Perhaps the Two Biggest Issues

I spent some more time today on both Rabbi Slifkin's and Rabbi Gil Student's sites. At this time, I believe that two of the most important questions to ask are:

One: When you read something novel in Tuesday's Science Times - an idea stated by scientists that seems to be in conflict with Chazal - do you first question the legitimacy of the scientists or that of Chazal? In other words, whose ideas do you feel need to be reconciled with the others'?

Two: If you believe that the world is older than 5768 years and you do not consider that position to be heretical, do you also believe that one who believes that the world is exactly (or approximately; let's not get into the "missing years" debate here) 5768 years old is a fool? In other words, do you accept the possibility that the universe is in fact much, much younger than you believe?

People I Intend to Interview for this Book

These people, listed in no particular order, are all mentioned on Rabbi Slifkin's website as having a role, large or small, in the controversy:

Rabbi Moshe Meiselman
Reuven Schmeltzer
Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky
Rav David Feinstein
Rav Reuvain Feinstein
Jonathan Rosenblum
Gerald Schroeder (not mentioned on the website that I know of)
Nathan Aviezer (not mentioned on the website that I know of)
Rabbi Yisroel Belsky
Rabbi Yitzchak Adlerstein
Dovid Kornreich
Rav Aharon Feldman

Three years later...

It's been three years since Natan Slifkin's books were banned by a distinguished group of Jewish Elders. With the passage of time, the controversy has died down, for the most part. Everyone who has an opinion on the matter has made up his or her mind and many of them have spoken it as well.

Perhaps it's not time to reexamine this issue, but in searching for something on Wikipedia, I was directed to a page which mentioned the controversy and spent a few hours reading through Rabbi Slifkin's website www.zootorah.org. Much had been added since I last looked at it a few years back, and I noticed as I read that I had personal relationships with several of the people mentioned and that perhaps I could bring a new perspective to this...controversy.

I keep using the word controversy. It's in the title of this blog. But "controversy" implies that there are two sides arguing - perhaps not of equal strength but each with it's own merits. And to pit one man against practically every Gadol - including some who initially supported him, as we shall see - is perhaps not best described as a "controversy."

The reason I chose to do this in blog form, therefore, is threefold. One, to allow words and terms to develop and change (dare I say, evolve!) as I progress. True, this can also be accomplished with the creation of a simple Word document, but the blog format simply feels more malleable. Two, the feedback from readers that a blog provides will allow me to edit this more sharply, both in terms of content and style. Bear in mind that I will be merciless in cutting off and out people who get too, er, emotional. And three, a blog, by being more open and alive, will give me - someone with a full-time job, and many, many other distractions - the focus to return to it and develop it.

Let me say this at the outset: My heart goes out to Rabbi Slifkin. Whatever happened, I cannot imagine his intentions were anything but pure; I cannot imagine that he lacks faith in God or the Divinity of His Torah; I cannot imagine the emotional and psychological toll that this has taken on him and his family.

Let me also say this: I fully and completely accept the authority of the Orthodox Rabbinate to be binding. If there were two sets of Gedolim pitted against each other on this issue, that would be one thing. But ladies and gentlemen, it's a rout. So you must understand that I am approaching this more in terms of discovering what happened and how, than in debating the results. The results are clear.

Let's begin.