Abortion - the lenient view

Tzitz Eliezer (13:102) Abortion because of Tay Sachs In all cases the child will die before the age of four after progressive physical and mental deterioration and there is no known treatment. There are tests that clearly establish whether the embryo has Tay Sachs.  There is a well-known leniency of Rav Yaakov Emden who allows abortion within the first three months even in cases which are not life threatening to the mother It is permitted in the case of the serious condition of Tay Sachs to abort until seven months. A Jew does not get capital punishment for killing an embryo. In addition many poskim view abortion as only a rabbinic prohibition or merely a restriction for the good of society but not murder and therefore the Maharit (9:97-99) permits a Jew to do abortion when it serves the needs of the mothers health even if not life saving. In addition there is the leniency of Rav Yaakov Emden (1:43)  who allows abortion in cases of great need even when it is not life saving but saves the mother from great suffering. . Therefore if there is a need because of great pain or suffering as exists in our case of Tay Sachs (and it doesn’t make a difference if the child is taken away and institutionalized until he dies.)  It would appear  that if there was a leniency to permit abortion in halacha  because of great need  of suffering this would be a classic case.. If possible the abortion should be done by a female doctor since according to the view that abortion is prohibited because of wasting seed and that prohibition doesn’t apply to women according to most poskim.

Tzitz Eliezar (14:100) Abortion leniency in cases of great need – in particular for Tay Sachs.  Concerning the analysis of abortion done bythe gaon Rav Moshe Feinstein shlita., I reviewed it two or three times, and even though there is much to comment and criticize nevertheless I have decided for practical reasons not to do so and will only briefly comment on fundamental points and not with a lot of noise but in a quiet calm manner and let the reader decide between us.   Regarding Tosfos (Niddah 44)  which states that abortion is permitted, he takes the simplest path and declares that it is an error in the text and that it should say patur (exempt) rather than permitted. He is not bothered by Tosfos makes the statement twice that abortion is permitted and simply states that Tosfos really views abortion as prohibited because it is permitted to profane Shabbos to save its life.  With all due respect Sir this is not acceptable. We are dependent on the previous generations and they struggled each one in his own way to try and establish what the intent of Tosfos (Niddah) was and how to reconcile the words. Not a single authority concluded like this easy way to declare that there was an error in the text. .  I am totally amazed how he could ignore all the sources from previous generations including some close to the period of Rishonim that clearly disagree with him and furthermore don’t view abortion as murder. .

Advising Against the Use of the International Beit Din: A Translated Letter From Rabbi Hershel Schachter, Shlita

 https://jewishlink.news/features/9425-advising-against-the-use-of-the-international-beit-din-a-translated-letter-from-rabbi-hershel-schachter-shlita

Editor’s Note: The recent publication on Torahweb.org of a letter  by Yeshiva University Rosh Yeshiva Rav Hershel Schachter, shlita, criticized the work of the International Beit Din and advised all not to rely on their rulings, and for any associated rabbanim to resign. The original was printed in Hebrew and is available here: http://torahweb.org/torah/docs/ibd-machaa.html. We present a translation here, as well as a response from representatives of the organization he is addressing. The response from the International Beit Din can be found here.  

It is a tremendous chutzpah that these three rabbis joined this beit din. Questions of this most serious nature—permitting a woman to remarry without a divorce—were brought to Rav Yitzchak Elchanan, after him to Rav Chaim Ozer and in our time to Rav Moshe Feinstein, all of whom were recognized as the greatest of their generations. It is forbidden for average rabbis to involve themselves in these matters because whoever does not understand the nature of marriages and divorces cannot be involved with them. In our generation, we present these questions to the few Torah scholars who have specialized in these laws and apprenticed under greats, and who therefore have a tradition about where to be lenient and where strict. 

