Letter of Chizuk for the "Eternal Jewish Family"

To Mr. Menachem Yitzchack Kaplan,

We have heard of your good works that you do, which we hope that you continue in the future.

May you merit that only good should come from your deeds, like every baal chesed strives to do.

28 of Kislev 5769

Yosef Shalom Elyashiv   Aharon Leib Shtainman   
Michl Yehuda Lefkovitz
Chayim Kanievsky   Yitzchok Shainer

==========================
Mekubal wrote:
Photoshop is so grand.

What you have is a handwritten original note which says just this

בס"ד
לכ' מר מנחם יצחק קפלן נ"י


שמענו על הפעולות הטובות שנעשו על ידך, יישר כחך על כל הנ"ל, ונקוה שכן תמשיך להוסיף כהנה.
ויהי רצון שתזכה שאך טות וחסד יצא על ידך כחפץ לב דורשי חסד.

כ"ח כסלו תש''ע לפ''ק

Then under that orginial note you have photoshopped in the block text Hebrew, which claims it was to the EJF, but in reality it was only to Tom Kaplan, who wrote many a check from his Foundation to various Yeshivot and such.

This is a pure deception. A note to Tom Kaplan encouraging him to continue giving to worthy Jewish causes is not a letter of Chizuk to EJF.

EJF press release: " THE TRUTH ABOUT EJF"

EJF Updates    [Hat Tip: Joel Katz.]
Press Releases
12/24/2009

Recent press coverage of an unfortunate development within the Eternal Jewish Family (EJF) has included inaccurate information about the organization. The following is a review of some of the falsehoods that have appeared in news reports and blogs about EJF:

False Statement: EJF has been paralyzed by the current situation.

Truth: EJF continues its full slate of programs throughout the world, under its rabbinic leadership. Its offices in the USA, Europe, and Israel are fully functioning.

False Statement: There has been no change in EJF.

Truth: EJF is in the process of restructuring its rabbinic leadership, including its rabbinic board. Rabbi Chaim Blum, rabbinic liason and Interim Director, is spearheading the effort to reach out to the many gedolei yisroel who support its mission.

False Statement: EJF conversions are now very much in question

Truth: There is no such concept as an "EJF conversion." It simply does not exist. EJF is not a bais din and has never and will never perform conversions. Conversion applicants who seek EJF support and guidance, and whose sincerity is verified by a reliable sponsoring rabbi, are always referred to separate, independent batei din.

False Statement: EJF is one-dimensional organization focused solely on conversion.

Truth: EJF is involved in a broad kiruv program to head off intermarriage before it happens. It has partnered with such well-known kiruv organizations as Gateways, Ohr Somayach, Arachim, Nefesh Yehudi and Hidabroot, preventing hundreds of young Jews from intermarrying.


False Statement: EJF encourages conversion, which is contrary to halacha.

Truth: EJF's mission of support to batei din and candidates for conversion is only in the narrow case of an intermarried couple where the Jewish spouse is a fully observant baal teshuva and the non-Jewish spouse is committed to a universally acceptable halachic conversion. All the leading poskim, led by the late venerable posek Harav Moshe Feinstein, zt"l, have ruled that, in such a case, the conversion is mandated by halacha.


False Statement: EJF has diluted the standards for conversions.

Truth: On the contrary, EJF's rabbinic and dayanim conferences, which are detailed on its website, address the havoc wrought by assimilation and intermarriage, including the devastating effects of improper conversions. In response to this issue, EJF has helped establish a network of continually growing batei din that operate under the guidance of gedolei yisroel, according to the highest halachic standards. Sincere conversion candidates are guaranteed universal acceptance by any Jewish community throughout the world.

Yes, EJF was victimized by an unfortunate event related to one individual! But this is no time for falsehoods, mistruths, and simply vicious accusations. The mission and support for EJF is sound. The organization prepares to emerge stronger than ever before. EJF is answering the siren call of Klal Yisroel and Kedushas Yisroel, and remains committed to continue under the strong leadership of Moronon Verabonom, Gedolei Yisroel from around the world.

EJF scandal and the British conversion process

Jewish Chronicle

Three children rejected from JFS, their parents' conversions in doubt and their own Jewish identities in tatters. A legal ruling by a British court establishing "Who is a Jew" in a way at odds with the traditional Jewish definition. A community at risk of schism.

How did we get into this mess?

A scandal currently unfolding in New York, at first glance completely unrelated, may shed some light on the current farce. [...]

