Rav Solveitchik & Commensurability II

Taken from Daas Torah page 53

Rav Yosef Ber Soloveitchik (The Halakhic Mind): the problem of evidence in religion will never be solved. The believer does not miss philosophic legitimation; the skeptic will never be satisfied with any cognitive demonstration. This ticklish problem became the Gordian knot of many theological endeavors. Philosophers of religion would have achieved more had they dedicated themselves to the task of interpreting concrete reality in terms and concepts that fit into the framework of a religious world perspective.

Rav Yosef Ber Soloveitchik (Lonely Man of Faith): I have never been seriously troubled by the problem of the Biblical doctrine of creation vis‑à‑vis the scientific story of evolution at both the cosmic and the organic levels, nor have I been perturbed by the confrontation of the mechanistic interpretation of the human mind with the Biblical spiritual concept of man. I have not been perplexed by the impossibility of fitting the mystery of revelation into the framework of historical empiricism. Moreover, I have not even been troubled by the theories of Biblical criticism which contradict the very foundations upon which the sanctity and integrity of Scriptures
====================================
Rav Yosef Ber Soloveitchik (Unpublished 7th Lecture on Bereishis): Indeed, one of the most annoying scientific facts which the religious man encounters is the problem of evolution and creation. However, this is not the real problem. What actually is irreconcilable is the concept of man as the bearer of a divine image and the idea of man as an intelligent animal in science. Evolution and creation can be reconciled merely by saying that six days is not absolutely so, but is indefinite and may be longer. Maimonides spoke of Creation in terms of phases and the Kabbalah in terms of sefiros, the time of which may be indefinite. However, our conflict is man as a unique being and man as a friend of the animal. Science can never explain how being came into being, for it is out of the realm of science, while the Bible is concerned with the problem of ex nihilo. Aristotle could not accept evolution because he believed in the eternity of forms. (Lecture XII).

The Emergence of Ethical Man, pp. 4-5:[from R' Gil Student]

Indeed, one of the most annoying scientific facts which the modern homo religiosus encounters and tries vainly to harmonize with his belief is the so-called theory of evolution. In our daily jargon, we call this antinomy "evolution versus creation." The phrase does not exactly reflect the crux of the controversy, for the question does not revolve around divine creation and mechanistic evolution as such. We could find a solution of some kind to this controversy. What in fact is theoretically irreconcilable is the concept of man as the bearer of the divine image with the equalling of man and animal-plant existences. In other words, the ontic autonomy or heteronomy of man is the problem.

Father can ruin daughter's life

שו"ת משנה הלכות חלק יד סימן קצה

רק הערה קטנה בדבר מה שאמרו חז"ל דביד האב למסור את בתו הקטנה למנוול ומוכה שחין וכמ"ש ז"ל דאי בעי מסר לה למנוול ומוכה שחין, ולכאורה פלא אמאי לא תקנו חז"ל קנס ועונש להעושה כן שאם יבא אב וימסור את בתו למנוול יענשו אותו הב"ד וימתחו אותו על העמוד, אבל לא מצינו כן אלא מצינו ההיפוך שכיון שחששו ז"ל שאפשר שיעשה לה כן וימסרנה למנוול אם יכעוס עליה באופן שתמצא מציאה וכיוצא בו ויחייבו אותו לזונה והיא תקבל המציאה והמעשה ידיה ולכן תקנו לו לאב מציאתה ומעשה ידיה עיין תוס' כתובות (דף מ"ז) זכאי במציאתה משום איבה ופי' בקונט' וכו' ולר"י נראה איבה דמציאתה היינו שלא יקדשנה למנוול ומוכה שחין ובקטנה אפילו אינה סמוכה על שלחנו ואינו מפרנסה ואפ"ה תקנו מציאתה לאביה משום איבה שלא יקדשנה למנוול ומוכה שחין

ובזה ישבתי קושית הב"י והב"ח על הרמב"ם בפ"ג מהל' אישות הי"א האב מקדש את בתו שלא לדעתה כל זמן שהיא קטנה וכו' וקידושיה לאביה וכן הוא זכאי במציאתה ובמעשה ידיה וכו' והב"י א"ע סי' ל"ז והב"ח תמהו דמאי שיטא דמציאה לכאן ולא הי' לו להזכיר כאן מדיני מציאה ע"ש ולפמ"ש נראה לישב דהא בהא תליא דכיון דזכתה התורה לאב לקדשה ולקבל כסף קידושיה ואכתי א"כ באב שירצה בכסף קידושין ימסרנה למנוול ומוכה שחין בשביל להוסיף כסף קידושין לו וע"ז הוסיף דחז"ל תקנו לו שזוכה במציאתה ולא יהיה לה איבה ולא ימסור אותה למנוול ומוכה שחין.