 Rav) Tzvi (Hershel) Schachter, Tammuz 5775

I also agree to this objection with full force:

(Rav) Gedaliah Dov Schwartz, 21 Tammuz 5775

It is superfluous to add that there is no ruling and no judge but nonsense of fools who have appointed themselves authorities:

(Rav) Nota Tzvi Greenblatt, Memphis, 22 Tammuz 5775

The words of the above giants are clear in law and in practice, and I also join in their objection:

(Rav) Avrohom Michael Union, 26 Tammuz 5775

I also join in objecting to this brazen breach:

(Rav) Menachem Mendel Senderovitz, 3 Av 5775

Abortion Igros Moshe (C.M. 2:69)

Igros Moshe (C.M. 2:69) Abortion is prohibited also  for the pain of the mother both for Jews and non-Jews.  Tosfos (Sanhedrin 59a) states explicitly says it is obviously prohibited for Jews since whatever is prohibited to non-Jews is also prohibited to Jews and it is considered murder. .It raises the question but for a Jew it is permitted to save the mother while this is not so for a non-Jew? It answers that for a Jew it is a mitzva to kill the embryo to save the mother.while the heter of pikuach nefesh does not apply to a non-Jew  We see that Tosfos views abortion as murder.  While it does state twice in Tosfos (Nida 44a) that abortion is permitted. But it is obvious that is a mistake. According to the Rambam abortion is only permitted in life threateing situations prior to the baby’s head coming out because the embryo is considered a rodef. Why does he have that condition since the baby still endangers the mother even after the head comes out? The simple answer is that when the head comes out we don’t know who is the rodef since the mother endangers the child and the child endangers the mother and thus Rambam also views abortion as murder. Furthermore abortion is prohibited unless it is certain to the doctor that the mother will die otherwise and thus abortion can not be done even when it is known the baby will not live long such as in Tay Sachs even if this will greatly upset the mother.  Therefore I told the religious doctors not to test for Tay Sachs Regarding the Chavis Yair which permits abortion – that is an erroneous text. Regarding the Maharit there are two contradictory tshuvos. And one of them must be a forgery and therefore the one that permits abortion should be ignored.  Similarly what is stated in the Rashba about the Ramban that he performed abortions for non=Jews. That Rashba does not appear in our Rashba and also must be a forgery.  Both the Tzitz Eliezar and the Seridei Aish (Noam volume 9) say that the Chavis Yair holds abortion is prohibited as I have written. I was astonished to read the analysis of the sefardi posek Rav Pealim( 1:14) who says abortion would be permitted except for the concern for prostitutes. He then notes that Tosfos (Chullin) prohibits abortion and then apparently rules that l’chatchila abortion should not be permitted though he doesn’t write that it is prohibited from Tosfos (Chullin) and Rambam. He does note the Maharit (99) that permits abortion  but not Maharit (97) which prohibits abortion and thus we must conclude that the Maharit holds abortion is prohibited as I noted before and he is not a source for this halacha. The Seridei Aish improperly cites the Ramban claiming he holds abortion is not a Torah prohibition and yet it is permitted to profane the Shabbos to save it. In fact the Ramban that is cited does not say that the Torah permits abortion but only that until the head appears there is no requirement to save its life and therefore its life is not valued as that of its mother but nevertheless Shabbos can be profaned to save its life.  It is thus obvious that the Ramban holds there is an obligation to save the life of the embryo and that surely there is a Torah prohibition to kill it. It is not clear how he derives the conclusion that the Ramban permits abortion and his words should not be relied upon on his view in this matter at all.  In Rav Yakov Emden (1:43) I saw words that should not be said that an embryo of a mamzer can be aborted because when there was Sanhedrin, if a pregnant woman was to get capital punishment they would not wait until she gave birth to execute her. So today when there is no Sanhedrin and even if she was not sentenced to death the law of execution still exists. His words are total nonsense even though a great man wrote them but since the sentence was not passed the accused is not liable to the death penalty. Therefor anyone who kills someone today who was not sentence directly by Sanhedrin is a murder no matter what crime they committed and even if there were witnesses and warning.  This that he adds that a person today  who transgressed a serious crime intentionally and commits suicide it is a meritorious act.  These words are absurd and no one should pay attention to them.  I am writing this analysis of abortion because of the great disregard for this since many countries in the world permit abortion including the government of Israel. Since a great  unknown number of babies have been aborted in modern times there is a great need to make Torah restrictions and surely not leniencies concerning the severe crime of murder. Consequently I was astonished to read a teshuva of an Israeli scholar who wrote to the director od Shaarei Tzedek Hospital in the journal Asia (13) permitting abortion for Tay Sachs after the third month he claims it is permitted since abortion is only a rabbinic prohibition according to many poskim.  He cites the Maharit (99) that permits abortion without mentioning that Maharit (97) prohibits abortion.  He also cites Rav Yaakov Emden as permitting when in fact he prohibits abortion with the language in case of great need it is permitted. So even if you want to claim there are justifications for leniency there are  more to prohibit.  He also cites Rav Pelim. He concludes to be lenient in the case of Tay Sachs and abort until seven months. . This time frame makes no sense as no one talks about it. Therefore it is clear and obvious as I have written  that according the Rishonim and Poskim that abortion is prohibited as actual murder,even for mamzer and Tay Sachs. One should not err and rely on the tshuva of this chachom