When Scholars Fall

5 Towns Jewish Times Rabbi Yair Hoffman

There is a well-known Mitzvah to honor Torah scholars (Sefer HaMitzvos 209). Although the Rishonim cite different verses as to the source for the Mitzvah, it is almost universal that the Mitzvah is a Biblical one. Indeed, it is such an important Mitzvah that the Meiri (Yuma 71a) writes that it is a greater Mitzvah to honor a Torah scholar than to honor a Kohen Gadol – the High Priest in the Bais HaMikdash. The Talmud in Menachos (99b) discusses a case of a Torah scholar who has fallen morally. Raish Lakish tells us that we do not shame him in public. To back up this position he cites a verse in Hoshea (4:5), "You will stumble by day and the 'prophet' who is with you shall stumble at night, and I shall silence your mother." The Maharsha cites Rashi who explains the verse to be understood as "cover it up like the night." This seems to be the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch as well (Yore Deah 334:42).[...]

Rabbis need to investigate charges against community leaders

Journalism, Controversy, and Responsibility: halachic Analysis \ Steve Oppenheimer DDS

Mahari Weil, z"l, was asked about a community leader who had served the public for twenty years and now was being accused of inappropriate behavior. Was it appropriate to have a public investigation and give a detailed accounting to the public? He answered that an investigation should be conducted by a committee of trustworthy individuals appointed by the public. If this is not feasible, a dayan, a rabbinic judge, should appoint such a committee. The dayan should thoroughly investigate the matter so that the truth should emerge and justice prevail in this world. Unfortunately, he lamented; many communities are victimized by unscrupulous leaders who act more to serve their own interest rather than the interests of the community. These dishonorable leaders shirk their responsibility and further burden those who already suffer. The details of the investigation should not be discussed publicly, so as not to cause undue embarrassment to other involved parties.

We see that it is incumbent upon the community to appoint representatives from within its midst to examine the behavior of those who serve the public lest the weak and the vulnerable in the community suffer the consequences. In fact, based upon the responsum of Mahari Weil, the Ramo states that in order to be innocent before G-d and Israel, all people who deal with the community must give an accounting of their actions.

Any questionable behavior must be promptly investigated under the guidance of recognized poskim. While the details of the findings may not be revealed to the public, the public must be given assurance that the matter has been corrected properly and that the public interests have been protected.

Detailed revelation of the investigation may only serve to cause additional, unwarranted pain and embarrassment and this serves no public need.

Chofetz Chaim accused of lashon harah

Melave Malka at South Fallsburg

.

I was just informed that the guest speaker's  - Tropper - topic was that Yosef's brothers only saw the bad in him. I wonder what he meant by that?

Lashon harah: Chofetz Chaim permits for to'eles only when not motivated by hatred.

There is a very fundamental question that affects not only the laws of lashon harah but also the issue of rescuing someone from harm such as child abuse.

For example the understanding of the mishna and gemora  of Sanhedrin (73a) is disputed. Do we stop a rodef from killing a person or a rapist from attacking a woman because we are commanded to save the victim or because we want to stop the perpetrator from sinning?

We learn also learn from this gemora that there is an obligation to "not stand idly by the blood of your fellow". It is important to note that this verse is the end of the verse that is the source for the prohibition of not speaking lashon harah. There are a number of sources which say that the prohibition of lashon harah is therefore connected with the mitzva of saving others. In other words there is no prohibition of lashon harah when someone is in danger - either physically or financially.

Another way of phrasing this question is - will a person be hurt if we fail to keep the mitzva of "not standing idly by the blood of ones fellow"? If a person died after we avoided rescuing him - would he have died if we had tried to save him? If we saved him - would G-d have found another way of rescuing him if we had not? In other words is the mitzva of saving another independent of whether or not the person is actually rescued?

Another example is found in the laws of lashon harah. We know that it is permitted to speak lashon harah to save a person from harm by warning him that somebody is planning on attacking him. The Chofetz Chaim however says that before a person can say lashon harah there are 7 conditions that must be filled. If even one of these is not fulfilled he says it is prohibited to say anything. One of the 7 is to'eles (benefit). We normally say that to'eles means it brings a benefit. The classic description of lashon harah says that just as a snake bites without getting pleasure so is the case of speaking lashon harah. It is something which does not bring benefit and therefore it there is a benefit it would be permitted. However the Chofetz Chaim has an additional understanding of to'eles. Not only must benefit result from the telling of lashon harah - but also the intent of speaker has to be for benefit and not because of hatred or the enjoyment of pointing out someone's faults. The Chofetz Chaim says that this requirement can be seen from the fact that Jews have been harmed by non-Jews as part of G-d's plan to correct their ways. Even though it was G-d's will and desire that they harm the Jews they were were severely punished for doing it. That is because they didn't hurt the Jews because they wanted them to stop sinning but rather because they of hatred and enjoyment of the suffering of the Jews.

