מיליונים שנעלמו וחשבונות בחו"ל; ההסתבכות של ועד הרבנים
ספרים שחורים, שכר בשחור, חשבונות זרים ללא פיקוח מינימלי, מיליונים שנעלמו, חלוקות שלא היו וחשדות כבדים להלבנת הון. הדו"ח החריף נגד "ועד הרבנים לענייני צדקה"
הדו"ח החמור על אחת מוועדות הצדקה החשובות במגזר החרדי נחשף: בחודשים האחרונים, לאחר בדיקה מקיפה של רשם העמותות במשרד המשפטים, הוחלט לשלול מעמותת הצדקה "ועד הרבנים לענייני צדקה" - אחת מהעמותות הגדולות ביותר במגזר החרדי - את אישור הניהול התקין ולבטל את הטבות המס שניתנות לעמותות ללא מטרת רווח (סעיף 46). כעת חושף לראשונה "כיכר השבת" את הדו"ח החמור שהוגש לרשם העמותות נגד ועד הרבנים וגרם להחלטה.
על פי הדו"ח, שהוכן על ידי רואה החשבון רמי אלחנתי, עולים חששות כבדים לשורת עבירות מס חמורות, חשש למעילות ענק ולניהול בלתי תקין בעליל. בין היתר נכתב בדו"ח כי במקביל לספרי החשבונות שהוגשו לרשם העמותות, נוהלו ספרי חשבונות "שחורים" משם יצאו מיליוני שקלים ללא פיקוח. יודגש כי בכתבה מובא חלק מזערי בלבד ממאות המקרים הבעייתיים שחשף הדו"ח.
How will the "world" respond to this. The Gedolim (including, prominently, Rav Chayim Kanievsky) have endorsed and supported this charity. If the Gedolim are infallable, how could they have supported an organisation which is corrupt and is diverting large amounts of money from charity? The Gedolim are expected to know everything (they have special providence which allows them to know things and rule on them despite not having all the evidence presented to them) so they can't plead ignorance. I suppose that the "world" will have to either act as though this never happened, or claim that it was a crusade by the "haters of Torah" who are trying to bring down the foundations of Judaism.
ReplyDeleteBut if these reports are true, more than anything else that has happened recently, this should be the final nail in the concept of "Da'as Torah" (not the end of this blog, which is "Da'at Torah)
I can say that in my case I never gave them money. For many years this charity did not seem credible to me.
ReplyDeleteOne must remember that giving to the wrong place is twice an Aveira, the first because the poor will never get the money and the second because it feeds criminality and corruption.
Not sure your logic works on this one.
ReplyDeleteGedolim supported a charity, which is fine. However, those who had their hands near the tills decided to plunder some cash.It has nothing to do with the Gedolim. The Gedolim might have Daas if you go to them with a she'elah. That is where their expertise extends to. So this case does nothing to support or detract from Daas Torah ideology. Also, Gedolim do not claim to know everything. I remember a story when someone asked Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach a question, and he had an answer, but couldn't recall which sefer it was in.
This would be the final nail in the concept of Da'as Torah? Is this particular point a determining factor? Because we just followed out of the aishes ish scandal? ??.....Maybe for some people. .....
ReplyDeleteVarious questions:
ReplyDelete1. Did the various gedolim do any verification of the a: fundraising. B: expenses. C: clients / recipients D: were clients restricted as to (charedi / non charedi / different charedi groups / charedi politics?
2. Did the 'gedolim really do those tfillot at various kevarim, domestic / international, other locales as advertised? Or did they send their own talmidim /4 gabbaim? Or was this strictly the gabbaim of the organization?
3. Did the 'gedolim have their own tzedakot? Or did they utilize these tzadokot exlusively / occasionally / rarely / backup ooly?
Did he claim to have Daas Torah? As I have noted before Rav Dovid Feinstein told me he never heard his father base his authority on Daas Torah
ReplyDeleteI don't know whether Rav Chayim claims to have Da'at Torah or not. I suspect he does not make such a claim. But many say of the Gedolim that they are infallable.