.

אמונה בצדיקים יותר מהקב"ה

 

רוחו של הצדיק כירחפת עלינו

בירמא דהילרלא קדישא, כאשן יהודים יושבים ומתאחדים לשמר ולזכור של הצדיק הרה "ק רבי ישעי'לה בן רבי משה מקערעסטיר זכותו תגן עלינו, בוודאי ובוודאי שרוחו הגדול מרחפת עלינו ואפשר לפעול וכרת בזכותו הגדולה.

כדי שנזכה אכן שרוחו הגדולה תרחף עלינו ונרכל לפעול בזכותו ישועות גדולות, אבר צריכים לדעת את גודל חשיבות האמרנה בצדיקים.
רוחו של הצדיק כירחפת עלינו

בירמא דהילרלא קדישא, כאשן יהודים יושבים ומתאחדים לשמר ולזכור של הצדיק הרה "ק רבי ישעי'לה בן רבי משה מקערעסטיר זכותו תגן עלינו, בוודאי ובוודאי שרוחו הגדול מרחפת עלינו ואפשר לפעול וכרת בזכותו הגדולה.

כדי שנזכה אכן שרוחו הגדולה תרחף עלינו ונרכל לפעול בזכותו ישועות גדולות, אבר צריכים לדעת את גודל חשיבות האמרנה בצדיקים.

אכירנת צרייזים צריכה יהירת ער הסרף

בעניין זה יש מאמר נורא בשם הרה"ק רבי יהושע מבעלזא זי"ע, בפרשת ויצא, כאשר אמרה רחל אמנו ליעקב אבינו: הבה לי בנים ואם אין מתה אנכי. מיין, ריחו אף יעקב ברחל ויאמר, התחת אלקים אנכי, אשר מנע ממך פרי בטן. על פי זה מסביר הרה':ק מבעלזא כי אמנם עניין האמונה בבורא עולם הינו עבודה גדולה ובשמיים יודעים שיש בה עליות וירידות וצריך להתחזק

בה כל העת. אך אמונה בצדיקים, צוינה להיות אמונה עז הסוף. אם זו אמונה חלשה, זה לא עובד. ועל פי זה הוא מסביר כי 'ויחר אף יעקב ברחל', היה בגלל שהיא אמרה 'ואם אין מתה אנכי', שבכך היא ביטאה שאין לה אמונת צדיקים שלמה בו, אלא היה לה גם צד שלא יכול לעזור לה ואז 'מתה אנכי'. על כך ענה לה יעקב אבינו 'התחת אלקים אנכי' וכי אמונה בצדיק זה אמונה בבורא עולם? אמונה בבורא עולם היא עבודה גדולה ובשמיים יודעים שיש בה עליות וירידות. אך אמונה בצדיקים, צוינה להיות אמונה עז הסוף.

כאשר אבר יושבים כעת ביראה ובאהבה יחד ומעלים את זכררנר של הרה"ק מקערעסטיר, אבחנן בוודאי מאמינים בצדיק, מאמינים שהוא יכול לפעול בעבררינו בפני כסא הכבוד בשמיים בררדארת מוחלטת, בבחינת "ויאמינו בה' ובמשה עבדן", כי רק אז אבחנן בוודאי ניוושע בזכותו.

