Sunday, July 7, 2019

מה קורה בקהילה של הרב שמואל טל? - מקור ראשון

https://www.makorrishon.co.il/magazine/150085/


  1. "כחצי שנה לאחר שעברנו מצפת ליד־בנימין, יצרתי קשר עם הרב בשאלה משפחתית. בפגישה הרב התוודע לכך שאני מטפלת באנרגיות, ומאוד התעניין בתחום, שאל וחקר. הוא התעניין גם בי והציע לי ללמוד בבית הספר שלו לי​י​עוץ. (…) אחרי הפסקה של חודשיים הקשר התחדש בעקבות שיחה משמעותית ומקשרת שהייתה בינינו. חווינו חוויו​ת רוחניות חזקות אחד לגבי השני, והיה שדה אנרגטי מאוד חזק בינינו כל הזמן.
  2. "ואז הרב קיבל 'מסר' שבו הוא רואה שהוא עתיד להתאלמן ואני עומדת להתגרש. הוא אמר שהוא נשמת דוד המלך, אני נשמת בת־שבע ואשתו היא נשמת מיכל. התפתח בינינו קשר עמוק וחזק, נפגשנו פגישות ארוכות כמה פעמים בשבוע, דיברנו בטלפון והסתמסנו המון. הייתה אהבה גדולה. כל הזמן היינו בחוסר ודאות: האם להאמין למה שאנחנו מקבלים? למה נראה לנו שהשם משתף פעולה עם הסיפור הזה? אבל לא יכולנו לנתק את הקשר בגלל המשיכה העצומה והמִגנוט החזק. 


48 comments :

  1. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 7, 2019 at 10:28 PM

    The guy is a total looney.

    ReplyDelete
  2. https://www.facebook.com/100004085435536/posts/1842823789197118/

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kalonymus Anonymus says “The guy is a total looney. A very dangerous man, why would anyone want their sons to attend his yeshiva?”
    “Job again took up his theme and said: By God who has deprived me of justice! By Shaddai who has embittered my life! As long as there is life in me, And God’s breath is in my nostrils, My lips will speak no wrong, Nor my tongue utter deceit. Far be it from me to say you are right; Until I die I will maintain my integrity. I persist in my righteousness and will not yield; I shall be free of reproach לא יחרף לבבי מימי as long as I live. (Job 27:1-6)
    KA, you cast aspersions on so many. No. You are not right. Troll = In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic message
    KA and Berel are trolls throwing muck on this daattorah website. DT, why do allow KA and Berel such freedom to post aspersions on so many?
    Muck = muck definition: 1. mud, dirt, or a sticky natural substance such as animal waste: 2. something you consider very unpleasant or very low quality: 3. wet, sticky dirt:

    ReplyDelete
  4. i get more such comments regarding your posts

    ReplyDelete
  5. How come people still fall for this distinguished parentage trick around since at least the time of the Chavas Yair?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Daas Torah replies to me “I get more such comments regarding your posts”
    Daf Hayomi Arachin 16b
    “How far shall a man suffer before changing his lodging? Rab said: Until he is beaten, Samuel said: Until they throw his bundles over his shoulder. Where he himself is beaten there is no dispute [that it is proper for him to leave]. Similarly if they through his bundles over his shoulder, there is likewise no dispute. They are of conflicting opinion only in case his wife is beaten, one holding: As long as he himself is not vexed what difference does it make? The other's view being: It will end in a quarrel [ultimately]. Why all that [deliberation] [Why undergo so much suffering before changing one's lodging? Is there any significance in this seemingly trivial act?] ? Because a Master said: A boarder [constantly changing his lodging] discredits others and himself. [Frequent change of lodging brings disgrace upon him who changes, because he will acquire the reputation of a man hard-to-please, as well as upon the lodging place, which will be regarded as unsatisfactory.] R. Judah in the name of Rab said: Whence is derived from the Torah the view that a man should not change his lodging? Because it is said: “And he proceeded by stages וילך למסעיו from the Negeb as far as Bethel, to the place where his tent had been formerly אשר היה שם אהלו בתחילה, between Bethel and Ai” (Genesis 13:3). R. Jose b. Hanina said: [It is derived] from here: where his tent had been formerly אשר היה שם אהלו בתחילה . What is the practical difference between them? There is this difference: the case of a casual lodging [He who based his view on where his tent had been would not object to a change from a casual dwelling, because his tent suggests a certain permanency. whereas he who emphasized the Biblical he went on his journeys would want to see the place of any of his journeys revisited.]”
    Beautiful. I’ve been lodging in your tent, DT, since 2012, using always my own name. I want KA and Berel, 2 anonymous lodgers for years in your tent, to stop crowding up your tent with muck, their baseless casting aspersions. Follow KA and Berel?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 12:42 PM