ReplyDeleteIn his list of people who will not be able to repent, Rambam includes someone who enables a theif.
והחולק עם גנב--לפי שאינו יודע גניבה זו של מי היא, אלא הגנב גונב רבים ומביא לו והוא לוקח; ועוד שהוא מחזק יד הגנב, ומחטיא אותו.
If va'ad harabanim has been stealing from the goverment and the public, then anyone who publicly supported them has been enabling them.
Either Rav Chayim didn't know he was giving them support (which means that we cannot rely on things said in his name) or he didn't know they were crooked (in which case his opinion is not infallable).
Whether R Moshe claimed his authority via Daas Torah or not, the percention is that Daas Torah is where his authority came from.
ReplyDeleteCase in point, the Rabbi of my Shul (Rabbi Yerachmiel Milstein) said in a shabbos drasha that a medical shayla once came to R Moshe. R Tendler wanted to show R Moshe information about the case from a medical textbook but R Moshe said he didnt want to look in the textbook and R Tendler should explain it to him outside, because looking in the textbook would "mess up his Daas Torah".
And it is not "he". All of the "Gedolim" appear prominently on the page of va'ad harabbonim
ReplyDeletehttp://www.vaadharabbanim.com/
Not sure on that. Do poskim base their psak on DaasTorah or on the sources? My point is simply that Gedolim are not 100% perfect, Moshe was not, that is why he didn't make it to E.Y. The point being that a scandal in a charity house does not mean that Gedolim have less DaasTorah than if the employees were honest.
ReplyDeleteNot relevant to the point. I once discussed Rav Dovid Feinstein's statement about his father lack of use of the term daas Torah with Rav Shabtzai Rappaport - Rav Tendlers son in law. He said that while Rav Dovid was correct that Rav Moshe did not claim Daas Torah to justify his rulings - he once told Rav Moshe Tendler who was contemplating creating a medical school - that given that he was the daas torah of the generation he was against the school. It seems he used daas Torah in dealing with Rav Tendler - but not anyone else. I leave it to the read to decide what this means
ReplyDeleteIn addition I doubt that the story is true. As Rav Moshe himself states there are many things that are said in his name which he never said. The famous story about chalav Yisreol and Rav Moshe vomiting it up when he was served chalav stam without his knowledge. But Rav Mordechai Tendler and Rav Bluth - (Rav Moshe's gabbi for many years) said they never heard the story and they doubted its veracity because Rav Moshe didn't do disgusting things.
Same with the famous story about Rav Moshe never making a mistake in agunos - both said they never hear this "famous" story.
Bottom line - a story about Rav Moshe needs to be taken with a grain of salt because he was often used to justify positions by made up psakim and stories - that he never held.
You might want to look at the Introduction to the first volume of the Igros Moshe where he discuss the basis of his authority - it is not Daas Torah. He writes in the Igros Moshe that he is not infallible.
Bottom line - a story about Rav Moshe needs to be taken with a grain of salt because he was often used to justify positions by made up psakim and stories - that he never held.
ReplyDeleteAnd this would certainly hold true about Rav Moshe's supposed opposition to talmidei chachomim having knowledge and involvement in politics. Especially since there was a precedent such as the Pononvitcher Rov being part of the Lithuanian Semias, Rav Meir Shapiro being part of the Polish Sejm among many others.
But if these reports are true, more than anything else that has happened recently, this should be the final nail in the concept of "Da'as Torah"
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you explain what precisely is the concept of Daas Torah. Then, kindly explain who defined it as such. Finally, please explain how this story has contradicted this claim. Thank you.
Let's take a step back here, shall we?
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone who donates money to a cause that has many workers not know that the possibility of foul play and theft is involved? Has this charity not honestly distributed tens of millions of dollars to needy people and families?
How are you accusing Rav Chaim Kanievsky of enabling a thief? Your logic would then also call the donors "enablers of thieves" since it was their donation that was stolen. Will you now also accuse YU donors who had millions of their dollars squandered through Madoff and other bad investments enablers of thieves? Double standard?
