Monday, July 28, 2014

Was the siruv justified - against the sefer Shaal Avicha - by Rav Kaufman's beis din?

I was requested to post this information which you should examine carefully.
-----------------------------
Guest Post

Complete sefer can be downloaded with this link

WAS THIS SIRUV KOSHER AND JUSTIFIED? OR JUST A BLATANT CASE OF CRONYISIM?


Attached you will find a PDF of a sefer recently issued About Oz Vihaddar Publishing company

And the Siruv against this sefer By Rav Kaufman’s Bais Horaah /Rav Chaim Flohrs Kollel of Monsey NY 

OVERVIEW AND BACKROUND INFO:

The 300 page Sefer authored by Rabbi Yoel Abraham(with Haskomos of 5 prominent Rabbonim) containing a Halachic Discussion regarding the Many Textual Changes made to the Targum al Hatorah In their recently  published Chumasim .

The Sefer titled Shaal Avicha is a Birur Halacha seeking to enhance and reinforce our Mesores in Targum which is the mesores of Rashi Hakodosh and Rabenu Gershom and Rabenu Tam of the Chachmei TZORFAS (France and GERMANY)

And to  Dispute the many  changes made in all the new seforim and chumashim issued by Oz Vihadar who relied on the Targum of Taimon  and svtina  which was historically  questionable and Not accepted by orthodox Mesores  of Ashkenaz and even many Sefardim   only by Maskilim see the details in the sefer.

The Question is why? And How A Siruv was issued By Rav Shlomo Zalman Kaufman? 

And If Rav Shlomo Zalman Kaufman who has an existing working relationship with Rabbi Leifer who is the owner of Oz Vihader and also happens to be the owner of Rockland Mikvaos where Rav Kaufman was recently appointed to join Rabbi Leifer as an additional Rav Hamachsir of several Mikvaos (of course through the efforts of Rav Chaim Flohr’s longtime relationship with Rabbi Leifer) And the real question was Rabbi Kaufman working to protect his friend ?

Attached you will also  find an open letter ‘MICHTAV GOLOY’ by Rabbi Yoel Abraham  Astounded at the unbelievable Siruv rapidly issued by Rav Kaufman and detailing exactly each step as it happened with copies of all documents and the dates so you can judge for yourself whether or not  this Siruv is Kosher !

What’s astounding also is that Rav Gold was pushed out of the bais din because he was one of five Rabbonim who gave Haskomah to this sefer so he was considered by rav Kaufman not to be impartial

Yet Rav Kaufman himself and his Cronyism with Rabbi Leifer did not affect his own impartiality!!!

THE REAL Question now is is How can we now rely on these Rabbonim for the Hechsher on the Mikvah!! If this is what transpired

נזדמן לידי המכתב גלוי הנכתב ע"י הרב המחבר דבר ה' במחזה שליט"א, וכאשר קריתי בו ראיתי בתוכו כמה וכמה תמיהות, ואמרתי אשיחה וירוח לי.

ראשית כל, אם האמת אתו, אין כאן שום מקום לדין תורה, דדין תורה אינו אלא בדברים שבין אדם לחבירו, ולא בדיני איסור והיתר וכ"ש לא בדברים שהם יסודי הדת, וכמו שמובן לכל בר דעת דאין שום מקום לעקל או להזמין לדין תורה למי שמפרסם על סוחר אחד המוכר נבילות וטריפות בשם בשר כשר, או למי שמפרסם על ירקות של קאמפאני אחד המוכרן בחזקת נקי מתולעים, שיש בתוכו תולעים, או למי שמפרסם על מאגאזינען שהם מלא מינות ודיעות כוזבות ואסור לקנותן, בטענה ותביעה שהמה גורמים להם נזק רב, וכמו שידענו מרב אחד שהכריז ברבים שסוחר אחד מוכר דגים טמאים, והדבר ידוע.