Waters' comments on Chauvin trial pour fuel on the fire -- and expose Republican hypocrisy

 https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/20/politics/maxine-waters-kevin-mccarthy-minnesota-police/index.html

 Incendiary warnings by Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters about the potential outcome of the trial of the ex-police officer charged with killing George Floyd could spike tensions, were legally unwise and raise questions of Democratic double standards.

But they also drew out the hypocrisy of pro-Donald Trump Republicans over incitement to violence and ought not to overshadow the profound issues of race and justice raised by a harrowing four weeks in court.

Waters' inflammatory remarks in Minnesota on Saturday justifiably caused an uproar as they came at hyper-sensitive moment of one of the most racially sensitive and emotionally wrenching trials in years, with US cities on edge as jurors begin deliberations.

Indeed, Republicans argue that her call on protesters to "get more confrontational" if they don't like the verdict would have resulted in swift punishment from leadership in Congress if they were uttered by a Republican.

Michigan GOP Rep. Lisa McClain complained on the House floor that if Waters were a member of the GOP she would have already stripped of her committee assignments.

"Are they not the words someone would use if they wanted to incite more violence?" McClain asked.

That the presiding judge in the trial warned that the Waters comments might have given the defense of ex-police officer Derek Chauvin an opening during any eventual appeal against conviction raise the level of seriousness even more.

 

During Trump's second impeachment trial, Republicans mobilized behind his defense lawyer's claim that his calls on his angry crowd to "fight like Hell" before they stormed Capitol Hill were metaphorical and "ordinary political rhetoric." They're not giving Waters, a veteran of the civil rights movement and its marches and protests, similar benefit of the doubt.

הדיין, ל'מתנגד החיסונים': "לאנשים כאלו נדרש פסיכיאטר"

 https://mobile.kikar.co.il/article/389904

בדיון סוער במיוחד שהתקיים לאחרונה בבית החולים שערי צדק, בשיתוף 'מאוחדת' ובנוכחות רבנים ורופאים בכירים, נידונו מגוון שאלות מעמיקות באשר לחיסוני הקורונה. בשיאו של הדיון, הוטחה ביקורת קשה בפני המתנגדים לחיסון.

במפגש המרתק השתתפו אב"ד בני ברק הגרא"י לנדא, אב"ד ביתר עילית הגר"צ ברוורמן, בעל ה'פסקי תשובות' הגר"ש רבינוביץ, הגר"מ ברנדסדורפר, ראשי מערכת הכשרות של בד"ץ 'העדה החרדית' המורגלים בחקר ייצור ותעשיית התרופות מזה שנים ושורת רבנים נוספים.

בפתח הכינוס, אותו יזם והנחה איצ'ה דז'אלובסקי, הובאו דבריו של אב"ד 'דרכי הוראה' הגר"א וייס, 'הרב הפוסק' של שערי צדק, שאמר: "גיליתי דעתי בהזדמנויות רבות שחובה להתחסן, כדי למנוע התפשטות המגיפה, וזה בכלל ההלכה הפשוטה שפיקוח נפש דוחה את הכל".

New Letters Against the "International Beis Din"

 

Brianna Keilar: Fox is not news no matter what it calls itself

An Interview with Rabbi Yosef Rottenberg

 https://wherewhatwhen.com/article/an-interview-with-rabbi-yosef-rottenberg

WWW: What did you learn from him that influences the way you pasken?

 YR: I learned from him to think for myself. Reb Moshe wasn’t impressed if you showed him a sefer where it said the opposite of what he thought. “This is what I think,” he used to say. So, even though in certain matters I pasken not like R’ Moshe, when friends point out this out to me, I say to them, “I’m doing exactly like R. Moshe. R. Moshe said to think for yourself. I’m thinking for myself!”

I also learned that minhagim (customs) are very chashuv (important). Once we were all standing around, and somebody came over and mentioned to R’ Moshe that a certain rabbi was writing a get (Jewish divorce) on a typewriter. R’ Moshe said, “A get on a typewriter? This rav will never get out of gehinnom.” Now, R’ Moshe, as everybody knows, was the finest, most eidel (gentle), the sweetest person alive. You never heard a bad word about a Jew from his mouth, ever. We all got shook up from hearing this, and went back to our seats.

