Tuesday, June 23, 2009

EJF - Rabbi Tropper responds to my criticism

The following is a recent post by R' Tropper on his blog responding to my criticism. It is unfortunately obvious that he doesn't seem to have a high value on truth. He slanders me by quoting an anonymous source that "According to a trusted source, Rav Sternbuch, shlit”a was asked if he approves of the blog which is critical of EJF. His response was negative."

That is simply an outright lie. R' Tropper could have simply called up Rav Sternbuch to ascertain that the claim is false. But he obviously was not interested in the truth so he chose rather to slander me and publish a lie. He also further distorts the truth by not mentioning the strong condemnation by the Bedatz and Rav Sternbuch to his activities.

It is hard to trust anything that R' Tropper says without written documentation. This is the third time he has tried to slander me. The first being a serious distortion of a statement in my Daas Torah which he claimed meant that I didn't think a ger needed to keep mitzvos but simply had to accept the 13 principles of faith and the second being his insane claim that my motivation to criticize him is the result of my desire to defend the views of R' Slifkin.

I am adding a second posting from R' Tropper - he is obviously obsessesed.

Gedolim On The EJF (Eternal Jewish Family)
Posted by Rabbi Tropper Posted in <EJF Posted on 22-06-2009

Question: Rav Tropper, what is Maran Harav Eliyashuv’s position regarding the EJF?

Answer:
Rav Tropper Says:
Rav Eliyashuv shlit”a gave us a warm bracha which was shown at the most recent Jerusalem conference.

Rav Eliyashuv has sent people to discuss issues of geirus (Jewish conversion) with the EJF (not halachic questions).

Rav Feinstein, shlit”a just met with Rav Eliyashuv and separately with Rav Leib Tropper and was very happy to hear of EJF’s acheivements.

Rav Efrati sent a letter of approval b’shem Maran, shlit”a a number of years ago.

According to a trusted source, Rav Sternbuch, shlit”a was asked if he approves of the blog which is critical of EJF. His response was negative.

Contrary to a Rav in the midwest, the Talmidim Muvhakim of Rav Moshe ,zt”l say that Rav Moshe, zt”l approved of not rejecting a mixed couple who wishes to convert to Judaism.

When they come to ask for a conversion to Judaism, Rav Moshe writes “Mitzva rabba l’hizdakek l’zeh”.

Rav Tropper heard this directly from Maran Harav Moshe, zt”l during the early 70’s.

Some even believe that Rav Moshe, zt”l said, that it is a mitzva to be Mekarev and be Megayer the non Jewish spouse if they are sincere, in order to save the Jew from an “Issur Chamur” of intermarriage.

All the above of course without compromise on Kabbolas Mitzvos.

We (EJF) do not do that at all.

The Rabbi, who claims to have heard from the Posek Hador, Rav Moshe, zt”l otherwise , was not one of his Talmidim Muvhakim and probably misunderstood Rav Moshe, zt”l.

His Son Rav Reuven, shlit”a wrote a Teshuva which was printed, supporting our position. In that Teshuva, he quotes his father, zt”l who supports our position.

WE (EJF) DO NOT SEARCH FOR MIXED COUPLES TO CONVERT.

Those who say otherwise are MISREPRESENTING OUR POSITION.

Helping a mixed couple rectify their problem is NOT considered a Geirus “Leshem Ishus”.

Rav Tropper heard this exact position from the Posek hador, Harav Yosef E. Henkin, Zt”l in May of 1972 and subsequently in 1981 from Harav Yaakov Kaminetzky, zt”l.

Similar Posts
[2nd posting]

How Was the International EJF Conference in Jerusalem?

Posted by Posted in EJF Posted on 18-06-2009

Question: Rabbi Tropper, how would you rate the International EJF conference held this week in Jerusalem?

Rabbi Tropper: Succesful beyond expectation. All the nonsense on one blog and his ad hominem attacks are meaningless in face of the decorated dais of Gedolei Yisroel.

Similar Posts

79 comments:

  1. You can see one can spread anything in the name of a rav, if it is not in writing! Rav Sternbuch has already written about his disapproval of R
    Tropper, there is no reason why he should then disapprove of your site!

    ReplyDelete
  2. And it's a lie for Tropper to say that they do no search for mixed couples to convert. All his lectures, talks, and promotions in small/medium sized communities with no Chereidi shul have NO other purpose. People who aren't intermarried and are just interested in becoming more frum go to CHABAD, not to EJF. His only "constituency" is intermarried couples.

    ReplyDelete
  3. They are not mutually exclusive: He might have written in the past *privately* criticizing the organization; yet he would not be happy (to put it mildly) when his letter becomes a) public arena and battle' b) especially that it becomes solely focused (on htis issue) againstt this *one* organization (when viewed in perspective it is perhaps the best of all evil even in the eyes of Rav Sternbuch, c) and especially he may perhaps be against these battles being done in theinternet in particular.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Daas Torah:

    Why don't you post a letter from Rav Sternbuch where he explicitly condemns EJF, or alternatively commending you for your work in spreading the emmes about EJF.

    This will lend much more credibility in the readers eyes. You constantly challenge EJF to produce a letter from Rav Elyashev, shouldn't you be held to the same argument?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mevakesh Emmes said...

    Daas Torah:

    Why don't you post a letter from Rav Sternbuch where he explicitly condemns EJF, or alternatively commending you for your work in spreading the emmes about EJF.

    This will lend much more credibility in the readers eyes. You constantly challenge EJF to produce a letter from Rav Elyashev, shouldn't you be held to the same argument?
    ==================
    Agreed - you obvious are not familiar with the many postings on this blog.

    http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2009/05/eternal-jewish-family-r-tropper-blog.html

    Check out all the links that RaP noted from the blog. Or you can just do a search on the blog with the word Bedatz or Rav Sternbuch

    ReplyDelete
  6. D"T in all fairness I think that we can ask you to produce a haskama from R' Sternbuch regarding your site and the publication of his comments and those of the Badatz Eidis Chareidis.

    What EJF has effectively done is thrown this into a matter of hearsay in which both you and Tropper are claiming support of some of the same Gedolim. Simple solution. Whoever can post a haskama is the one who is telling the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Rav Sternbuch in his sefer vol 5 , 296 clearly forbids the actions of the EJF. I have also heard personally from various Rabonim who have visited Rav Sternbuch, he asks them if they have any connection to the EJF, if they do, he protests having any association with them. I find it hard then to believe what EJF claim in this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  8. mekubal said...

    D"T in all fairness I think that we can ask you to produce a haskama from R' Sternbuch regarding your site and the publication of his comments and those of the Badatz Eidis Chareidis.
    =================
    Rav Sternbuch is not going to give haskomas to blogs. That is ridiculous.

    These are two separate issues. In the context of Tropper's blog he is asserting that Rav Sternbuch does not agree with my criticism of EJF.
    That is quite readily refuted by all letters I have posted from Rav Sternbuch and the Bedatz. All I am asking is that Tropper produce similar documentation that his approach is in fact validated by Gedolim.

    The second issue is whether Rav Sternbuch approves of debating this issue on the internet. That has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of the criticism of Tropper's program. If that is the "big" chiddush of Tropper's statement then he could have just as easily have said that "he heard from a reliable source that Rav Sternbuch doesn't approve of R' Tropper's comments against me on the internet". Obviously he was making the false claim that my criticism of EJF has met with Rav Sternbuch's disapproval" - An obvious lie.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Roni said:

    They are not mutually exclusive: He might have written in the past *privately* criticizing the organization; yet he would not be happy (to put it mildly) when his letter becomes a) public arena and battle'

    Aaron says;

    As previously mentioned Rav Sternbuch publicised his objections to the EJF in his sefer so he obvioulsy has no objection. Furthermore his seforim are available for download at hebrewbooks.org so why is this blog not allowed to publish them?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ahavah Gayle,

    what he means is that he does not search for individual people and call them individually to come to him! Obviously his work is with intermarried couples. but he does NOT beg them or call them individually to come to him. He does not "search" for an individual. He publicizes the Organization and and let's theiondividual come to him if *they* are interested!

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Rav Sternbuch in his sefer vol 5 , 296 clearly forbids the actions of the EJF. I have also heard personally from various Rabonim who have visited Rav Sternbuch, he asks them if they have any connection to the EJF, if they do, he protests having any association with them. I find it hard then to believe what EJF claim in this blog".

    and so? Does that mean that he a) approves a blog b) that is solely devoted on EJf?

    (BTW, He is also much more adamant about conversions typical to those done by RHB And I don't know why this blog has not make mention of this?)

    ReplyDelete
  12. DT writes:"he is asserting that Rav Sternbuch does not agree with my criticism of EJF".

    That is NOT what he wrote; he wrote "Rav Sternbuch, shlit”a was asked if he approves of the blog which is critical of EJF. His response was negative". He did not assert that Rav Sternbuch agrees with ejf or that he does not criticize EJF; he asserted that Rav Sternbuch was critical of the Blog that was critical at EJf. He did not specify exactly the nature of the objection but it appears two pronged: 1) the mere usage of his name to divulge publicly that he criticizes EJF in the public arena of massees, b) at the internet.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Aaron wrote:"As previously mentioned Rav Sternbuch publicised his objections to the EJF in his sefer so he obvioulsy has no objection. Furthermore his seforim are available for download at hebrewbooks.org so why is this blog not allowed to publish them?",

    Not true at all: He might criticize someone in private but may not find it useful and worthy to have this charadcter assassination and also associate him with everything else written by masses on a public forum!

    ReplyDelete
  14. In addition: there may another safek. that while the last letter I bleieve was a year ago or even mroe distant, maybe Rav Sternbuch (even if not agreeing with hisapproach) does not feel that is the need to protest him. Or another safek: he only felt the need to prtest when things happen in yerushalyim; he may not wish to see him protest everything tha happens outside of yerushalayim.

    ReplyDelete
  15. the Monsey TzadikJune 23, 2009 at 10:48 PM

    Tropper likes to drop names, he likes to say that he was ben bayit in rav Moshe house [...] he also claims that rav Yaakov told him to open his Yeshiva kol Yaakov.

    [...] it goes something like this:
    “I went to rabbi Kamenetsky and I told him I want to open a yeshiva for baalei teshuva, he told me “No, do not open a baaley teshuva yeshiva open a regular yeshiva and let baaley teshuva come in”

    A close family member who is a talmid of rav yaakov told me that [...] he finds this problematic

    ReplyDelete
  16. Roni said...

    "Rav Sternbuch in his sefer vol 5 , 296 clearly forbids the actions of the EJF. I have also heard personally from various Rabonim who have visited Rav Sternbuch, he asks them if they have any connection to the EJF, if they do, he protests having any association with them. I find it hard then to believe what EJF claim in this blog".

    and so? Does that mean that he a) approves a blog b) that is solely devoted on EJf?
    =============
    Some people see what they want to see - and block out reality. This blog is not soley devoted to EJF. For example this month there were 47 posts - 5 were devoted to EJF.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Roni said...

