Sunday, July 7, 2013

Halachic justification for Kolko's defenders

 I have been getting feedback regarding the views of the Lakewood rabbonim who defend Kolko. The picture is getting clearer and better balanced. Unfortunately it is also clear that there are rabbonim - including major poskim who have approved the course of action of Rav "S" but are intimidated against publicly acknowledging this. It is disgusting that they feel threatened  and will not admit what they view is the proper halacha in this case. Rav "S" clearly has major poskim to rely on.  Hopefully this public presentation of views will lead to improvements in dealing with sexual abuse and less fear in presenting differening views.

My understanding of the the view of the Lakewood rabbonim is basically this:
Kolko is a nebach but he is not a pedophile (i.e., he doesn't have a sexual desire for children) and he definitely is not a rodef. He is a lonely guy who befriended a kid (11 years old) who had no friends. They alleged that this kid seduced him into doing things he didn't want to do and would never had done without being seduced. Therefore he can not be viewed as dangerous to others and is "innocent" of being a pedophile. He clearly does not deserve jail time since he didn't initiate any wrong behavior - but was seduced. This apparently is also the view of Rabbi Belsky. Since they don't view Kolko as a rodef there was no heter to go to the police and thus the father is a moser. Consequently the rabbonim didn't do anything wrong by calling the father a moser and driving him out of Lakewood - and do not need to apologize. Rather Rabbis "S" is the aggressor for calling the police and causing Kolko to be given a severe jail sentence - which helps no one and is totally unjustified. Anyone who doesn't understand these elementary facts doesn't belong in Lakewood.

Update: This explanation not only is nonsense but it is immoral. They are shamelessly putting the blame on the victim. At least they acknowledge that Kolko is guilty of what he was charged with. The issue shifts simply to whether the father had the right to call the police. [see below] Aside from the fact there is no evidence that Kolko was "seduced" - it is a common excuse given by pedophiles

However their allegations still don't make the father a moser for calling the police. A problem with their view is that an adult male who was seduced by a male child is still chayiv misa. If the adult has been seduced numerous times by this or other children and yet  insists on remaining in contact with these and other children - and "allows" himself to be seduced - isn't this the classic rodef [Sanhedrin 73a) that one needs to save him from himself to stop him from sinning? He obviously can not control himself. So even if you want to say he is not a rodef to harm the child [a problematic assertion] because he allegedly is not initiating the sexual contact and the child allegedly asked for it - why isn't he a rodef for sin and thus needs to be stopped? In Kolko's case it has been alleged that he has had sexual contact with more than one child - and yet he refused to quit teaching  and being a camp counselor. Lakewood rabbonim would have had a stronger case if they had required Kolko to quit teaching and spend his day packing candy in Brooklyn where he would have minimal contact with children. To base a case on the ridiculous assertion that an 11 year old made him do it is embarrassing! It is fairly common for a pedophile to complain that he had been seduced by the child.

See this article in the National Catholoci Reporter where a priest with a PhD in psychology claims the children seduced the priests  You might want to do a google search at the outrage that claim caused.
========================
I think the key to understanding the differing views in the Kolko case is a passage in Rambam Chovel u'Mazik (8:11). In a section dealing with moser he states, "And thus one who distresses the public can be turned over to the police but not one who distresses the individual."

According to the simple reading - the Rambam is talking about verbal distress - not financial or physical distress and certainly not threatening life activity. Thus calling the police is permitted to stop someone from verbally abusing 3 or more people. This is the understanding of the Chasam Sofer  as well as the Pnei Yehoshua and the Minchas Yitzchok. They view the basis for the Rambam as Gittin (7a). Thus they understand that if the distress is in fact financial or physical (e.g., beating) - then they claim the Rambam would permit calling the police even for an individual. There are other sources in the Achronim that permit going to the police if someone is physically assaulting another person - even though it is not life threatening. Obviously sexual abuse of a child - even not involving penetration - would justify calling the police

However others view this Rambam as talking about someone like the counterfeiter who is endangering the community or a missionary. The Tzitz Eliezar applies it to a teacher who is abusing young girls. Since there is no Torah prohibition against this he applies this Rambam to justify calling the police. However if the teacher only abuses a single young girl - then he holds that the Rambam doesn't provide a heter. Rav Eliashiv disagrees with the Tzitz Eliezer because he claims abuse destroys the victim and thus it doesn't matter whether it is boy or girl and how many. It is pikuach nefesh and the abuser is a rodef. However it is argued by the Lakewood rabbis that if the adult does not take the initiative then he would not be viewed as a rodef and there is no heter to call the police.

Thus we have three levels - 1) one can only go to the police if it involves either life threatening actions or to save the abuser from doing a sin that he is chayiv misa for (e.g., mishkva zachor) and there is no other way of stopping the act. The concern is only when the adult is clearly the aggressor rather than mutual consent - otherwise the adult is not considered a rodef. This is apparently the view of Rav Scheinberg and Rav Menashe Klein (Sanhedrin 73a). 

2) It is permitted to go if the child's psychological health is threatened by the abuser and this would increase the likelihood of suicide or severe psychological trauma. This is apparently the view of Rav Eliashiv and other contemporary gedolim. Beis din is not viewed as capable of protecting against this type of aggression. Beis din is not needed but a rav should be consulted for objectivity and to prevent the world being hefker. It is not clear what their attitude would be if the child initiated the sexual activity. I think that the majority would hold that the adult is still responsible for the resulting activity - not the child. For example the Rambam holds that a child is responsible for sexual activity and thus a seduced child is guilty while the majority view is that a child is not considered liable and all sexual activity of a child with an adult is considered rape.