ומבואר דיש חשש איבה בין אביה לבתה אפי' במציאה ומעשה ידיה אם לא יתנו לאביה וחיישינן שלא ימסרנה למנוול ומוכה שחין כ"ש שאם יגרמו לו איבה לשנאת את בתו בפועל ע"י שיקחו אותה בע"כ ממנו בערכאות וכיוצא בו שאז יקחו מציאתה ומעשה ידיה ממנו ח"ו שיש לחוש שימסרנה למנוול ומוכה שחין, שזה בכלל גזילה ממנו שגזלה הבת מה ששייך לו ואח"כ עוד יתבענו להחזיקה ולזונה בע"כ של הערכאות וגם יקחו את המעשה ידיה והמציאה שתמצא שבודאי יהי' לו איבה ואם עוד האם שמחזיקה הבת ילמדה לדבר נגד האב בודאי ובודאי שיהי' לו איבה ואיבה, וילך וימסרנה למנוול ומוכה שחין ויקבל כסף קידושין הרבה ממנו ויוכל עם כסף זה לשלם החוב מה שהוטל עליו השופט בע"כ שלא כהלכה.

והנה מה נאמר ראה ראינו מה קרא בעונ"ה אם המעשה אמת מהאב שקידש את בתו קטנה ולא ידוע לי אם אמת הדבר או לא כי לא שמעתי מהבעל כלום רק מה ששמעתי מבחוץ ועכ"פ הרי האב נאמן לומר קדשתי את בתי והוא הלכה מפורשת בלי חולק, אבל בין כך ובין כך הדבר מכאיב מאד וכנראה שכל גדולי ישראל דואגים על הדבר וחוששין ח"ו על קלקול הדור, אבל האמת שצריך לירד למקור המחלה הזו, כי אין אני רוצה פה לאשם או לנקות את הבעל או את האשה כי לזה יש דין בישראל ושמוע בין אחיכם כתיב, ואם הם רוצים להיות ככל הגוים וללכת במשפטי עכו"ם האחריות עלינו למונעם אם יכולים, אמנם לעצם הענין פשוט שמחמת האיבה שנעשה בין האב לבתו עשה מה שעשה וגם אנחנו כנראה לא יצאנו ידי חובתינו שעד עכשיו לא רבני קאנאדא ולא רבני מפה לא עשינו שום פעולה ולא דאגנו לא על מעשה אשה זו ולא על נשים אחרות או אנשים אשר הולכים בערכאות ולא הוציאו חרם ונדוי על האשה שהלכה לערכאות או על הבעל ועדיין לא חזרה בה, ולא הוציאה המסירה מהבית משפט שלהם לבא לב"ד או לזבל"א ולהבטיח להבעל שלא ילכו ולא יביאו עוד לידי עכו"ם.

וידוע מה שאמרו חז"ל (גיטין נ"ז) במעשה דקמצא ובר קמצא ומדשתקי להו רבנן ש"מ מינח קניחא להו והלך ומסר את כלל ישראל והחריב את בית מקדשינו וגלה את ישראל ופלא שחז"ל לא האשימו כלל אותו מוסר בחורבן הבית אלא אמרו ענותנותו של זכרי' בן אבקילוס חרבה את מקדשינו וכו' וצ"ב ח"ו לשום אשמה גדולה כזו על הצדיק וענו ר' זכרי' וליקחה מהאשם והמסור באמת, אבל כנראה ששתיקת החכמים גרמה לזה וגם כשבאו כבר חכמי ישראל ושאלו את ר' זכרי' שהי' ראש ב"ד כדת מה לעשות עם המסור והוא השיב יאמרו בעלי מומין קרבין א"כ נהרוג אותו והשיב יאמרו המטיל מום בקדשים ולכאורה הצדק אתו ומה הי' לו לפסוק ואטו הי' לו לפסוק שלא כהלכה ואמרתי בס"ד שהחסרון הי' כשבאו לר"ז ואמרו לו יש כאן מסור הי"ל לר"ז מיד לומר מסור מצוה להרגו כדיני מסור ובפרט לכלל ישראל ולא ליכנס יאמרו מטיל מום בקדשים ואטו משום מטיל מום הורגים אותו והלא מסור אבל הקילו בדין מסור ולכן הטילו כל האשמה עליו.