    Ahavah Gayle,

    what he means is that he does not search for individual people and call them individually to come to him! Obviously his work is with intermarried couples. but he does NOT beg them or call them individually to come to him. He does not "search" for an individual. He publicizes the Organization and and let's theiondividual come to him if *they* are interested!
    ================
    I don't really see the significance of the distinction you are making.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Rabbi Sternbuch is easily accessible and English speaking. I decided to call him myself and speak to him earlier on;

    His number for anyone who might be interested is;

    00197226519610

    I asked him 3 questions;

    1. I told him that I was invited to a Rabbis conference by the EJF, if I should attend, and I sometimes have queries in Gerus issues should I take advise from the EJF

    He answered me that the Bdatz Beis Din have already sent out a letter some time ago that Rabbonim should not attend their conferences and furthermore there is nothing to speak to them about, I should confer with a recognized Halachic authority.

    2. I asked him if I can publicize this psak,

    He said that of course, what he says is no secret and whoever it concerns can be and should be told this

    3. I asked him if I could post in on a blog,

    He said that I can post it to anyone but he doesn’t know who is blog, I explained to him that I meant the internet, he said, "what I say is for everyone to know, I have never told anyone yes to, or not to, put something on the internet, that is what each person decides himself."

    I actually have this conversation recorded, I am trying to load it up with a link, but I am not so tech savvy so it isn’t going so well.

    It is quite obvious that Rabbi Tropper is not telling the truth about what he claims Rabbi Sternbuch to have said.

    Needless to say if this claim of Rabbi Tropper isn’t the truth then who knows what is!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Roni said;

    Or another safek: he only felt the need to prtest when things happen in yerushalyim; he may not wish to see him protest everything tha happens outside of yerushalayim.


    Aaron Says,

    Please do your homework first and then discuss from an educated standpoint, The letter from the bdatz was written regarding a conference that took place in the USA.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Roni said...

    "Rav Sternbuch in his sefer vol 5 , 296 clearly forbids the actions of the EJF. I have also heard personally from various Rabonim who have visited Rav Sternbuch, he asks them if they have any connection to the EJF, if they do, he protests having any association with them. I find it hard then to believe what EJF claim in this blog".

    and so? Does that mean that he a) approves a blog b) that is solely devoted on EJf?

    DAat Torah writes:"Some people see what they want to see - and block out reality. This blog is not soley devoted to EJF. For example this month there were 47 posts - 5 were devoted to EJF".

    I meant that in issues of conversion, DAattorah. blogspot.com when devoted to crtiize and condemn an individual picks on ONE individual! And this while, even after all ills that are reported and interpreted by this site would be 100% accurate it would not COME CLOSE to what other groups and individual rabbis do, as Rav Sternbuch himself writes in his seforim, when they bring GOYIM GMURIM TO KLAL YISROEL! and that is (contrary to the perspective of this site) FAR WORSE than the ills described in the worse light about EJf. Actually Rav Sternbuch does not subscribe to the school fo thought "they both equally stink"! His views in his teshuvas strongly suggest otherwise. When this site villfies one idividual when it leaves others in blank gives the wrong perspective of Rav Sternbuch's position in perspective and therefore this is an additional reason why Rav shternbuch would reject his agreement to allow his psition in such a forum.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Roni said...

    "Ahavah Gayle,

    what he means is that he does not search for individual people and call them individually to come to him! Obviously his work is with intermarried couples. but he does NOT beg them or call them individually to come to him. He does not "search" for an individual. He publicizes the Organization and and let's theiondividual come to him if *they* are interested!
    ================
    I don't really see the significance of the distinction you are making".

    THe significance of the distinction is that there is no DIRECT call on single individual to convert, so that the Halachik custom not to entice someone to convert is absent there. It makes the claim you make that they "proletyze" in halachik terms less problematic. For what might be the custom/issur not to prseltyze? So that the convert genuinely decide to convert and not be pushed into it . when: he is not called upon on an individual level, then: a) there is la lesser level of such a "pushing" if they are *not sincere*, b) it makes the factual claim that EJF WILL REJECT THOSE WHO DO NOT FIT TO CONVERT eaiser to accept.

    A\In any event: I"l bli neder in the next few days bring you the actual position by Rav Reuven and before that I will cite you the Teshuva of Rav Elyashiv which clearly rules in a way that implies that in certain situations IF THEY ARE SINCERE it is desirable to create a situation and encourage so that people EWOULD WANT TO COME FORWARD AND CONVERT! CONTRARY TO YOUR CLAIMS THAT ANY SUCH SITUATION IS FORBIDDEN!

    ReplyDelete
  22. ". I asked him if I could post in on a blog,

    He said that I can post it to anyone but he doesn’t know who is blog, I explained to him that I meant the internet, he said, "what I say is for everyone to know, I have never told anyone yes to, or not to, put something on the internet, that is what each person decides himself."


    Can you post in writing that he was asked about putting in the Internet and he said that you may put it if you so decide and he answered this in *writing*?

    FOR HE TOLD ME THE OPPOSITE! HE TOLD ME THAT HE NEVER MEANT THAT THIS SHOULD BE PUT ON THE INTERNET!

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Aaron Says,

    Please do your homework first and then discuss from an educated standpoint, The letter from the bdatz was written regarding a conference that took place in the USA".

    IF your ask me to do "homework first"; I must admit that I did the homework and I asked him and he told me that the only reason he protested this case and not other cases was becuase there was a conference that took place in Yerushalayim so he felt the need to protest in his place. And he proceded to tell me that he did not intend that his words and letter be used the way it was used on THIS WEBSITE! ( I sent him a page of where his letters were quoted)!

    One thing is certain: The way his opinion was quoted here in which ONLY ONE INDIIVIDUAL IS VILLIFIED when he actually saves some FAKE GERUT and others who bring goyim into klal yisroel weer not addressed and when they were they were equated qith EJf, does not reflect the real opinion of Rav Sternbuch, since he certainly abhoors the program that brings goyim into klal yisroel more than the program that (in his eyes as he stated in his last letter) only *might bring* to future negative consequences while the other program clearly brings in the present goyim into klal yisroel and certain intermarriage.

    ReplyDelete
  24. With regards to the whole mountain of complaints against R' tropper that he has no backiing from Gedoyley yisroel (while it is KNOWN to anyone who does a bit of "homework" (and there is no great work in it) that he has clear support from Rav REuven Feinstein, so that they just ignore as if this insignficant is mind boggling. With G-d's help we may try to help them to give over Rav Reuven's written directives on this matter.

    but in the meantime those who cannot sleep for such a long time without knowing that there is support to the position of R' Tropper from other Gedoyley Yisroel in writing, they can begin to look in the Teshuvot of Rav Elyashiv "Kovetz Tshuvot" 3 Tevhuva 140, where he discusses the issue of teaching Torah to non-Jews (which is in general a prohibition). He brings Rav Akiva Eiger's hesitation regarding those who are in the process to convert and wrote that he could not permit. Then Rav Elyashiv brings MEiri and Redal that indicate that it is certainly permitted to teach one who is engaged to convert.

    Then Rav vElyashiv concludes: "...מכל זה נראה דרק דנישואי תערובת שעי"ז שהצד הנכרי משתתף בשיעורים יש סיכויים סבירים שיתן אל לבו להתגייר, ועל ידי זה מצילין את היהודי או היהודיה לשוב בתשובה יש לראות במצבם כאילו בדיעבד ויש לתפוס הדיעה המתרת ללמוד תורה לגוי אם דעתו להתגייר...אבל במקום דלא שייך הטעם הזה. אין מקום להתיר, דהרי איכא תרי איסורא....":

    Rav Elyashiv seems that there is safek how to rule (if like RAE or like MEiri) and he rules that if it is a case of "nissuey taarovet" AND THERE IS A *LIKELY POSSIBILITY* THAT THE NON JEWISH PARTNER WOULD DECIDE TO CONVERT *AND THEREBY SAVE THE JEWISH PARTNER TO DO TESHUVA* THEN WE SHOULD LIKE A BEDIAVAD AND PERMIT IT!

    It is clear that in the eyes of Rav Elyashiv it is IDEAL that the non jewish partner decide ("yossim el liboy") to convert and *through that* the jewish partner does teshuva, to the extent that we would permit something that otherwise it would be prohibited (according to Rav ELyashiv).

    NOw: According to the standards of this Blog Rav ELyashiv's position would be called "proseltyizing"! being that he wants that the non jew go to lectures and shiurim that would teach him torah so that he be encouraged to convert and decide to convert! That itself is a terrible and tremendous prohibtion that we must focus all the energy to fight this! while Rav ELyashiv feels that this is proper! to the extent that we bend backward and even permit something that might otherwise be prohibited!

    ReplyDelete
  25. The real truth about the position of Rav Sternbuch about the efficacy of Gerim whom we are certain from the outset that they would not observe torah and mitzvot:

    In Teshuvot VeHanhagot Chelek 1 610 he sstates: "רבו היום גרים שאומדנא דמוכח דאף שמקבלים מצוות ברור הדבר שלא ישמרו המצוות וכל כוונתם בגרות הוא לשם נישואים ולא לשמור דת וכה"ג לא מועילה הגרות כלל. וזה דעת כל גדולי הפוסקים...":

    There are NUMEROUS "converts" today, that there is conclusive evidence that even though they "commit themselves to observE"' it is clear that they WILL NOT OBSERVE and their whole intention is for the sake of marriage and NOT to keep the religion THE LAW IS: THAT THE CONVERSION IS NULL AND VOID! and so ruled ALL GREAT HALACHIK DECISORS!

    he then continues further on: "...הקANI ROSHEM DVORIM ELU LEMAZKERET LEDOROT, שאפי' יש לאשה תעודה רשמית חתומה שנתגיירה כדת וכדין חייבין לדרוש ולחקור שמא לא קיימה המצות מעולם והגרות לא חל ובעו":ה בזמנינו בעיקבתא דמשיחא רבו כאלו":

    He states that he is writing as a TESTIMONIAL FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS that even if a woman will come with a document, we would be obligated to search and investigate lest she never observed mitzvot and the conversion NEVER TOOK EFFECT and in our many sins, there ARE MANY OF THIS SORT IN OUR MESSIANIC DAYS!

    He then continues to explain at the resonsa that the lack of kabbalat mitzvot touches upon the efficiency of the conversion from two angkes: a) thelack of commitment, b) that a JUDGE THAT CONSTANTLY MAKES SUCH CONVERSIONS LACKS THE LEGAL HALACHIK TERM OF "BEIT DIN"! If a Beit Din knowing that the prospective convert will not observe and yet "converts" them then this Court loses the status of "Beit Din" and therefore the conversion does not take effect.

    This is certainly reflective of Rav Sternbuch's opinion to be passed on in all venues being that this is PRINTED IN BOOK MEANT TO BE DISSEMINATED AND PASSED ON whereas a private letter (Even of condemnation) is usually not menat to be publicized unless the perso explicitly states in writing!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Recipients and PublicityJune 24, 2009 at 9:17 AM

    Part ONE: Reasons for the ceasefire between Tropper and Rav Eisenstein and why Tropper has now changed his tune on proselytizations.