3) It is permitted to call the police as protection  -  even against serious verbal harassment - if there are at least 3 victims and an individual can call the police for financial or physical harm. Moser is understood as being only if it is a willful act to hurt another. But if you call the police solely to protect yourself or others - it is not considered moser. No beis din is need since it is simply an act of self preservation. A rav should be consulted - but there is fact is no aveira if he isn't. This is the Chasam Sofer (based on Gittin 7a) and others. Clearly a father or anyone else can call the police to protect a child from any sexual activity.

58 comments :

  1. WADR to the rabbanim - how many times did they watch/read Lolita before reaching the conclusion that an 11 year old seduced a grown man?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why are you taking Eidensohn's narish imposition of views on others seriously? Eidensohn is putting words into rabbonim's mouths that they never uttered or implied.

      None of the rabbonim say or said or think that anyone is innocent because a child seduced the adult. This is only from Eidensohn's vivid imagination.

      Delete
    2. Dick Tracy I think you spend to much time reading the comics. You totally misunderstood what I wrote. The arguments I reported came from rabbonim in Lakewood.

      The issue is not whether kolko is a tzadik because a child seduced him - the question is whether he is a rodef. Some rabbonim are claiming that an adult can not be a rodef if he is seduced by a child and thus there was no heter to go to the police. It is a shame that your goyishe mind doesn't understand the subtle points of halacha.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, sure, they came from the rabbonim in Lakewood. In your vivid imagination anyways. I challenge you name which rabbonim they came from. Oh, you can't because they're afraid. Sure. I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. At a bargain basement price. Only for you. And of course the rabbonim who believe all this child seducer is guilty baloney, right? Oh, no? It was other "rabbonim" who think some other rabbonim they don't like/disagree with them told it to you? Ah, so THEY falsely paraphrased thoughts into other rabbis they assume they think (which they don't) and told you that bubbe maisa and you ate it wholesale.

      Delete
    4. Mr. Tracy if you can't say anything intelligent I will simply block you stupid comments. You offer absolutely no evidence for you assertions.

      Delete
    5. If the same 11 year old boy broke into their house at night and started pillaging their property, how long do you think it would be before the very same Rabbonim dial 911 even on shabbos.

      Delete
    6. Mr. Tracy,
      Most of the Rabbonim will not publicly express that this is their reasoning. R' Daniel is trying his hardest to give a half of an explanation to an inexplicable policy.
      Belsky clearly believes this nonsense. He stated it in the infamous letter and has related it in person to people involved.
      To the dear victimin this case, and victims of similar cases, עמו"ש
      Please don't think for a second that R' Daniel or any of the followers of this blog think that you seduced him. (Furthermore, please don't think that anyone here would look at a child that initiated something with a grown adult is at "fault" in any way).
      The reason it wasn't explicitly stated on this post is because R' Daniel assumes it's obvious!!! This post is not a justification for their thinking!! We are just trying to understand better what we're up against.
      Don't forget everyone here completely sympathizes with your hurt and cause!!

      Delete
  2. You write, "a seduced child is guilty". Guilt of what? He is a minor. In this case 11 years old. Who lowered the age of 'guilt' for a Jewish child? Would Beis Din punish him? Of course not!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. רמב"ם (הלכות איסורי ביאה ג:ב): הבא על הקטנה אשת הגדול אם קידשה אביה הרי זה בחנק והיא פטורה מכלום ונאסרה על בעלה כמו שביארנו בהלכות סוטה, ואם היא בת מיאון מכין אותו מכת מרדות והיא מותרת לבעלה, ואפילו היה כהן. +/השגת הראב"ד/ ונאסרה על בעלה. כתב הראב"ד ז"ל /א"א/ לא ידעתי למה נאסרת על בעלה ישראל שהרי אמרו פיתוי קטנה אונס הוא עכ"ל.+

      ערוך השולחן (אבן העזר קעח:כז): כתב רבינו הב"י בסעיף ג' קטנה שהשיאה אביה וזינתה לרצונה יש מי שאומר שאסורה לבעלה לפיכך מקנין לה כדי להפסידה כתובתה ויש מי שאומר שאינה נאסרת על בעלה אא"כ הוא כהן עכ"ל דפיתוי קטנה אונס הוא ודיעה ראשונה היא דעת הרמב"ם בפ"ב דסוטה ובפ"ג מאיסורי ביאה דלית ליה האי סברא וכל הפוסקים דחו דבריו ואנחנו בררנו כוונתו בס"ד בסי' ס"ח סעיף ח' ובסי' ו' סעיף ל' ע"ש:

      Aruch HaShuchan (E.H. 178:27): The Beis Yosef (178:3) writes, “a child who has been married by her father and she commits adultery willingly – there are those who say that she is prohibited to her husband…. Others say that she is not prohibited to her husband unless he is a cohen.” That is because the seduction of a child is considered rape. The first opinion that she is prohibited to her husband is that of the Rambam (Hilchos Sotah 2) and Rambam (Hilchos Issurei Biah 3:2) who doesn’t agree that sedution of a child is considered rape. However all the poskim reject his words….

      Delete
  3. What they claim seems very strange. Do you know of any similar cases?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unfortunately, the Rabbi's are missing the point and are getting caught up in micro-managing each individual instance of abuse.