ולכן נלפענ"ד דגם ידינו אינם נקיים אם נוסיף להטיל איבה בין אב לבתו ולא נעקר ונשרוש את הרע להחרים על כל ההולכים במסירות לערכאות הן איש והן אשה שדינם נפסק בש"ע ח"מ שם ולא להניח כן שיקחו הילדים מאבותיהן ע"י כח השופט וערכאות שנותנין הילדים להנשים וכיוצא בו ועוד יותר בלי להתחשב עם תורתינו הקדושה כלל, שחייבים לחנך הבנים וזה שייך להבעל ומצוה שלו הוא וחיוב על האב ואין להם להאבות רק להחזיקם בממונם וגם לא לראותם כרצונם ואינם סומכים על שלחנם כלל ואפילו לראותם בלבד רק מתי שיתרצה השופט או הגרושה שהביאתו לבית המשפט והאיבה גדולה ולא די לו להבעל שקנסוהו השופט ואשתו המרשעת שהביאתו לבית המשפט שבאופן שהולכת לערכאות ולוקחת הבנים מבעלה אינו מחויב ע"פ התורה לשלם אפי' פרוטה ואדרבה הרי גזלה הכל מבעלה הבנים והמשפחה והרכוש שלו בבית המשפט ועכשיו גם אנחנו נוסף עליו חרמות וקנסות על אשר בצערו עשה מה שהתירה לו התורה וחששה לו
שו"ת משנה הלכות חלק יד סימן קצה

בקיצור עכ"פ לא מצינו שיקנסו את הבעל אם קדש את בתו למנוול ומוכה שחין אלא תקנו חז"ל דרכים שלא יבא לידי זה, ולכן לפענ"ד הגם שודאי צריך לגנות הדבר וכן לא יעשה לנקום בבתו מחמת איבה אבל החוב קדוש מוטל עלינו ועל כל מי שיש בידו להסיר הרע הזה מלילך לערכאות וליקח הבנים וילדים אשר חנן ה' את האב וליתנם בידי אכזרים אשר על זה נאמרב בניך נתונים לעם אחר ואין לאל ידיך ואפילו לראותם בלבד רק להחזיקם וליתן הרבה כסף כמו שיפסוק השופט העכו"ם הרשע לפי רשעתו השם ירחם.
[..].

Rav Soloveitchik's lectures I - Commensurability

Rav Meir Triebitz writes:

The Rav’s position on commensurability can be gleaned from two statements of his, one from these lectures and one from the aforementioned essay u-Bikashtem Misham. The Rav opens his second lecture by stating:

“The Torah is not interested in disclosing any scientific data to man. Revelation was only the revealing of the will of God… Therefore if the Bible employed the Ptolemaic description of the cosmos, it was only to present to the people of its time and not to present the true scientific view…” (Lecture II).

The essence of revelation for the Rav is therefore not ontological but ethical. Ontology demands commensurability with scientific facts. Not only is ethics not in need of such commensurability, ethics is often more safely anchored in previous ontologies which science has long discarded. We discussed above that Kant’s revolution in Western thought was to restore a ‘Copernican’ like view of the world. While not claiming a Ptolemaic description of scientific reality, the Rav’s whole philosophy of ethics rests upon an anti-Copernican conception. The halachic process, he writes, “cannot free itself from its subjugation to the initial a priori assumptions. It begins with those and concludes with them.” (u-Bikashtem Misham p. 206) This is in contradistinction to science which can free itself of previous assumptions and create new paradigms. On the other hand, “Halachic thought which is rooted in revelation cannot command absolute authority over its axioms.” (ibid.)

The halacha must combine both revelation and reason in a dialectic process in order to remain bound to both tradition and continuity. The dialectic of revelation and reason, which is rejected by the scientific method, is the basis of the incommensurability of the two systems of thought. [...]

Rav Soloveitchik's Lectures on Bereishis

I would like to share with you a problem that has bothered me for a while. Most of you are aware that Rav Soloveitchik gave public lectures on many topics through the years. In the 1940's he gave lectures on Bereishis which involved his views on science and evolution as well as halacha, kabbala and philosophy. One of the students who took notes of some of these lectures, requested that they be edited and given a proper introduction and critical notes be provided to expand and place the lecture in context.

This has been done concerning the lectures on Bereishis by a good friend - Rav Meir Treibitz - who is not only a master of the Torah literature but is also intimately acquainted with kabbalah and philosophy - as well as having a Ph.D. in physics etc etc. He also wrote an introduction to my sefer Daas Torah.