    It's been interesting watching Roni/Tropper in his latest incarnation do his intellectual gymnastics and come up with new positions and think that the world suffers from amnesia and that only he can say something, even if it defies what has been establsihed as fact, and then expect the world to buy into it.

    There are already quite a few matters worth noting. One is that Roni/Tropper is now alleging that EJF never was interested in mass proselytizations of gentiles hitched to Jews, which is an ouright lie simply because this blog has spent a lot of time posting and linking to many articles and posts produced by EJF and its PR hirelings to recruit up to a third of the 6 billion human race that they allege has Jewish ancestry, a kind of "kiruv effort gone haywire" (that would be appreciated and desired by a kiruv die-hard like Tropper, but which a professional Rov like Rav Eisenstein would be aghast at!) of reaching out to the millions of Jews hitched to gentiles, which is both a kiruv workers wild fantasy and the worst Halachic nightmare.

    No doubt this point must have been what caused a huge rift between Tropper and Rav Eisenstein, because it is unimaginable that Rav Eisenstein would agree to such an effort, and that EJF must now adjust accordingly. Therefore the new focus is on working with whatever kiruv and outreach organizations can be arm-twisted (and have Tom Kaplan's millions dangled in front of them like a carrot) into joining with EJF to hand over their intermarried students and recruits like hostages who will now face (the stick) a take it or leave my-way-or-the-highway offer they cannot refuse from don Tropper to convert and become ultra Haredim his way, or else, RCA and Religious Zionism options be damned, causing more religious conflict within Orthodoxy as a whole.

    While Tropper would have gone it alone if he would have had to on this, as long as he had the tens of millions of Uncle Tom Kaplan and his nephew behind him, that was great for Tropper, but the minute the nephew dumped Tropper and cut of his uncle Tom, slicing EJF in half while opening it to the valid question of how EJF could have allowed a person whose wife was not even willing to accept an EJF-style conversion co-found and co-lead EJF and pay the hundreds of rabbonim to come to its concerts, Tropper had no choice but to eat humble pie and come hat in hand back to Rav Eisenstein who had already been boycotting him, but must have now clearly insisted that Tropper must STOP proselytizing (thank you Rav Eisenstein for this, but how long do you think Tropper will fool you 'til he starts doing it again?) and that EJF restrict themselves to "couples who come to EJF" of their own free will and volition and that Tropper and Kaplan and EJF stop their shady and controversial attempts, all well proven and documented, to recruit every last gentile on Earth who may have the most tenuous connection to Jews in violation of more than 2000 years of Jewish law forbidding outright luring of gentiles to become Jews, even if they are hitched to Jews...

    ReplyDelete
  27. Recipients and PublicityJune 24, 2009 at 9:18 AM

    Part TWO:...

    So the question now is only if Tropper's and EJF's change of language is merely tactical to appease those like Rav Eisenstien, AND THE BADATS that put Tropper and EJF under fire in the Torah world for his unconventional chiddush of reaching out to millions of gentiles hitched to Jews with all his krumme and cockamamie "proofs" and false justifications from this and that gadol or sefer who would all have heart attacks and turn in their graves if they knew how Tropper was shmeering and fardreying their heilige words, in fits of being megaleh ponim baTorah shelo kehalacha, making Tropper into a clear-cut apikores, and all those who who opposed the EJF proselytization agenda which all EJF commercials and infomercials and concerts in hotels for goyim hitched to Jews, proved to be its real aim, OR is this a strategic and true change by EJF to abide by standard Torah-dikke norms and not go looking for people to convert even if it's the unfortunate millions of born Jews who have landed up in the arms of gentiles marrying them, and that now EJF will restrict itself and Tropper and Kaplan and the EJF people will do real teshuva berabim for its past errors, so the world can know it has changed for the better? Only time will tell!

    ReplyDelete
  28. What's your problem? à la guerre comme à la guerre: you fill your blog with negative statements about him, so why should he not answer from time to time.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Recipients and PublicityJune 24, 2009 at 10:36 AM

    ONE: Tropper's latest red herring argument tries to make blogs the issue and not his forbidden proselytizations of gentiles hitched to Jews.

    In a move of verbal dog-fighting worthy of a virtual Houdini, Tropper uses his favorite counter-ploy when confonted with proof of his and EJF's own errors, by resorting to his well-known but by now worn out trick of casuistry of deploying a RED HERRING ARGUMENT.

    The last time he was under serious fire for proselytizing on this blog, with ever mounting numbers of links and proofs to infomercials and events for gentiles hitched to Jews coming out of EJF itself, Tropper/Roni deployed the notorious forged English letter from the "P.O. Box" against Rabbi Bomzer in an attempt to make Bomzer and his controversial conversion of a "Brazilian woman" [...]

    All that came about from the "Red Herring" trap laid by poster Roni/Tropper on this blog with the aim of taking the focus away from the central question and concern that this blog's owner Rabbi Dr. Eidensohn/da'as torah raised about two years ago with clear-cut support and documentation against Tropper and EJF from Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS that has hung like a sword over Tropper's head.

    But now that the old red herring has been dealt with one way or another (nobody seriously supports Bomzer on this blog in any case, and the nephew has gone his way), Tropper comes up with a brand new one, as he now tries to divert attention with another red herring diversion, by stating his lie: "According to a trusted source, Rav Sternbuch, shlit”a was asked if he approves of the blog which is critical of EJF. His response was negative."

    Firstly, there is NO such "trusted source" -- it's a bogus claim! Secondly, the issue is not about this blog or any blog, but the content of this blog's claims and the warnings of Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS against Tropper and EJF. And thirdly, what exactly does the word "negative" mean? when a direct quote of real words would be the right thing because Rav Shternbuch's WRITTEN words are clearly posted, WITH FULL PERMISSION FROM HIM, and can be read on this very blog, unlike Tropper who for all the scholarly mouthings of poster Roni/Tropper has not come up with even a one line WRITTEN heter or haskoma or anything from any posek for EJF and Tropper's proselytization agenda...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Recipients and PublicityJune 24, 2009 at 10:40 AM

    TWO: Tropper's latest red herring argument...

    So all this is just a cheap and time-wasting attempt to tie people up in knots by throwing crafty curve balls from the house of Tropper to take the focus off of Tropper and his plans for EJF to proselytize and instead make it question of if Rav Shternbuch "approves" of this blog, or of any blog for that matter, implying that anything like this associated with the Internet surely "cannot" be "approved" by someone like Rav Shternbuch, and once again avoid the REAL issue which is the WRITTEN bans and criticisms and warnings from Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS specifically, clearly and categorically condemning EVERTHING that Tropper and EJF are doing, and that the owner of this blog quite obviously would not have posted such serious rabbinical letters and warnings from the major Bais Din such as the BADATS had he not been allowed to do so by Rav Shternbuch himself who is the Halachic authority for Rabbi Eidensohn whom he knows well, sees frequently, has open lines of communication with, is the place where Rav Shternbuch's weekly columns in the English YATED are published online each week.

    Yet in spite of this, Tropper ever ready to assault logic and truth by perverting it, resorts to the cheapest and oldest trick in the book of "chaning the subject" by creating the red herring argument that now wishes to focus on whether Rav Shterbuch allows his and the BADATS's letters to be published on this highly respectable blog, trying to make the usage of blogs the issue.

    Note: all this while Tropper himself has started his own blog and is now using it to write whatever he feels like saying, as he shows that he thinks blogs are there only to tell lies, but that is not the case with this blog as it is one of the most respectable and read blogs in the Torah world -- while Tropper, minus his Uncle Tom Kaplan millions, has zero credibility given all his blunders with many cases, such as the hiding that Kaplan's nephew was a recent missionary and was married to a gentile woman as he gave millions to Tropper's yeshiva and was co-founding and co-running EJF.

    Below are the links to Rav Shternbuch's written warnings and the BADATS's written warnings that have been re-published and requoted on this blog umpteen times:

    ReplyDelete
  31. shoshi said...

    What's your problem? à la guerre comme à la guerre: you fill your blog with negative statements about him, so why should he not answer from time to time.
    ===================
    If you really think this is a simply a question of allowing both sides to present equal amounts of negative comments and the issues are totally irrelevant - why are you wasting your time reading this material?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Recipients and PublicityJune 24, 2009 at 11:02 AM

    Original Sources and Documentation with APPROVED Translations on this Blog from Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS against Proselytizion the Controversial New Efforts of EJF:

    *Rav Moshe Sternbuch - Kiruv for non-Jews (Friday, August 10, 2007) and ORIGINAL HEBREW DOCUMENT FROM RAV SHTERBUCH

    *Rav Moshe Sternbuch - Authorized Translation [of above]: Kiruv for someone with a Jewish father and a non‑Jewish mother (Friday, August 10, 2007): "...it is absolutely forbidden to try to proselytize a non‑Jew even if he mistakenly views himself as Jewish. One obvious reason is that such an approach actually encourages intermarriage. If people with only a Jewish father are encouraged to participate in Jewish educational events it will convey the message that in some sense they are actually Jewish...Thus this innovation crosses the red lines that have always been accepted by Torah true Jews..."

    *Bedatz letter regarding conversion (Sunday, November 18, 2007) and ORIGINAL HEBREW DOCUMNET FROM BADATS

    *Bedatz letter regarding conversion: Rav Sternbuch, shlita approved translation by Daniel Eidensohn (Sunday, November 18, 2007): "The senior dayanim of the Bedatz met today to discuss allegations that certain kiruv activists are actively proselytizing the children of intermarried couples to convince them to convert – even though according to Torah law there is no halachic relationship with their Jewish fathers...Therefore we are warning that this activity is against the Torah. It has never been acceptable to proselytize non‑Jews...We therefore are turning to the poskim and the roshei yeshivos not to participate in their conventions - such as the one that occurred in America last week...This approach is directly causing serious problems."

    *Bedatz Letter regarding EJF signed by Gaavad (Thursday, February 14, 2008) and ORIGINAL HEBREW LETTER FROM BADATS SIGNED BY GAAVAD: "Distinguished Rabbi shlita, I am requesting from you - with every expression of entreaty - to stop and break off association with this organization (Eternal Jewish Family) which is a danger to the future of the Jewish people. Even isolated cases of this type of conversion (of intermarried couples) are extremely problematic. This is explicitly stated by the Achiezer (3:28) that “no kosher beis din should deal with this (the conversion of intermarried couples).” Also look in the Igros Moshe (E.H. 1:27) where he states “this whole issue of conversion of intermarried couples is personally totally distasteful even in isolated cases.” It is simply not acceptable to deal with the issue of intermarried couples in this manner and to openly reinforce their activities with public announcements and notices in newspapers and internet and other such means. They are in effect inviting non‑Jews to participate in a program of conversion through this publicity. It is a really damaging approach which unfortunately will bring about even more intermarriages and invalid conversions. Distinguished Rabbi shlita, please act according to your understanding and wisdom and desist from participating in this program (of the Eternal Jewish Family). It is a public danger. G‑d should assist you."