    What is urgently needed is a clear signal from the leadership that no form of abuse will be tolerated, ever. This will in turn reduce the likelihood of it taking place. The Rabbi's who take the attitude espoused in this post are aiding and abetting abusers. They are complicit in their sin.




    What is needed right now is for the rabbinate to take a clear stand that there is zero tolerance for abuse.




    This concept is found in the Gemorah where Chazal killed a person who rode a horse on Shabbos and in a very relevant case, gave lashes to persons who acted with sexual impropriety - not because they deserved it but because the times required it.



    For Rabbi's to delay is comparable to Nero's 'fiddling while Rome was burning'

    ReplyDelete
  5. Shalom al yisroelJuly 7, 2013 at 3:40 PM

    To call an 11 year old a "seducer" is playing with fire. Did you consider the ramifications if the victim reads this blig? As a psychologist I am sure you undrdtand this better Than me. Please remove this post. Before its too late!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Eidensohn is confusing the halachic definition of a child (under 13 or 12) with the contemporary definition of a child (under 18).

    There is no halachic difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old. Both are considered adults according to Jewish Law.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I missed the relevancy of your point - are you agreeing that Rav "S" was a moser because his son seduced Kolko or do you disagree? An eleven year old is a child according to the halacha. You would have a valid question regarding two teenagers - but that is not the case that I have been discussing.

      Delete
    2. Okay, fair enough.

      So, please, address the definition of a "child" under halacha, for the purposes of molestation issues. Is it under 13 (or under 12 for girls)? Or is a 14 year old a child? What about a 17 year old? 18 year old? 19 year old?

      Is there a difference between a 17 and 11 months and 3 weeks year old and a person whose 18th birthday was last week?

      Do the poskim agree with you or what is their opinion of who is a child and who is an adult.

      Delete
  7. I know you do your research before you blog, but I have to ask you, who told you this?
    Do the Rabonim have one iota of proof that this was the case? Do they really believe that this is what happened?
    Why didn't he claim this in court, especially since there must be proof for such a claim, otherwise they shouldn't have thrown out Rabbi S just on a whim? And if they have proof, why didn't they defend him in court? All in all, this story of an eleven year old seducing a 30 plus year old doesn't make sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This claim is not relevant for the secular court. It is only a reason to explain why they consider reporting Kolko to the police was a case of mesira. At this point it seems that not too many people think Kolko was innocent of sexual contact.

      Delete
  8. Rabbi S only went to the secular authorities after first going to a Bais Din to prevent Kolko from continuing to have access to young children as a camp consular. It was only when Rabbi S saw that this was not going to be accomplished by going through the Bais Din did he go to the secular authorities.

    In other words the “Lakewood Rabbi’s” felt that a grown man who can be “seduced” by an eleven year old is still fit to be a camp consular?

    This “defense” makes them look even worse in that they allowed Kolko to go back to his job as a camp consular knowing that he “did things he didn't want to do” whether he was seduced or not.

    I may be crazy but a grown man who can be seduced by an eleven year old boy should not be working as a camp consular!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Come on, do they really expect us to believe this?
    In addition, he plead guilty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pleading guilty is secular court has zero halachic relevance. Secular courts are notorious for convicting innocent people. No one denies that fact. You hear stories every week of people spending time in jail, some months, some years and some decades, before they are exonerated. Imagine how many more innocent people are languishing still in jail and will never be officially exonerated.

      So pleading guilty is simply to avoid an unjust life imprisonment sentence. It in no way proves actual guilty.

      Delete
    2. "Pleading guilty is secular court has zero halachic relevance. "

      I don't know what the halachic relevance is, but it certainly has relevance. He admitted to the crime. Why didn't he fight the charges if he is innocent?

      "Secular courts are notorious for convicting innocent people. No one denies that fact. "

      I don't agree with this. Some innocent people end up in jail unfortunately, but I don't think America's legal system is inherently unjust (unfairness to Pollard and Rubashkin, aside - those are individual examples of high-profile injustice, but the courts generally don't operate that way).

      "You hear stories every week of people spending time in jail, some months, some years and some decades, before they are exonerated."

      No, I don't.

      " Imagine how many more innocent people are languishing still in jail and will never be officially exonerated."

      The vast majority will never be officially exonerated because they are guilty of their crimes.

      "So pleading guilty is simply to avoid an unjust life imprisonment sentence. It in no way proves actual guilty."

      If he was innocent, he should have tried to prove his innocence. His crime even if given a guilty conviction probably would not have been given a life sentence. So you just completely made that up.

      Delete
    3. "He admitted to the crime. Why didn't he fight the charges if he is innocent?"

      Because in secular court the innocent are convicted and face near lifetime imprisonment. Often it is better to plead guilty even if innocent rather than face a life sentence.

      There are many many people who were exonerated and released after serving hard time in prison. And many more innocents who weren't exonerated.

      Delete
  10. I seem to recall there were other victims. How do the rabbonim explain the other victims that came forward? Was that a conspiracy?

    Rabbi Eidensohn, can you confirm there were other victims?

    -ben dov

    ReplyDelete
  11. Shalom al YisroelJuly 7, 2013 at 5:32 PM

    Dear Victim, Amu"sh

    Please realize that no one in their right minds think that you are the cause of your own molestation. Even these Rabbonim who made such statements are only saying that to keep YAK out of jail. In their opinion, he won't do it again.

    Your father is also a giant Talmid Chochom and he consulted with other giants of the generation. You did exactly what you were supposed to do.

