Torah & Hashkafa Questions (PC Free For All)

[aygart]

Not new like today new.

Of course. When was it new?

[imayid2]

Of course. When was it new?

Not really new information, he writes before this that this was really known thousands of years ago. Point is that Rabenu Tam didn’t accept it, but it is now established fact.

THE ASTRONOMY
The idea that the sun and stars move through the rakia, however, does not stand up to what we now know about the sun and the sky. The idea that the stars travel through the rakia only makes sense with the view of chachmei Yisrael. By the seventeenth century, this view had been thoroughly disproven. After discussing the opinion of the Sefer Yereiim, the Minchas Kohen writes as follows:

ואני אומר כבוד הרב במקומו מונח אבל באמת שכל אלו הם דברים זרים שהרי אין הכוכבים יורדים מכפת הרקיע ולמטה ואם כן צאת הכוכבים דעזרא ודברכות אינו אלא כשנראים לבני אדם.

I say that, with all due respect, truthfully, these are all strange ideas. The stars do not descend below the rakia. Therefore, tzeis ha'kochavim in Ezra and in Berachos must mean when they become visible to people.
 Minchas Kohen, maamar 1, chap. 6

The event that determines night like the Sefer Yerei'im does not exist. It is impossible to say that tzeis ha'kochavim in the pasuk means when the stars enter the rakia if there is no such metziyus. Rabbeinu Tam had interpreted shekias ha'chamah that begins bein 'shemashos in a way that was consistent with the celestial dome view; the Tosafos Rid reinterpreted his approach in a way consistent with the view of chachmei umos ha'olam. The Re'em had interpreted tzeis kochavim in a way that was consistent only with the view of chachmei Yisrael, and there is no way to reinterpret it. Unless we believe that the stars move through the rakia, there is no way of saying that tzeis occurs immediately at sunset. Acharonim such as the Minchas Kohen, who knew that neither the sun nor the stars pass through the rakia, dismissed the opinion of the Yerei'im because of this.

[S209]

Anyone read 'The Great Z'manim Debate' by Rabbi Ahron Notis?


I wonder if this book will incur public backlash.

I read this book cover to cover some months ago. While I found the case he makes incredibly compelling, I don’t have enough of a background in the inyanim to say with certainty that he presents the opposing side with their true and proper arguments.

His language regarding Rishonim and even Tannaim is shockingly blasé and I was extremely taken aback. He goes so far as to say he finds Rebbi to be more correct than the Chachamim but not because of his stated reason, rather because of science. He basically insinuates the Rakia is nothing more than a fantasy believed in by Chazal which has since been disproven. He does try to show respect when stating this.

I showed it to my shver who has been a highly learned Rov for decades (but not typical Lakewood) and he did not find it completely objectionable, although he pointed out I would need to hear the other side before reaching a conclusion.

I will say he brings solid sources for all of his assertions, including his overall premise that Rabbeinu Tam’s shita stemmed from scientific illiteracy. He also brings a solid quote from Dayan Fischer where he told someone who asked why he did not reason with Rabbeinu Tam “Rabbeinu Tam was shlugged up!”.

P.S. There is a story told in “The Brisker Rav” that when the Rav came to EY R’ Chatzkel Abramsky heard he was still keeping 72. R’ Chatzkel, like most, had begun to keep the far earlier Zmanim prevalent in Yerushalayim (as early as 16 minutes after Shkiah). R’ Chatzkel went to visit him around half hour after sunset and asked him if it was true to which the Rav responded it was. He offered to take the Rav on a walk outside to show him that it was completely dark and all of the stars were out.

The Rav responded, “The Mechaber wrote his Shita while living in Eretz Yisroel and the Gra wrote his in Vilna. Certainly the Mechaber was aware that it is dark earlier in Eretz Yisroel! You see from this that they reasoned only with the Torah, not with science.”

P.P.S. I have more to say on the subject but am holding back.

[EliJelly]

I don't remember if this was in Sanz or Belz. When someone argued that we see stars before 72 min, they called him an איצטגנין-חוזה בכוכבים.

[imayid2]

I read this book cover to cover some months ago. While I found the case he makes incredibly compelling, I don’t have enough of a background in the inyanim to say with certainty that he presents the opposing side with their true and proper arguments.

Thanks for the TR!
Wondering the same. Is there an opposing side with substantive arguments, or is it simply “that’s what we always did”?

[S209]

Thanks for the TR!
Wondering the same. Is there an opposing side with substantive arguments, or is it simply “that’s what we always did”?

R’ Aharon Kotler, who held strictly of 72 (I’m aware of personal stories where it is clear he held it to the extreme) cannot be accused of ignorance or lack of innovation.

[aygart]

Thanks for the TR!
Wondering the same. Is there an opposing side with substantive arguments, or is it simply “that’s what we always did”?

There are so many reasons to say that chazal fully understood astronomy that the premise that some things don't fit is utterly ridiculous. This can be seen in cheshbonos about the moon and mazalos. When Shmuel said he understood the paths of the sky like the paths of his hometown he meant what he said. It is not coincidental that the Jewish lunar calendar is from the most accurate solar calendars around without even intending to be so precise.