They stole the "l", too!
ReplyDeleteAccording to you, no one can give tzedakah unless they know the recipient personally and through and through. ...obscure...
ReplyDeleteDon't the legitimate tzedakot want to differentiate / be more transparent now?
ReplyDeleteOr is their 'professional courtesy' extend to wrongdoing?
I was speaking today with a senior Rov and dayan and he was shocked. He said , it seems that no one can be trusted. If the leadership was aware of the situation, they would have had in place, an annual external and independent audit. One of the outcomes of every body in learning and poverty is that dishonesty and misappropriating money or not full disclosure etc can be easily justified as going to a good cause. Dishonesty is also an outcome of the need to work in the black market and avoid the army. A preferred life style comes with costs which imho have been ignored for a long time
ReplyDeleteThe concept of "Daas Torah" is that the Gedolim know everything about the entire world (past present and future) through their Torah learning. They are able to answer any question without even knowing any details of the question or the questioner. And they are infallible. Therefore, if someone says in the name of a Godol that nobody may send their children to a certain type of school, believers in Da'as Torah will not send to that school. If Gedolim say to support a certain charity, their followers will do so, without question. I could go on.
ReplyDeleteThis is different than the case of eishet ish because a) that was a matter of halakha, and even great Rabbis can sometimes err in matters of halakha. b) that was only a small group of American Rabbis (who by definition can't be "real" Gedolim because they don't live in Israel. c) there were many Rabbis who disagreed with the heter, thereby removing it from Da'as Torah.
But when "all" the "Gedolim" agree on something (whether it be a book ban, the need for kosher phones, the obligation to avoid the army or whatever) that must be Da'as Torah. I have literally had people tell me that we cannot rely on G-d, but only on the Gedolim who are the conduit for G-d's message.
Personally, I don't believe in Da'as Torah (never have). My question was whether those people who do believe in the Gedolim will now say that it is G-d's will that the charity money be stolen/cheated etc. or whether they will admit that sometimes the Gedolim are fallible. Or that even though the Gedolim themselves are fallible, sometimes "wicked" people say things in the name of Gedolim which are not infallible. If so, such people should take all further pronouncements with several grains of salt.
One of the outcomes of every body not content with their learning and lifestyle is that dishonesty and accusations of others misappropriating money or not full disclosure etc can be easily justified as doing a good cause. Dishonesty is also an outcome of the need to belittle others in order to feel good about forcing others into the army. A preferred life style comes with costs which imho have been ignored for a long time
ReplyDeleteDavid, I would venture to say (and invite as much feedback as possible from our esteemed readers) that although Gedolim may be fallible, taking the Torah without Mesorah, such as approaching it by ourselves without the gedolim who accepted it from the gedolim of last generation, all the way to the gedolim accepting it from Moshe Rabbeinu, would be a definite lose.....and a guarantee to come up with NOT Torah (although it may look and sound similar....)
ReplyDelete@David Sedley
ReplyDeleteYou said:
A) The concept of "Daas Torah" is that the Gedolim know everything about the entire world (past present and future) through their Torah learning. They are able to answer any question without even knowing any details of the question or the questioner.
B) And they are infallible.
C) Therefore, if someone says in the name of a Godol that nobody may send their children to a certain type of school, believers in Da'as Torah will not send to that school. If Gedolim say to support a certain charity, their followers will do so, without question. I could go on.
1) You failed to state who defined it as such? Is this simply your strawman figure that you created, or is did anyone else indeed create this. A source would be appropriate.
2) Your A is a level of prophesy that most prophets never reached. I find it hard to believe that this is anything other than a strawman that you set up so that you can knock it down.
3) Yes, Talmidei Chachomim have much knowledge about institution that teach Torah. I would trust their judgment in these issues.
In don't think Rav Chaim and all the others who are prominently featured on the Vaad Harabonim publications were directly involved in the goings on of this organization. They basically were all for the idea being presented and they trusted that it was all as they were told. They were being used as advertising material.
