Chazal, Science, Controversy ... - Slifkin

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Advanced Search Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Previous 1 2 3 19 20 21 22 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

Motek

Sun, Jun 10 2007, 10:40 pm

healthymama wrote:

This last clause applies to so many groups that writing it is almost meaningless. Many things that chabad says are not considered legitimate except by their own members. Does that render those ideas illegitimate? This is known as circular reasoning.

I don't think the comparison or your point is valid but that can be for another thread, if you like. You didn't explain what "very legitimate" means.

Quote:

By the way, did you note that quote I brought from the rambam in Moreh Nevuchim where he says that chazal's perspectives on astronomy were based only on the science of that time and not on ruach hakodesh? I think the rambam would be legitimate enough for the purpose of this discussion.

The Moreh Nevuchim is no proof for this discussion as it is the category of apologetics.

Quote:

If we do not have to take every word of the Torah literally, why would it be a terrible problem for you if a frum Jew believe that the world was around longer than 6000 years?

Because our Torah Sages and commentators, down through the ages, up until Haskala, said a day is 24 hours. Sometimes, there were views held by outstanding Torah scholars that were valid for him, in that time, but later were dropped from "normative Judaism."

A mashal (and I think I'm repeating myself here and I don't want to do more repeating ...) - there is a view in the Gemara that one can eat chicken and milk. Does that mean we can Chicken Parmesan for supper? No. How come? It's a view in the Gemara!!!!! Because that view was rejected. Although a rejected view in the Gemara is Torah, one is not allowed to follow it. Ditto for hashkafos.

Quote:

I would like a source that says if the date on the get is off by a year or so, it is invalid.

Do some research Smile

Don't put it all on me ... General rule - gittin with the wrong date are pasul.

Quote:

What she means is that the world is 5767 years old from the time of man's creation.

So the first 5 days were eons long and the 6th and 7th days were not? Confused

healthymama

Sun, Jun 10 2007, 10:46 pm

Quote:

The Moreh Nevuchim is no proof for this discussion as it is the category of apologetics.

Either this is an unprecedented denigration of the Rambam and his works or it is unprecedented praise for apologetic writing in general. You tell me which one it is.

Oh, do you mean to say, perhaps, that the rambam didn't really mean what he wrote?

So does the term "chazal" include the rambam then? In which case you might then consider him fallible and answer your own question about which kinds of people could possibly see chazal as fallible.

Motek

Sun, Jun 10 2007, 11:08 pm

healthymama wrote:

It's not unprecedented. Rav Yaakov Emden (1697-1776) writes in a number of places that the differences between Moreh Nevuchim and Mishna Torah are so stark that he rejects the idea that the Moreh is authored by the Rambam! This is not the accepted view of most rabbis from the early Rishonim till today, however it does express the extreme dichotomy between the two works, one (Moreh) written in Arabic for the general population who were pursuing philosophy and the other (Mishna Torah), his halachic rulings written in Lashon Ha'kodesh, in which he covers many of the same issues and takes a different position.

Quote:

So does the term "chazal" include the rambam then?

Definitely not. Chazal refers to those included in Mishna and Talmud - including Medrash.

chavamom

Sun, Jun 10 2007, 11:33 pm

Motek wrote:

The Moreh Nevuchim is no proof for this discussion as it is the category of apologetics.

You never cease to amaze me motek. Just when I thought I'd heard it all!

At least Slifkin, Aish.com, Schroeder et al know they are in good company.

Last edited by chavamom on Mon, Jun 11 2007, 12:38 am; edited 1 time in total

Ruchel

Mon, Jun 11 2007, 12:01 am

Motek what did he say in the emails?

healthymama

Mon, Jun 11 2007, 6:44 pm

Quote:

Definitely not. Chazal refers to those included in Mishna and Talmud - including Medrash

I'm gonna guess that quite a few authorities disagree with you. I believe that many people think that the rambam wrote with ruach hakodesh.

Motek

Tue, Jun 12 2007, 8:28 pm

healthymama wrote:

I'm gonna guess that quite a few authorities disagree with you. I believe that many people think that the rambam wrote with ruach hakodesh.

He sure did Smile

You're mixing up two things. Chazal refer to the authors of the Mishna and Talmud. That doesn't preclude later Torah scholars from writing with ruach ha'kodesh! In fact, the Alter Rebbe said that all rabbinic authors until and including the Taz (Turei Zahav, d. 1667) and Shach (Sifsei Kohein, d. 1621-1622) composed their works with Ruach Hakodesh!

ruchel - it was an EXTENSIVE email exchange which I won't summarize here

TzenaRena

Tue, Jun 12 2007, 8:41 pm

BrachaVHatzlocha wrote:

re: writing get
the counting of the world is from the time of man, so it's still accurate.
6 days can still be 6 days, even if they weren't what we called 24 hours.