[S209]

There are so many reasons to say that chazal fully understood astronomy that the premise that some things don't fit is utterly ridiculous. This can be seen in cheshbonos about the moon and mazalos. When Shmuel said he understood the paths of the sky like the paths of his hometown he meant what he said. It is not coincidental that the Jewish lunar calendar is from the most accurate solar calendars around without even intending to be so precise.

I don’t disagree with you but he does cover this. He says that they were unparalleled at charting the stars and brings many proofs of Yiddishe astronomers being pioneers and inventors in astronomy and navigation, including the forerunners to Galileo and Copernicus. This does not contradict his thesis.

[imayid2]

R’ Aharon Kotler, who held strictly of 72 (I’m aware of personal stories where it is clear he held it to the extreme) cannot be accused of ignorance or lack of innovation.

Neither would I accuse Rav Moshe of ignorance. Yet his 50/9 mehalech is way off base apparently:

[aygart]

I don’t disagree with you but he does cover this. He says that they were unparalleled at charting the stars and brings many proofs of Yiddishe astronomers being pioneers and inventors in astronomy and navigation, including the forerunners to Galileo and Copernicus. This does not contradict his thesis.

I haven't read this but I am not referring to general knowledge but rather these specific aspects.

[S209]

Neither would I accuse Rav Moshe of ignorance. Yet his 50/9 mehalech is way off base apparently:

Someone I once spoke to claims it’s well known R’ Moshe’s talmidim knew he was “making a mistake” but didn’t want to correct him. I imagine one can pretty easily verify if that’s true as many of them are freely available.

[imayid2]

There are so many reasons to say that chazal fully understood astronomy that the premise that some things don't fit is utterly ridiculous. This can be seen in cheshbonos about the moon and mazalos. When Shmuel said he understood the paths of the sky like the paths of his hometown he meant what he said. It is not coincidental that the Jewish lunar calendar is from the most accurate solar calendars around without even intending to be so precise.

This doesn’t have anything to do with RT and the Gra as they are both interpreting Chazal.

[chevron]

It's interesting that we have this topic here and then in the general discussion there's something that talks about the Chachamim being scientifically advanced.

Can it be that they knew things and both didn't know things?

[S209]

It's interesting that we have this topic here and then in the general discussion there's something that talks about the Chachamim being scientifically advanced.

Can it be that they knew things and both didn't know things?

I think we can all agree Chazal were incredibly scientifically literate and way ahead of their time.

[aygart]

This doesn’t have anything to do with RT and the Gra as they are both interpreting Chazal.

Somewhat. To fully go down this route you end up saying it about chazal too. He was basically quoted as doing just that.

[chevron]

I don't know... I think we need to accept evolution in scientific terms.

If chazal said it would be impossible to walk on the moon, was Apollo faked?

By evolution, I mean the evolving of science.

We have new ideas of matter, we have new elements that aren't natural..



I started reading;

https://www.amazon.com/New-Heavens-Earth-Reception-Copernican/dp/0199754799?ref=d6k_applink_bb_dls&dplnkId=1f90a47c-68ba-48f4-834b-eba7c8b52500

Something I lifted from Rabbi Riskin but more specifically I thought over

"
Literal belief in the seven days of creation is not included in Maimonides’ “Thirteen Principles of Faith,” or even in Rabbi Yosef Albo’s book of principles, “Sefer Ha’ikarim.” So why does the Bible express itself in terms of six days of creativity culminating in one day of Sabbath rest [Genesis 2:2]? Why would the Bible utilize the Hebrew word “yom” (day) with any meaning other than a 24-hour period?

The truth is that from the usage of the word “yom” it is possible to conclude the very opposite of the charedi dogma just cited. The Bible is not interested in conveying literal and chronological facts in its story of Creation. After all, the sun and the moon were not created until the fourth day, and it is specifically their movements which are the determinants for our 24-hour day. Beyond any doubt, then, “yom” in the context of the seven days of Creation cannot mean a literal 24-hour day.

Furthermore, Maimonides, in his “Guide for the Perplexed,” interprets all biblical stories until the advent of Abraham as allegories, whose purpose is to convey moral lessons rather than historical fact."

Science dates items... But if you calculate existence beyond time and space... The Torah's age works .

[imayid2]

Furthermore, Maimonides, in his “Guide for the Perplexed,” interprets all biblical stories until the advent of Abraham as allegories, whose purpose is to convey moral lessons rather than historical fact.

Where does he say that?

[imayid2]

Somewhat. To fully go down this route you end up saying it about chazal too. He was basically quoted as doing just that.

Not really. The Gemara says חכמי אומות העולם were and he’s pointing out that fits with scientific reality. That’s a far cry from saying Chazal were wrong.

The מנחת כהן already engages in this blasphemous behavior:

[imayid2]

Something I lifted from Rabbi Riskin

Before Riskin went off the deep end, he learned in YOB and was close to Rav Manis Mandel. Later on Rav Manis would say that he had had 2 sons named Shloma (his son Rav Shloma Mandel is currently head of YOB), “one I’m very proud of, and one I sat shiva for.”

Anyone he davens with Christians, so he makes talking in shul look like a joke.

[koplonko]

R’ Aharon Kotler, who held strictly of 72 (I’m aware of personal stories where it is clear he held it to the extreme) cannot be accused of ignorance or lack of innovation.

And RT could?