August 19, 2016 10:44 am at 10:44 am #1169707
I’m surprised by the posters writing that the idea that the first 6 Days of Creation were longer than 24 hours is controversial. I don’t know the source, but I always learned that in school, and I went to very Yeshivish schools when I was younger. I really am under the impression that it’s not a controversial point of view, although I don’t have a source off-hand.August 19, 2016 12:01 pm at 12:01 pm #1169708
I’m surprised by the posters writing that the idea that the first 6 Days of Creation were longer than 24 hours is controversial. I don’t know the source, but I always learned that in school, and I went to very Yeshivish schools when I was younger. I really am under the impression that it’s not a controversial point of view, although I don’t have a source off-hand.
As stated by Sam2, Rav Elyshiv stated anyone who did not belive the world was 6000 years old was a Koifer
I think it was Rav AVigdoe Miller or Rav Shimon Schwab (I could be wrong here) said he belived the world was 6000 years old , he did not think it was Kefirah to belive it was olderAugust 19, 2016 1:00 pm at 1:00 pm #1169710
I go to a modern orthodox school, and are science teacher was a rabbi and taught evolution. I’m going into 8th grade. How old r u guys.August 19, 2016 1:15 pm at 1:15 pm #1169711
Livelovelaugh – I apologize. I just read your post more carefully and realized that you weren’t positing that humans and animals share a common ancestor. In terms of what you are positing – that some aspects of evolution may not be against the Torah – I don’t know enough about the topic to be able to say, but I would think that it could be a possibility.
In any case, when Frum people come out against evolution, I don’t think that’s what they are talking about. They are talking about the idea that people come from monkeys. In psychology, evolution is brought in in order to make a point that is against the Torah. They are trying to explain that people are the way they are simply because of some kind of evolution process. Basically, they are trying to take G-d out of the picture.
For example, there is a theory that the reason why people like to be nice to other people has to do with evolution and the fact that those people who were nice to others were more likely to survive. This is as opposed to saying that people try to be nice because we are not like animals and we have a tzelem Elokim.August 19, 2016 2:22 pm at 2:22 pm #1169713
TCMO: I did not say everything was Apikorsus. There are some things that are. That is not debatable. What falls under that might be.
Joseph: I am aware of the sources. I’m also aware that it’s fair to read Rashi as saying that 24 hours means vis-a-vis itself–meaning it was a normal day with some form of progression that shifted and can be divided into 24 recognizable parts, like our days. It doesn’t have to mean that they 24 hours averaged to 60 minutes each.August 19, 2016 2:31 pm at 2:31 pm #1169714
ZD, I just reread Sam’s post – I had thought he said the opposite.
In any case, the fact that Sam wrote it doesn’t necessarily make it true, plus, there may be other opinions. Also, even if R’Elyashiv said that, I wonder if he could have been referring to the world from the time of Adam’s creation (i.e. after the 6 days of creation). Maybe we only start counting the 5776 years from that point, and that is what R’Elyashiv was referring to.August 19, 2016 2:55 pm at 2:55 pm #1169715
I also heard that Rav Elyshiv said the world was 6000 years old without seeing Sam2’s comments. It was not new informationAugust 19, 2016 4:07 pm at 4:07 pm #1169716
Rav Elyashiv paskened that if a goy underwent a geirus while believing the world is older than 6,000 years, the conversion is invalid and he remains a goy.August 19, 2016 4:12 pm at 4:12 pm #1169717
Joseph – why? thers sooo many other things than just that?August 19, 2016 4:19 pm at 4:19 pm #1169718
Because that belief is apikorus.August 19, 2016 4:42 pm at 4:42 pm #1169719
Rav Elyashiv paskened that if a goy underwent a geirus while believing the world is older than 6,000 years, the conversion is invalid and he remains a goy.
Define “the world”.August 19, 2016 4:43 pm at 4:43 pm #1169720
Because that belief is apikorus.
And yet, here, you state that, according to R. Eliyashiv, I’m *not* an apikorus becuase I accept the scientific evidence regarding the age of the earth.
Make up your mind.
The WolfAugust 19, 2016 5:10 pm at 5:10 pm #1169721
I responded to you in that thread, Wolf.August 19, 2016 5:14 pm at 5:14 pm #1169722
Joseph – arent you allowed to believe in the big bang?August 19, 2016 5:20 pm at 5:20 pm #1169723
LU: No. R’ Elyashiv Davka referred to the Sheishes Yemei Bereishis being 24-hour days.August 20, 2016 6:13 pm at 6:13 pm #1169724
Joseph, it depends on what one means by “the world”. There is a midrash that says that Hashem created and destroyed worlds before this. The Torah also says that Adam’s body was created and only later did he receive a “living soul” (according to Onkelos the power of speech.In fact, according to archaeological evidence writing has only been in existence for a little over 5,000 years so perhaps 5,776 is from the time people were raised above the animals. this si the world as we know it.