The wording on a get is " _____ shonah l'brias haolam"

Lechatchila Ariber

Tue, Jun 12 2007, 8:47 pm

motek you don't have to summarize it here but did he answer any of the questions asked in this thread?

Motek

Tue, Jun 12 2007, 9:43 pm

EstiS wrote:

motek you don't have to summarize it here but did he answer any of the questions asked in this thread?

the thread is too long to review and

the email exchange was too long to review and

I don't know which questions you mean and

I'm not looking it up!

healthymama

Tue, Jun 12 2007, 9:45 pm

Quote:

Mmm. Okay, then. Was the moreh nevuchim written with ruach hakodesh? Are apologetics part of ruach hakodesh? How do you decide whether something is written with ruach hakodesh.

TzenaRena

Thu, Jun 14 2007, 1:06 am

Too bad that I don't remember which sicha it's in, but the Rebbe speaks about the Moreh Nevuchim and says chas v'shalom to divide the RamBam, it's the same Rambam! And of course it was written with ruach hakodesh.

The differences between the Mishneh Torah and the Moreh Nevuchim are because they are essentially two different disciplines, the MT is a sefer of halachos, and MN is chakira.

I'll try to locate that sicha.

TorahMom48

Sun, Jul 01 2007, 12:54 pm

I don't think any of anti rav slifkind crowd ever answered brachas post.

BrachaVHatzlocha wrote:

Motek,
I'm sure you're aware that chazal HAVE made mistakes in the past. Please do not call me an apikorus, but everyone will agree that lice doesn't come from sweat and mice aren't 1/2 dirt, the Earth is flat..... R' Hirsch says chazal only knew science up to date....
Because people are used to learning certain things according to chazal, they are unwilling and unable to look/hold differently. It's hard when people have believed things for many years. but it doesn't mean he's wrong. in fact, these ideas are not new, made by R' Slifkin.

faigie

Sun, Jul 01 2007, 1:17 pm

something has got to give,,,,,,,,,
those skeletons of pre modern man exist. they are very real..... the dino skeletons of all varieties exist too. all of those creatures once were alive on what we call our planet. ( yet obviously they came before adam)
those "people" lived, and yet, we dont have a lot of info on them past their cave drawings.......
isnt anyone here kind of curious who they were? what were they about.. and why they were utterly destroyed?
another awful question.. when our acharit hayamim comes, are we going to be the skeletons pulled out of the earth and ogled at by the next generation of "mankind"?
-----do you see what happens when you cut amother off from her supply of nosh, ( in the quest for better health, of course.....I think theyre gonna have to send me to the loony bin first)

Motek

Sun, Jul 01 2007, 3:06 pm

TorahMom48 wrote:

I don't think any of anti rav slifkind crowd ever answered brachas post.

I responded on the page before this one.

TzenaRena

Thu, Jul 05 2007, 6:39 pm

Quote:

Life2
Genesis, Darwin and Life in Two Worlds

By Tzvi Freeman

Question:

I feel like I'm living in two worlds at once. Teaching biology, I frame my lessons around evolutionary theory, which seems to hold all the parts together in a single whole. But at home, I help my son with his Hebrew homework, including the story of creation in Genesis.

I'm actually very inspired by Genesis, particularly through the prism of the classic commentaries and the little I've tasted of the Kabbalah. But despite all I've read on the subject, I've yet to find an honest and plausible resolution of these two perspectives on life and its origins. Yes, plenty have written on the subject, but I find their solutions very distant from the spirit of the text.

Is a resolution possible? Or is a Jew meant to live in two mutually exclusive worlds?

Answer:

Dear Jew2,

For Tzvi Freeman's answer, read the rest at:

http://www.chabad.org/library/.....34097

poelmamosh

Thu, Jul 05 2007, 9:31 pm

Interesting read, TR! Thanks. I'm a big fan of R Freeman.

I also read an interesting article about Professor Silman (RYAL Institute) in the Beis Moshiach this week, and how he spent his youth torn between science and Torah, and how he finally resolved the issue. Fascinating, too

TzenaRena

Sun, Jul 08 2007, 10:49 pm

Can you post a link?

Motek

Mon, Jul 09 2007, 5:42 pm

http://beismoshiach.org/_pdf/607.pdf

the article "a chassid and mathematician"

poelmamosh

Mon, Jul 09 2007, 6:05 pm

Thanks, Motek. You do all the hard work.

(really, I tried... what day of the wk does it get posted?)

Page 20 of 22

Previous 1 2 3 19 20 21 22 Next