The sponsor of the original process - due to his many difficulties has not been able to pay for the work nor is he prepared to publish it as originally intended. The person who produced the notes - has no money to pay for anything - but insists on his ownership of the notes he took. A major Orthodox organization as well as various members of the family have expressed great appreciation for the tremendous work which has been done - and they look forward to more such efforts. But they seem preoccupied and after 6 months despite promises - nothing is happening.

In sum, the brilliant exposition of Rav Solveitchik's notes on Bereishis is finished. But there is no obvious path for the work to be published. Lawyers who have been consulted have said the issue could stay in courts for many years - assuming that one can afford the legal expenses.

I will publish excerpts on this blog. Anyone who has a solution for this painful problem - should please contact me.

Sex offenders III - Treatment in Chareidi society

Time magazine reports:

Among Israel's ultra-orthodox Jews, the Haredim, social workers are often called "child-snatchers" and the police "Cossacks," harking back to the 19th century pogroms against Jews in Russia. These cloistered communities, in which women are expected to raise and financially support their large families while their husbands spend their days stooped over the Torah, make up 10% of Israel's population and a third of Jerusalem's, and consider themselves defenders of a core morality in Jewish society. But that moral authority has come under scrutiny since evidence began to emerge in March of incest, rape and child abuse in four different ultra-orthodox enclaves around the country.

Over the last few weeks the Cossacks have arrived wearing the uniform of the Israeli national police force. In a series of raids following tip-offs from victims' relatives, neighbors and hospital workers, the police have arrested ultra-orthodox wives, husbands and yeshiva students.

Community elders were at first appalled. Now they are grateful for the intervention. "The Haredim are shocked by these cases," says Noach Korman, a Haredi attorney in the rabbinical court that adjudicates family and religious law, and the director of a shelter for battered wives. "At first they said, 'These people are crazy, they don't belong to us.' But now I hear Haredi voices saying: 'We should examine ourselves and not close our eyes to why these things are happening.' "Says Naomi Ragen, an orthodox woman who is an author and advocate for gender equality: "These shocking things had to come out. There was no more room left under the carpet."

Sex predators operate with ease among the ultra-orthodox communities because female victims often keep quiet, knowing that to speak out will damage their prospects of finding a husband. "The families all want their girls to have a AAA marriage to a religious scholar from a good family, and nobody's going to marry a girl who gets raped," says Ragen. In Bnei Brak, a predominately Haredi city near Tel Aviv, social worker Doron Agasi says one young Haredi man told him that he had molested more than a hundred girls. Agasi, director of the Shlom Banaich Fellowship, the only organization in Israel that treats pedophiles and their victims, convinced the young man to confess to the police. But, says Agasi, the authorities refused to bring charges because none of the parents of the alleged victims had filed complaints. Agasi says the rapist is now roaming free.

Convincing the Haredi to work with police and social workers has been a struggle, says Miki Miller, a social worker in the newly built Haredi town of Kiryat Sefer near Jerusalem. "The Haredi believe that a closed society is a pure society," she says. But a closed society can hide a multitude of sins. A senior police officer in Jerusalem acknowledges that the instincts of the Haredi community to cover up such crimes undermines the authorities' ability to investigate and prosecute offenders: "We're aware of this phenomenon of sex abuse among Haredis, but an extremely low number of these cases are ever reported."

The first port of call for Haredi families faced with violence or sex crimes is often their rabbi. But religious leaders themselves have not been immune from accusations of abuse. On April 6, a Jerusalem court indicted a Haredi mother of eight for child abuse in light of evidence that she broke her two toddlers' bones with hammers, forced the children to eat feces, and locked them inside a suitcase for hours. The alleged abuses came to light only after her three-year-old son was taken to hospital in a coma with brain damage. The woman claimed she was driving "devils" from her children following instructions from her religious counselor Elior Chen, who has since fled to Canada. Israeli police are seeking his extradition.[...]

EJF - RaP's recapitulation

RaP responds to Roni's questions from a previous "EJF - Proselytizing Advertisement":
===============================
To Roni who said... "It is overwhelming clear that you on a rampage campaign against R. Tropper"

RaP: Nope, I am not on a "rampage" and you are mistaking and confusing a serious interest in this subject and thorough analysis and misnaming it a "rampage" simply because you don't like the concluions. Stop calling names and acting "frum" and holier-than-thou and debate the points in detail, if you can.

Furthermore, if you had even bothered to read some of my other posts you will see that I have defended Rabbi Tropper many times right here on this very blog, and in depth, trying to fathom and explain where he is coming from on kiruv and geirus issues and I even took Rabbi Tropper's hashkafic point of view against the owner of this blog and some of his serious supporters in the complex and sad Rabbi Slifkin saga (but I do not support Rabbi Tropper's alleged methods in slandering Rabbi Slifkin against other gedolim.)