To put it more clearly, if a person was robbed and he wants to tell others that he was harmed because of his hatred for the assailant the Chofetz Chaim says it is prohibited to say anything - even though there is benefit in that the others will know to guard against the robber. Similarly the Sema (C.M. 421:28) says that if a person sees an assailant beating up someone one he can normally stop the assault even if he needs to beat up the assailant since there is a mitzva of stopping a person from sin. However he adds that if typically he does not intervene to stop assault  but on one unusual occasion he decides to intervene -  he is not allowed to beat the assailant. The Sema says because we know from past experience that he is not motivated to stop a person from sin. Therefore his intervention this time must be because he has hatred for the assailant. The Sema rules you can not rescue another by beating the assailant if your motivation is hatred rather than a desire to stop him from sinning.

Understanding this issue has tremendous implications for self-defense and the defense of others. The discussion will continue in a future post.

High Court:Palestinians can use highway - despite danger to Israelis

NYTimes  

JPOST 


The High Court of Justice on Tuesday accepted a petition against an IDF order barring Palestinians from driving on Highway 443.

The ruling will come into effect in five months' time, allowing Palestinians to use the road for the first time since October 2002, when it was closed to Palestinian traffic following a series of drive-by shootings at the height of the Second Intifada. Then-defense minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer was adamant at the time that Israelis would not serve as "moving targets" to West Bank terrorists.

Tuesday's decision came despite the court indicating last year that the road had become a key highway serving tens of thousands of Israelis whose safety would be endangered if Palestinians were allowed to use it unrestrictedly. [...]

R' Riskin: Judaism & Christianity

This is not the typical way an Orthodox rabbi speaks today. Rabbi Riskin issues a clarification
There is also an official clarification issued by Rabbi Riskin in the comments section

EJF scandal - comments from other blogs

1. From R' Harry Maryles:

I knew what this con man was about 20 years ago when I first met him. He was responsible then for ruining the life of one young man I am very close with - making life miserable for his parents. His mother went to the grave suffering an estrangement from her son for which Leib Tropper was responsible. His father suffers to this day from it. He took advantage of this young man's misfortune and conned him into doing something no decent man would ever do. And he made it seem like he was doing him a favor. This young man is now 20 years older and still suffering the consequences of it. Consequences that after 20 years have little chance of being reversed! I cannot get into details because confidences would be broken. But suffice it to say his only concern at that time was not to help this young man but to help himself by gaining the support of a wealthy friend in doing this con.

2. From a comment on ViN:

I have been involved with Kiruv for over three decades. Close to thirty years ago a university student underwent a Giyur Kehalacha when he discovered that his mother was converted by Conservative rabbis. A week later he went to Yeshivas Ohr Sameach. A few weeks ago EJF told him that his Giyur may not be good because they have questions of the Rabbonim who did it. Who is a erliche Orthodox Rav and does not do kulahs in Giyur. This shocking action is beyond belief. The EJF did not call the Rabbomin in question. They just put the Safek in the mind of this person 3 decades later. We need a proper structure in Giyur, and proper standards kept. However the idea that Rabbonim in Monsey, or Meah Shearim will suddenly begin to question Geirus done properly is outrageous. There is no historical precedent for this. There are a small group of Rabbonim aligned with EJF that have attempted to impose their view on Gierus. They are overreaching and creating havoc in the Jewish community.

3. From a comment on ViN:

I went to Rav Reuven Feinstein when the now infamous former head of the EJF tried to stop my marriage to my wife who is a giyores. He claimed that the Rov who was migayer her did not know what he was doing. Rbe Reuven told me that her geirus was fine. We are married now. The head of EJF got what he deserved for the pain he caused me and many others.

4. From a comment on ViN:

I converted years ago and have been frum from the time I emerged from the mikvah and the EJF told me my conversion was invalid because of the rabbonim on the beis din, all of whom were frum Orthodox rabbonim by the way. I was not the only person this happened to. Of course the EJF offered to 'fix' it for a substantial sum of money. How nice of them.

5. From Rabbi Natan Slifkin:

Also involved in the campaign against my books was Yaakov Kalmanowitz's brother,Rabbi Osher Kalmanowitz of the Mir Yeshivah in New York. He did not want to openly involve himself, and so he recruited his friend Rabbi Leib Tropper of Yeshivas Kol Yaakov in Monsey. Rabbi Tropper created a story that was told to the Rabbis who were approached to condemn the books. The story involved two students in his yeshivah, described as "angelic," who allegedly dropped out of yeshivah and left Orthodoxy after reading my books and concluding that "if the Sages could have been wrong about science, then they could have been wrong about everything." Rabbi Elya Wachtfogel, the primary rabbinic authority behind this ban, presented this story as grounds for his campaign. I myself was shaken when I heard about this story, but my mentors were skeptical and advised my to investigate it. The investigation showed that one of them was barely observant to begin with, and dropped out of yeshivah before my book on the Sages' knowledge of science was published. The other left Kol Yaakov and went to YU; he wrote to me that it was nothing to do with my books, which strengthened his Judaism, but he noted that the rabbis in Kol Yaakov did not like them.