I don’t know how I had the nerve to do this, but I came there to learn, so I went over to the Rosh Yeshiva, and I said, “Rebbe, what’s takeh wrong with a get on a typewriter?” Do you know what R’ Moshe answered me? In Yiddish, he said, “We have to think about that.” In other words, he had not yet decided definitely that it was against the halacha.

So why did he give such a klala (curse) to the person? It was because he changed a custom that was observed by Yidden for thousands of years. Maybe it’s not assur (forbidden) to write a get with a typewriter, but since the custom is to write it with a quill like a sefer Torah, for not observing the minhag, he will go to gehinnom. The point is that Jewish customs have to be kept. He was very makpid (exacting) on minhagim.

The Manufactured Agunah Crisis(V19

In this video, I dispel the notion that we are in the midst of an Aguna crisis. I demonstrate that it is only a creation of disingenuous rabbis, who have corrupted the Torah by allowing women violators of halocho to abuse their husbands via stealing of their assets and children through the use of the civil court. All of this leaves men no choice but to use the get as leverage to achieve fairness in the halachic divorce process. SHULCHAN ORUCH SIMAN 26 AND THE RAMO FORBIDDING USING CIVIL COURTS AND THE VIOLATORS CANNOT USE A BAIS DIN AFTERWARDS TO CLAIM A GET: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RCsm...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mUoD...​ RAV ELYASHIV TESHUVA THAT CLEARLY STATES THAT EVEN IN A CASE WHERE HUSBAND AND WIFE LIVE APART A MAN DOES NOT HAVE TO GIVE A GET: ( ח״א קעד) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HtVD...​ NODA BEYEHUDA RULING THAT EVEN IN A CASE WHERE MAN AND WOMAN LIVE SEPARATELY, YOU CANNOT FORCE A GET: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I9KN...​ ISRAELI RABBIS PROTESTING AGAINST FORCED GITTIN https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZjJL...​ STRONG LETTERS FROM RABBIS FROM PREVIOUS GENERATIONS CONDEMNING WOMEN USING THE CIVIL COURTS, PROCLAIMING THAT THEIR GETS ARE INVALID AND REQUESTING TO EXPOSE THE NAMES OF RABBIS SUPPORTING THEM. https://drive.google.com/file/d/17fEg...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DPnR...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T7fZ...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/13Vie...​ BAIS DIN LETTERS SHOWING MR.JOEY MOCHON IS JUSTIFIED FOR NOT GIVING A GET AND MRS MOCHON HAVING 2 SERUVIM.: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13_rC...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O036...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-RZ7...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W__G...​ VIDEO SHOWING INSTAGRAM MOB HARRASSING MR. MOCHON AT KENNEDY AIRPORT AT 3AM https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bDPF...​ RABBI SHLOMO WEISSMAN FROM BETH DIN OF AMERICA THREATENING MR. MOCHON AFTER SEEING THE ZABLO DECISION: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HlP1...​ SEFER SHOWING IT’S A MITZVA TO PUBLICIZE A BAD GET: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_ZE8...​ HALOCHOS RELATED TO GET COERCION: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1D0Mr...​ BAIS YOSEF,RABEINU TAM AND MAHARIK AGAINST COERCION TACTICS: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DYvw...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MBMu...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UDNu...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Apxt...​ MAHARIK188 STATING THAT SHAMING IN PUBLIC OR NOT GIVING AN ALIYA AS A SANCTION IS PROHIBITED AND A GREAT SIN: https://drive.google.com/file/d/134-q...​ MAHARASHDAM SAYING THAT GET CANNOT BE FORCED IF MAN AGREES TO GIVE IT VOLUNTARILY BUT WITH A CONDITION: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12uuR...​ MENDEL EPSTEIN IS CAUGHT TAPE:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1euzF...​ RABBI RAFUL THREATENING DAVID OHAYON WITH JAIL. EVIDENCE OF GET MEUSA: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xvJc...​ MOSHE TENDLER DECLARING MENDEL EPSTEINS GITTIN ARE INVALID: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13oP3...​ 2014 RCA RESOLUTION PROHIBITING GET VIOLENCE https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hiMb...​ RABBI WEISSMAN IN AN INTERVIEW ADMITS TO THE PROHIBITION OF LITIGATING IN CIVIL COURTS BUT FAILS TO EXPLAIN THE PENALTIES INCURRED IF ONE VIOLATES THIS HALOCHO. HE ALSO APPROVES “SOCIAL PRESSURES”WHICH IS AGAINST HALOCHO LISTEN TO 2.00,15.09,30:35,31:33,34.40,35.06 ,https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bDFs...​ AVROHOM UNION AND RALBAG ISSUE ME AN ILLEGAL SERUV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F6gA...​ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XbmJ...​ RALBAG TELLING MRS. SOKOL THAT ITS PROHIBITED TO USE THE CIVIL COURT BUT ALLOWS LONNA RALBAG KIN TO USE CIVIL COURT:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PufW...​ SEE HERE FOR MORE LINKS: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s8Gw...