As for Rav Eliashiv, with all due respect there are other poskim. Perhaps the “halacha” (I find it difficult to write that about a non-legal matter) is not like him.August 20, 2016 7:44 pm at 7:44 pm #1169725
Any source for rav elyashiv saying that?
And even if he did say that it doesn’t mean there’s a consensus.August 20, 2016 9:45 pm at 9:45 pm #1169726
Joseph – I just read that other thread, and it does seem like there may be a contradiction here. I assume that the reason you are saying there is not a contradiction is that R’ Elyashiv Zatsal seemingly differentiated between the person and the belief. In other words, the idea is kefira, but the person who has it is not, so t/f if someone who wants to convert has this belief, he holds a belief that is kefira (even though he is not an apikorus), and t/f he is not allowed to convert.
Is that what you meant when you said that there is no contradiction?
That makes a certain amount of sense, but the problem I have with that is that I am not sure from R’ Aharon Feldman’s letter that that is what R’ Elyashiv meant. Maybe he is just saying that we are not allowed to state & teach that view, not that it is kefira. And that wouldn’t necessarily mean that a potential convert can’t be converted if he holds that way. Do we have proof that R’Elyashiv did in fact state that that view is kefira and that someone who has that view is not allowed to convert?
I am having a hard time understanding how a belief can be kefira but the person who has it is not an apikorus. That is why I wonder if that is really what he said.August 21, 2016 1:49 am at 1:49 am #1169727
perhaps 5,776 is from the time people were raised above the animals. this si the world as we know it.
That description doesn’t fit what it says in Bereishis.
there are other poskim. Perhaps the “halacha” (I find it difficult to write that about a non-legal matter) is not like him.
Perhaps the halachah is like him, even if you don’t like it. (I am speaking theoretically; I don’t know whst he holds.)
How is determining who is accepted for geirus not a legal matter? This is a fallacy of some on the left, dismissing hashkafos as not halachic, despite the fact that there are clear halachic ramifications. Don’t fall into it.August 21, 2016 2:09 am at 2:09 am #1169728
I found these two statements on Natan Slifkin’s website:
According to this, it was Rav Chaim Kanievsky Shlita and not R’ Elyashiv Zatsal who MIGHT have made the statement about geirim. We do not even know for sure that R’Chaim said that. Also, the way it is phrased, it is not referring to someone who already converted and we are not saying his geirus is possul; rather it is saying that we should not convert him to begin with (but it might be possible that his geirus is accepted after the fact).
In terms of the other statement, he only says that R’ Elyashiv is reported as saying it.
These statements were made in an article in which Natan Slifkin was trying to show that the Gedolim do not believe the world is older than 6 thousand years, and yet, he didn’t have proof that R’ Elyashiv Zatsal & R’ Chaim Ybdl”c actually made those statements.
I’m not saying that they definitely didn’t; I am just saying that no one has brought proof yet that they did. And if Natan Slifkin who had an agenda to show that the Gedolim are against the belief that the world is more than 6 thousands years old couldn’t bring any proof that they actually said that, it makes me wonder if they in fact did. If anyone has any proofs/sources on that matter, please provide. Thanks!August 21, 2016 2:24 am at 2:24 am #1169729
Rereading the letter from R’ Aharon Feldman, it sounds pretty clear that R’ Elyashiv did not consider this belief (that the world is over 6 thousand years old) to be kefira but rather that he held that it should not be taught.
Again, if anyone has any proofs/sources to the contrary, I’d be happy to see them.August 21, 2016 2:51 am at 2:51 am #1169730
Sam2 said: If you assume that the 6 days of creation were 6 24-hour periods, there just isn’t enough time for any evolution.
Not that I believe there’s reason to think evolution happened at all, but Hashem could have sped up the process of change so that many years worth of species evolving and the world’s aging occurred in six days.
It has the same effect as saying that the six days took longer, without actually saying that they did.August 21, 2016 2:54 am at 2:54 am #1169731
lilmod, Rav Eisenstein shlita was Rav Eliashev’s personal gabbai. And Rav Eliashev’s statement regarding the invalidity of geirus is widely known and was extensively reported upon when he made it.August 21, 2016 3:01 am at 3:01 am #1169732
DaasYochid – your NOT allowed to believe in evolution.August 21, 2016 3:03 am at 3:03 am #1169733
Joseph, thanks. But I still would want some kind of proof. It may have been extensively reported, but it’s a chiddush to me. I’m not saying it’s not true, just that I would want some kind of proof.
I don’t consider Natan Slifkin to be a source especially since he is very nogeah b’davar.