    You courageously accused your abuser publicly in court. You have saved others from being molested and victimized. YOU are a hero!

    May you continue to grow in Middos, DE, Yiras Shomayim, Torah and...song!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Elef layla v'laylaJuly 7, 2013 at 6:10 PM

    It is getting better everyday. First the problem was with Raglayim, as in sheker ein lo raglayim. Then it was an issue of consulting a Rav first. When R' S. did get permission to tell the authorities even though such needs no consultation first, woe, of this R' E. was not aware, he therefore apologized with explanation. R' B. was still holding his own, that Koko admitted only so that he should get a reduced sentence.
    Hold on a sec. Not so fast my friend, had he explained to the Judge that this really was a Maisseh Eishes Potifar and a 'komaysse meusshe', and it was the child that raped him, not only would that get him off the hook in toto, but they would rather put the child behind bars so as to protect the public from harm, kappish. There has been a precedence to such a happening. "The man" vs "The Dog" that he took a bite into it, and guess what, he took and bought the bait, Hook Line and Sinker. Furthermore, why didn't Kolkele report this seducing child to these Ra Banim out there that he is harming the public, Huh? Where were the Kolko-reh's to be be aware of this so dangerous child? Where were the Pashkevilin, did they also make the father aware that he should reign in his 11 year old ben hashovevo? Hey, if you have a Brooklyn Bridge for sale, I have two of them 4 U, 4 Half price. And now for the Jugular, can they explain away what is so charming about this Koko that at least three kids that came forth, they all seduced him, huh? I have news for you. Tze ubasser lasussim vachamorim. Yeah, sure, Posrim hoyu, aval lo leParoh. "Pileh bekupe demachtei", drawing a pink elephant through a needlehead, fershteist. I already heard big shtussim and lukshin, but such I never heard. It would not even fit in gizmoess deRabba bar bar Chune. In wall street, they call it the Horse feathers are bigger then the bullish, and I don't mean no feathers.

    It is getting better everyday. First the problem was with Raglayim, as in sheker ein lo raglayim. Then it was an issue of consulting a Rav first. When R' S. did get permission to tell the authorities even though such needs no consultation first, woe, of this R' E. was not aware, he therefore apologized with explanation. R' B. was still holding his own, that Koko admitted only so that he should get a reduced sentence.
    Hold on a sec. Not so fast my friend, had he explained to the Judge that this really was a Maisseh Eishes Potifar and a 'komaysse meusshe', and it was the child that raped him, not only would that get him off the hook in toto, but they would rather put the child behind bars so as to protect the public from harm, kappish. There has been a precedence to such a happening. "The man" vs "The Dog" that he took a bite into it, and guess what, he took and bought the bait, Hook Line and Sinker. Furthermore, why didn't Kolkele report this seducing child to these Ra Banim out there that he is harming the public, Huh? Where were the Kolko-reh's to be be aware of this so dangerous child? Where were the Pashkevilin, did they also make the father aware that he should reign in his 11 year old ben hashovevo? Hey, if you have a Brooklyn Bridge for sale, I have two of them 4 U 4 Half price. And now for the Jugular, can they explain away what is so charming about this Koko that at least three kids that came forth, they all seduced him, huh? I have news for you. Tze ubasser lasussim vachamorim. Yeah, sure, Posrim hoyu, aval lo leParoh. "Pileh bekupe demachtei", drawing a pink elephant through a needlehead, fershteist. I already heard big shtussim and lukshin, but such I never heard. It would not even fit in gizmoess deRabba bar bar Chune. In wall street, they call it the Horse feathers are bigger then the bullish, and I don't mean no feathers.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I don't know, personally, anything about this, but I spoke recently to some Lakewood rabbonim about it. Some rabbis expressed their great frustration with the situation. I am not talking about halacha. I am talking about the fact that we are not equipped to deal with these situations, at least, that is what some people told me. The state has paid people, jails, etc., but what does the Torah community have? So we have a formula for frustration, and some times, when people realize that there is really nobody in charge, they take things into their own hands, and of course, that can make bigger problems. On top of our lack of resources, we have differences of opinions in important areas, so we have a situation designed to produce frustration, and ruin the lives of some people. And people are getting ruined. What will be tomorrow? Now the situation has become a major chilul haShem, and what further disgraces are awaiting us? We don't have great rabbinic leadership today, rather we have individuals who run Yeshivas, shulls, etc., but the total picture is a blur, nobody runs that show. I think the most practical solution is to wait for Moshiach! Of course, Reb Elchonon says that to push our problems into waiting for Moshiach and not solving them ourselves is the greatest curse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Korossi V'ein OyneJuly 7, 2013 at 8:01 PM

      Velo yihyu Bnei Yisrael ka'adas tzon bli royeh. We have a Beit din Hagadol shebeYerushalayim, that have been dan in this issue bekoved rosh. Nimnu vegomru, that such matters are to be given over to the authorities to deal with, since they are the ONLY ones that are equipped. Dina demalchusse dina, and it is Universally accepted, that whatever the local law of the land should be, so be it!

