Rav Menashe Klein: Does sending girls to collect charity violate "the honor of the princess is to stay inside"

Rav Menashe Klein (4:125):Woe is to the girls school that sent them to collect money for charity Question: You want to know my view as to whether it is correct to send school girls from the higher grade with collection boxes (pushkes) into the stores and streets to collect money for Torah study or other worthy causes. Your view is that this practice violates the principle that the “The honor of the princess is inside” and also there is inappropriate contact with the people who pass by and this causes at times disgusting things. And I want to raise the additional question, “Why should this only be a concern for the higher grades? The question is definitely relevent also for the lower grades. Why should it be different because in both cases the girls are getting used to being amongst men? And the father of Shmuel did not let two sisters to sleep together to prevent them getting used to being physically close to another person. Everything depends on habit as is well known in this matter.

Nonetheless it is difficult to state a clear cut rule because it strongly depends upon the place and the time and the person. There is no question in a case where the girls who normally are in fact in the house the whole day that we say “The honor of the princess is inside”. But that is an unusual case. In such a case there would be no mitzva to send them out to collect charity and in fact it would be a mitzva accomplished through sin. However due to our many sins it seems that these present day girls do not in fact fulfill the verse of “The honor of the princess is inside” and they leave the home regularly for all sorts of things. For example they go to school everyday on the bus with various and strange drivers and joke with them or discuss issues with them or even with an ordinary non-Jew that gets on the bus and they greet them – and this is a problem even with a Jewish driver. They learn English in school with male teachers who might be non-Jews or Jews. And this is true not only for English but also they have male teachers for Torah - and many of the teachers are unmarried.

It was a long time ago that I spoke with one of the principals of a girls high school here concerning why they have unmarried male teachers? We know from Toras Moshe Rabbeinu that an unmarried male should not teach – even boys because of the mothers who come for them. So surely they shouldn’t be teaching older girls who are at the age to cause problems even for married teachers. Surely males teaching girls is not considered a clean and simple profession. In fact our Sages have said that a person should have a job that doesn’t involve interacting with females and surely not to be teaching them every day for the entire day! Can it be that a person will light a fire in his bosom and not be burnt? Who in today’s generation can say that he doesn’t have sexual enticements in these situations?

G-d forbid that I should be blaming holy Jewish girls and I am not not saying they are doing anything wrong because all of them are holy. And also it is certain that the teachers are pure and holy and I with my many sins and am the lowest of the lowest I have not merited to holiness like this. However for someone of lowly value such as myself it is certain that I need to protest. And perhaps in truth you will not find amongst the teachers someone as lowly as me – it should only be so.

The holy and learned Rav Hillel Kalamair occasionally gave talks to women concerning mussar and the halachos that they needed to know. When he entered into they synagogue to speak before them, he would first wrap his head with a talis so he would not look at them and come to sin. Are we greater than he? And I have said that if perhaps I had two other rabbis supporting me I would make a great protest against this practise. [see E. H. 1:3 and Beis Shmeul 1:4. My brother pointed out to me that the Lechem Chamudos said something similar. I am happy to see that I am agreement with such an elevated person.]

So to return to the original question. We see that these girls go into the markets and streets for walks, for jobs, for purchases and for all their needs. If so why should we be concerned specifically for the issue of going to collect charity? Is this worse than what they do for other needs? In fact the opposite is so because there are times when it is good for them to go and collect charity and not go to worse places than that e.g., to watch television or listen to the radio or sometimes they even go to see a movie or other entertainment which I don’t want to mention. So I am not speaking about the girls who in truth do not generally go out and they fulfill, “The honor of the princess is inside” and they are adorned with golden garments. A girl who spends her staying at home and not going out – they should be truly rich and their portion be successful and their forfathers rejoice – because this is true greatness for girls like these not to go out. For such girls the question of collecting charity does not arise.