    Baseless? Tal seduces a married woman (lo tachmod) and gives her the fantasy that they will create moshiach together. I didn't (and couldn't) make it up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house: you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female slave, or his ox or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s” (Exodus 20:14). What’s your evidence that Rabbi Tal violated this commandment? I say Rabbi Tal did not violate this commandment and is 100% kosher as a teacher of Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 1:21 PM

    He seduced the wife, and promised to marry her, brainwashed her to divorce her own husband. He was found guilty by the bd and paid reparations to the woman.
    He said he would marry her and have children with her. Therefore, he is not fit to be a rosh yeshiva.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 1:41 PM

    Are some people thinking that because David HaMelech took Batsheva, from her husband, then a Kabbalist today can do the same thing>?
    This is highly problematic - the Navi reprimanded David hamelech severely for this sin . David was a tzaddik, but it was still a severe sin. Maybe the Talmud tries to minimize the sin, but the Navi says that this will be the downfall of the house of David, which will be split into 2 , and the sword will never leave it. It can hardly be called a mitzvah. I don't fully understand what the argument of the Talmud is, in saying that he didn't sin - the Tenach says he did and outlines punishments for it. Also, the son of that union was the one who died, also as punishment.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 2:12 PM

    It seems that the Tnach considers Uriah as having been married to Batsheva right up till his death.



    2 Samuel Chapter 11


    26 And when the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she made lamentation for her husband.


    27 And when the mourning was past, David sent and took her home
    to his house, and she became his wife, and bore him a son. But the thing
    that David had done displeased the LORD.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Kalonymus Anonymus says “He seduced the wife, and promised to marry her, brainwashed her to divorce her own husband. He was found guilty by the bd and paid reparations to the woman. He said he would marry her and have children with her. Therefore, he is not fit to be a rosh yeshiva.”
    KA How many times do you want to repeat your baseless nonsense? The bet din approved Rabbi Tal to be a teacher of Torah. I leave all my comments for public view. You don’t really respond to my comments. Your comments are muck. I see that you are casting aspersions on King David the business of Batsheva, the mother of King Solomon. It looks to me that you find casting aspersions a fun game. It’s easy to cast aspersions. Short phrases and hints are enough, ha ha. You’re a jokester. You like jokes, especially at someone’s expense. I’m still hoping DT will ban you from DT’s tent.
    “When Uriah came to him, David asked him how Joab and the troops were faring and how the war was going. Then David said to Uriah, Go down to your house and bathe your feet. When Uriah left the royal palace, a present from the king followed him. But Uriah slept at the entrance of the royal palace, along with the other officers of his lord, and did not go down to his house. When David was told that Uriah had not gone down to his house, he said to Uriah, You just came from a journey; why didn’t you go down to your house? Uriah answered David, The Ark and Israel and Judah are located at Succoth, and my master Joab and Your Majesty’s men are camped in the open; how can I go home and eat and drink and sleep with my wife? As you live, by your very life, I will not do this!” (2 Samuel 11:7-11). The Talmud here is very interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 2:51 PM