If you don't believe me, please see the following five posts on this blog for yourself:

1) My post at "Rabbi Tropper & Prague - what happened?" at where I tried to explain Rabbi Tropper's complex position that became a new post at:

2) "R' Tropper - Kiruv vs Geirus/ RaP's analysis" at See my comments there that which shows my deepest sympathies with Rabbi Tropper's present struggles:

"Rabbi Tropper is from those kiruv workers (his main stock in trade) who works using the hard-sell method and he is very good at what he does in kiruv and is famous for his heady, strong-willed, blusterry speeches meant to bowl over his listeners, and yes he can be very intimidating and insulting to his listeners who may not share his moods. (Guess what: This is actually good kiruv believe it or not, because it is prone to induce a mind-shift as a form of "shock therapy" in his listeners opening them up to new Torah ideas they had never heard before), although he can also take it slow and gentle when he works with very diverse audiences who he knows will not go for his shock tactics. And yes, he generally holds that those who become his disci[les must adhere to quick adherence to his utterances and rules. Rabbi Tropper's kiruv methods as such are not an issue in this dialogue, nor do I think that his role in getting Rabbi Slifkin's books off the frum radar screen has anything to do with the current set of "Kiruv vs Geirus" issues that are riling Rabbi Tropper and confusing those who come face to face with him today because right now the man is a walking dichotomy. A sort of split personality, not fully conscious of the depth of his inner turmoil and extent of the self-contradiction he is spilling wherever he goes nowadays, as his kiruv side battles and tries to reconcile itself with the issues of geirus he has now immersed himself in for better or worse, and he is in over his head this time. While Rabbi tropper is agadol in the kiruv world, he is a zero in the world of dayanim and batei din. And yes, he is a big talmid chochme, but most rosh yeshivas (which he also claims to be of Kol Yaakov Yeshiva) are not involved in shimush lema'aseh and they are not dayanim. You do not go to a rosh yeshiva if you want to get divorced or are looking for a geirus. Rosh yeshivas are generally never poskim except for what goes on inside their yeshivas, and unlike a kiruv worker who can and MUST walk all over the range looking for people to mekarev, a dayan on the other hand, MUST contain himself and restrict himself to a very narrow venue, the Bais Din and its confines where he sits in judgment of cases and of others. In short, how to reconcile Kiruv ("drawing people close") and Richuk ("distancing" people)? How to reconcile the need to be a sweet Kiruv Worker (who must always be winning JEWISH friends and influencing people to eventually become/morph into being Haredi/Yeshivish) and on the other hand with a conflicting task, the enforcing the rules and dictates of Batei Din in regard to conversions that requires, per force, the distancing and pushing away of people, certianly gentiles and if need be even the Jews attached to those gentiles."

3) "R' Slifkin - context of ban /Ra" at where I even say:

"You know, this is where you have to admire Rabbi Tropper's kiruv derech that at least he does not lose himself or his students on all this fake double-talk about having some sort of allegiance to science and secular knowledge when as he rightly holds, Torah is not a substance that can be mixed or diluted with anything else to prove its powers and validity" and defending him "It's now le'acaher hama'aseh, and to get back to the point, Rabbi Tropper, at the end of the day is just a cog in what turned out to be pretty hefty Haredi machine. What can you do, that is just the way it goes sometimes."

4) "Kiruv I - The end of kiruv as we know it!" at l where I state that

"Rabbi Leib Tropper went in the other direction, feeling that both Ohr Somaych and Aish HaTorah had lost sight of their main mandate of basing everying ONLY on intense Gemora learning and rapid paced transformation to being a Ben Torah (not a bad goal but not as attractive to the nasses as Aish HaTorah's appeal, as is evident.)...Rabbi Tropper's Kol Yaakov yeshiva also in Monsey that stresses only the learning element, even though it does have an outrecah "Horizons" program...Rabbi Tropper is a venturer because with his EJF program to welcome in by doing outreach the non-Jewish spouses of interfaith couples under "strict" Beth Din auspices (actually fueling the flames of the process, as it were) he is doing a classical juggling act, that on the one hand he is trying to preempt and ward off attacks from the Haredi world he admires and respects and needs but at the the same time he is caving in to the interfaith flood at the gate and in this he is no different to ALL other Kiruv workers out there today trying to cope with the flood tide of interfaith students (meaning students from mixed marriages or intermarrieds themseleves, or those with non-Halachic conversions), and instead of calling a spade a spade and seeing the writing on the wall, that THE AGE OF KIRUV AS WE KNOW IT IS OVER..."And much of the above became the new post at:

5) "Kiruv II - Paradigm change for outreach workers" at

So at this time, unless you can acknowledge otherwise, it is obvious that you have not been reading those posts but just come here and make a few belly-aching comments simply because you don't like a few things you hear here.