Rav Menashe Klein (9:250): Question: Concerning the halacha principle that a Jewish woman is considered a princess and therefore it is more respectful for that status that she should remain in the home (kavod bas melech penima) – is it preferable that a wife leave the home for the sake of her husband to a place of immorality [in order to earn a living or other purposes]. Answer: It is difficult to give a clear written response to this question. That is because in modern time this principle that it is best that a Jewish woman should stay in the home is almost nonexistent – because of our many sins. If a woman does remain in her home and doesn’t go out for any reason– even if it causes her husband to lose Torah study - then this is definitely an example of the principle. Traditionally a woman did not go out of her house. However after the Holocaust (because of our many sins) – when we find ourselves a small minority amongst the nations of the world and earning a livelihood is difficult – it has become normative practice for women to leave their homes. However in places outside the home there is the possibility of immorality and no protection against sexual sins – therefore it depends on the nature of the society and the characteristics of the woman. In particular whether she would in fact remain in the house all day if she had the opportunity. (See what I wrote in Mishne Torah 4:125) concerning sending Beis Yaakov girls out to collect money for charity.)

 First we need to clarify whether we actually rule that this principle is the halacha. It seems that in fact that it is a dispute amongst the poskim - as we see from Gittin 12 that apparently we don’t follow such a principle. Similarly Mahari Bruno (#242) was asked regarding a maid servant who did not want to leave the home to do the shopping because of this principle. He responded that we don’t rule in accord with this principle. In contrast we see in Yevamos (77a) that this principle is cited as halacha [from the fact that Amonite and Moabite women were not punished for failing to provide the Jews with bread and water - since all respectable woman remain in the home] .

he Nimukei Yosef say there that the principle is halacha because all Jews are considered royalty. Shulchan Aruch (E.H 4) also rules like Yevamos (77a). See the Levush. Consequently we seem to have contradictory evidence as to whether it is halacha. Furthermore in Shabbos (111a), Rav Shimon says that all Jews are royalty and that is the halacha. On the other hand the Ran says that the Rif says that the halacha that all Jews are not considered royalty. However the BeHag and Rabbeinu Chananel rule like Rav Shimon...Rashi (Shabbos 59) writes that all Jews are royalty. Similarly in Mishna Berachos (1:2) says that they are royalty. However Rabbeinu Yona says normally they are not considered royalty but here we do.

In my chidushim I write that there are three different circumstances. In truth there is no question that the honor of a princess is to stay in the home. However in spite of that, we find with Ruth that she did go out to gather grain amongst the other harvesters – and she is praised for doing so. But look at Rashi and the interpretations of Chazal that say when she went out she sought out the company of proper people. If so we can state that when a person does need to go out of the home this principle requires finding a place where there are proper people. In such circumstances there is no prohibition.

Rav Dessler:Failure of parents and teachers to hit children is producing Nazis and brazen people

from February 10, 2010

Is abuse an issue today because today's children are more delicate and easily damaged?

R’ Dessler(Michtav M’Eliyahu 3:361): ...My nephew told me that he saw in a sefer that even if the child obeys his parents it is still proper to find an excuse in order to hit him at least a small amount. … the Ibn Ezra (Shemos 20:14) has written that it is not relevant to talk about the love of a peasant to the king’s daughter. Also when the king punishes the peasant with a beating the peasant never thinks about taking revenge against the king and the only lesson he learns from being punished is to be more submissive. That is because it is obvious that he is totally subordinate to the king and the king has the right to punish - but not him. Similar when it is ingrained in a child’s heart the idea that the father is the ruler and total master over him and that he is subservient to his father then because of this subservience he will never learn to hit others just because his father hits him. However our education has become corrupted because the teachers now think that they need to be friends of their students and parents also think this and everything centers on the independence of the children. Because of this, when a father beats his son, the son will retaliate and hit his father or his small brothers… However the secular researchers in their search for new understanding and their desire to destroy the principle of education which were known even by non‑Jews and whose source is in G‑d’s Torah and Prophets - produce things which bring about a reversal of all these basic principles. They are educating future Nazis and brazen people. From this we see to what degree it is necessary to be careful with all aspects of innovation of the secular researchers concerning psychology and education and it is necessary to evaluate and ascertain whether their approach contradicts the words of Chazal and the Rishonim or Jewish practice which itself is Torah. If contradictions are found it is necessary to reject complete all their filthy innovations and not accept anything from them without first examining it with sharp examination and to evaluate it in the light of Torah and Chazal and the words of the gedolim of the Rishonim and Achronim.