    Sorry Gerry, the man who cast aspersions on David, father of Solomon, was Nathan. Nathan happened to be a navi, and he had every duty to cast aspersions.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 3:42 PM

    The bd or Rav Eliahu found him guilty of chasing a married woman and brainwash her to divorce husband. They fined him for this crime.
    As I said before. THE psak of the bd is an oxymoron _ the same rosh yeshiva who is permitted to teach Halacha is a sexual rodef who is forbidden to talk to women or give general advice to his community.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The Beis Din disagreed with you, and ruled that he may still serve as a rosh yeshiva. That closes the matter for me.

    You can scream all you want, and try to discredit the Beis Din, based on baseless allegations. That's not the way it works in klal Yisrael.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 5:42 PM

    Yes, they felt it unfair to remove him from the yeshiva he built up over 20 years. Let's hope he has no predilection for boys

    ReplyDelete
  17. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 7:15 PM

    The secular mystic _ Goel ratzon
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.jpost.com/Israel/Inside-Goel-Ratzons-cult/amp

    ReplyDelete
  18. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 7:34 PM

    The story of Uriah is interesting. If one reads the plain meaning of shebikhtav, it suggests one direction. Chazal extract evidence from little clues we tend to overlook.
    Is the get retroactive? Why does she mourn her husband if they are not married?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 8, 2019 at 10:39 PM

    There's no agree or disagree, I'm not qualified to make psak din, nor am I privy to what really went on. I'm just interested in exposing sabbatean pockets , especially when they pose as frum Jews.

    ReplyDelete
  20. While you're at it, dropping baseless sexual innuendos, why don't you also add that let's hope that he has no predilection for beastiality?

    ReplyDelete
  21. So you admit that you're "not qualified to make psak din", nor were you privy to what really went on.

    That's quite interesting, given that your lack of qualification hasn't prevented you from publicly challenging their psak, or baselessly accusing the dayanim of taking bribes.

    DO even bother to think what you write, before posting? Or is it that your innate hatred of the Jewish establishment, disguised as faux "exposing sabbatean pockets", has warped your thinking capabilities?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Though the Beis Din accentuated Rabbi Tal's flaws in their ruling, he's still entitled to choose to focus on the positive aspects of it, which cleared him of some very serious charges.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 12:22 AM

    Nice to see that Rav Amon Bazak holds clear thoughts on the matter

    ReplyDelete
  24. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 12:31 AM

    I said that - based on open knowledge - Rav Weiss shlita had previous personal and financial ties with the subject of the BD. Thus, according to basic Torah law, he is compromised, and should not be involved in the case. I didn't write the torah, it comes from Him up above, who told us about bribes "כִּי הַשֹּׁחַד יְעַוֵּר פִּקְחִים, וִיסַלֵּף דִּבְרֵי צַדִּיקִים."


    How does someone become immune from this law by being a Gadol? Again, it is an oxymoron, self contradictory position you are taking.


    a) You accept the Torah, therefore you accept Shemot 23:8


    b) Shemot 23: explicitly tells us that Tzaddikim do nto have immunity from bribes.


    c) You are claiming that Rav Weiss is a Gadol/Tzaddik and ipso facto is immune from bribes.


    there is no question that he has financial and personal ties to Tal


    so, please tell us, do you accept the whole Torah or only when it suits your agenda?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 12:32 AM

    Spell correct, it's written "bestiality"

    ReplyDelete
  26. Nice deflection, and avoiding responding to my comment.
    Note, as per Google, both spellings are correct.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Rabbi Asher Weiss did not hear the case.
    There were three independent respected dayanim who heard the case, and you should do Teshuva for casting aspersions as to their integrity.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 3:17 AM

    The psak din, which you have provided a blurred copy of, has the Header "Under the Presidency of Rav Asher Weiss" etc. Thus he presided over the BD.