And according to R’ Aharon Feldman’s letter that you brought, R’ Elyashiv did not say that.August 21, 2016 3:13 am at 3:13 am #1169734
Sparkly, the concept is something muttar to believe in, but using it to replace what it says in the Torah is assur.August 21, 2016 3:51 am at 3:51 am #1169735
lilmod, here is the complete context of the effect of what Rav Nachum Eisenstein shlita publicly stated at the podium in front of a large audience of gedolei haTorah and rabbonim on November 6, 2007:
Also, it was a rabbi speaking to the same audience the previous day prior to Rav Eisenstein that cited Rav Chaim Kanievsky that you mentioned above, it was not simply a claim from Natan Slifkin. Specifically, he said from the podium that Rav Chaim Kanievsky was asked if it is mutar to convert a person who is mikabel ol malchus shamayim but is unwilling to believe that the world is only 5768 years old. (This was almost 10 years ago.) Rav Chaim answered that it is in fact assur to convert such a person.
Rav Eisenstein is readily available to confirm this.August 21, 2016 7:19 am at 7:19 am #1169736
I do not believe that the problem is belief in the specific age of the Universe.
To be perfectly honest. I don’t care what it is. The age of the world is completely irrelevant to me.
I do believe the Torah was given at Har Sinai.
I do believe that the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is contained in the Torah.
I do know there are certain “secrets” of Torah that can be fully grasped and understood by only a select few in each generation.
Rav Elyashiv’s grandfather the Leshem was one such person and he wrote about the age of the world.
I am not on the level to fully comprehend what he wrote.
However I believe fully that any theory or thought regarding the age of the universe must fully comply with the Torah and if it is conflict it must disregarded as false.
Science must whole up to the test of Torah.
The Torah must not whole up to the test of science chalilah.
However I do think that the crux of the issue is where we get our information and what we base it on.
A careful reading of the second of the famous Ninteen Letters shows one thing RSRH made clear that to understand the Torah we must study the Torah from within the Torah not from with out.
Evolutionists point to the similarity between various skeletal structures as “proof” towards the need to identify one single common ancestor. if not there is no good explanation.
However if we look within the Torah we understand that man is a composite of a guf and a neshomah and what distinguishes us is not our bodies but our neshomah.
So if HKBH saw fit why could he not have acted as any architect and use one basic “sketch” for all his living creations with slight deviations based upon each ones respective purpose in this world with man being distinguished not by a completely different skeletal structure but a completely different soul?
It’s a simple solution to one of the primary riddles that evolutionary scientists claim as a “proof” to their theories.
In fact it’s not a solution or a form of “apologetics” it’s a logical conclusion that one would make by and basic study of machshovah.
But it’s one that “they” will not entertain at any cost.
Because the core. root, and the driving force between all their theories is to prove that at the very essence man and animal are the same with only “evolutionary genetics to thank and as such man and animal’s are equal’s in theory.August 21, 2016 7:54 am at 7:54 am #1169737
Joseph, thanks. What is your source? And if this correct, why does Rav Aharon Feldman’s letter say something completely different?August 21, 2016 11:05 am at 11:05 am #1169738
People here are mixing up Evolution, the Big Bang theory and the age of the earth.
While they are related, they are not the same. How old the earth is is a seperate question to how species arrived in the way they did on earthAugust 21, 2016 12:49 pm at 12:49 pm #1169739
I half agree with Ben Levi. What is important is not the actual age of world but why Chazal took the trouble to calculate it. For dating legal documents we could have stuck with the minyan hashetarot – which the Yemenites still use.August 21, 2016 2:49 pm at 2:49 pm #1169740
I just found this quote from Rav Hershel Schachter on the Kol Mevaser website:August 21, 2016 3:14 pm at 3:14 pm #1169741
I would accept the accuracy of RNE over RHS. 1) RNE has *not* retracted. A phone call to him can easily verify this. 2) It isn’t RNE’s position to retract, it is Rav Eliashev’s position. And he, too, never wavered in this position.August 21, 2016 3:58 pm at 3:58 pm #1169742
in general college is good. if someone doesnt go to college its like not going to high school.August 21, 2016 4:13 pm at 4:13 pm #1169743
Joseph, the difference between the two is that I have a source for RHS and not for RNE. It is true that RNE can’t retract Rav Elyashiv’s position, but since in this case he was the source, so he CAN retract his statement (which would either mean that he is saying that he was mistaken regarding Rav Elyashiv’s position or that Rav Elyashiv retracted.) “Hapeh sheassar who hapeh she matir.” If the original statement came from RNE, he can retract his own statement.August 21, 2016 4:14 pm at 4:14 pm #1169744
Joseph, if you have a source, I would be happy to see it. I’m not denying that he said it; I am just saying that I haven’t seen a source. Until I see a source, it is assur for me to believe it. Telling me to call him is not very helpful.August 21, 2016 4:29 pm at 4:29 pm #1169745
Joseph, additionally my issue is that in this thread you stated that the belief that the world is more than 6,000 years old is kefira, but in the other thread, according to the quote from Rav Aharon Feldman, Rav Elyashiv specifically stated that it is not kefira, but it should not be taught.August 21, 2016 6:19 pm at 6:19 pm #1169746
DY: That is a fascinating way to look at it.
Ben Levi: Honestly, for the vast majority who believe in evolution, it’s about figuring out what is more likely to be true. It’s not about making humans and animals the same.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.