Pardes Yosef(Shemos 15:26):Just as we find that medical treatment used in previous generations are not applicable today because they are harmful, so too we find with psychological and educational programs. We are no longer able to utilize corporal punishment and abusive treatment as they did in the past. That is because we find that instead of producing improvements they actually weaken Jewish society. So if previous generation were not burned even with boiling water, we find danger even in using lukewarm water. Therefore treatment and education needs to be mild and patient because the words of the sages are heard when presented pleasantly (Koheles 9:17).

The importance of accurately reporting the halacha: Who falsely claimed that even touching the Tree of Knowledge was prohibited- Adam or Eve?

Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky (Emes L'Yaakov Bereishis 3:3) Eve told the Serpent that G-d had said not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge and not to touch it

Rashi explained, Eve added to G-d's prohibition of not eating from the Tree of Knowledge and said He also prohibited from touching it. Because this assertion was false it caused damage... because the Serpent pushed Eve into the Tree of Knowledge and when he showed her that she was not harmed by touching it, he said, Just like you didn't die by touching it you will not die by eating it.

This needs further explanation. Because it is clear that Eve did not add to G-d's command on her own. Because if she had it makes no sense that the Serpent was able to persuade her by pushing her. Because if she had originated the addition then she would also know that G-d had not prohibited touching the Tree of Knowledge.

Therefore the correct understanding is that which is found in Avos D'Rabbi Nossan (1:35) that Adam was the one who made up this protective prohibition on his own. "Adam did not want to tell Eve exactly what G-d had said to him. Rather he added an additional restriction to what G-d had said...That is because he wanted to protect himself and Eve from the Tree - even to the degree of merely touching it."

In other words Adam failed to tell Eve that not touching it was his own prohibition - not G-d's. Consequently Eve that not touching and not eating the Tree of Knowledge were both G-d's prohibitions. Therefore when the Serpent pushed her into the Tree of Knowledge and she realized nothing happened when transgressing what she thought was G-d's prohibition - she was ready to accept the claim of the Serpent that she would not die by eating it. 

Consequently the sin of Adam was not in his making of an additional prohibition beyond that which G-d had said. In fact the opposite is true. It was in fact a good idea to make an additional prohibition just as we find that our Sages made additional protective decrees for many Torah prohibitions.

The problem was the fact that Adam failed to tell Eve what G-d had actually prohibited and what he had added himself as a protective measure. Eve's serious mistake followed from this.

If the claims about sexual abuse in Sanhedria Murcheved are false - what about the Nachlaot Scandal?

Guest post

This is an article that I wrote around 10 days before the article "

3 chareidim allegedly invented the story of the Sanhedria Murcheved satanic abuse ring - to make money for themsevles!"

It is surprising how the media and the general public have still not come to realize that the Nachlaot Scandal was also a false story. In the U.S. when similar false accusations took place in the 1980's and 1990's, both the media and the public came to a realization after a short while that what was occurring was a case of mass hysteria and a moral panic. People saw the injustices that were taking place and people rose to the occasion to put things right. Isn't it about time for that to occur in Israel also???

Nachlaot and False Accusations

It has already been over five years since the first mass accusations of a Pedophile Ring operating in the neighborhood of Nachlaot. Many bloggers, newspapers, Rabbis, and various individuals jumped on the bandwagon to publicize the terrible atrocities that were supposedly taking place there. Arrests were made. Some were let out after nine or ten days for "lack of evidence". Others went to trial. Of the three that went to trial, two were convicted; one was sentenced to nine years in jail and the other to fifteen. The third person was acquitted after spending almost three years in jail. His suffering did not stop with the acquittal. He is now fighting to keep his apartment, which the neighborhood is trying to take away from him. Although the judges in his case told him to return to his apartment, his ex-neighbors "advised" him to stay away. He has been basically homeless since being let out of jail.

The accusations did not stop in Nachlaot. There were similar allegations in many other Jerusalem neighborhoods. In Sanhedria Murchevet, the accusations went on for over a year before a Rabbi in that neighborhood decided to go public with "what was going on".