    ReplyDelete
  33. David said:". I asked him if I could post in on a blog, He said that I can post it to anyone but he doesn’t know who is blog, I explained to him that I meant the internet, he said, "what I say is for everyone to know, I have never told anyone yes to, or not to, put something on the internet, that is what each person decides himself."
    ===============
    Roni said: Can you post in writing that he was asked about putting in the Internet and he said that you may put it if you so decide and he answered this in *writing*?

    FOR HE TOLD ME THE OPPOSITE! HE TOLD ME THAT HE NEVER MEANT THAT THIS SHOULD BE PUT ON THE INTERNET!
    ===========================
    DT said: Roni perhaps you have to get your hearing checked.

    I just spoke with one of Rav Sternbuch's gabboim regarding this issues. I got a similar response to that reported by David.

    He confirmed that on 17/5/09 he received a phone call from someone who was claiming that Rav Sternbuch's views have been misrepresented on the internet. Rav Sternbuch's response was that he does not take any responsibility for what anyone else says in his name. However he didn't have any issue or problem about his views being publicized, only that he has not given any haskomo for any internet reporting or otherwise. But likewise he doesn't tell someone not to report his views on the internet.

    The gabbai told me that if Rav Sternbuch's views were understood differently then this it was a misunderstanding. The gabbai also mentioned that Rav Sternbuch has spoken about these issues in public in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "One is that Roni/Tropper is now alleging that EJF never was interested in mass proselytizations of gentiles hitched to Jews, which is an ouright lie simply because this blog has spent a lot of time posting and linking to many articles and posts produced by EJF and its PR hirelings to recruit up to a third of the 6 billion human race that they allege has Jewish ancestry, a kind of "kiruv effort gone haywire" (that would be appreciated and desired by a kiruv die-hard like Tropper, but which a professional Rov like Rav Eisenstein would be aghast at!) of reaching out to the millions of Jews hitched to gentiles, which is both a kiruv workers wild fantasy and the worst Halachic nightmare."

    But the REAL LIE is that RAp did not tell you (as he did not tell you whether or not he even talked to Rav Sternbuch or better whether he has a written agreemnt of Rav Sternbuch whether or not he is allowed to Rav Sternbuch to villify R' Tropper the way he did and he posted his Badatz letters making it appear thaty is a Shliach DeRabbanana and is the spokesman for Rav Sternbuch when that NEVER HAPPENED.

    That this was only a small frction of what has been done. MOST OF EJF ACTIVITIES is actually engaging in potenttial individual who are interested to convert and as a EHRLICHE HONEST ORGANIZATION (NOT THE factory of H' bomzer/rap) he declined those who are not sincere and certainly those who would not keep torah and mtizvot! so in practifec MOSTOF EJF'S AND R' TROPPER'S ACTIVITES WERE ACTUALLY TO THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF RAP's/DT obssession with "proseltyizing".

    to be continued

    ReplyDelete
  35. Thereofre, you usual misrepersentation and acrobatic twists of facts is not anomaly to what you have been doing for the past years regarding your misrepresentations of EJf and R' Tropper:" No doubt this point must have been what caused a huge rift between Tropper and Rav Eisenstein, because it is unimaginable that Rav Eisenstein would agree to such an effort, and that EJF must now adjust accordingly. Therefore the new focus is on working with whatever kiruv and outreach organizations can be arm-twisted "

    IS A usAUL LIE! For from it's inception EJF had contacts with kiruv organizations, with community rabbis who in conjunction with them have met potential candidates for conversion and they have followed shulchan oruch and covnerted those who fit the bill, while BOmzer/RAP were busy sending GOYIM and brining them into klal yisroe, and at that timee (for RAP never really laid it down that R' Tropper worked TOGETHER WITH RAV EISENSTEIN to call the attention of rabbonim that many gerut factories and fake dayanim are brining goyim into klal yisroel! So when Rabbi Eisenstein worked EITH R' TROPPER it must have been because RAbbi Tropper did work to stop THE PROSETYZING DONE BY BOMZER/RAP! and company that brought so much chillul hashem like the one when they covnerted a gentile for 40,000$ and brought many hundreds of thousands of dollars into their pockets IN EXCHANGUE OF THE ENTRANCE OF FAKE JEW AND GOYIM INTO KLAL YISROEL!

    And at the same time R' Tropper's energy is focused into hel[ping those couples who approach him to help them covnert WHEN THEY ARE SINCERE!

    tHEN COMES THE OTHER lie OF boMZER/raP AND HERE IS WHERE we have the combination of oppsoite claims by the same person (RAP and also the opposite of DT"s claims on the blog and DT does NOT chalenge this stupid claims even though it runs counter to the core argument of "prosetyzing"):

    RAP writes: "a take it or leave my-way-or-the-highway offer they cannot refuse from don Tropper to convert and become ultra Haredim his way, or else, RCA and Religious Zionism options be damned"

    ROni: THISIS A LIE Just go and read the teshuva I posted from HARAV MOSHE STERNBUCH (SDAAS TORAH: HOW ABOUT EXPLAINING THIS TO RAP?) where he rules that there be a "mazkeret ledorot", that those who convert and we know ahead of time that they will not observe ARE NOT GETRIM AT ALL! AND WHEN THEY COME FORWAR DTO MARRY WE MUST SEARCH EACH SUCH GER ...BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY OF THESE FAKE GERIM! So, he fails to tell you tha tthe apporach of R Tropper is THE APPORACH OF RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN, RAV ELYASHIV, RAV KOOK, RAV HERTZOG, MINCHAT YITCHOK, RAV CHAYIM OYZER.
    It is the way of Halacha from all segments of the spectrum (RAV KOOK was Relgious Zionist) that gertu without sincerity to keep mitzvot IS ZERO NULL AND VOID!
    to be continued

    ReplyDelete
  36. He then goes on with his usual LIES as he attempts to COVER FOR HIS FRIENDS INTRODUCTION OF AGOYA TO KLAL YISROEL FOR 40,000$ AND A BUILDING AND HELP CREATE REMOVE THE PERSON FROM TROPPER, HE AGAIN TWISTS THE REEALITY:

    " but the minute the nephew dumped Tropper and cut of his uncle Tom, slicing EJF in half while opening ",

    ROni: HE DUMPED HIM FOR TROPPER DID NOT WANT TO COVNERT A GOYA WHO DID NOT WANT TO KEEP SHABBAT; BECAUSE HE FOLLOWED THE OPINION OF RAV STERNBUCH! AND ALL GEDOYLEY POSSKIM,


    "wife was not even willing to accept an EJF-style conversion"

    DID NOT WANT TO CONVERT ACCORDING TO JEWISH CODE OF LAW! WANTED TO KEEP DESECRATING SHABBAT! NEVER KEPT ONE SHABBAT!),



    rap CONTINUES WITH THE ACROBATIC lies: "Have the most tenuous connection to Jews in violation of more than 2000 years of Jewish law forbidding outright luring of gentiles to become Jews, even if they are hitched to Jews.."

    roNI: wHEREIS THIS VIOLATION OF jeWISH LAW RECORDED? YOU REPEAT THE BROKEN RECORD AND WHEN CHALLENGED YOU ARE (AS USUAL) UNABLE TO PRODUCE THE EXACT LAW IN SHULCHAN ORUCH WHICH RECORDS THE 2000 YEAR LAWS. But what you fail to say is that you cover up for the real THOUSANDS OF YEARS LAW: TO HELP CCONVERT GOYIM WHO DO NOT WANT TO OBSER SHABBAT!

    ReplyDelete
  37. "Part TWO:...
    So the question now is only if Tropper's and EJF's change of language is merely tactical to appease those like Rav Eisenstien, AND THE BADATS that put Tropper and EJF under fire in the Torah world"

    The krume (who plagiarize hthe title that he earns) and hi slies: r' tROPPER HAS gedoyley yisroel at his conventions and this krummer tells you that he is "under fire". He has the backing of the "missoltoh umishmanh" of Gedoyley Yisroel.

    "for his unconventional chiddush of reaching out to millions of gentiles hitched to Jews",

    Again hyperbole and hype take him oveR: the chiddush is that YOU COVER UP TO BRING GOYIM INTIO KLAL YISROEL. The chiddush is that you make it sound that he converts a million goyim!


    The non cihddush is that you cannot even begin to show how a teshuva brought down is "megaleh ponim sheloh kahalacha" you are not equipped to it; your expertise is hyperbole and exxageration, not anaylzing what is written (and another epxertise is cover up for real giluy panim hseloy kehalacha and helping bring goyim into klal yisroel).

    ReplyDelete
  38. David said:". I asked him if I could post in on a blog, He said that I can post it to anyone but he doesn’t know who is blog, I explained to him that I meant the internet, he said, "what I say is for everyone to know, I have never told anyone yes to, or not to, put something on the internet, that is what each person decides himself."
    ===============
    Roni said: Can you post in writing that he was asked about putting in the Internet and he said that you may put it if you so decide and he answered this in *writing*?

    FOR HE TOLD ME THE OPPOSITE! HE TOLD ME THAT HE NEVER MEANT THAT THIS SHOULD BE PUT ON THE INTERNET!
    ===========================
    DT said: Roni perhaps you have to get your hearing checked.

    I just spoke with one of Rav Sternbuch's gabboim regarding this issues. I got a similar response to that reported by David.

    He confirmed that on 17/5/09 he received a phone call from someone who was claiming that Rav Sternbuch's views have been misrepresented on the internet. Rav Sternbuch's response was that he does not take any responsibility for what anyone else says in his name. However he didn't have any issue or problem about his views being publicized, only that he has not given any haskomo for any internet reporting or otherwise. But likewise he doesn't tell someone not to report his views on the internet.

    The gabbai told me that if Rav Sternbuch's views were understood differently then this it was a misunderstanding. The gabbai also mentioned that Rav Sternbuch has spoken about these issues in public in the past.
    Ad kan the words of DT.

    Roni: Maybe you check yourseef for many things that you do! I SPOKE WITH HARAV STERNBUCH AND *HE* TOLD *ME* that he did not ask you to post the stuff on your blog and he DID NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO PUT THE STUFF ON THIS OR ANY BLOG! He actually asked me to send the printed stuff. I sent him at the time a copy of a page where RAP's pasting and linking of his letter appears and he acknowledged to me that he received it!

    In FACT, IF YOU WILL BE TRUTHFUL AND CHECK: FROM THAT TIME ON, YOU STOPPED HAVING RAP'S PASTING THE LETTERS OF BADATZ UNTIL TODAY (WHERE SOMEHOW YOU NOW RESUMED THE PRACTICE)!


    In my eyes, anything to the contrary has no credibility. If you claim the contrary, please cite a WRITTEN LETTER BY HIM THAT HE PERMITTED TO WRITE HIS STUFF ON THE INTERNET BLOGS (wherepeople may misrepsent the real meaning of his positions).

    ReplyDelete
  39. RaP:"The last time he was under serious fire for proselytizing on this blog," with ever mounting numbers of links and proofs to infomercials and events for gentiles hitched to Jews coming out of EJF itself, Tropper/Roni deployed the notorious forged English letter from the "P.O. Box" against Rabbi Bomzer in an attempt to make Bomzer and his controversial conversion of a "Brazilian woman" [...]",

    Roni: LIAR! IT WAS NOT FORGED!