"and the more you attack every single person associated with him an even attack Rav REuven Feinstein shows your even more your irrational campaign."

RaP: Can you point to the alleged "irrationality" you IMAGINE? Is the owner of this blog Rabbi Dr. Eidensohn "irrational", who posted I, II and and many other posts like this and who posts his and others' comments after serious review of each comment and who opposes the EJF effort and Rabbi Tropper's methods? Is Rav Moshe Shternbuch "irrational" for opposing efforts, see "Rav Moshe Sternbuch - Authorized Translation" and "Rav Moshe Sternbuch - Kiruv for non-Jews and "Bedatz Letter regarding EJF signed by Gaavad" like those of Rabbi Tropper and the EJF? Is the entire BADATZ of the powerful Eidah HaChareidis "irrational" (are Horav Meir Brandsorfer, Horav Moshe Sternbuch, Horav Naftoli Frenkal, Horav Avrohom Yitzchok Ulman, Horav Yakov Mendel Yorovitch, Horav Yehoushua Rosenberg ALL "irrational" too for signing it?) see "Bedatz letter regarding conversion" and of taking the extreme measure of openly, see "Bedatz letter regarding conversion" and rebuking and warning dayanim and batei din all over the world who were Recipients of its official warning letters and giving Publicicty to it, authorising its dissemination online through this very blog by Rabbi Dr. Eidensohn. It has been Rabbi Dr. Eidensohn who has asked for written Halachik clarifications from Rabbi Tropper and EJF and none has been forthcoming, so take it up with him if you think he and others being "irrational" for asking for a written reason al pi din and for his efforts EJF tried to smear him, see "EJF smear campaign"

"While I unerstan the reservations against R. Tropper an his plans,"

RaP: You do? Like what? This may be the seed of some fruitful discussions perhaps, don't you think? instead of hiding behind smokescreens and blaming others of being "irrational" when you have no good RATIONAL and LOGICAL and FACTUAL arguments or proofs of your own to produce, so far.

"your voice of opposition shows that there is more at stake for his critics that are far from "leshem shamayim."

RaP: You are wrong and Rabbi Tropper has yet to prove that everything he does is "leshem shamayim" and not coming from his notorious over-sized ego that brooks no opposition and who yells at anyone who dares oppose him.

Rabbi Tropper does not need "defenders" that make him look like he is the "poor little victim" of something when he is not.

Rabbi Tropper and Dr. Tom Kaplan sat down and decided on their own on a new scheme, that went far beyond in a quantum leap from Rabbi Tropper's world of kiruv and his Baal teshuva Kol Yaakov Yeshiva (which he ran very well) and would now branch into the world of batei din and geirus (based on many reasons that I have discussed in my other posts) that they called "EJF" and how to sell it to rabbonim and to the frum world and of course to the world of gentiles who were married or hitched to Jews and who would now be targeted for being inspired to get "real" conversions at Batei Din, and how to implement all this as if this was a "product" like Coca Cola that was being launched based on a business plan with lots of financing and professionalism behind it. So let's get real please and not talk like babies.

"With regards to Rabbi Bomzer (which i can clearly see that what bothers you is that R. Tropper an many Rabbonim that participate in EJF attack the fake an phony conversions of people like R. H Bomzer),"

RaP: Quite honestly, nobody on this blog could give a hoot about Rabbi Bomzer because if you had read all the posts seriously you will see that most posters here are against ANY kind of easy conversions no matter from who, be it Rabbi Bomzer, Chabad, kiruv organizations and workers, the RCA, the Israeli Rabbanut and now including Rabbi Tropper and his EJF. So cut out the nonsense because noone on this blog cares about or has anything to do with Rabbi Bomzer.

"he is known in many circles for his false conversions where he converts people 1) knowing ahead of time that they are not interested to keep torah and mitzvot (not only that they have lapses in the future); do not keep shabbat, kashrut, taharat ha mishpacha from the very outset. 3) Actually the rabbanut over ten years ago has written that his conversion needs bedikah! for his reputation is actually very well known, an most importantly his fees are also known!"

