingly, Rav Moshe Feinstein was careful to give an approbation for the author (haskamat gavra) while noting that he had not had the time to review the content (haskamat cheftza)
Do you ever plan to rerelease those banned books? This post made me want to revisit them but they are still expensive to buy online.
The revised versions, available on the museum website, are superior in every way.
I remember when I gave you an original Science of Torah to sign, you wrote, "Where did you find this fossil?" :-)
Great, Toda raba for letting me know!
U and dansdeals 😀
Hey, Dan's my cousin!