    RAP:"All that came about from the "Red Herring" trap laid by poster Roni/Tropper on this blog with the aim of taking the focus away from the central question and concern that this blog's owner Rabbi Dr. Eidensohn/da'as torah raised about two years ago with clear-cut support and documentation against Tropper and EJF from Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS that has hung like a sword over Tropper's head."

    Roni: Daas TOrah, do YOU hear, yuor ally claims that your "central concern" is ONLY to document aginst Tropper? So much for your stating that you write about other issues? or even other issues about conversion? Your ally claims that raising any issue takes away the focus and "central concern" of the blog! And it is NOT a red herring! as Gedoyley Yisroel understand that part of the justification for his actions is because his activities help stymie and minimize fradulent practice of brinign goyim as the example of 40,000$

    RaP"But now that the old red herring has been dealt with one way or another (nobody seriously supports Bomzer on this blog in any case, and the nephew has gone his way),"

    It does not go away, becuase it was not a red herring as Gedoylely yisroel understand that part of the part of legitimacy for his actions is the fact that his ways undermine the fradulent actions by other corrupt factories!

    RaP: Tropper comes up with a brand new one, as he now tries to divert attention with another red herring diversion, by stating his lie: "According to a trusted source, Rav Sternbuch, shlit”a was asked if he approves of the blog which is critical of EJF. His response was negative."

    Firstly, there is NO such "trusted source" -- it's a bogus claim! "

    ROni:SO says the gospel of truth RAP! (the true messenger of lie and twist publicity!).

    RAP:"Secondly, the issue is not about this blog or any blog, but the content of this blog's claims and the warnings of Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS against Tropper and EJF'.

    ROni: NO RAP, the issue is CONTEXT and proper understanding of the disagreemnt by Rav Sternbuch! He NEVER INTENDED his disagreement to be so vehement and to be used to villify R' Tropper in the manner OYU HAVE MISUSED HIM! You better quote the Teshuva that heprinted about the goyim that factories of Bomzer and other you frineds bring to klal yisroel!

    RAP:"... because Rav Shternbuch's WRITTEN words are clearly posted, WITH FULL PERMISSION FROM HIM,...":

    Roni: Please cite a written statment by haRav Sternbuch that he permitted to give write his letters on this blog!

    RAP:"one line WRITTEN heter or haskoma or anything from any posek for EJF and Tropper's proselytization agenda.."

    Roni: REad the teshuva of Rav ELyashiv tha tI quoted yesterday!

    ReplyDelete
  40. RAP:" ...which is the WRITTEN bans and criticisms and warnings from Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS specifically, clearly and categorically condemning EVERTHING that Tropper and EJF are doing, and that the owner of this blog quite obviously would not have posted such serious rabbinical letters and warnings from the major Bais Din such as the BADATS had he not been allowed to do so by Rav Shternbuch himself..."


    ROni: If it is so obvious please produce the letter where he so stated! since he has "... who is the Halachic authority for Rabbi Eidensohn whom he knows well, sees frequently, has open lines of communication with, is the place where Rav Shternbuch's weekly columns in the English YATED are published online each week, it is easy for him to produce a letter that he has permission to post them here.

    And R" Tropper has the backing of Gedoyley Yisroel, who despite the opinion of Rav Sternbuch, nevertheleess Gedoyley Yisorel from ALL stripes attended his lat convention and praised him and his activities! as it was printed in Hamodia and Yated recently. Your critcism and chollent treatises are not even a slight metzius to be dealt with...and all of them notwithstanding did not STOP ANY OF THE LEADING GEDOYLEY YISROEL FROM DIFFERENT SEGMENTSOF THE HAREDI SOCIETY TO ATTEND AND PRAISE EJF!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ever notice that when the Popeye visits Israel the current Chief Rabbi always has something nice to say about him.... Or when major Evangelicals from the US come who give so much money to NBN and Yad Sarah, they extol their praises...

    Does this imply that the Chief Rabbis endorse Xtianity? NO!!! ChV"Sh!!! It means that they know how to be civil and diplomatic.

    Why should I have any other reason to believe that their "praise" of Tropper is anything more, when they fail to produce haskamot, as in the Torah world, haskamot, and only haskamot show a Rav's backing of an individual.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Roni I would like you to solve a very big mystery. Why do you and R' Tropper care so much about my views?

    Why are you much more bothered about the fact that I post Rav Sternbuch's views than about Rav Sternbuch's views themselves? I am just the messenger - don't you read the message?

    Why don't you and R' Tropper meet with Rav Sternbuch to settle your differences - especially when you insist they are relatively minor ones. Rav Sternbuch is a very reasonable person and quite pleasant to talk with.

    Don't you have anything better to do then waste time on my blog where you haven't really influenced anyone's view? I do enjoy your erudite discourses - but what do you get out of it besides high blood pressure?

    Rav Tropper describes himself as being surrounding by gedolim who praise him highly for his work. So why is he obsessing with my every word? We all know that there are always people in the world that you don't get along with - so why am I the bone in his throat?

    ReplyDelete
  43. Mekubal,

    So I guess that when Kalev BEn Yefuneh praised Moshe, bney Yisroel should have asked him for "a written Haskmah"! Too bad, Bney Yisrael at that time didn't have the advice of the peole of DAAtTorah blogspot

    ReplyDelete
  44. Roni said...

    IF your ask me to do "homework first"; I must admit that I did the homework and I asked him and he told me that the only reason he protested this case and not other cases was becuase there was a conference that took place in Yerushalayim so he felt the need to protest in his place. And he proceded to tell me that he did not intend that his words and letter be used the way it was used on THIS WEBSITE! ( I sent him a page of where his letters were quoted)!
    ===========
    You obviously misunderstood him. The text of the condemnation specifically mentions that it was a reaction to the conference in America.
    i Bedatz letter regarding conversion (November 18, 2007), (original document): "...We therefore are turning to the poskim and the roshei yeshivos not to participate in their conventions - such as the one that occurred in America last week. Even if their motivation was to improve the standards of conversions – they are making improvements in one area while making things worse in another. This approach is directly causing serious problems..."

    ReplyDelete
  45. I'm bothered by your display of false information and analysis. I'm bothered by your disproportionate treatment of an idea to demonize him while you do nothing about the real problems (on the same issue of conversion); I"m bothered with things that may appear as highly hypochrticial to the observer cloaked in a cloaked of holiness and on and on.
    you demand so much from someone (that such a such ROsh Yeshivaproduce his handwritten consent to an idea) while you would not care to do the same when some requests from you something in the same vein.


    Whom and howkmuch I have influenced, ie. the third parties who are for the mostparties is not something that you can or cannot measure. but I willl tell you one thing: I care for the TRU
    TH!

    The truth is is that most GEdoyley yisroel SUPPORT OR ENDORSE R' Tropper's position. The portrayal you give about reflects the lie of this truth.

    The truth is, that were you concerned about the real dangers of conversion I would see you writing about the real dangers...and how much false gerrim were brought to klal yisroel through fake dayanim....your obssession and "central focal point" as your "Shulchoh derachmnoh" RAP writes about the one person and his infaractions and ommission of any othe serious malady on this very issue is a FALSE PICTURE!

    Why do I "obsseess" with "my every word"? So that you give yourself an "Eyfoh voeyfoh" about the way you mistreat and malign others! Because I would like to show how what you call an evil path might be called by others as a righeous path!

    Mu obsseission also entails the fac tthat some opeople who make money out of the fake gerim have used an misused this blogsite to attack the person who made their business a little less "honest" in the eyes of people; have minimized their "proselytazaion" and influx of goyim into klal yisroel an dthey cloak themselves with the crocodile tears of Pinchos when they ACT LIKE ZIMRI!

    ReplyDelete
  46. Dt,

    I can only tell you what *Rav Sternbuch* told *me* at thephone call! Becuase I asked him if why he selected to condemn one individual amongst so many people in America and abroad who do gerut frauds? He responded to that question: because they came to Yerushalayim!

    ReplyDelete
  47. Roni,

    That was not minhag Israel then, however it is now. Look I split my time between a Yeshiva founded by R' Mordechai Sharabi in the 1930's and one founded by the RaShaSh. Yet both Yeshivot keep on file haskamot from current Gedolei Yisrael. What they are doing is not new, it is not novel, it relies on no heterim. The lineage of their Mesorah is undeniable, yet still they see the need, and have the ability to produce them if asked.

    So now we come to R' Tropper. What concerns me is that his approach is new and it is novel, and yet there are no haskamot.

    Just because gedolim say a few flattering things about them in public does not make that an endorsement. My own Rabbanim have said things publicly about me, especially when giving me berachot after the birth of each of my children, that simply are not true.

    Again we at times have seen our Rabbis praise peoples of other faiths. None of this counts as an endorsement.

    It is those missing haskamot that will continue to give him the greatest problems.

    Here is an honest question. Why does he waste his time on an internet word war with this blog? If he has such high access to these Gedolim why doesn't he just ask them for haskamot, as that would end all criticism?

    Its not so hard to do, I have haskamot from various Gedolim for my safrut. All things considered... it would seem that he would have them for his project.

    ReplyDelete
  48. excerpts of a RESPONSA by HARAV REUVEN FEINSTEIN ON THE ISSUE OF THE PERMISSIBLITY/DESIRABILITY OF MEKAREV COUPLES WHO ARE INTERMARRIED SO THAT THE NON JEWWISH PARTNER CONVERT AND THERE WILL BE "TAKANAT HASHAVIM" FOR THE JEWISH PARTNER!

    In a responsa by written by haRav REuven Feinstein Shlita to Netzach Yisrael (ETERNAL JEWISH FAMILY) WHERE HE WAS ASKED :

    "אם מותר לקרב זוג מעורב המתקרבים לתורה ולמצוות כשצד הגוי' רוצה להתגייר ומוכנים לקבל עליהם תורה ומצוות":

    The question relates to whether or not it is permissible to do"kiruv" to an intermarried couple when the non jewish partner wants to convert and is ready to accept torah and mitzvot.

    Rav REuven FEinstein respponds: הנה ידוע ומפורסם פסק הלכה של בשם אאמו"ר רשכבה"ג פוסק הדור הגר"מ פיינשטיין זצ"ל כי בנישואי תערובת משום תקנת השבים אפשר לקרב את הגוי או הגוי' בכה"ג שישמרו תורה ומצוות ויקבלו עליהם את כל דיני התורה ודקדוקיה":

    "IT IS KNOWN THE RULING OF MY FATHER THE REBBE OF KLAL YISROEL THE POSSEK OF GENERATION HAGAON RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN THAT BY INTERMARRIED COUPLES, FOR REASONS OF "TAKANAT HASHAVIM" (A TAKANA FOR THOSE WHO WISH TO RETURN AND TO ENTICE THEM TO RETURN -MY WORDS-) ONE MAY "MEKAREV" AND THOSE NON JEWS WHO ARE INERMARRIED, IN A WAY THAT THEY KEEP TORAH AND MITZVOT AND THEY ACCEPT ALL DETAILS OF THE TORAH WITH ALL IT'S DIKDUKIM".

