a strange defense - part I

It was by chance that I noticed on Parshablog that R' Slifkin quoted me in an essay in "defense" of his opponents. I don't think I have mentioned R' Slifkin directly on this blog and my original post, which he attibutes to an explanation of the banning of his books, was nothing of the sort. My post was written in reaction to what I view as a corruption of the entire meaning of mesorah that has resulted in part as an outcome of R' Slifkin's approach, but also in part due to other forces at work in contemporary Orthodoxy.

In for a penny in for a pound, so let me just respond to a the three errors that R' Slifkin claims that I make (as an aside, my original post is here):

1) R' Slifkin charges that I interpret the mesorah to be monolithic-- THE mesorah, meaning the views accepted as mainstream by the chareidi world, and therefore am dismissive of interpretations that may be legitimate. If anyone looks back at my original post (and esp. if one is a regular reader of this blog) I think it is more than clear that this strawman has nothing to do with me. I can only wonder how a paragraph in which I cite R' Soloveitchik can be read as advocating respect only for chareidi viewpoints (do other chareidi blogs have siderbar links to R' Aviner)?!

The point that R' Slifkin missed is that whether chareidi, dati-leumi, or Centrist, the mesorah has boundaries and those boundaries are defined by gedolei yisrael. Just because one denies that Judaism is a free-for-all where you can pick and choose from a grab back of historical shitos and hashkafos (my original point) does not mean one advocates a monolithic view of hashkafa. But it does mean aseh lecha rav -- there must be some tradition taught and lived by gedolei yisrael to which one subscribes. If not for R' Soloveitchik's approval of secular education, if not for R' Kook's defense of Zionism, the dati-leumi and Torah u'Madda camps would be intellectually diminished as valid Torah hashkafos. It is not enough, for example, to say that we look to the Rambam as an exemplar of a synthesis of Torah and secular wisdom and therefore reject the advice of contemporary gedolim to steer clear of secular literature -- "Torah archeology" of past viewpoints without guidance on what theoretical conclusions may be drawn or practically implemented is a dangerous game to play with great and grave intellectual pitfalls (more on this important point to come).

Rabbi Slifkin claims that "the rationalist view" finds contemporary support in the "Torah u'Madda" community. Here is a simple way to end this controversy: Rabbi Slifkin, just publish your works with a haskama from the leading Roshei Yeshiva of the mesorah you affiliate with, i.e. Rav Hershel Shachter, R' Mordechai Willig, etc. Ikkar chaseir min hasefer quite literally! I know of no such haskamos that have been printed. Why rely on questionable speculation of what R' Soloveitchik might have held when his greatest talmidim are a phone call away? -- and who so far as I know have written nothing in your support.

To reiterate, it's not just the books that are at issue here, but an entire hashkafa of Judaism. The controversy about books in many cases masks a far deeper controversy. Many fierce advocates of Rabbi Slifkin's books that I read in the blogosphere also espouse views such as orthopraxy, such as the belief that historical-scientific evidence trumps tradition, etc. (views that R' Slifkin himself may not espouse). R' Dr. Moshe Bernstein of YU recently reacted in the YU newspaper to the invitation by students to a speaker whose views undermine the belief in Torah m'Sinai. He wrote that fundemental traditions cannot be questioned even when all the evidence calls our beliefs into doubt; we must simply remain b'tzarich iyun. To those who belief scientific fact trumps belief, there are no tzarich iyuns and no need for haskamos for what the laboratory has proven. Based not only on the chareidi teachings of R' Kanievsky and R' Shternbruch, but also based as well on the view of Professor Bernstein (whose Intro to Bible class I enjoyed immensely) and others like him, I respectfully disagree.