    First you attack me for pointing out that Rav Weiss's position in this specific case is compromised - despite the fact that he had financial interests and personal friendship with the nidoon.


    My point regarding the BD is that they are also possibly compromised. It could be a top-down problem.

    If his presidency over the court is so irrelevant, why is it appearing in BIG LETTERS? Obviously to impress by his big credentials. So it is perfectly legitimate to ask if this has trickled down to the BD of 3.
    It is perfectly legitimate to ask any question, whether it upsets your thinking or not.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Ki seishev lilchom im moshel, bin tovin es asher lefonecho, vesamta sakin beloacho, im horav domeh lemalach H' tzvokos yevakshu tora mipihu vechilhu.... Although the BD paskened that he can go on with his Yeshiva, it is the responsibility of the individual to comprehend and to understand of what /who lies in front of him ("bin tovin") whether to drink from his well. As the good book advocates and says," Vesamta sakin beloacho". While both parties are married, it is inappropriate to incite a married woman to get divorced and discuss having children together. From her viewpoint, it is the classical of shemo nosno eineho beachar, al tikro shemo ela vaday nosno. Not to say the least, a typical Kivsas ho'rosh. He also abused his position by impersonating as if he is privileged with vision of who is destined to whom.
    He is not the best example of yevakshu tora mipihu, nor a malach H'. Enough said.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Wow Ehud replies to me: “While both parties are married, it is inappropriate to incite a married woman to get divorced and discuss having children together. From her viewpoint, it is the classical of shemo nosno eineho beachar, al tikro shemo ela vaday nosno.”
    Ehud I’m a big fan of yours. I love your comments on Mendel Epstein et al, the K-G garbage heter, all your comments on DT. I trust all is well. All is well with me, thanks, ב"ה. In 1991, by miracle from God, CUNY signed on June 11, 1991 my PhD dissertation of 3 published articles in economics. Surely, while both parties are married, it is inappropriate to incite a married woman to get divorced and discuss having children together. Yet this exactly what Rabbi Irwin Haute and his wife Rivka did to me in 1991. They opened: Court: Kings Supreme Court Index Number: 0023213/1991 Case Name: ARANOFF, SUSAN vs. ARANOFF, GERALD Case Type: MATRIMONIAL MOTION Track: Standard RJI Filed: 08/23/1991 Attorney/Firm For Plaintiff: IRWIN H. HAUT, ESQ. Attorney Type: Retained Atty. Status: Active.
    Bad actions of the moredet wife should concern everyone. “Judge the wretched and the orphan, vindicate the lowly and the poor” (Psalms 82:3). I’m trying to get my pension back in NYS COA 649 7/15/2019 and in SCOTUS 18-9390. DT, KA, and others tease me in my efforts in this blog.
    Ehud, true Rabbi Tal violates “While both parties are married, it is inappropriate to incite a married woman to get divorced and discuss having children together.” Yet, look at the happy ending: the husband does the מצוה מחזיר גרושתו. The civil court gives her a victory in her slander suit against Rabbi Tal. This, maybe, restores her name. Rabbi Tal remains married. Life goes on. I say we should stop calling Rabbi Tal horrible names, as KA does, calling him a loony, whatever.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 1:04 PM

    That's putting it very mildly. But I'm glad someone understands the kedusha required by a Rav , Kal vchomer a rosh yeshiva.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 1:09 PM

    The BD told him to stop talking thru his yidoni spirit. In plain psychological terms, the man is delusional, or is a charlatan.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 2:19 PM

    We can argue both sides - since he is allowed to continue teaching, you argue that he is righteous. since he is forbidden to have any communal or counselling role, i argue that he is unfit to teach Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 5:03 PM

    Top definition
    beastialityA common way to incorrectly spell word bestiality/word.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 9, 2019 at 5:35 PM

    There seems to be a tension between the text, and then how the Talmud brings in details about the Gett etc. You make a very good point - if he was killed, then there was no get. it only make sense if he divorced her before going out to war.