Now, all is quiet. I have not seen any mention of Nachlaot or Sanhedria Murchevet for over half a year, except one mention of speeches being given in the United States in the Ultra-Orthodox communities to collect money for therapy for the children. What is most striking is the quiet. Two people sit in jail for totally ridiculous claims. Countless others are still suffering from being falsely accused.

In America, in the 1980s and 1990s when similar ridiculous claims were made, various individuals of stature and position stepped in and made their voices heard. Lawyers of stature offered their services free of charge to the falsely accused. Efforts were made to release the falsely imprisoned. Yet here in Israel, there is utter silence. Rabbis of stature and position have stood up for the poor children against the accused. Beit Dins have given psak without inquiring into the facts from both sides. Enough to hear from one or two Rabbis that atrocities that were committed against innocent children to give a psak against certain persons. Never mind that these Rabbis were spoon-fed by hysterical parents facts that were not facts and untruths that were claimed to be true. Articles were written by investigative journalists, who went to investigate the terrible atrocities that were supposedly taking place in order to report on them, but found that the "facts" had no basis to stand on.

Yes all is quiet now. The poor children have gone through therapy that was kindly funded by so many people. They are on the way to recovery though it is unlikely they will ever really recover until the truth comes out and until these families that think their children were molested by a cult, a pedophile ring or whatever they think, get the therapy they need to come to the truth of the damage they caused through false accusations.

Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter and the sins of Gedolim - have their roots in Korach and his associates

Update: SEE posts about Breslov

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/06/senior-breslav-rabbis-protest-sefer.html

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/06/breslov-hashkofa-you-cant-be-saved.html

update: See my previous post

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/...

Rambam(Hilchos De'os 6:8): Therefore, a person should be careful not to embarrass a colleague - whether of great or lesser stature - in public, and not to call him a name which embarrasses him or to relate a matter that brings him shame in his presence.

When does the above apply? In regard to matters between one man and another. However, in regard to Heavenly matters if [a transgressor] does not repent [after being admonished] in private, he may be put to shame in public and his sin may be publicized. He may be subjected to abuse, scorn, and curses until he repents, as was the practice of all the prophets of Israel.

========================================

People (especially their families and students) criticize me - how can you say they have sinned? How can you insult gedolim (which a rosh yeshiva claimed is a sin worse than adultery)?  My critics claim that what I say is impossible because they are great tzadikim! They are the gedolei hador. They have been responsible for decades of Torah development and countless talmidim? They are such nice people with exemplary midos.

How can you say that they are responsible for not only the severe distortion and corruption of the Torah and the rulings of Rav Moshe Feinstein and severe public degradation of an innocent man - but they have caused a man and woman to commit adultery! Perhaps even worse -that they have caused severe damage to emunas chochomim.

Unfortunately it is true and they have expressed no regret for their actions and have not done teshuva and apologized. Nor have they even said they have made a mistake. And apparently the adulterous relation still exists. [I am willing to publish a cogent defense of the Heter and the failure to denounce it and the failure to tell the adulterous couple to separate.]

To understand this reality one needs to not lose sight of an elementary truism - there is no man that does not sin (Koheles 7:20). However, not all men and not all sins are equal. The sins of an ordinary man are not that of a gadol nor are their consequences. The yetzer harah is very smart. An ordinary man can be readily seduced to sin by basic lusts such as money or women. For a person on a high spiritual level - the yetzer harah needs to be more creative. One of the sources for sinning unique to gedolim is in fact their high spiritual level. Starting with Adam, the most superior man of all times - sinned the first sin - in order to be like G-d. 

Korach's sins were also in the spiritual dimension. He decided with his superior intellect and logic that the Torah of Moshe was wrong and that he knew better.  Being on an elevated level he in fact had ruach hakodesh and with it he saw that Shmuel would be his descendant. That gave him additional support that his spiritual ideas were correct. However he was grossly mistaken and  he sinned in his effort to elevate the spirituality of the Jewish people and save them from what he thought were the distortions and fraud of the Torah that Moshe presented to the people.