    IT is clear from this ruling that Rav REuven claims that Rav Msohe held THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT HAS BEEN WRITTEN FOR YEARS ON THIS BLOG IN rAV moSHE'S NAME. tHIS BLOG CLAIMED THAT rAV moSHE HELD THAT WE SHOULD NOT ENGAGE INTERMARRIED COUPLES SO THAT THE NON JEW ULTIMATELY CONVERT. RAV REVUEN CLAIMS RAV MOSHE HELD THAT ONE ACTUALLY *MAY* MEKAREV SO THAT THE NON JEW UNDERGO A FULL CONVERSION.

    But Rav REuven holds so so with one caveat: That accept full Torah and mitzvot to all it's dikdukim.
    to be continued..

    ReplyDelete
  49. He then proceeds to cite from Rav Chayim Oyzer Grodzenski. Then he cites from the Ohr Sameach. Then he cties from Mechaber Tevuot Hasadeh an Hungarian Rabbi.

    Then he states: וכן מפורסם בשם הגאון רבי יוסף אליהו הענקין זצ"ל, הגר"י קמנצקי זצ"ל, והרגרש"ז אורבאך זצ"ל, להתיר בכה"ג והוא על פי תשובות הרמב"ם....":

    Rav REuven claims that position is known to be the position of Possim haRav Henkin Ztl, HaRav Yaakov Kaminetzky Zt"l, HaRAv Shlomoh Zalman Aurbach zt"l, to permit kiruv to these couples (including the non Jew)!

    and again Rav Reuven repeats one caveat: "אמנם נכון שכל זה צריך שיהיה בלי פשרות וויתורים בקבלת המצוות כדבעי":

    There is one condition to all the above: there should be no COMPROMISES AND GIVING IN IN THE AREA OF KABBALAT MITZVOT!

    Iow, all the ways done by BOmzer and COmpany and all their enablers is ruled that it is disqualified by all these Posskim! Otoh: To engage in kiruv to these couples in a way that does not offer an inch of compromise is permissible! according to all the above Posskim!

    He then cites another ruling of his father Rav MOshe )IM 3ץ109( because "גם מפני תקנת השבים שאיכא בשביל בעלה איכא מצוה גדולה להזקק לזה": (Although there was a situation where the was asofefk gerut previously it appears that the reasoing given is a general reasoning as REuven understands it). Here the father held that for Takanat Hashavim (not only is it permissible. butit is also a ) Mitzvah! to engage in helping out the situation.

    to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  50. Then he cites the ruling by Rav ELyashiv menioned yesterday where HaRAV ELyashiv permits teaching them TOrah (although it may prohibited otherwise) to intermarried couples so that through the teaching the are strong possibilities that he will "yassim el liboy" arouse his heart to covnert! ("prosetyze"?!?) and Rav REufven interprets that TEshuva to mean : "ומפורש בדבריו שבזוג מעורב שע"י הגרות יצילו את היהודי או היהודי' מעבירה חמורה נכון הדבר לקרבם, ומובן מאליו שכ"ז בגרות עם קבלת המצות כהלכה...":

    Rav REuven states that from HArav ELyashiv's teshuva it is clear that he holds that it is appropriate and proper to do kiruv to an intermarried couple if through that they will save the jewish person from a terrible sin! BUT AGAIN ONE CAVEAT: ALL THE ABOVE WITH A COVNERSION WITH KABALLAT MITZVOT KEHILCHATA! (EXCLUDING BOMZER'S AND ENABLERRS APPROACH MY WORDS VIN PARENTHESIS).
    He concludes: מסקנא דמילתא דבזוג מעורב הרוצים לקבל עליהם את שמירת התורה והמצוות לפרטיה, ישלקרבם מפני תקנת השבים ולא לדחותם":

    COnclusion: one should do kiruv to a intermarried couple who want to commit themslves the observance of torah mitzvot to it's details!


    And then Rav reuven put's his signature to this TESHUVA!

    So now, most of your arguments against Rav Tropper should be directed agsinst Rav REuven in the name of Rav MOshe! and "מי נדחה מפני מי" ...

    Shalom

    ReplyDelete
  51. He then cites another ruling of his father Rav MOshe )IM 3ץ109( because "גם מפני תקנת השבים שאיכא בשביל בעלה איכא מצוה גדולה להזקק לזה": (Although there was a situation where the was asofefk gerut previously it appears that the reasoing given is a general reasoning as REuven understands it). Here the father held that for Takanat Hashavim (not only is it permissible. but it is also a ) Mitzvah! to engage in helping out the situation.

    =====================
    Your revealing some excerpts from the teshuva is greatly appreciated.

    שו"ת אגרות משה יורה דעה חלק ג סימן קט

    הנה האשה שנתגיירה זה כחמש שנים אצל ב"ד וניסת במאנטריאל אבל לא התנהגה בדיני התורה מאחר שבעלה לא התנהג אז בדיני התורה, וזה קרוב לשנתיים ימים אשר בעלה נעשה בעל תשובה ממש והתחילה גם היא לקיים כל מצות התורה בדקדוק גדול, והביאם הרב ר' חיים יעקב בראדער שליט"א אשר כעת קבע דירתו ג"כ במאנטריאל, וחקרתי ודרשתי אותה על ידי שני אברכים מופלגים בתורה וביראת השם ונודע כי היא מאמינה בהשי"ת ובתורתו ומקיימת כל המצוות ומקבלת עליה גם להבא לקיים כל המצות, אשר על כן מפני שהוא ספק על גרות הראשון דשמא היה כדין והוו בנה ושתי בנותיה כבר בדין יהודים וגם מפני תקנת השבים שאיכא בשביל בעלה, איכא מצוה גדולה להזדקק לזה ולהטביל אותה עוד הפעם לפני שלשה אנשים כשרים ואחד מהם יהיה רב מומחה בדיני גרות, וגם להטביל את הילדים מספק על דעת ב"ד כי זכות ודאי הוא להם מאחר שמתחנכים בדרך התורה והילדה הקטנה ימתינו עד שתגדיל ערך שתי שנים ואז יטבילוה ג"כ לפני ב"ד על דעת ב"ד מספק, והבן כיון שאיכא ספק שמא היה גירות הראשונה גרות מדינא אין צורך להטפת דם ברית וסגי בטבילה לבדה. משה פיינשטיין.

    Not sure how this indicates that Rav Moshe would have supported R' Tropper's position.

    There are three places where Rav Moshe uses the term

    שו"ת אגרות משה יורה דעה חלק ב סימן מו

    בדבר המשפחה שהשפיע כתר"ה עליה שיאכלו כשר, ויש להם כלים יקרים מפארצעלאיין שלא שמשו בהם משך שנה והוא הפסד גדול, הנה מצד הפ"מ ויותר מזה בשביל תקנת השבים שמצינו שכמה דברים הקלו חכמים עיינתי ונראה לע"ד שיש להקל להתיר בהגעלה ג' פעמים.

    שו"ת אגרות משה יורה דעה חלק ב סימן מו

    וגם בכלים אלו הם ברוב הפעמים רק בתשמיש כלי שני ועכ"פ הוא רק ספק שמא השתמשו בעירוי ובדבר גוש חם שנמצא שאיכא עוד ספק. ולכן יש לסמוך בכה"ג על בעל העיטור שהביא הטור בסימן קכ"א להגעיל ג"פ כיון שהוא הפ"מ וגם צורך תקנת השבים ויהיו כשרים להשתמש בהם אח"כ ולקובעם או לבשר או לחלב.

    I am sure Rav Sternbuch would like to see it. Is there any reason that we can't see the whole teshuva? I would like to post it. Perhaps now we can have meaningful discussion of the issues.

    ReplyDelete
  52. the Monsey TzadikJune 24, 2009 at 10:00 PM

    Tropper!,

    You again try to confuse the issue and to point to some red herring just like you did before when you focus on Rav Bomzer Shalita and not YOUR own actions.

    The issue is not if r’ Sternbuch approve of this blog or not, the issue is if he approve of YOUR actions. He obviously does not approve and he let it known. What you can do is to get some of YOUR gedolim to say they approve your actions and put their name on just like r’ Sternbuch did.

    It is not true (Rav Eidenshohn does not let me say that it is a lie) that you do not actively search for people to convert. You call rabbis who are involved with intermarriage couples such Chabbd and MO (which you hate to no end) and ask them to send the couple to you and you actually pay them keiruv expense.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Roni said

    Dt,

    I can only tell you what *Rav Sternbuch* told *me* at thephone call! Becuase I asked him if why he selected to condemn one individual amongst so many people in America and abroad who do gerut frauds? He responded to that question: because they came to Yerushalayim!

    June 24, 2009 6:20 PM

    i will explain what Rav sternbuch meant with these words,
    "coming to Yershlayim",
    he meant that the EJF came to recruit Rabonim from Yerushalyim, that is why the Bdatz felt it their responsibility to interfere and clarify to these Rabonim that their innocence was being misused

    ReplyDelete
  54. Rav REuven claims that Rav MOshe uses this as an additional reason why we should reconvert her so that there is takanat hashavim so her husband do teshvua it is a mitzvah to engage in it. Rav Reuven understands that conceptually Rav Moshe holds that there is inyan and mitzvah to help the jjewish partner by converting the jewish partner (ie. in addition to the first reason given in *that specifi case* where she anyway a safek giyoret) so that given the conditions it is an inyan to convert the non jewish partner so that the jewish partner do tesvhua (even if he initially intermarried her!) contrary to what was stated in Rav MOshe's opinion on this blog1

    what is your email so that I can try to scan it to you?

    (where is my last reply to mekubal?)

    ReplyDelete
  55. AAron,

    Exactly! what he told me then. So he told me then that he didn't mean that this letter be used on public arena to share this fight through the internet. While he went out of the way because it was in yeerushalayim as you explain he still felt that it was not prooper to use his letters over the internet and this was what they meant with the letter! (and actually for a while these letters disappeared from the form they were disseminated here "beshochbecha uvkumecha").

    ReplyDelete
  56. Roni said...


    what is your email so that I can try to scan it to you? yadmoshe@gmail.com

    (where is my last reply to mekubal?)

    According to Blogger I have processed all the comments that I have received.

    ReplyDelete
  57. MT/Bomzer!

    Tropper!,

    Since you are very confused person it is very hard to clear out your confusion:

    1)RAbbi Tropper has the backing of dozens of Posskim and Rabbonim. He does not backing of all gedoyley Yisroel. And ertainly he does not need the backing of the internet blgos! and certainly not from MT/Bomzer! who has no backing whatsover from any Gedoyley Posskim; on the contrary they repudiate his conversions.

    He might be aware that Rav Sternbuch might not agree with his approach. A Godol is certainly entitled to his own opinion even if it differs with the vast majority of popinions of the posskim. But he feels that the owner of the blog has misused the Possek to fight the iwar over the internet with MT being his spokesman. It is not respectful neither to Rav Sternbuch or anyone by bringing him to areas where the message was not intended to be presented and misinterpreted.