    I wonder if this is aggadah, and then how much we are required to accept it literally or not. Aggadah is not meant to be taken literally, it is an allegory, open to various interpretations.
    there is an aggadah that says when the Red sea parted, there were fountains of desalinated water from the walls of the sea.
    Perhaps there was also Coke, diet Coke, 7Up and orange juice.

    But again, it is not to be taken literally. Why should the Tenach be taken not literally, but aggadah be taken literally?

    ReplyDelete
  36. lol, coke and diet coke, similar to the flavors of the Manna, you made my day. Omarti echkemo vehi rechoka mimeni. No matter how much I tried to approach it with an open mind, I still couldn't fathom it. Yes, there is shivim ponim letorah, but I am not privileged to them. On the surface it does seem that David sinned as attested by the navi and confessing chotosi laH', and by his son Shlomo, when he said sei shearim rosheichem and the doors lifted, it seems H' forgave him, and I accept it as so. Outside of that, H' loved him and told his son Shlomo, bechol beisi ne'emon ...and he is our Hero!

    On the other note, a Rosh Yeshiva cannot talk from both sides of the mouth, do as I tell you and not as I do. Birvot hayamim, I firmly believe that many will part ways from him on their own. Vechaval Just because the BD did not ban him, there probably are other forces at work that we don't know. time will tell

    ReplyDelete
  37. Ehud says: “On the other note, a Rosh Yeshiva cannot talk from both sides of the mouth, do as I tell you and not as I do. Birvot hayamim, I firmly believe that many will part ways from him on their own. Vechaval Just because the BD did not ban him, there probably are other forces at work that we don't know. Time will tell”
    Yes, there probably are other forces at work that we don't know. Time will tell as in my case too. Allow me to show here my letter today:

    2.Exhibit A: Susan signs 2/9/1989 to live with me in Jerusalem shows convincingly that Susan and I had a dispute on where we should live. The Jewish law is adamant that a wife must agree with the husband on the issue of living in Jerusalem or in Brooklyn. I quote the Talmud Kethuboth 110b
    Mishnah. [A man] may compel all [his household] to go up [with him] to the land of Israel., but none may be compelled to leave it. all [one's household] may be compelled to go up to Jerusalem, but none may be compelled to leave it. [this applies to] both men and women [A wife also may compel her husband to live with her in Jerusalem or the Land of Israel and, if he refuses, she is entitled to demand a divorce and the payment of her kethubah.]. If a man married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must pay her [her kethubah] in the currency of the land of Israel. If he married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in Cappadocia he must pay her [her kethubah] in the currency of the land of Israel [The Cappadocian coins were dearer than the corresponding ones of the Land of Israel.]. If he married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must a gain pay [her kethubah] in the currency of the land of Israel. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel, however, ruled that he must pay her in the Cappadocian currency. If a man married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in Cappadocia, he must pay her [her kethubah] in the currency of Cappadocia.

    4.In August 1991 Susan and I were still married. See Appendix C US Federal Judge Sand March 6, 2009 in SCOTUS 18--9390: “Plaintiff and his ex-wife were divorced by foreign decree on February 17, 1993.” While both parties are married, it is inappropriate to incite a married woman to get divorced. This is what Rabbi Irwin Haut and his wife Rivka were doing. They submitted written testimonies: lies, lies, lies. The Hauts have passed on. Let bygones be bygones. I don't want to learn the truth about the Hauts and Susan. I just want my pension. I quote Appendix C US Federal Judge Sand March 6, 2009 in SCOTUS 18-9390: “Plaintiff, appearing pro se and having paid the requisite filing fee, brings this action against his pension fund alleging violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. \S 1001 et seq. Specifically, he claims that defendant is paying 55\% of his pension to his ex-wife, Susan Aranoff pursuant to a state court order in violation of ERISA. Plaintiff seeks a court order directing defendant to stop further payments and to reimburse all monies previously submitted to his ex-wife.”
    Thanks KA for your uptick and your comment “I follow.”