RaP: All this is interesting, but not to the point and only proves that YOU want to now smear Rabbi Bomzer. If you want to get into these kind of discussions, then you will discover that most situations involving geirus involve matters of self-interest somewhere along the line. It was Rabbi Tropper's connection with Tom Kaplan whose sister married to a man of Hispanic ancestry (Otto Aguiar) and who needed a conversion for himself and son ("Guma Kaplan Aguiar is the son of Ellen Kaplan.") that was a huge factor dragging Rabbi Tropper into this whole EJF adventure, see "Who is behind Eternal Jewish Family?" and "Is Eternal Jewish Family the center of the universe?" It may be rabbis who need money and charge fees, or interfaith couples who lie about their true intentions just to fool the dayanim, entire rabbinates and batei din that are not respected and are negated by other batei din, like happeened to Rabbi Drukman at the hands of Rav sherman and the High Court of the Rabbanut and Rabbi Tropper at the hands of the Bais Din of the Eidah Hachareidis for attempts at working to facilitate mass conversions. So while talking about RabbI bomezer may be true and interesting it is not much different to all the other problems that will arise for rabbis in the geirus business. So again, quit harping about Rabbi Bomzer, because he is already history, noone here really cares about him, and the focus is now on Rabbi Troppe and EJF and it would be apprecaited if you can expa=lain to us what Rabbi Tropper and EJF are doing that is so great that in the meantime so many people are having genuine Halachic issues with it.

"Continue to defend him and other similar rabbis"

RaP: Noone is defedning anyone here if you haven't noticed. This is a forum for discussion and you are welcome to join it instead of standing on the sidelines making silly comments.

"an attack vehemently Rav Reuven Feinstein and others with such disparagment and everyone will see clearly publicity's agenda!"

RaP: Again you fail to understand that this is a serious matter that is under discussion and just by saying that Rabbi Reuven feinstein like Rabbi tropper and wishes him well, while on this blog Rabbi Tropper has been asked dozens of times to produce WRITTEN haskomas from Rav Reuven or Rav Dovid Feinstein and he still does not, must mean that RabbI tropper does not have a written haskoma to do outreach to gentiles in order to get them to convert and marry Jewish spouses. This is no different to learning any sugya where the subject is open and we must look for answers and if no official answers are given it is possible to speculate for motives that require greater clarity. Can you answer this question please: Does or has Rav Reuven shlit"a or Rav Dovid Feinstein shlit"a or any institutions they head ever received financial backing and donations from Dr. Tom Kaplan and one his family or any businesses and foundations they head? Let's get real with some real questions instead of your bobba-maises.

"Rabbi Bomzer is not unique and he can't be blamed for every conversion that went off the rails."

RaP: Right, and Rabbi Tropper is not unique and he cannot be blamed for every person he once mekareved and then went off the rails. And just like I would not blame Rabbi Tropper for his kiruv failures noone can blame any serious Orthodox rabbi who is a dayan for conversions when converts go off the rails because just like SOME Baalei teshuva fail in the end to stay frum, many geirim in the end fail in the end to stick to their commitments to be truly Halachically Jewish. And guess what, every religious Bar Mitzva boy starts out good but by the time his life is over many Jews are off the derech, and it is not always the fathers' and mothers' who must be blamed. But while all that is intersting, this is not what this discussion is about, which is the determination of Rabbi Tropper and RJF to pursue mass conversions for goyim, which even for the best and frummest of reasons, MUST result in a huge catatsrophe for Klal Yisroel, and per force mass Chillul hashem in its wake, and he should be convinced to stop now at all costs, before his "solutions" and "cures" become worse than the diseases and plagues of assimilation and intermarriage.

EJF - Proselytizing Advertisement

This recently appeared on the internet - Hidabroot website

Glatt - Response to Prof Marc Shapiro

Forward reports the rebuttal by Rabbi Menachem Genack of the Orthodox Union:

In an August 18 opinion article, Marc Shapiro takes the Orthodox Union to task for, over the last 30 years, having “adopted a new standard in kashrut, one that defines only glatt kosher as acceptable” (“glatt Kosher Meat Is Not All It Is Cut Out to Be”). The era that Shapiro laments as having passed, however, was unfortunately one frequently rife with fraud.

What he terms “regular kosher” meat — in other words, non-glatt — is unquestionably kosher when reliably supervised and regulated. But there were ongoing problems with both the production and the distribution of kosher meat. Discerning kosher consumers began to demand glatt kosher meat, which was more carefully controlled — not because they wanted glatt per se, but because they wanted to be assured that the meat was indeed kosher. Thus it was consumer demand that made glatt the dominant standard in the marketplace, not some fiat by the O.U.