We have also the case of Zimri who openly had sexual relations with a Midianite princess - not chas v'shalom because of mere lust - but because he wanted to accomplish the same spiritual tikun that Moshe had done with his wife. In fact when he confronted Moshe with this idea - Moshe could not reject the idea because he had in fact accomplished that which Korach wanted to do.

Rav Tzadok(Takanas HaShavim #6): Dina was incarnated in Kosbi whose father was the source of evil of Midian who wanted to destroy the Jews so that they would be like all the other nations. But Kosbi didn’t listen to her father and wanted to convert if Zimri was interested. This is the meaning of Zimri’s claim, “Who permitted Tzipora to you?” Zimri grabbed Kosbi by her hair in the manner of the Amorites while she was still a non‑Jew because he was the incarnation of Shechem and he sensed that there are souls of non‑Jews that come into to Jews and non‑Jews who have Jewish souls. He thought that by having intercourse with Kosbi he would collect the holy sparks that were in her while she was still a non‑Jew.

Rav Tzadok(Likutei Amarim #16): Zimri went to Moshe with the defense, “And who permitted the daughter of Yisro to you?” That is when Moshe married Tzipora she had not yet converted since she was under the control of her father Yisro to the degree that the Mechilta says that Yisro insisted to Moshe that his first son should be for idolatry – conversion came later…

Rav Tzadok(Takanas HaShavim #15): Zimri meant by his defense to Moshe, “And who permitted the daughter of Yisro to you?” that the children he had with Kosbi would be considered Jews. Thus he was doing a sin for the sake of Heaven which is like a mitzva not for the sake of Heaven (Nazir 23b)…

Finally we need to mention Shabtsai Tzvi and Jesus who also sinned because of their greatness. Here are the words of Rav Tzadok.

Rav Tzadok (Machavos Charutz #1):...Therefore the Torah has to command us "Be Holy" You might mistakenly think that means as holy as G-d...[See Vayikra Rabba 24:9]. When a person has reached perfection in holiness until he is comparable to the angels through his free will - the Yetzer HaRah does not leave him alone ever and seduces him with the thought that he can be as holy as G-d literally (mamash). Because of this a person can fall from the greatest heights to the lowest depths c.v. This is in fact what happened to Jesus and Shabsai Tzvi - the name of the wicked should rot. Because of their excessive asceticism their imaginative faculty grew and they thought that they could compare themselves to G-d. This all came about because they saw themselves as holy people....

The Baal Shem Tov also noted the problem

Shivchei haBesht(#66) Rabbi Joel told me… that Shabbtai Zvi came to the Besht to ask for redemption. Rabbi Joel said in these words: “The tikkun is done through the connection of soul with soul, spirit with spirit and breath with breath” The Besht began to establish the connection moderately. He was afraid as Shabbtai Zvi was a terribly wicked man. Once the Besht was asleep and Shabbtai Zvi may his name be blotted out, came and attempted to tempt him again, G-d forbid. With a mighty thrust the Besht hurled him to the bottom of hell. The Besht peered down and saw that he landed on the same pallet with Yeshu. Rabbi Joel said that the Besht said that Shabbetai Tzevi had a spark of holiness in him but that Satan caught him in his snare, G‑d forbid. The Besht heard that his fall came through pride and anger. I was reluctant to write it down, but nevertheless I did so to show to what exent pride can be dangerous. [in Praise of Baal Shem page 86-87

Meir Pogrow: Why wasn't he stopped by people who clearly knew he was a danger years ago?

A common complaint in some quarters as well as from some the comments on this blog is why the rabbis did nothing until now about Meir Pogrow. In particular why they didn't stop his teaching career. I have responded, Why only the rabbis ones are being criticized are rabbis - and not the bloggers and pscyhologists and others who knew about it but did not publicize the matter?

 The simple answer is there was not any solid evidence against him and that apparently none of his victims was willing to file a complaint against him. Furthermore he apparently was careful to only seduce adult women and this was not a crime until after the Motti Elon accusations a number of years ago when it was made a crime in Israel for a teacher to have sexual relations with a student. It is only a crime in some states for a teacher or rabbis or other senior figure to have sex with a subordinate. It is also clear that in fact his teaching career was severely curtailed and that eventually no one wanted to hire him.