    ReplyDelete
  38. It seems he coveted her and wanted her at all costs as a hidden second wife while coming up with all kinds of self serving explanations, vechen lo y'eosse bimkomenu. He used his position to charm her hiding behind the cloth of Itztela deRabanan, metaher sheretz bekuf nun ta'amim, Stealing Kivsas HoRosh, the epitome of Lo Signov and Lo Sachmod behe'elem achas, Lifnei Iver lo siten michshol offering Atzas Achitofel to break up a family unit, Novi Sheker, ve'ein gomrim olov et haHallel, veze rak miktzas shvocho befonov (in his face). We have heard these stories of "destined from heaven", ""previous gilgulim partners" etc. from Pedophiles and other menuvolim. This story screams of an unbecoming, unfit entity, aka 'Achar', chametz baPesach vesha'ar kol yemos hashanah with a sure downfall coming soon soon. Rabbi S. Eliyahu is a straight shooter, although such a Rosh Yeshiva should have been removed from his position veyafeh sha'a achas kodem, however, it is analogous to Rabbi Yehuda Hanassi, at bentzivin umtzudoso prusso b'Yerushalayim, and Shmuel HaNAvi baMitzpa, sparing King Shaul public humiliation. In the line of Holech rochil megaleh sod, we are not privileged to the debate of what went on behind the scenes, and may not express of uma e'eseh shechaverim robu olay.
    I am yet in midst of reading Makor Rishon in discovery stage, and it ain't pretty!

    ReplyDelete
  39. My Dear friend G.A. I feel your pain and sympathize much with you and I am sure many others do as well. In well meaning terms, there is a time and a place for everything as in the song "Turn Turn Turn, For everything there is a time", a time to cry and a time to laugh....and as a good piece of advice, it is time turn the page. It consumes you and miss out on all the good things in life. Enjoy your blessings, since there is no better thing in this world than of what is called "Nachas"! Try not to let the past distract you from the present and eat your heart out, while seeking justice humbly in the background if you will. If you don't believe me, ask Dr. Phil!
    Shalom uVracha vekol tuv mikerev halev. Vehakol yavo al mekomo beShalom! Amen

    ReplyDelete
  40. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 10, 2019 at 9:25 PM

    Also, a Rav with a stain on his shirt is liable to the death penalty. What will average Jews say about this Rav? Secular Jews who occasionally consider becoming more religious? Maybe they will decide against it because is stories like this one.
    So it's a very severe aveira, with serious repercussions.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 10, 2019 at 9:35 PM

    Let's not forget Barry freundel, the mikve peeping rabbi. He even wrote books on modesty. What a sick joke.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Ehud replies to me “My Dear friend G.A. I feel your pain and sympathize much with you and I am sure many others do as well.”
    Thanks Ehud and thanks KA for the uptick. The judges in NYS COA 649 7/15/2019 cannot rule until after the return date, next week. Yes, they will rule in my favor, God willing. Why? They do feel my pain and do sympathize with me as you and KA and many others do.
    Ehud, you gave me the great idea to tell the judges that it is highly inappropriate when the couple are still married to incite to divorce. Supposedly this is what Rabbi Tal did, but we don’t know for sure. It could some trickery. Maybe Rabbi Tal planned a trick in his wife, to deprive her of money. Cunning rogues are in Arachin, daf hayomi. I like Rabbi Eliezer’s view. Our Sages are very angry at cunning rogues.
    Sotah 20a:
    “R. Joshua says: a woman prefers one kab [metaphorical for a scanty livelihood] and sexual indulgence to nine kab [luxurious style of living] and continence. he used to say, a foolish pietist, a cunning rogue, a female pharisee, and the plague of pharisees bring destruction upon the world.”
    Sotah 21b:
    “R. Assi said in the name of R. Johanan: [A cunning rogue is] he who gives advice to sell an estate which is inconsiderable [The law of inheritance is that where the estate is small, the daughters inherit and the sons can go begging (B.B. 140a).]. For R. Assi said in the name of R. Johanan: If the male-orphans sold an inconsiderable estate before [the daughters established their claim at a Court], their act of selling is legal.”
    Maybe Rabbi Tal wants to give away his money, the 500,000 court fine, just to aggravate his wife? Maybe to please his wife. Maybe Rabbi Tal is not a cunning rogue. Can we not speculate? Can we change the subject? KA, Barry Freundel got punished: jailed for his crimes. KA, tell us your opinion of the K-G garbage heter, please. I’m trying to change the subject, follow KA?