ReplyDeleteMany signatures are routinely gotten from big rabonim for questionable causes. Gedoilim are used all the time. When we see a letter with the signature of a gadol, all we know from that is that the gadol agrees with the concept as it is there presented. But we don't know at all if the facts of that particular case reflect that concept.
It's obvious that to really be able to endorse an operation like that, you would have be entirely hands on. This requires lots of time and investigation such that obviously the gedolim are not able to offer. Whoever believes that the endorsement from gedolim means that they have investigated it, is making a ridiculous mistake.
Replying to Der Medina......
ReplyDeleteRegarding Question #2, I was at Kever Rochel about 8 months ago and I had the opportunity to see a respected looking individual (I, though, cannot recall if he was for Kupat Ha'ir or Vaad Harabbanim) who said Tehillim with fervor and afterwards went through a large AND thick book (you know, like those thick Gemaros that have all the meforshim un the back) of names to daven for, so at least, one of your questions seems to be verified. ...
Being 'daat torah' of a generation is different than getting (or being assisted) in his psak via 'daat torah'.
ReplyDeleteOne is influenc on others, the other is influence on him.
Losing money through bad management is different than losing money through theft.
ReplyDeleteFurther, it seems there was no control over the management, leading to stealing.
The madoff matter was different. Was the losses one of no / loose controsl, or was it luckily cashing out before he ratted himself out (leading to 'clawback lawsuit.)
In this case, the 'gedolim' were being used (knowingly) as endorsers. Therefore, they had a responsibility to verify the finances. If they didn't verify, that is reason enough to question them.
Cesides, as stated, the other tzedakot have to rethink their using these (somewhat) discredited endorsers. Otherwise, they will lose donations.
Reb Moshe:
ReplyDelete"There are people who maintain that Talmidei Chachomim are not qualified to decide political matters, that Gedolei Yisroel should limit themselves to Torah and Halacha. Such people cannot be considered within the Torah camp. One might well say ignoring the advice of a Talmid Chochom is far worse than violating a commandment. One who violates a commandment because he is too weak to resist temptation, at least knows that his action is wrong. By contrast, one who ignores the advice of a Talmid Chochom denies that a Torah scholar's wisdom is superior. This is a far more serious breach."
(Reb Moshe, p. 123)
Igros Moshe, Even HaEzer 2:1
ReplyDelete"My outlook is based only on knowledge of Torah whose ways are truth, without any influence of secular studies."
could you tell me what you think that means? Are you claiming that Rav Moshe's view was not contaminated by consultations with doctors or any other secular experts?
ReplyDeletePerhaps he was simply responding to the claim that artificial insemination - even the Bishop knows it is wrong. To that he said my views are not influenced by value judgment that come from outside the Torah
I was just elucidating on Yisrael B's comment about Rav Moshe telling Dr. Tendler he didn't want to see his textbooks.
ReplyDeleteI cannot give you a source in print. I have had these types of discussions many times with people, most recently this week, with someone who is the head of an institution. He literally said to me that we cannot rely on G-d, but only on Rav Chayim who is the conduit to what G-d wants. And he also told me that he knows the future. I replied that we no longer have prophets. But he did not back down from his assertion.
ReplyDeleteI personally know many people who do believe this about the Gedolim. If you think it is a strawman then I guess we move in different circles.
Talmidei Chachamim know about Torah institutions. But I'm not going to send any of my children to a school based on a general statement of a Godol. Yet that is what some people expect me to do.
I have elaborated my views further on my Facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100010722904166
I suspect that we do not fundamentally disagree, but you have simply not had to deal with the same type of people as I have and you cannot believe that there are sensible people in the world who think like this. Unfortunately there are.
Upon further recollection, I have once heard quite a long time ago that the gaon, Rav Shimon Shkop used to give money to people who claimed to deserve it quoting the Gemara in the 6th Perek in Kesuvos that says that we need to appreciate the tremendous tovah that fake aniyim do for us in that they save us from the issur of "Lo suchal l'hisalaim" (otherwise known in Gemara the issur of "ha'alomas ayin min he'uni"). He gave them money out of earnest hakaras hatov! ....