Question remains as to what mechanism is available for publicizing such predators. You might recall that I was recently threatened with criminal charges  by a pedophile for merely reporting the public information that he had been convicted, served a jail term and is currently listed on the sex offenders registry in America. Rabbi Yakov Horowitz was in fact sued by the same pedophile for the same reason.

===================================================

Unorthodox Jew    Paul Mendlowitz  June 23, 2016

I was informed Meir Pogrow, allegedly, was a sexual predator many years ago, and asked to post about him...The issue was, at the time, I could not get written and signed testimony from at least 2 women/girls that were willing to put their names on the allegations. I did all I could do in private communications with various people to stop Pogrow from remaining a teacher. I believed them, people do not make these things up. I am happy that they found the strength to come forward with their stories. I wish them all the very best in their healing process and the best life has to offer.

=================================
Times of Israel by Dr. Michael Salamon June 24, 2016


Pogrow, often referred to as a brilliant and charismatic Torah, scholar taught at Yeshiva University High Schools in Los Angeles, Michlahlah seminary in Jerusalem, and at the Kollel of Aish HaTorah in Jerusalem and Austin, Texas. He first appeared on my radar about eight years ago when Riva (not her real name) a woman in her early twenties came to therapy following some time at the seminary in Israel. She was anxious, depressed, and afraid that she could never get married or ever trust men. She described a relationship with a rabbi at the seminary who was challenging but also extremely demanding. She complained, “He got into my head somehow and it messed me up.” As we worked through Riva’s anguish and concerns, she described how a man of prominence used his position and his intellect to groom her, manipulate her, and ultimately have her do his bidding. With time, she told me his name.

I checked back with other young women I had worked with who attended the same schools. None had been willing to provide his name in the past, but when I asked if it was he, they all said yes. I asked Riva to report him. She felt that she could not because on the one occasion that she had tried, the administrator she went to did not believe her. In fact, Riva said that she felt “belittled” by the person to whom she tried to report him.

With Riva’s permission, I called someone I had contact with to report Pogrow. I was told, “He is a problem, but because the women are adults there is nothing that can be done.” I tried another person. “He is a bad guy,” I was told with little more than a shrug of the shoulders.

This situation is unfortunately no different from far too many others. Abusers are often smart, manipulative professional liars who choose victims carefully and deliberately and abuse victims repeatedly. Overwhelmingly, when someone finally gets the courage to overcome the resistance to make a complaint, it must be treated as a fact. Unfortunately, reports of abuse are still minimized. If someone reports having being abused, it is a fact that they are telling the truth.People in position of power do not want to deal with bad news particularly if it may harm their institution.

This hesitancy allowed Pogrow and others like him to get away with their evil. Even in cases where a director or board acts against an abuser and dismisses him, there is no attempt to alert other organizations and protect other potential victims. Ultimately, this gives the perpetrator license to keep at his evil.

The Beit Din ruling addresses some of these errors, albeit late. The call for restricting contact with this abuser should apply to all abusers and we should not have to wait 20 years for an abusers name to be broadcast.

Frum Follies Yerachmiel Lopin  June 20, 2016

Pogrow’s misconduct was known for many years by many parties. In 2001 he was forced out of employment by the Michlala Seminary in Jerusalem because of sexual exploitation of students. His wife was kept on and she kept bringing home students and she was kept on for quite a few years. But nobody else was publicly warned.

After six years of working for Aish Hatorah including one running their kollel in Austin, Texas, he was forced out around 2006 for sexual misconduct with women.

He formed Master Torah in 2007 because nobody would hire him. Over the years he had fewer and fewer speaking engagements in mainstream orthodox settings because word kept spreading about him and he was largely confined, if hired, to work with males. The last significant engagement I can find was 2011 with Chabad. Yet the broader public was not warned.