Disagreeing with authority

 Rav Chaim Voloshner(Ruach Chaim 1:4): … It is prohibited for a student to accept the words of his teacher if he has questions about them. Furthermore sometimes the truth is with the student and not the teacher. Avos(1:4), One should sit in the dust at the feet of one’s teachers and drink with unquenchable thirst what they say. The word for sitting - avek - can also mean struggle or warfare. That is because this is an obligatory struggle. The holy rabbis who have composed the books we study have in fact given us permission to struggle and to fight over their words and to answer the difficulties they raise. Therefore, we have the right to question what they say and not to blindly accept their words - but one must love the truth…. Since ascertaining the truth is the prime concern - we must be very careful not to be conceited and egotistical in the discussions and to imagine that we are as great as the teacher or author with whom we are disagreeing. We should be aware in our hearts that we might simply be misunderstanding their words. Therefore we must always be very humble. We must have the attitude, ‘I am not worthy to argue but this is Torah and I must know the correct answer’. Furthermore, the Mishna states that the struggle is conditional on being ‘in the dust at their feet’ which means we must be humble and submissive and figuratively sit on the ground before them in these discussions. 

 Seridei Aish(1:113): I frequently comment on the apparent contradiction found in Avos (6:5) concerning those factors involved in acquiring Torah i.e. analysis of the students and faith in our Sages. Furthermore, what does faith in our Sages have to do with acquiring Torah? However, the explanation is that if one doesn’t believe in the truth of the words of the sages then one readily dismisses them for the slightest reason. With an attitude of condescension, one proclaims that they didn’t know what they were talking about. Consequently, one makes no effort to investigate and try to validate what they said. However, in the end we find that in fact we are the ones who have erred. … Therefore it is characteristic of the truly wise to presume that the sages have not erred, G‑d forbid! In fact we, with our limited perspective and limited understanding, have erred. On the other hand to blindly believe and not struggle to comprehend with our intellect the apparent difficulties, saying simply that they knew and we need merely to mindlessly rely on them - that is also not correct. We need to wrestle mightily with the apparent contradictions and doubts as if they are people like us. With this approach, we will come to a much profounder and sharper comprehension. Thus, we see that both factors - emunas chachomim (faith in our sages) and pilpul (intellectual evaluation) - work together to the purpose of the acquisition of Torah.

RAV ELYASHIV TESHUVA THAT CLEARLY STATES THAT EVEN IN A CASE WHERE HUSBAND AND WIFE LIVE APART A MAN DOES NOT HAVE TO GIVE A GET:

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HtVD5WXWSFCpj-98Fi-hfi80RzCESQ9b/view?usp=sharing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jaffa yeshiva rabbi assaulted after inquiring about apartment; 2 arrested

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/jaffa-yeshiva-rabbi-assaulted-after-inquiring-about-apartment-2-arrested/

 A rabbi was violently assaulted in Jaffa in an apparent hate crime on Sunday while seeking to purchase an apartment to house his yeshiva.

Two men in their 30s were arrested over the beating of Rabbi Eliyahu Mali, who runs the Shirat Moshe Hesder Yeshiva in the mixed Jewish-Arab city adjacent to Tel Aviv.

 

Are segulos avoda zara? Mishpacha magazine