    For some of the supporters of Rav Tropper you can see, for instnace, Rav REuven FEinstein Shlita that spports and actually wrote a responsa (whose excerpts i posted earler) that clearly allow Rav Tropper to do many of things that EJf does.

    While it is a step in the right direction that you do not state that Rav TRopper calls individua people to conert; he does not stand in the street corners missionizing and call them to sprinke water on them; nevertheless what you say that he icalls rabbis who are involved in kiruv who have contact with intermarried couples is actually something that is not prohibited according to Rav Moshe FEinstein according to REv Reuven FEinstein Shlita! It is permissible according to them to be mekarev intermarried couples, including the non jewish partner when they show interest in performing a sincere conversion ie. observing Torah and mitzvot! (unlike the fraudulent services performed by Bomzer who peforms gerus for these itnermarried couples when they do not want to observe plain shabbat, kashrut and taharat hamishpacha. Like driving on the Sabbath and th elike).

    ReplyDelete
  58. Mekubal,

    I'll try again but try to be brief (sent you a longer message earlier):

    1) You cannot begin to compare rabbonim who say something nice about an individual ) to when they come and speak about an organization. that reuqires a much greater achrayut and responsibility. Especially when some critcize it. And especially speaking publicly about the important task it performs and that it benefits klal yisroel to proect kedushat Yisroel and prevent gerus sheker it would be disastrous if they do not mean what they say and irrespojnsible if they say these things publicly when hundrds of people attend and many more can get their tales if the truth would actually be the reverse,

    2) They do not come as "observers" only; they partake and partner sto it.
    Rav REuven is an active MEMBER of tghe organization. you cannot just ignore this and belittle it significance for what it actually really is.

    3) Rav Tropper does not waste his time on "internet wars"! ROni (who IS NOT rt) wastes his time and energy on it!

    4) the most important question: Why does he not get haskamot?

    I'll give you possible answers which do not mean that they do not agree with him. a) Being thatit is a novel approach. Practically speaking this method was not used especially with such an intensity therefore any respected RESPONSIBLE POSSEK would not necessarily want to to put his paper to endorse an organization if CHas Vesholom it does not uscceeded to recah the hopeful goals.

    b) Maybe others may follow suit and misuse the idea of the organization to take it a step further and perform these covnersions iwtout kabbalat hamitzvot. He does not want to take this ublic step to put his name on paper to that level.

    c) and no RAbbi put's his name to sign on an organization which may in the future stumble on occasion and do soemthing that is not correct and then people migh tmistake that this particular acation had the apporval of the Rabbi as he signed on the organization.

    But on the other hand Rav REuven partakes himself as member of the Organization. He is involved in guiding them in the Halachik Shaylos and so on. You can see the TEshuva that I poosted erarlier (and I"ll try BLN to scan it to Dt) has the teshuva Rav Reuven wrote to EJF where he rules on the focal question of the blog to Rav Tropper and he cites that his father the Possek HaDor HaRAv MOshe Feinstein of B"m permitted the issue in certain conditions (which is exaclty what EJF attempts to follow).

    ReplyDelete
  59. Roni wrote:

    4) the most important question: Why does he not get haskamot?

    I'll give you possible answers which do not mean that they do not agree with him. a) Being thatit is a novel approach. Practically speaking this method was not used especially with such an intensity therefore any respected RESPONSIBLE POSSEK would not necessarily want to to put his paper to endorse an organization if CHas Vesholom it does not uscceeded to recah the hopeful goals.

    b) Maybe others may follow suit and misuse the idea of the organization to take it a step further and perform these covnersions iwtout kabbalat hamitzvot. He does not want to take this ublic step to put his name on paper to that level.

    c) and no RAbbi put's his name to sign on an organization which may in the future stumble on occasion and do soemthing that is not correct and then people migh tmistake that this particular acation had the apporval of the Rabbi as he signed on the organization.
    ==================
    I find this an astonishing analysis. You are admitting 1) R' Tropper's approach is a chidush 2) It might fail so therefore it is best not to discuss the halachic justification because really it is ais la'asos such as Beis Yaakov. 3) If it proves itself then discussion can be allowed as to the halachic basis 4) Thus because it represents a signifcant break from the past - any discussion will only prevent it from functioning. Since the perceived emergency situation calls out for something to be done the main issue is success not halachic correctness. 5) Because it is a major break from mesora - there is a decided danger that those who are not guided by gedolim will feel justified in other innovations that will be destuctive to the system.

    In sum, you are saying that my request for transparency in what you are doing can not be done and furthermore you must deny that you are not being transparent or innovative. This of course arouses suspicious and opposition to what you are doing by you need to bite the bullet and ignroe questions.

    That brings back my original question - by responding to my blog you seriously undermine your position. If what you say is true - it would have been better if 1) you had a private meeting with Rav Sternbuch 2) you ignored me.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Roni says: "And at the same time R' Tropper's energy is focused into hel[ping those couples who approach him to help them covnert WHEN THEY ARE SINCERE!"

    And who gets to decide whether or not they are "sincere?" Is he rejecting people who are WITHIN the halachic framework simply because they choose not to be Chereidi or fund his community? What is the basis for insisting on chumras/stringencies that all of our grandparents never heard of or practiced to be the standard for new converts? By those standards NOBODY is really Jewish, because we all know good and well - there are plenty of photographs - that in the early part of this century Orthodox women dressed like normal American women and were not distinctive in any way, Jewish immigrant kids went to school with other Americans and associated with them, pretty much everyone had a business or day job, women raised their own kids, not daycare, and so on and so on.

    How is it that Tropper gets to insist on standards that everybody here's grandparents and great-grandparents and probably even parents (for many) did not hold to? Where does he get such power - who gave it to him and is it legitimate and according to halacha? Other Rabbis seem to be saying "no."

    ReplyDelete
  61. Dt wrote: "I find this an astonishing analysis. You are admitting 1) R' Tropper's approach is a chidush",


    ROni: Dear Dt it does not take an Einstein to understand that this is an innovative way of working (within Halacha). For no responsible Halachik body has done it Halachikally (they have done for past 100 and more years the bomzer factories).


    DT:"2) It might fail so therefore it is best not to discuss the halachic justification because really it is ais la'asos such as Beis Yaakov. "

    Roni: Now you are falling back to the trap of non bney torah talk! (and i beg yor forgiveness for saying so but this is exactly the kind of non taljk). I never said it is best not discuss the halachik justifications; it is exactly what I'm doing and giving you the teshuva of Rav reuven and his opinion of his father. I i'm giving you a justification for not having a Rabbi give a particular written haskomoh for an *organization* that does it. Why can't you be mavchin the difference like a ben torah (sorry again)?


    DT:" 3) If it proves itself then discussion can be allowed as to the halachic basis":

    Again the non ben torah kind of talk! I'm NOT talking about lack of *discussion* and guidance and halachik backing; obviously Rav Tropper has aHalachik comittee and Rav REuven is the head of the comittee with other rabbis! and he (and so ANY organization) should not DO anything without halachik guidance; whAT i'm saying is that to give a haskomoh to a *particular* organization is still a little early in the game! But aain of course i'm for halachik discussion about it!

    DT:" 4) Thus because it represents a signifcant break from the past - any discussion will only prevent it from functioning. Since the perceived emergency situation calls out for something to be done the main issue is success not halachic correctness".

    ROni: It's very upsetting that you can infer this from I have said!? We are discussing and answering Mekubal why Rav Tropper does not have a written baking about his particualr organization. But of course, he has Halachik backing and discussion to everything he is doing. And of course if something is done wrong I"m sure Rav Reuven will call his attention or another Rabbi (and this is so [precisely because it is a new kind of organization) and they will discuss it and others can (and should) RESPCTFULLY DISCUSS or raise problems in particular applications thereoff. but this after the premise that he the halachik backing for the general approach WHICH HE HAS AS EVIDENCED BY THE CLEAR TESHUVA OF RAV REUVEN TO HIM BASED ON THE PSSOKIM OF THE POSSEK HADOR RAV MSOHE FEINSTEIN!

    dT:" 5) Because it is a major break from mesora - there is a decided danger that those who are not guided by gedolim will feel justified in other innovations that will be destuctive to the system".

    roNI: AGAIN A LEAP FROM A NON BEN TORAH TRAINING! i'M TALMKING ABOUT THE GIVVING OF A PARTICULAR HASKOMOH TO PARTICULAR MOSSAD AND THE RAMIFICATIONS THAT MAY ARISE FROM THIS PARTICULA R HASKOMOH. but of course, he must have backing for his approach by asking shaylos about policies and decisions if and how they should conform to the best hlaachik outcome.

    ReplyDelete
  62. DT:" In sum, you are saying that my request for transparency in what you are doing can not be done and furthermore you must deny that you are not being transparent or innovative":

    ROni: CHAS VESHOLOM CHAS VECHALILA! talks from origins of a non ben torah way of analysis! TRansparency has to be done! and discussions have to be made! but you cannot demand hashgocho for a particular organization in such kind of insitituion!

    And it does not arouse any opposition and suspicion from a honest person who is not intersted just to fight Rav GTropper at all costs, for when sees that Rav REvuen FEinstein is with him in the halachik committee and he they come at all conventions and DUSCUSS HALACHIK ISSUES ON HOW TO AMELIROATE AND TO FIX THE AND ENHANCE THE GERUT PROCESS (FOR IF YOU ARE NOT AWARE: DURING THOSE CONVENTIONS, BESIDES THE SPEECHES THAT GET TO THE PRESS, THEY DISCUSS HALACHIK ISSUES AND POLICIES ) then of course the person starts from the perspective that the organization is valid. And now, as you can see, Rav Tropper has the foundation ground backing in the general bone of the apporach of the organizatiuon which is the permission to mekarev intermarried couples to get to covnert if they are sincere and want to commit to rah and mitzvot then you can understand that he wha he does is discussed with the Rabbis and you can certainly and should raise questions. but this will only work if you begin with a premise that the guy has halachik backing as he does, but if you begin with perconceived notions that RT ...then nothing that I'll bring you from this or that Rov would not work.

    In sum: 1) Rav Tropper has Halachik backing for his general approach by Rabbonim like Rav Reuven which is a cornerstone piece in his organization, 2) One can and should raise questions if he finds halachik flaws. 3) He should give the benefit of the doubt (when he begins the criticism) that he has Rabbis backing in general so either: the probelm was addressed or that there was was a lapse or heeder simas lev about particular detail, 4) A particular *haskomoh* for a *particular* organization cannnot be demanded, 5) ALL THOSE WHO CLAIMED THAT HE HAS NO HALACHIK STANDING FOR HIS APPROACH AND THAT RAV REUVEN WAS GOING AGAINST FATHER SHOULD ASK MECHILA FOR THIS FALSE DISSEMINATION OF AND DEFAMATION! and tehn we can proceeed,

    It is obvious that I request and demand tha tthere be no flow of messages that contain zilzul at Rav REuven FEinstein Shlita, that goes without saying but things have gone out of hand in the past so i ask that they should not go out of hand now.