Car guy

06/20/2016 AT 9:56 AM

Yerachmiel, sounds like you are well acquainted with the whole history. So I am left wondering why we had to wait for Tamara Schoor? Why didn’t you come out with something before she had to stick her neck out publicly?
Keep up your great work

Yerachmiel Lopin

06/20/2016 AT 11:47 AM

Considerations that I am not free to disclose. I did in fact investigate extensively hoping for this moment. You will notice that my recent post on Pogrow had a lot, and there is a lot more coming out, most of it gained through research I did two years ago.

Car guy

06/20/2016 AT 1:32 PM

I guess those considerations must be very serious. It must be a difficult balance to strike, between keeping confidences on the one hand, and on the other hand knowing that more innocents could fall victim at any time. Maybe you could write about that balance…

Rbsze

06/23/2016 AT 8:47 PM
We lived in the Pogrow’s neighborhood. 17 years ago, Pogrow was arrested for inappropriate sexual misconduct with a 10 year old boy who took a ride with him as did other kids to school each day in the Old City. He was released on bale and four years later the case was closed. Two of the minors who witnessed the abuse on several occasions and even a rabbi who travelled in the,car daily who admitted that Pogrow’s verbal banter in the car was inappropriate and that he himself would not have wanted his child to be in the car with Pogrow, refused to give evidence. They were friends of Pogrow and even though they knew his crime, they preferred to protect the pervert rather than protect future victims. Imagine how many destroyed lives could have been saved if people who knew of his sick perverse side had done the responsible thing and acted upon צדק צדק תרדוף.

Dr. Natan Slifkin   June 23, 2016

I first heard reports about Meir's inappropriate behavior over a decade ago. That itself, however, obviously raises a question. While these cases are complicated, and there are all kinds of factors to consider, there remains to be more light shed on why it took so long for the condemnation to appear, and how last week he could be perfectly acceptable as a maggid shiur but this week he is a rasha with whom one must not associate. (I am not saying that there aren't any good answers to this question - there may well be. But I think that, if there are good answers, they should be made known, rather than leaving it up to people to speculate.)

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT Meir Pogrow (founder of Master Torah program) has been determined to be a rasha by beis din and that it is prohibited for women to have any contact with him

Another tragedy, Meir Pogrow a brilliant, popular and influential Torah scholar has been found guilty of various prohibited and disgusting activities with women for a long period of time. He has used his Torah knowledge as a means of seducing women. As a consequence the beis din has announced that it is prohibited for women to have any contact with him. In addition a number of well known rabbis have signed the psak of the beis din. He is a resident of Ramat Beit Shemesh and lectures widely around the world. For the appropriateness of anyone listening to his shiurim see Igros Moshe (E.H. 1:96).

Master Torah website    Over 2000 Torah shiurim
=========================================================
This is the psak of the Beis Din which I was asked to post

Meir Pogrow: Learning Torah from morally disgusting individuals: The gag reflex

The current focus on the ban of Meir Pogrow from teaching Torah and communicating with women raises an important question. Should the thousands of Torah lessons that he has recorded be removed from the Internet and not be used to learn Torah. 

The Beis Din did not comment on this question so far. I was told that that the teshuva of Rav Moshe Feinstein regarding the music of Shlomo Carlebach was utilized ONLY to decide that the shiurim were not TECHNICALLY prohibited. And this was the only comparison made.

 It is important to note that the "bad report" of singing to a mixed audience that Rav Moshe Feinstein addresses is much less serious than what Meir Pogrow has been accused of.  (As a side point, I once met Shlomo Carlebach on a flight to Toronto and asked him about the teshuva. He got flustered and explained that he got along very well with Rabbi Feinstein and that they were on good terms.) .

It can readily be seen that while there is no actual prohibition of listening to the music  - Rav Feinstein indicates that there is the natural revulsion factor. Would you serve an exquisite and expense dinner in a bathroom?  Would you eat from plates and drink from glasses that had just been rinsed in the toilet? Would you serve food out of garbage can? What about eating food that someone had chewed on then put it back on the serving plate? While physically the food is the same food - but the context should initiate a gag reflex that would prevent consuming the food. 

This of course is separate from the question as to whether the shiurim contain information or attitudes that are heresy or even problematic. I am not familiar with the shiurim regarding its content - but it is clear that what we are dealing with is a smell test. Here is Rav Moshe Feinstein's teshuva. The shiurim are apparently not prohibited but if you ask a rabbi he would like tell you that you shouldn't learn them.

