Apparently some of the works of Rabbi Steinsaltz were banned. What are the specific examples that prompted the ban? Is there a list of all of his works that have been banned, as I am interested in knowing if this ban is limited to his previous works or if it applies to his new shas project with Koren publishing as well?
I have an old copy of The Jewish Observer that discusses the ban. It seems a couple comments in his translation of the Talmud implied that certain sages ruled consistently in a particular fashion (e.g. stringently) because their personality inclined in that direction. Some were worried that readers would infer that the sages were allowing their personal biases to influence their rulings, and doubt their authority. However, this does not appear to have been the intent of those comments, but merely to point out the consistent pattern among the sages' rulings. To my knowledge, none of his other works were banned.
My Rabbi once told me that HaRav Shach ZSWQ"L didn't like the idea of changing the Surat HaDaf of the Gemara.
The link provided in the question has all the answers! (and i'm dissapointed no one is pointing out the obvious so now i have to comment)
Here I simply quote in English (making use of google translate feature), from the said site above, some of the more controversial examples of comments from Steinsaltz.
"..."Moshe sees and knows his own limitations ... In his approach to the people he must always avail himself of people who have A closer relationship to the problems of the Jewish people. In a certain sense it seems that Moses can never fully understand the so-called 'simple man'. The great limitation of Moses is that there is a gap between himself and the people. Although he cares for their needs, he can not take seriously their problems and wishes ... In the end he can not relate to the great people that he leads as adults"
"אכן על ראשיתה ותחילת התפתחותה של התורה שבעל פה יש בידינו רק מעט ידיעות..." (עמ' 14). "Indeed, at the beginning and start of the development of the Oral Law, we have only a little knowledge ..." (p. 14).
this summary over the generations, decisions on one side have been gradually changed to another, and therefore a considerable part of the Halachot has not yet reached an absolute consolidation ..." . Everything is developing. Everything can be changed. "Natural process" of "gradual" development
Bar Yochai is a "gloomy and mystical figure." "In later generations it was attributed to him the composition of the book of the Kabbalah, the Zohar, in which he is the main protagonist"
"... the custom of Israel in recent generations of inviting a rabbi to perform the wedding ceremony is from the late Middle Ages and partly by imitation of the Christian example... "
"The very existence of a written marriage contract between husband and wife is Very early. And it is already mentioned in the laws of Hammurabi, long before the giving of the Torah , but the shape and contents of this contract vary according to the times, according to the nature of the culture in which they are made. The sages were very careful to make such a contract ... "(p. 97).
You can see the site for the sources, but they are in Hebrew. It seems to me that people defending Steinsaltz must either improve upon my translations, or explain the true intent behind the words to coincide with accepted orthodox opinion, or are unfamiliar with the actual opinions of Steinsaltz.
The Internet was also banned, so if one is paying heed to bans, it makes little sense being on the Internet inquiring about it.
But, as for what prompted the ban, perhaps two factors were in play:
1) As Rav Mordechai Gifter said about Adas Korach:
And this is experienced in every generation, that of those who are diligent and precise in mitzvos, the fire of controversy moves them against their own will and against the will of their Creator.
2) As one commenter in the a Hirhurim thread writes:
IIRC, R Leiman thought that the ban was inspired by the fact that R Steinsalz’s English edition was being published by Random House, which had beaten ArtScroll to the secular and English speaking audiences.
Any other details are secondary.
Probably because he also authored books prior to his becoming religious. Long ago I recall reading a book of his on Sampson, which hardly could have been something he wrote as a religious scholar. The book depicted Sampson as a tough hombre rather than the great tzaddik Sampson really was!