ואם הוא משקר ואין האמת אתו, אין שום צורך לטרוח על זה הבי"ד, התובע יברר הדברים כשמלה שהוא משקר ובודה הדברים מלבו, ומוציא שם רע עליו, ויפרסם הדבר לרבים, ואם אין היכולת ביד התובע לברר הדברים, על זה אפשר לקבוע ישיבת בי"ד שיבררו הדברים, אבל אין צורך להזמין הרב המחבר הנ"ל על זה, דהא ספרו נכתב בבאר היטב דברים מפורשים, הן דברי התובע, והן דבריו מ"ש עליהם, ויעיינו הבי"ד בדבריו, ויפסקו לפי ראות עיניהם מי ומי ההולכים עם האמת, ועל דבר זה נראה שהרב המחבר שליט"א מרוצה להכניס לפנים משורת הדין, לבוא לברר דבריו הנכתבים בעל פה לפני הבי"ד.

והשנית, מה שכתבו בהעיקול שהוא מפרסם כתבי פלסתר, לא ידענו מה זה כתבי פלסתר, הלא אינו חוזר וכותב רק דברים שהם בעצמם כתבו בחומשיהם, והרב המחבר חתם עצמו על כל מה שכתב, ומה זה ועל מה זה נקראו כתבי פלסתר.

והשלישית, אם הוא השיב תיכף ומיד שהוא מוכן לילך להבי"ד של בית הוראה, למה נתאחר הדבר לחתום שטרי בירורין מיום ד' תמוז תשע"ג עד כ"א אדר ב' תשע"ד

 !

27 comments :

  1. At least in this case the beis din actually seems to exist.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dovid Kornreich Voice from theJuly 28, 2014 at 2:02 PM

    The letter says if someone publishes a sefer and others criticize it,
    there is no need for a Beis Din to be convened. Just publicize your
    criticism! And even if a Beis Din is convened to clarify the matter,
    there is no need to summon the author to defend his works because the
    contents of the book stand for itself.

    Mmmm.....

    Makes
    you wonder why so many people cried foul and claimed there was a lack of
    "due process" when Natan Slifkin's books were banned without the banners summoning him to defend his books beforehand...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 28, 2014 at 4:58 PM

    The Oz V'Hedar sefarm bear the Haskamot of the Eidah HaChareidit, Rav Vozner, Rav Eliashiv, and several others... So I guess I'm questioning the validity of someone who attacks them for "destroying" our mesorah.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is the 300 page pdf sefer available for the readers of this blog, or only for Rabbi Eidensohn?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Once fake seruvim are accepted, why should legitimize and quasi legitimate batei din not get in on the a$tion.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The contents of the book stand for itself and any competent judge can read the works and decide the case. The problem with the Slifkin banners was that they were unable to read the books they were banning. Thus, in essence, the banners were not the rabbanim but the askanim.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Even the Chumash? He isn't attacking all Oz V'hadar seforim - only the new Chumash, which came out within the past two years.


    Also, his strong language has to seen in comparison to the culture he grew up in.

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2014/06/rav-shlomo-zalman-kaufmans-contract-of.html

    http://yudelstake.blogspot.com/2012/11/cause-and-effect.html

    There are rumors that Rav Chaim Kanievsky wrote a letter against Kaufman. Any truth to it? If so, what did the letter say?

    ReplyDelete
  9. You're getting desperate to justify what happened to Slifkin from the likes of this character.

    Leaving aside the specific issues pertinent to the Targum, where he may have a point (I haven't researched this) he writes that anyone who uses manuscripts to try and clarify the correct nusach of seforim and implies that 19th century Gedolim did not know the right nusach, are apikorisim. Throw your whole Mosad Harav Kook library out the window, as well as almost any other new print of rishonim etc that try to clarify the right nusach. That's well and good if you live in KJ and think all MHRK seforim are good for is kindling, but for the rest of klal yisroel it's not acceptable.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Did you get my post? I asked if the 300 page pdf document is available for download.

    ReplyDelete
  11. A one word Teshuvah :"YIZRIKENU!" Remove him!
    It was publicly posted in all monsey Shuls about six months ago and was not retracted or disputed .It is considered to be credible !