      Having said that, it states all over Shas, ein Beit Din yachol levatel divrei Beit Din chavero ela im ken gadol mimeno bechochmo uvminyan. What the Rabbanei hagolah are grappling with, it is a davar Pashut for Poskei hador. Amongst those that turn tables, memir umachlif the Rodef to the Nirdaf and the Nirdaf to the Rodef, I yet have to come across that the Rabbanei haGolah that ever debated Poskei haDor of Eretz Yisrael in search for the truth. Since we see a pattern of a Modus Operandi, that it is ALWAYS the perpetrator that is the Tzadik, and FOREVER the tinoket shel bet Raban of which are the tinoket shenishbu, shene'ensu, venehergu, venisrefo et nishmatan ve'et gufom, are chas veshalom the reshaim talks volumes, which only indicates the RAK EIN YIRAT ELOKIM BAMAKOM HAZE. They have NEVER done a thing to help these tayere lost children other then to bash them, their parents, their families, their relatives, their supporters, taking away their parnassas e.g. yordim imahem lechayov, taking away the roofs from over their heads, and chase them away from their eyesights, as if they can just wish them away, by the ENABLERS BELA'AZ
      Abber VEDAH, ki al kol ele yeviacha Elokim baMishpat. It is time to fess up to the truth. Do you in your right mind think for one second that anyone believes your chadoshim labkorim LIES? You make yourself the laughing stock of the whole wide world. Ki lala'ag vakeless hayinu baGoyim.
      Be'emet however, Aval ASHEMIM ANACHNU al achinu asher rainu tzarat nafsho behitchaneno elenu, oy vey Gevald Gevald, velo shamanu al ken ba'ah elenu hatzarah hazot. What a chilul Hashem! Does anyone still care. Can we suffice by saying we are in a quandry, we have no solution and in the mean time our children are Korbanot tmidim kesidran. Lo TAAMOD AL DAM REACHA,we cannot stand idly by. It is time for CHANGE. BOI CHESHBON. Oy Gottenyu, Please save our children, the TZON KODOSHIM!!! Asseh lemaan ollelenu vetapeinu!

      Delete
    2. "Of course, Reb Elchonon says that to push our problems into waiting for Moshiach and not solving them ourselves is the greatest curse."

      Shalom R Dovid,

      is the above quote from R' Elchanan Wasserman?

      Delete
    3. Yes, it is from Reb Elchonon Wasserman. He was commenting on the Mishneh at the end of Sota where great decline in family, etc., is predicted and the statement is made, "And we have nobody to rely on except our Father in Heaven." That, said Reb Elchonon Wasserman is the greatest of the curses, because while we fight others curses to improve things, when we despair and leave it to HaShem, or just wait for Redemption without fighting back at evil, this is the greatest evil.

      Delete
    4. Reb Elchonon means Reb Elchonon Wasserman.

      Delete
    5. This is very interesting - I wish I had heard this many years ago.

      And it is, if applied to a wide range of matters, a very "secular" approach, which is why I am surprised at it coming from R' Elchonon.

      Some approaches towards parnoso, for example R Dessler, is very much a minimalist approach, where he suggests just going through the motions, and letting bitachon - in Hashem, do the rest for us.

      Delete
    6. First of all, Reb Elchonon was talking about things that the Torah requires of us, such as good family life. He was not talking about how much effort we invest in secular or material matters. But working and making a living are very important. The gemora says in Berochose 8A says, "Greater is one who toils with his hands than the one who fears HaShem." We also have a gemora in Pesachim 118A that "harder is parnoso earning a living than the Redemnption" because an angel can bring the Redemption but HaShem must provide parnoso." Anyone who encourages people not to work is not doing the right thing. There is a long Zohar Chodosh in Beraishis showing how important working and making a living is. One who learns and does not earn is called a pagan.

      Delete
    7. "Korossi V'ein Oyne" You described the matzav perfectly . I would just add to these Rabbanim that don't you realize that you are standing in Shaul Tachtis and are already in Pischei Gehinnom !!!
      Do a real Teshuva fast before its to late !!!

      Delete
    8. I am talking about the fact that we are not equipped to deal with these situations, at least, that is what some people told me. The state has paid people, jails, etc., but what does the Torah community have?

      first thing to do is admit that this is the situation. after that, it will possible to start working on how to alleviate the problem.

      Delete
    9. This is a good approach I hear from R' Dovid.
      Ultimately, everything we encounter during our 6 days of melacha is secular, whether it is work, business, driving kids to school, or having to defend ourselves from threats out there. It is impossible to hide in an Ivory tower , away from these tings. Even in the Midbar, where we had Man from heaven on a daily basis, there was politics, Korach, Bilam, etc. So isolation from the secular is impossible.

      Delete
    10. Ben Waxman,
      Do we have to admit that we have no resources as the state does, that we have no jails, etc.? And if we did have jails, what authority do we have to use them? Obviously, we are quite limited.
      Then we have issues such as when a person is put in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day, and nobody cares. That is something we can do something about. To care. If we really cared, we would do something.

      Delete
    11. Is eating truly "secular"? Prayer is only dirabonon and Benshing after meals is a Diorayso. We learn on a table, but when we eat "this is the table before HaShem." And what is family if not the highest holiness? And children, etc. And earning a living with its great temptations and great challenges, is there a greater test? HaShem made a world with spiritual and material parts, but all of it is connected to heaven, if we do it right.

      Delete
  14. This "justification" is laughable. I can not imagine an 11 year old boy "seducing" a grown man. How exactly does that work?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Once upon a time in Chelm, Reuven, Shimon and Dina were students in a yeshiva who were given pushkas to collect for Tomchei Shabbos. The Pushkas had locks on the bottom but only teachers in their yeshiva who were gabaoim for Tomchei Shabbos had the keys.