ReplyDeleteWith all due respect, you are taking a big leap of faith here.
ReplyDelete1) How is there a comparison between Rav Moshe saying that sincere Talmidei Chachomim may come to different conclusions as to what the Halacha is, and your claim that Talmidei Chachomim have no knowledge of politics? What does one have to do with the other?
2) You yourself just wrote:
Bottom line - a story about Rav Moshe needs to be taken with a grain of salt because he was often used to justify positions by made up psakim and stories - that he never held.
Yet you quote an unsubstantiated claim from the introduction of a volume of Igros Moshe that was published posthumously (with controversy!). Here is your quote:
Igros Moshe (Volume 8 Introduction page 27): Active involvement of gedolei Torah in politics - also in Israel - aroused [Rav Moshe Feinstein’s] opposition. He used to say that greatness in Torah is not combined with expertise in politics.
I would like to hear a first person account from a reliable source. Did he really mean that if a person became great in Torah, then automatically, he loses his ability to understand politics? That would be absurd.
Did he instead mean that a Talmid Chochom who says that he understands politics may not be trusted since he is great in Torah? Are you suggesting that he said that greatness in Torah turned him into a liar or a delusional person?? That is even more absurd.
3) A Talmid Chochom is a person who becomes trustworthy. If he becomes involved in politics, then he is certainly from the most trustworthy politicians. It doesn't ensure that he will never err; it ensures that he will proceed with general honesty and goals that are befitting and important to Torah Jews.
Many, many political decisions are driven by skewed morals and worldviews. Of course, some are driven by greed, visions of grandeur, etc. (Shall we take the transgender bathroom hoopla about 0.02 % of the population as an example. Another would be the desires to go up to Har Habayis as a political statement. Etc.) A person who is great in Torah and accepts direction from the Torah - which according to Rav Hirsch means Morah, a guide for everything - will use that guide for political decisions. His decisions will generally be superior than those of people who do not use the guide Hashem has given us. If he hasn't thought into, understand, etc. politics, he will certainly be honest about that as well.
Of course, just as a person who is great in Torah can make a halachic mistake or misunderstanding, so too can that same person make a political miscalculation. That does not, in any way, detract from the fact he is in a position to make morally superior political decisions. That does not detract from the fact that generally, his decisions will be morally superior. It does not detract from the fact that he would be able to understand that certain "right wing" politicians like Arial Sharon did not share any sort of ideological alliance with Misnachlim. He would be able to understand that he was just using the idealistic settlers to further his political ambitions. He would therefore clearly predict, that according to nature, the day will come where it will be more politically convenient for Sharon abandon the land that the Misnachlim gave their lives for. Yes, this is something that Rav Schach had said many years ago. Yes, it happened. Surprising to some, but not surprising to those who merited the Torah's view of the human condition.
So, which decision was superior - to team up with Arial Sharon, or to view him as an opportunistic politician who is willing to stab their ideals in the back?
-----
There are other reasons that one could think of why Rav Moshe would not want those great in Torah to be involved in politics. This is why it is important to get a first person account from someone reliable.
Much of this 'don't send your children to that school' etc is political.
ReplyDeleteOne 'godol' says that one, the other says that one.
'Respected looking' is different than 'distinguished'. Meaning, was he some 'godol's shamash', or the godol himself? (Easy way to tell: was he accompanied by a 'shamas' attended?)
ReplyDeleteAnd this was in israel. Wahat about the overseas / eastern european kvarim they often advertise, without committing to a 'godol'.
Rav moshe, we see her., is defining 'daat torah' as his methodology in psak, not on any requirement to accept his psak.
ReplyDeleteThese pushkes are still out there as if business as usual continue barking HAV HAV. The ads prominently continue to appear in major magazines on the stands. Seems like too profitable to give it up just like that.
ReplyDelete