    ReplyDelete
  12. Kolel zircon menachemJuly 28, 2014 at 10:44 PM

    There is letter from rabbi Ben Shabbats from monsey who is rov in Wesley hill against Kaufman also rabbi shlesenger came out against Kaufman,,

    ReplyDelete
  13. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 28, 2014 at 11:10 PM

    Yes even the Chumash, and he is, if you read his seforim, attacking the Oz V'Hedar Shas as well(and pretty much any sefer that corrects nusach based on manuscripts).

    ReplyDelete
  14. Maybe because those who banned the books couldn't read English and were in any event relying on second hand reports.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 29, 2014 at 11:56 AM

    That isn't strictly true. Rabbi Yaakov Hillel was very instrumental in the ban on Slifkin, and he reads English. He is also generally against the publication of books that do not fit within the parameters of his hashkafic view.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Are you implying that is heresy is published in a foreign language then gedolei rabbonim or gedolei poskim who aren't speakers of that language cannot rule on the halachic status of that publication? That would be an absurd position.

    ReplyDelete
  17. In other words if heresy is published in Russian or Dutch, only Russian or Dutch speaking rabbis can ban it? The gedolei poskim, probably all or almost all who do not know Russian or Dutch, cannot take a position on the books? That's absurd.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Most of Klal Yisroel do not subscribe to Rabbi Kook or his philosophies.

    ReplyDelete
  19. No such word yizrikenu. Maybe you do need dikduk.

    ReplyDelete
  20. In the sefer I clearly do see how he is attacking them for the Shas etc. as well.


    For the Targum, I feel he has a valid point.


    As far as his criticism of dikduk, it is obviously not everyone else's opinion. Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky was very clear that dikduk should be taught and learnt. Others as well.

    ReplyDelete
  21. They don't have in the Beis Medrash the controversial prints of works changing the nusachs.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Rabbi Chaim Shabbos
    And Rabbi Y Schlesinger , Rav Moshe Green ...Etc....many others ,

    ReplyDelete
  23. Interesting, The link to the Shal Avicha
    sefer has already received 8000 views in four days!
    The Kaufman Bais din SIRUV against rabbi Abraham IS actually HELPING the publicity and PR!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Yes I saw the sign posted and Horav Chaim Knievskisy's teshuvah Yizrikenu! it was an answer to a faxed Sheilah About rabbi flohr renting space to rav Kaufman for use of His/their bais din
    This bais din is well known in Monsey to be under a question mark by many informed Rabbonim and lay people

    They have issued a startling amount of Lopsided Psakim !!
    And their methods and manners and association with epstien and wall mark ....

    Also much criticism about their infamous Arbitration agreement they compel all? to sign!???!!.
    Just another Blip.

    ReplyDelete
  25. אמר רבי מלאי משם רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון: מאי דכתיב (ישעיהו יד ה) שבר ה' מטה רשעים שבט משלים?



    'שבר ה' מטה רשעים' - אלו הדיינין שנעשו מקל לחזניהם;



    שבט משלים' - אלו תלמידי חכמים שבמשפחות הדיינין.



    שבט מושלים = מקל אגרופין של
    מושלים, היינו דיינים רשעים שתלמידי חכמים שבמשפחותם להם למקל ולאגרוף: שעל
    ידיהם היו מעמידין אותן, ומחפין עליהם, ועושין סניגרון לדבריהם

    ReplyDelete
  26. Bais Helevi in rishon lishasheles Brisk
    on Extensive excessive gemarah commentaries
    this is for the shal avicha disscussion

    ReplyDelete
  27. Arent you an eineckele of the ARIZal?
    If so the targum should be quite important to you , as the sefer Chok !
    Which is according to the Holy Ari has a daily learning schedule for all yidden with daily TARGUM read alongside torah and also with daily Neviiem its daily targum, So Would you consider changing the targum that the AriZal Used for a different one like OZ Vihadar did?

    ReplyDelete

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