Since “glatt kosher” is a phrase that is often used but not always understood, let me elucidate it further. As Shapiro notes, the term glatt in America has also become a consumer phrase meaning unquestionably kosher, even beyond the context of meat. glatt is actually the Yiddish word for smooth, and indicates that an animal’s lungs are smooth and have no adhesions.

The Torah forbids consuming treifa meat. A treifa is an animal with one of 18 possible anatomical defects, the most common of which is a puncture in its lung.

Therefore, even a properly kosher slaughtered animal has its lungs inspected to make sure that there is no puncture or adhesion that may result in a puncture, or might be the result of a puncture. Each lung is visually inspected, and is then inflated and placed in water to find any holes, much as you would do to a tire with a leak.

While the discovery of a puncture renders the animal unquestionably a treifa, there is a disagreement regarding the permissibility of adhesions between the “Beit Yosef,” the forerunner to the “Shulchan Aruch,” and the Rama, Rabbi Moses Isserles. The “Beit Yosef” rules that virtually any adhesion is treif, while the Rama ruled leniently, permitting certain adhesions.

The glatt standard of the “Beit Yosef” is generally relevant only to Sephardim, and is sold with the designation “Beit Yosef glatt.” In prewar Europe, this was known as kalbene *glatt*, because young calves have no adhesions.

However, there is another reason for glatt, and the demand for it. The Talmud interprets a verse in Ezekiel as saying that the prophet never ate meat concerning which a decision had been rendered as to its kosher status — even if the determination was that it was indeed kosher.

Non-glatt meat always requires such decisions to be made, because the adhesions that are removed must be carefully evaluated by the bodek, or onsite kosher examiner, as to their status. Meat classified as glatt does not require such evaluations, as any adhesions that might be present are minor, uncomplicated and obviously kosher.

The glatt standard currently in use permits such minor adhesions, or ririn. Despite Shapiro’s assertion to the contrary, this was the standard of glatt for centuries in Europe, and is so codified by the “Beit David” and the “Simla Chadasha,” the two primary works on the laws of shechita, or
kosher slaughter. [...]

Finance - Time to make Aliya

Jerusalem Post reports:

Ely Cole, a 25-year-old accountant from Columbus, Ohio, says he always dreamed of moving to Israel but worried about leaving his high-paying New York job before he'd established a career for himself.

Now, that job is gone, and Cole is on his way to the Jewish state, joining a wave of returning Israelis and new immigrants fleeing the dismal economic outlook in the US.

"It's a bit of a relief to be laid off instead of quitting - I'm not second-guessing myself," said Cole, who was let go two weeks ago from a New York hedge fund. "Having the push is beneficial."

Cole will join his sister, who made aliya last year, and begin looking for work in either Tel Aviv or Jerusalem once he has completed ulpan.

Cole was among more than a half-million Americans who lost their jobs last month, and economists predict that three million more could be unemployed in the coming year.

The job losses, initially centered in the hard-hit financial industry, are beginning to spread through the economy, touching everyone from lawyers to book publishers to independent business owners whose holiday sales expectations have nearly evaporated.

When pressed what opportunities they hoped to find in Israel, considering that the economic crisis is also affecting Israel and could get worse there, they did not mention specific job plans but expressed optimism that something would work out.[...]

Child abuse -Call police/ Religiousity lessened?

Tzitz Eliezer(19:52)...However in a case of physical abuse where it can not be solidly established that it is actually pikuach nefesh (life threatening) then the case is merely one of determining what is in the best interest of the child. In such a non-life threatening case, it is prohibited to file a complaint with the police when it is highly likely that the child will be taken from his religious home or traditional home and be transferred to a non‑Jewish institution or a non-observant Jewish one or one that is not even traditional. The exception being if his home is no different in religious observance than the institute to which they will likely transfer him. This governing principle is found in the Sifre (Ki Satze) where it states that those who cause others to sin are worse than if they had killed them. That is because the killer [only] takes the victim from this world but not the next. In contrast the one who causes sin causes him to lose both this world and the next.

Sifre (Devarim #252):..R’ Shimon said that the Egyptians drowned the Jews in water while the Edomim attacked them with swords and yet the Torah only prohibits them from marriage to Jews for three generations. In contrast the Ammonites and Moabites because they attempted to cause the Jews to sin, the Torah prohibits them from marriage to Jews forever. This teaches that causing another to sin is much worse than killing them. That is because when a person is killed he only loses this world while someone who is caused to sin loses this world and the next world.

EJF - takes over kiruv

scanned from current edition of HaShavuah