    ReplyDelete
  63. roni said:
    DT:" In sum, you are saying that my request for transparency in what you are doing can not be done and furthermore you must deny that you are not being transparent or innovative":

    ROni: CHAS VESHOLOM CHAS VECHALILA! talks from origins of a non ben torah way of analysis! TRansparency has to be done! and discussions have to be made! but you cannot demand hashgocho for a particular organization in such kind of insitituion!
    ===============
    Here we go again! EJF is not being transparent if Rav Sternbuch can not get information about your halachic principles and goals. Your nonsense about non ben Torah way of analysis is just another smoke screen.

    You again are substituting rants for discussion.

    It is nice that after repeatedly asking for two years the EJF finally releases the teshuva of Rav Reuven. It is nice that after two years there is some acknowledgement that EJF's approach is a chidush.

    But that doesn't mean there can not be disagreement and criticsm from those outside the organiztion. Rav Moshe Feinstein himself did not demand such an attitude of docile subservience.

    Your concept of transparency seems to mean that it only applies within the closed circles of EJF. That is not what transparency has ever meant.

    BTW I hope you finally accept what Rav Sternbuch has told you - that he does not object to his views being presented and discussed on the internet.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Oni: CHAS VESHOLOM CHAS VECHALILA! talks from origins of a non ben torah way of analysis! TRansparency has to be done! and discussions have to be made! but you cannot demand hashgocho for a particular organization in such kind of insitituion!
    ===============
    DT: Here we go again! EJF is not being transparent if Rav Sternbuch can not get information about your halachic principles and goals.

    ROni: Again the distortions! Can you stop distort?

    !) I NEVER said that there CAN BE NO DISCUSSIONS. Where did I write any such thing? I'm sorry: you demand transprency and any one can criticize; but you tihnk you are beyond criticsm? vyou are unable to analyze something straight! you aRE always twisting! LIKE A NON BEN TORAH! YES AM ALLLOOWED TO CRITICIZE YOU FOR TWISTRING AND NOT THINKING CLEAR!

    Listen: I never said you cannot criticize from the outside! Quote me where I said this! I said you cannot deamnd a *hashgocho* for a particular mossad of trhis sort. You could criticize and you could ask for the halachk principles that guide you. and WHEN GIVEN THE INFORMATION YOU SHOULD STOP CRITCIZING ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE!

    dt WROTE: "But that doesn't mean there can not be disagreement and criticsm from those outside the organiztion. Rav Moshe Feinstein himself did not demand such an attitude of docile subservience".

    roNI: oF COURSE YOU COULD respectfully disagree. But at the end you cannot raise "ERav Sternbuch said such and such" for RAV REUVEN IS ENTITLED TO ARGUE WITH HIM AND ESPCIALLY THAT RAV HE IS REPEATING RAV MSOHE'S OPINION; AND A LITTLE MORE OF *RESPECT* TOWARDS THAT POSITION CAN HELP THE DISCUSSION. AND AT THE END WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO HIS CRITICISM RAV TROPPER HAS THE BACKING OF RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN! AND YOU MAY ACKNOWLEGGE IT ALBEIT YOU GET THE INFO TWO YEARS LATER...NONETHELESS THE BACKING IS RIGHT HERE IN FRONT YOUR EYES! JUST THINK CLEAR AND STRAIGHT!


    dT" Your concept of transparency seems to mean that it only applies within the closed circles of EJF. That is not what transparency has ever meant".

    rOni: never said it! begin thinking straight. but transparency does not mean that your criticism is valid. And on the other hand once your criticism is no longer valid you should acknowledge that it is no longer valid! Even *You* are beyond transparency!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Somebody needs to get Roni some meds. That problem with his ability to write grammatical and properly spelled sentences fading in and out randomly surely indicates a brain tumor - or maybe he's possessed.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Ahavah,

    I thought your question earlier deserveas answer. thank you for reminding that you deserve no answer!

    ReplyDelete
  67. Recipients and PublicityJune 25, 2009 at 10:50 AM

    Hoda'as baal din kemei'ah eidim dami: Roni/Tropper finally admits and gives his own reasons that EJF is NOT a halachicly valid organization and has NOT been certified as kosher in any way (noone would eat at a pizza store without a teuda-certificate of kashrus), so why would anyone want to imbibe EJF when it has no teuda (but it has teudot-letters by Rav Shternbuch and the BADATS forbidding it) and its spokeman comes here and admits to the world, you know what, EJF does not deserve a teudah as Roni/Tropper OPENLY admits that:

    "a) Being thatit is a novel approach. Practically speaking this method was not used especially with such an intensity therefore any respected RESPONSIBLE POSSEK would not necessarily want to to put his paper to endorse an organization if CHas Vesholom it does not uscceeded to recah the hopeful goals.

    b) Maybe others may follow suit and misuse the idea of the organization to take it a step further and perform these covnersions iwtout kabbalat hamitzvot. He does not want to take this ublic step to put his name on paper to that level.

    c) and no RAbbi put's his name to sign on an organization which may in the future stumble on occasion and do soemthing that is not correct and then people migh tmistake that this particular acation had the apporval of the Rabbi as he signed on the organization."

    [...]

    ReplyDelete
  68. RAP,

    BOMZER IS A POSSUL DAYAN AND ALL THE GERIM THAT YOU SENT HIM AND PARTOOK SOME $$$ ARE GOYIM GMURIM; TROPPER'S GRIM ARE YIDDEN...ALL YOUR NARISHKEYTEN AND AMORZATZUS WON'T ERASE THIS...RAV TROPPER HAS BASIS FOR WHAT HE DOES FROM POSSKIM LIKE RAV MOSHE AND RAV ELYASHIV; WHAT YOU $$$ AND BOMZER DO IS NOT COVERED AND PERMITTED BY ANY ROV WORTH HIS NAME!

    ReplyDelete
  69. Recipients and PublicityJune 25, 2009 at 11:02 PM

    Roni, who is talking about Bomzer? Tropper's inordinate obsessive-compulsive fixation on Bomzer is bizarre. Noone on this blog gives a hoot about Bomzer, but as far as is known (correct this if it's not true) he is still a member of good standing of the RCA last anyone heard so it must mean that they approve of him as a rov. It's part of the Modern Orthodox world that noone can do much about by jumping up and own like a haredi hooligan creating yet another chillul Hashem berabim. Get a grip on yourself, you are beginning to sound unhinged.

    ReplyDelete
  70. You give a hoot about Bomzer so that is the reason you are up on arms against Tropper for he takes away your bus$$$iness. when you quote Rav Stenrbuch give a look what he holds about the gerut that you sent him~! Rav Sternbuch says that they cannot get married!

    ReplyDelete
  71. Recipients and PublicityJune 26, 2009 at 12:33 PM

    I agree with Rav Shternbuch 100% both in his position on geirus and in his position against EJF and Tropper.

    Rav Shternbuch is a true posek, is inovlved in hora'ah over a lifetiumes and his seforim are learned and rtespcted in the entire Torah world, he and sits as a dayan, ra'avad on the Bais Din of the BADATS in Yerushalayim (yet you/Tropper have had no problem in being mevaze him many times) while Rav Reuven Feinstein is a rosh yeshiva of a smallish yeshiva in far out Staten Island, that's all. What don't I get?

    ReplyDelete
  72. again the rotzer whois mvazeh Rav Reuven FEinstein and the owner of this blog allows it!

    Shoteh and chayoh rooh: Rav Reuven states that Rav MOshe, Rav Henkin, Rav Kamenetsky, Rav Aurbach ALL OPPOSED RAV STERNBUCH'S POSITION!

    ReplyDelete
  73. Recipients and PublicityJune 26, 2009 at 7:21 PM

    Roni have you ever noticed or counted the number of times that you/Tropper/EJF are challnged about EJF's outright known publicized goals of proselytizing to millions and billions of goyim (to mad there are zillions, right?) that automtically, instead of answering the question fully, which sometimes you start doing but then you get lost in the minutia of details that anyone can argue ten different ways, that your standard response and defense is to fire your red herring smokescreen and diversions button and you start screaming "Bomzer, Bomzer" like a banchee and you honestly expect that that it takes away the attntion or the need to stick to one subject, EJF's forbidden proselytizations to millions and billions of goyim as they please when this has never been done in the entire history of Klal Yisroel?

    Even Moshe Rabbeinu did not recruit the Eruv Rav but they came and joined willingly to Bnai Yisroel when they sawe the makkos and what happened to Mitzrayim, unlike EJF with its delusions of recruitment power that thinks that by using the modern miracles of Internet communications and the power of high priced million dollar concerted and planned PR to its dirty proselytization work, as if this is an election campaign in the US, that somehow or other, because you can cite a few meforshim with references to conversions shaylos and NOTHING to do with mass proselytizations of millions and billions of goyim, that you are on "safe ground" and that you have the right to kill off any criticism that comes your/Tropper's/EJF's way.

    You are making a big mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  74. THe Erev Rav were a large number...the numbers that EJf's actually covnerts do not reach the FRACTION OF EREV RAV THAT YOU ENABLED BOMZER TO JOIN KLAL YYISROEL!

    ReplyDelete
  75. Recipients and PublicityJune 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

    Roni's mantra is "THAT YOU ENABLED BOMZER TO JOIN KLAL YYISROEL" --but guess what? I have never met Bomzer not would I know him if I saw him. I have nothing to do with Bomzer's or anyone's conversions. I have nothing to do with him, nor have I ever sent him anyone to be megayer, on the other hand you/Tropper/EJF run after goyim all over America and preach a forbidden new testament screed of recruiting and converting infinite numbers of gentiles justifying it with cockamamy "heterim" and sevoras from this and that gadol who never intended their limited words to be applied as you do for mass conversions and forbidden proselytizations. Get real and be a mentsch by talking to the point instead of looping the loop a thousand times.

    ReplyDelete
  76. you enable bomzer to bring A MILLION EREEV RAV; TROPPER STOPS THE AWCOND MILLION FROM COMING IN!

    ReplyDelete
  77. Daas Torah said...

    Mekubal wrote:

    Once again Roni, you can read things anyway you like, but that is not what this says. This says, "And that there is to take hold of the understanding that it is permitted to teach Torah to a Goy if his mind is to convert." I am convinced that either you do not know Hebrew or that you are intentionally misreading these statements.

    Your rejection of R' Efrati's letter of clarification is ridiculous. He is R' Eliashiv's right hand man. Is he lying? Is he woefully misinformed?

    At the request of R' Eidensohn I asked R' Eisenstein about R' Efrati's clarification. His statement was that he understood R' Eliashiv's position the same way.
    ==================
    With the confirmation from both Rav Efrati and Rav Eisenstein that Rav Eliashiv's teshuva 3:140 is not talking about proselytizing or inspiring a nonJew to convert - I think it is time to end this thread.

    Roni - any more repetition of your distorted and abusive ad hominem comments will simply be rejected. Whether it is your problematic readings of Rav Eliashiv and other poskim or whether it is your reflex denunciation of R' Bomzer. Enough is enough. However you have served the valuable service of confirming for us the tenuous and problematic nature of R' Tropper's authority to do what he is doing.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.