    Nevertheless, a Reb Yosef in one Yeshiva kept taking money out of Reuven's Tzedakah box. When it all came out Reb Yosef first said, I didn't do it. However, eventually he changed his story and said, "Modeh ani" I did take the money from Reuven's pushkah, but you should know he is no ordinary boy. He sat in my car and opened the bottom of his pushkah because he is no ordinary boy. He is a boy who desires nothing more than to have grownups steal from his pushkah. He has a magical way of opening his pushkah in front of you while you are driving a car and making the contents irresistible. He seduced me. I admit I should not have taken it. What can I say. I am not perfect but I would not have taken the money if he had not put out the money. We are all humans and have a tayveh for money which we should resist but have rachmunis on me. This boy is mamish eishes potiphar and though my name is Reb Yosef, I am not Yosef Hatzadik, any more than my uncle Yehudah was like Yehudah in the Torah in being able to be moideh.


    The Rabbonim of Chelm pondered this and concluded that collecting for Tomchei Shabbos is a great mitzvah and they decided not to ban these pushkas. But geneivah is not OK. But Reb Yosef is a necessary worker in Chelm so they could not get rid of them. Thus they paskened that if Reuven was expelled from Chelm everything would be OK again, nobody would ever again complain about thefts from pushkas, and that is what they did.

    However, they did not want people to lose their confidence in Reb Yosef whose reputation was vulnerable to the accusations. So they also declared that no money was taken from Reuven's pushka. And Everyone in Chelm was happy again except some feeble minded rebellious people who could not reconcile the fact that a child was expelled for opening his pushka but they were told that Reb Yosef was innocent. They all said memunafshach. But the gedolim replied, just because you learned in kollel does not put you at our level, and besides nine of us said it and we have it whispered into us from the hanhalah like ruach hakodesh. And besides, Rav Yisroel says it and he is a bigger talmid chacham than the rest of you.

    But things got worse in Chelm when Shimon and Dina also had the chutzpah to claim Reb Yosef stole from their pushka. The amaratzim in town did not understand how this is possible. So now, what is at stake is not just Reb Yosef's reputation but emunas chachmei Chelm.

    It is a difficult complicated story and I don't know how it will end. Of course this is a Chelm story, not a Lakewood story, so it may not be relevant. And besides, why is everyone making such a fuss about a story which involved small amounts. It is not like we are talking about Bernie Madoff or even smaller geneivas of only millions.

    So, I will not propose an ending. I think the power to end the story should be given to the Chachmei Chelm who started it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOVE IT. You have not lost your touch, Yerachmiel Lopin!

      Delete
    2. Job well done, sir.

      Delete
    3. There is an updated version on frum follies. http://frumfollies.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/how-the-rabbis-in-chelm-solved-the-problem-of-the-stolen-money/

      Delete
  16. For those that indulge with consent and consult, yelamdenu rabeinu, till what age down can you consider consent? These consulting rapists go down as far as toddlers--. This is sick and getting sicker. When you start out with lies, you need to keep up with thousands of other ones to cover up. So now you know why Internet is banned. How about an asifa for the sake of our children, or are they matir daman behefker beis din hefker.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sources that sin (and by extension rape?) is the seductive (/looking for trouble) subject/victim's fault, not the committer/offender's:

    וגבי חציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין שנהגו בה מנהג הפקר וכפו את רבה ב'השולח', משום שהיתה מחזרת וממציאה עצמה לזנות ודומי' לאנוסין
    --תוס' שבת ד:א

    והא דשרי בחציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין לשחררה כשנהגו בה מנהג הפקר אע"ג שעובר בעשה, לא דמי פריצות דידהו ל...אותו [ש]לא היה אנוס כלל, אבל שפחה האסורה לעבדים ולבני חורין והיא להוטה אחר זנות אי אפשר שלא תכשיל בני אדם ודמו לאונסין
    --תוס' עירובין לב:ב

    וחציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין דכפו את רבה משום דנהגו בה מנהג הפקר אע"ג דהם פושעים, כיון שהיתה מחזרת אחריהם ומשדלתן לזנות חשיבי כאונסים
    --תוס' גיטין מא:ב

    ReplyDelete
  18. If you claim that RYB made such a statement, after claiming he had investigated the matter. Could you please elaborate on how he conducted his investigation.
    Are you telling us he asked YK what happened & this is how he answered?
    Did he speak to the kid, father, Physiologists, therapists, other accusers?
    Are you telling me that if someone's wife would beg RYB to have ... with her & be Oiver Eishes Ich, & because he is so nice & can't turn down such a begging lady, he would not be guilty of aishes Ish?
    Thank you for being don lekaf zechus, but I think your analogy makes a bigger mockery of RYB, than accepting that is impartial {nogei bedover} seeing that YK is a talmid & musmach of his, that has blinded him & caused him to err, unfortunately at the expense of others. It may be time for him to take a shiur in resignation, because of mess-ups from R'Norman Lamm.
    He is a massive Talmid chochem, but even on Moshe Rabeinu it says Vatechasreyhu meat Meloikim, meaning he too was not perfect. This may be RYB"S weak point, but the stuff you post, unless you saw it signed by him or heard it from his mouth just doesn't add up.
    I am prepared to bet that BOTH RYB & RAMK had the image of their Yeshivos Uber Alles. We don't have such nisyoinos so we can't judge them, but they are not stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Reb Yerachmiel this piece is utter brilliance!!!
    Yes yes I live in Chelmwood (or do they call it kelmwood), and "glattkiet" and "klarkiet" like this, are hard to come by.
    The analogy to the Children's pushkah is particularly powerful. Like a pushkah our kinderlach are precious, reserved for a mitzvah, and R"L one can steal from them!!

