Saturday, July 09, 2005

Letter to Rabbi Feldman

Dear Rabbi Feldman,

Your important recent article on the Slifkin affair has had a great impact on my life. I think you should hear about it.

I am from a very chashuve family and have been frum my entire life. Yet from an early age I have had many questions about hashkafa. I have read many books on science and found them very convincing. It has always been quite obvious to me that the science brought down in the gemara is very often, even mostly, wrong. The world is not flat, the sun doesn’t go behind the rakia at night, pi is not three, there are not two separate urinary tracts, eight month fetuses are not dead, etc.

I’m pretty sure that also you and various other gedolim who claim to believe in chazal’s science rather than modern science don’t really mean it. Unless I’m wrong in assuming that you ride cars and planes and go to doctors when you’re sick.

Anyway, none of this ever affected my emunah because I simply understood that chazal were experts in halacha and agada but not in science. That never seemed problematic as hashkafa since many gedoilim held like that and it seemed like the only possible conclusion an honest person could reach.

But now I’ve been taught by the gedoilei hador that this view is kefirah. It is no longer possible to maintain this view and remain a frum yid. As a result, I have been faced with the decision of either believing that all of modern science is wrong and chazal’s science is right or no longer being frum. I can’t have it both ways. At first I thought maybe only the kannoim held like that but your article made it clear that this is not the case – I have to choose.

I’ll be honest this is a very hard choice. I know that chazal’s science is wrong and that modern science is mostly right (mostly but not always; the whole idea is that if a better theory comes along the old one is abandoned). To say that I don’t believe that would be a lie. On the other hand, giving up frumkeit means for me giving up my whole family and all my friends. I’m not even sure what my wife will do. If she’ll agree, we’ll have to take our three small children out of Yiddishe moisdos and send them… I don’t even know where.

Right now I’m checking into possibilities for how to continue my life. The possibility of remaining frum seems to have slipped away forever thanks to you (and many others like you). Please don’t feel bad. You were only being honest and explaining yiddishkeit the way you understand it.

Now it’s my turn to be honest. With you, with my rebbes, with my family and friends. And mostly, with myself.

-- Eliyahu Zecharia Rabinovich

13 Comments:

At 11:04 AM, Blogger micha said...

I would have to agree with the basic intent of the belly-acher, but not his value judgements.

The Creator made multiple paths in Torah so that each can find the one that leads from where they are. It's not supposed to be "one size fits all". That's why the famous pasuq says "Derakheha darkhei no'am vekhol nesivoseha shalom -- its ways are ways of pleasantness and ALL OF ITS PATHS are peace."

 
At 11:57 AM, Blogger Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer said...

The simple reality is that there is no Pope (or group of Popes) in Orthodox Judaism. With the exceptions of Chazal, Rambam and Shulchan Aruch (the definition of "exception" is beyond the scope of this he'arah), no one is more of a ba'alim on the definition of Orthodoxy than anyone else. Hence, your assertion:

But now I’ve been taught by the gedoilei hador that this view is kefirah. It
is no longer possible to maintain this view and remain a frum yid. As a
result, I have been faced with the decision of either believing that all of
modern science is wrong and chazal’s science is right or no longer being frum.
I can’t have it both ways.


is fundamentally incorrect.

DA

 
At 4:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What melodramatic nonsense.

Grow up.

 
At 5:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Centrist Orthodoxy is not kosher. Dont listen to anything about it.

 
At 5:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"vekhol nesivoseha shalom "

Does that mean we can judge the tree by its fruit? In this case, "Eliyahu Zecharia Rabinovich" has obviously identified a way in Torah that hardly seems to exemplify shalom -- or is it by definition "shalom" because it is an approach within Torah and then we work backwards?

 
At 5:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Anonymous, I noticed that you did not actually address any of the issues, you just rejected the alternatives.

 
At 5:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Other folks to read include R' Eliezer Berkovits and R' Isidore Epstein, which should provide a measure of comfort in that other intelligent people have thought through these issues. Perhaps their writing will resonate, perhaps not, but it's probably worth a try.

 
At 6:31 AM, Blogger micha said...

Mr. Rabinovich has so far been given a number of choices:

1- Check out MO.
2- Check out those chareidi rabbanim who did not go along with the ban or voiced disagreement in other contexts on points it implied.

But we seem to have ignored the simplest:
3- Continuing to believe what he did. Does a belief system need to have an organization promoting it in order to be true? Someone who has a crisis of faith WRT "the gedolei hador" (which really is only about a subset of the generation's greats) need not have a crisis of faith about mesorah as a whole.

I agree with those who imply there's more to this break than the one letter. However, you have to figure that out of the entire kehillah, someone must be at the cusp, struggling with difficulties. And those people might otherwise grapple with their problem until they come to terms with it, or at least come to terms with having an open question. If something they find outrageous hits them just at that point in their religious history...

 
At 7:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eliyahu Zecharia Rabinovich -

1. It is quite obvious that you could go MO; you know the MO-charedi debate about frumkeit is long standing and you have options.

2. you write on GH's blog you are treif for the first time yesterday.

3. I am MO. I thought the letter was very wrong and poor apologetics, I think the relationship between science and Judaism is not at all what was described there. And I don't know RAF - only heard of him very recently - so I owe him nothing.

4. So I hope you will be honest enough, at least with yourself, to admit that if you are choosing to leave Judaism, it has nothing to do with this specific debate. You have choice and you are making yours so don't blame him. At most RAF would be merely a catalyst for something you already were probably looking to do.

 
At 8:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This letter is interesting, but it looks like a work of fiction. I would advise readers against taking the writer's personal situation too seriously, though the point being made is presumably serious.

 
At 1:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are upset at particular Rabbis and their hashkafa and taking it out on Orthodoxy as a religion.Is there a reason you haven't sat down and talked to a Rav with a different hashkafa.?

 
At 9:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent piece. Your pain and dilemma are shared by many. And I personally suspect that going MO doesn't really solve many of the problems. But you should try.

 
At 1:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

NER ISRAEL RABBINICAL COLLEGE PHOTO GALLERY

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
NER ISRAEL RABBINICAL COLLEGE PHOTO GALLERY

 

Post a Comment

<< Home