    ReplyDelete
  43. * Supposedly this is what Rabbi Tal did, but we don’t know for sure. *

    This is what BatSheva (not her real name) said in מקור ראשון ===>
    https://www.makorrishon.co.il/magazine/150085/

    "ואז הרב קיבל 'מסר' שבו הוא רואה שהוא עתיד להתאלמן ואני עומדת להתגרש. הוא אמר שהוא נשמת דוד המלך, אני נשמת בת־שבע ואשתו היא נשמת מיכל. התפתח בינינו קשר עמוק וחזק, נפגשנו פגישות ארוכות כמה פעמים בשבוע, דיברנו בטלפון והסתמסנו המון. הייתה אהבה גדולה. כל הזמן היינו בחוסר ודאות: האם להאמין למה שאנחנו מקבלים? למה נראה לנו שהשם משתף פעולה עם הסיפור הזה? אבל לא יכולנו לנתק את הקשר בגלל המשיכה העצומה והמִגנוט החזק.

    ...הרב דרבן אותי להתגרש
    ...הוא הציע לי להתגרש ולהינשא לו בסתר
    ...אני התחלתי לפעול לגירושין וחיכינו לראות מה יקרה.
    ...סיכמנו שאעדכן אותו ביום שבו אקבל גט

    A rude awakening:
    עכשיו אני רואה איך השקר וההסתרה שלו רק הולכים ומסבכים את כולם, ואני לא רוצה ...לתת יד לזה".
    אישה נשואה שלטענתה התגרשה על פי הוראתו,
    ...לטענתה הרב טל דחף אותה להתגרש


    בשלב הזה החליטו לתבוע פיצוי מהרב טל על השנתיים שחיו בפירוד בגללו".

    בת־שבע תבעה 700 אלף שקל, ובדיון הצדדים התפשרו על 500 אלף. יש מסמך חתום
    בכתב ידו של טל, שמתחייב לשלם את הכסף בתנאי
    ...שבת־שבע תשתוק
    Shtika kehoda'ah, pun intended

    כעבור זמן הסיפור דלף, אבל לא ממנה, ומאז הוא לא מוכן להמשיך לשלם.
    הרב טל תובע שם חצי מיליון שקלים מבת־שבע ובעלה, בטענה כי הפרו את חובת הסודיות

    ...כששאלו את הרב וייס למה הוא מפרסם מכתבי תמיכה, הוא אמר שהרב טל עזר לו בעבר בקמפיין שלו, אז הוא חייב לו".
    Not so fast my friend, According to "Vihyisen Nekiyim", he should have recused himself! A big NO NO according to the Sh"Aruch

    תוכני המחשב הגיעו גם לידיעתו של הרב שמואל אליהו, ולאחר מכן פרסם הרב מכתב שבו נאמר בין השאר: "בדקתי את עניין רוח הקודש שהוא משתמש בה, וגיליתי שהרב טל נותן עצות במשך שנים רבות לאנשים רבים על פי רוח הקודש, וגרם לנזקים גדולים מאוד לאנשים רבים. (…) הרב טל ניהל קשרים לא בריאים גם עם בחורות צעירות וגם עם נשים נשואות. (…) התברר לי סופית שהוא

    *** לא יכול כעת להיות ראש ישיבה,***

    גם בגלל קשריו עם הנשים וגם בגלל הרוח שהוא מנחה את הישיבה על פיה".
    Ruach HaKodesh my foot, much rather Ruach Shtut!