    ReplyDelete
  20. If the theory proposed in this posting is true, that would take these Rabbonim out of the category of evil, and place them in the category of stupid. Not sure which one is worse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One Purim, with the help of a beautiful, clear reading, I got completely caught up in the Megillah as pure narrative. From that standpoint, Achashverosh at first looked like a stupid jerk. גראב און זשלאָב, maybe but you could laugh at him.

      On the surface, anyway. If you can put out of your mind that it was the kelim from the Beit HaMikdash, there's not that moment when the bottom drops out and it's sickening. But then the story of the banquet goes on, the king is drunk, wants his wife to put on a strip show for his drinking buddies (OK, I'm cheating here, it's not explicit in the text,) character revealed as complete trash. It almost seemed sort of funny again.

      Then as the story unfolds some more, we see that he wasn't funny at all; he was extremely dangerous. Stupid, maybe. Jerk, maybe. Certainly easy for a wicked man to manipulate. Also in a position of power, in which his every word was given total deference. But he made his choice of who to listen to, and picked Haman. And at the end of the day, we refer to Achashverosh as a rasha too.

      Delete
  21. HELP WANTED

    6th grade Rebbe and camp counselor

    Unmarried and capable of being seduced by 11 years olds, okay

    haskomos from Rabbonim a must


    -ben dov

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Kolko is a nebach but he is not a pedophile (i.e., he doesn't have a sexual desire for children)"

    The Lakewood rabbis are really saying they do not believe in psychology. Not so surprising, since they believe in Torah l'shmah above all else.

    And that is the fatal flaw in their thinking. Since he is not a pedophile, and lacks that deviant yatzer hara, he can be managed within the religious community. He is not at risk, or at tiny risk only below halachic parameters, for re-offending. He need not be isolated in prison for years. He can be found a wife, a chavrusa, a steady job, and managed, and the community will remain safe.

    This is the same mistake that has been made for years, with disastrous results. The rabbis, thinking they know better than all, believing in their own Daas Torah, keep repeating the same error. This flawed thinking also denies justice to the victims.

    Interesting quote from Rav Wasserman. Rabbi Gil Student credits Rav Ahron Kotler, or Rav Itzele Voloziner. http://torahmusings.com/2008/09/relying-on-heaven/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Elliot,
      The Mishneh in Pirkei Avoth says clearly that anyone who learns and does not earn will end in waste and sin. The Zohar Chodosh in Beraishis says that such a person is like a pagan. I learned in Lakewood during the time of Reb Aharon Kotler. Those who learned there at that time did so with a blind faith that included realizing that one may never find a good wife. In those days things were very bleak. So people, so it is hinted in the Zohar, who are willing to give up everything for Torah, may learn and not earn. But the ones who want both worlds must work. Vollozner Yeshiva and other Yeshivas featured starvation diets and people marrying very late if at all. That is mesiras nefesh but other people have to work.

      Delete
  23. I really don't think its fair to post this view in the name of "Lakewood Rabbonim" unless you know for certain that this is the view of THE rabbonim that signed the letter. Otherwise it is just throwing out a theory that was presented by people who have no true relevance to this case (they just happen to be rabbonim living in Lakewood).
    If you want to find a limud zechus - it is much more plausible that they hold like the Ztitz Eliezer and not like R Elyashiv (maybe they were not even aware that this was his view)and as long as there was no penetration its equivalent to the ZE's case of young girls etc.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @ KRUM IZA

    "Kolko is a nebach but he is not a pedophile (i.e., he doesn't have a sexual desire for children) and he definitely is not a rodef."

    Im ken, the kushyo is even bigger. How in the world can an 11 year old seduce a 30 year old beheimeh, let alone if he is NOT a pedophile, such for a straight is ===> DOCHE, you do not get seduced for something that is not your cup of tea, and I do not mean tea. Furthermore, hadra kushye leduchtei, if he IS a pedophile then how do you turn tables, RODEF LENIRDAF veNIRDAF LERODEF, huh? VeHitzdik es haROSHO veHIRSHIA es haTZADIK?

    All those rayas you bring are:
    1) Straights,
    2) Adults,
    3) nohagu bah minhag hefker of which is the perpetrators fault.

    Domiyo "LEONSIN" is in reference of being a chetzya SHIFCHA vechtzya bat chorin ONLY of which is not known or suspected for those that are minhagu bah minhag hefker therefore only legabei isssur Shifcha is he an ONESS, hevanta. The issur of znus in and of itself, of which IS known to the perpetrators of minhagu bah minhag hefker, they are indeed very much culpable. It is thus, why they urged him to be her meshachrer. My dear friend, the meaning of the word onsin is not in the CONTEXT of being MEFUTEH, as in ME'ANESS, Kappish. OK, so now that we that out of the way,
    NOW WHAT, HUH?"Kolko is a nebach but he is not a pedophile (i.e., he doesn't have a sexual desire for children) and he definitely is not a rodef."

    Im ken, the kushyo is even bigger. How in the world can an 11 year old seduce a 30 year old beheimeh, let alone if he is NOT a pedophile, such for a straight is ===> DOCHE, you do not get seduced for something that is not your cup of tea, and I do not mean tea. Furthermore, hadra kushye leduchtei, if he IS a pedophile then how do you turn tables, RODEF LENIRDAF veNIRDAF LERODEF, huh? VeHitzdik es haROSHO veHIRSHIA es haTZADIK?

    All those rayas you bring are:
    1) Straights,
    2) Adults,
    3) nohagu bah minhag hefker of which is the perpetrators fault.

    Domiyo "LEONSIN" is in reference of being a chetzya SHIFCHA vechtzya bat chorin ONLY of which is not known or suspected for those that are minhagu bah minhag hefker therefore only legabei isssur Shifcha is he an ONESS, hevanta. The issur of znus in and of itself, of which IS known to the perpetrators of minhagu bah minhag hefker, they are indeed very much culpable. It is thus, why they urged him to be her meshachrer. My dear friend, the meaning of the word onsin is not in the CONTEXT of being MEFUTEH, as in ME'ANESS, Kappish. OK, so now that we that out of the way,
    NOW WHAT, HUH?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think it is much worse to label Rabbis stupid, than impartial evil, for evil could repent, & explain why they felt they had to protect their institutions against individuals. Whereas if they are stupid, repenting won't help, they will remain stupid. Stupid leadership is more dangerous than evil.

    ReplyDelete
  26. @DaasTorah - "an individual can call the police for financial or physical harm. Moser is understood as being only if it is a willful act to hurt another."

    Your very broad, non-specific statements here can easily open the door to real MESIRAH, one of the worst crimes in Judaism.

    Financial harm? No Bais Din needed? Where does the Rambam say one can MOSER a Jew for financial reasons, without first going to Bais Din?

    Physical harm? Does this include a Jewish wife (advised by feminist groups on how to destroy her husband) who "feels" that her husband is angry or wants to harm her, or whose husband shouted at her, when in fact he would never commit violence against her?

    Physical harm? Does this mean that when a Jewish wife (who met a cute boyfriend and wants to dump her husband) is advised by the local feminist group to slap her husband, and when he slaps her back, she can now throw him out of the house with an Order of Protection, prevent him from having contact with his children (because he's a "danger"), and claim "agunah" status in the Jewish Press? (Then the local feminist "rabbi" will halachically justify everything she does and condemn the husband.)

    Even if a Jewish spouse had some weak halachic grounds to call the police on their spouse, if the "victim" now hires a shark lawyer and files any exaggerated or non-factual claims against their spouse in court, are you saying this is not MESIRAH?

    (NOTE: My comments here refer to disputes between adult Jews (such as spouses) and NOT to molestation or sexual abuse cases.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What planet do you live on? Are you the husband who yells (and then hits, and then rapes his wife) or is he one of your friends?

      You imply that the man in this case was "provoked" because he was slapped. The man himself could have gone to the police or to his rabbi or even out the door at that moment rather than hitting back. Are you telling me that this Jew, who can keep shabbos, keep kashrus, dress a certain way, do tefilah b'zman -- this person who can control himself and his desires in every area -- cannot control himself and must hit someone smaller and less powerful than he is?

      No -- there is no provocation. There are only lies after you are finally caught. Men who cannot control their anger are always blaming the world (including their wives and children) for provocations. There was no slap. There is just the anger inside this kind of man, waiting for any chance to be released. There is no seduction for pedophiles. There are only desires they cannot admit and take responsibility for.

      They were provoked, it was not their fault, they had no choice, it's all because of the feminists. Sure, keep going. We've heard every excuse in the book.

      People who commit domestic violence and sexual abuse are ill and they are a danger to themselves and to their communities. Perhaps you know of some man who you think has been accused unfairly or perhaps you just hate women or perhaps you are afraid of the secular world.

      Regardless, you have no idea what you are talking about. Those who work on domestic violence hear the same stories day in and day out while each person who is victimized thinks she or he is completely alone in the world. The lies you describe above is not so special or unique. The people who do this work hear those same lies day in and day out. Yours is not even creative.

      Those who hear these terrible stories every day do not laugh or count their money when they manage to put someone in jail or get an order of protection.

      They go home every night and cry out to G-d to give them the strength to continue to fight this kind of evil in the world without giving in to despair.

      If this story is about someone you know, consider the company you keep. If it's about you, get help.

      Delete
  27. I think it's fascinating that the same people who are so worried about the sight of women that they dress them in burkas and make them sit on the back of the bus will find any excuse they can to support a man-on-boy pedophile.

    ReplyDelete
  28. You can run, but you cannot hide. Houston, they've got a problem. The same problems prevail in the four corners of the earth, misof haolam ad sofo. From all the way in Berland, to England, to Ossieland, to Williland, to Jewland, to Lakeland, we our yet not out of the woods, just to mention a few. These Protectors and Enablers have cornered themselves between a rock and a hardplace and left no wiggle room to lie anymore. Claims such as the sardine swallowed the Livyasan and the bird swallowed the Bull, is nothing other then Bull..., it is insulting our intelligence. Sell your story to the Birds. It is so hard to be modeh al haEmes, why not just imagine all the pain you caused the children and their parents. Haven't you seen all these years why these Nifgoiim went of the derech, resorted to drugs, threw themselves out of the windows in your Yeshivas, out of Hotels, under trains or buses. It was because of the pain that was indurable, kaved minsso. When did you hear that a pedophile did such to end his pain. Al ken no Shimi no Raboisai, it time to resign. You have been poshea in the Pikadon, our precious children just because you can and out of convenience. See how this weeks Haftorah describes the situation we are up to our eyeballs. Have you no shame, have you no decency? There are no words to describe. Not even the devil invented such tragedies upon children. Chizri bachem beod moed lishbor bachuray.

    ReplyDelete

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