    אדם המכיר מקרוב את הפרשה, הרב משה (שם בדוי), סיפר לנו על השתלשלות הדברים: "הרב טל מסר את המחשב לבית הדין, מתוך מחשבה שהוא מחק ממנו הכול. אלא שמי שנתבקש לטפל במחשב הצליח לשחזר את תוכן הדיסק הקשיח. מתברר שהרב טל ניהל במשך שנים התכתבות שבה הוא שואל שאלות, ואיזו ישות מיסטית עונה לו תשובות. הטקסט הזה מציג לך תמונת ראי של כל השערוריות. אותה 'ישות' מורה לרב טל לעשות דברים לא הגיוניים בעליל, כמו לקשור קשרים עם בת־שבע, והוא נכנע לה לגמרי, גם כשברור לכל בר דעת שייגרם נזק גדול.
    ???אפשר לכהן כראש ישיבה כשאתה מנוהל על ידי קולות ???
    אם יש לך טייס שמקשיב רק לרוחות, היית נותן לו להטיס מטוס מלא בנוסעים
    ?"
    Ki yakim bekirbecho Novi

    "הרב אמר לי שהוא רואה בשמיים שיהיה לנו בן. כשהתברר שיש לנו בת, שאלתי אותו 'הרי אמרת שזה יהיה זכר', ובתגובה הוא תקף אותי ואמר שלא התפללתי מספיק, ושאם אתפלל חזק, העובר יהפוך לבן. בהמשך אמר שהוא עצמו יכול להתפלל ולהפוך את העובר לזכר, אבל אז יהיה על הבן שלנו קטרוג גדול"

    Question: would you send your children to him to learn Torah?
    Do you still have any doubts for "Suppositions"
    Your Honor, I rest my case.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Kalonymus AnonymusJuly 12, 2019 at 3:37 PM

    Gerald, K-G heter, not sure how valid it is, and on what basis. Rav Goren had to reverse mamzerut, so he found flaws in the alleged conversion, added doubt upon doubt. Nowadays, they annul conversions without blinking an eye. Rabbi Rackman tried to find flaws in kiddushin, and I think this inspired Shmuel K, and the IBD.
    BUT kg were alleging mental illness. They need multiple doubts. A single doubt can be countered. I don't support that heter.

    ReplyDelete
  45. KA says: “Rabbi Rackman tried to find flaws in kiddushin, and I think this inspired Shmuel K, and the IBD. BUT kg were alleging mental illness. They need multiple doubts. A single doubt can be countered. I don't support that heter.”
    Beautiful. The problem is that K-G alleging mental illness, is so preposterous, it smacks of רשע ערום, especially after a baby. Tamar never claimed mental illness, as DT proved in this blog many times. This was רשע ערום advice to Tamar to free her, so she could marry her lover without bet din, get etc.
    See https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-2012-05-05-fl-postelnik-divorce-20120504-story.html
    But Susan Aranoff, director of Agunah International, which supports Jewish women seeking divorces, said social media has little effect because many husbands still are resistant after "all the bullets have been fired.”

    ReplyDelete
  46. This man lost a lifetime of credibility in a spur of the moment. He is still in the covering up stage, paying tavin utkilin for Ksus einayim. If he still has left any self respect, he would resign and go into seclusion. Umah yomru hagoyim, umah yomru haYidden, how can his wife pallet all this? lol, she just might die from this whole scandal, having his death wish for her all come true.

    ReplyDelete

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