This question has been address to the Beis Din and I will publish their response when it becomes available.

שו"ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק א סימן צו

בדבר ניגונים שעשה אדם כשר שאחר זמן נתקלקל וסני שומעניה אם יש לנגנם על חתונות כ"ב אייר תשי"ט. מע"כ ידידי מהר"ר שמואל דישון שליט"א.

בדבר אחד שהיה בן תורה בחזקת כשרות כמה שנים והוא מנגן שעשה ניגונים על שירי קדש ולשיר לחתונות והורגלו כמה בני תורה לזמר אותם בשמחות של מצוה ועתה אין שמועתו טובה שמכנס בחורים ובתולות יחד ומזמר לפניהם, ושואל כתר"ה אם מותר עתה לזמר בניגוניו שעשה תחלה כשהיה בחזקת כשרות. לע"ד איני רואה בזה שום איסור מכיון שהם ממה שעשה בכשרותו. וראיה שהרי מצינו בתקנות יוחנן כהן גדול שנקראו על שמו במתני' סוף מע"ש ובפ' עגלה ערופה בסוטה ויש שסוברין שהוא זה ששימש שמנים שנה בכהונה גדולה ולבסוף נעשה צדוקי עיין במלאכת שלמה במע"ש שם, ואף ששם לא היה אפשר לבטל התקנות הגדולות שתיקן ונתקבלו בישראל ונעשו הלכות קבועות, מ"מ לא הי"ל לקרא אותם על שמו אלמא דכיון שתיקן אותם בכשרותו יש לקרא על שמו אף שעתה הוא רשע ומין כיון שנקרא על השעה שהיה כשר.

איברא שהרמב"ם רפ"ט ממעשר כתב שהוא יוחנן כהן גדול שהיה אחר שמעון הצדיק וכתב הכ"מ לאפוקי שלא נאמר שהוא אותו יוחנן כ"ג שנעשה צדוקי לבסוף, מ"מ מסתבר שאינו משום שסובר הרמב"ם שהיה אסור לקרא על שמו אם היה אותו יוחנן כ"ג שנעשה צדוקי לבסוף, שאין לנו לעשות מחלוקת בחנם וא"כ מדידהו נשמע שגם הרמב"ם יודה שמותר לקרא על שמו מה שתיקן בכשרותו, אלא שיודע מאיזה מקור שהיה זה יוחנן כ"ג הקודם לזה שנעשה צדוקי. וגם הא מצינו מאמר באבות פ"ד מ"כ מאלישע בן אבויה אף שהוא לו זכרון גדול והוא משום דאמר זה בכשרותו.

ולבד זה הא מוכרח כן דהא כל המקור לאסור הוא לטעם הרמב"ם בס"ת שכתבו מין שישרף שהוא כדי שלא להניח שם לאפיקורסים ולא למעשיהם, והא זה ברור שבנעשה מומר אחר שכתב הס"ת היא כשרה ממש אף לקרות בו עיין בפ"ת יו"ד סימן רפ"א סק"ב אלמא דכיון שכתב כשהיה בכשרותו הוי הנחת השם לזמן כשרותו שלזה ליכא קפידא. ואין לדחות דבכתב בכשרותו הרי קידש את השמות שהיה אסור לשרוף אף בכתבו מין כדמשמע שם ברמב"ם, דמ"מ היה לן לפסול ולהצריך גניזה, אלא צריך לומר דכיון שהנחת השם הוא לזמן כשרותו ליכא קפידא גם להרמב"ם. ולכן גם בעובדא זו הניגונים שעשה כשהיה בכשרותו שאף אם נימא שיש בזה ענין הנחת השם לעושה הניגונים אין לאסור דהרי הוא הנחת השם על זמן כשרותו שליכא קפידא בזה ומותר. ואף לבני תורה ובעלי נפש אין מקום להחמיר.

ובעצם מסופקני אף בהניגונים שעשה אחר שסני שומעניה, אם הם ניגונים כשרים שאין בהם קלות שראוין לנגנם, אם יש לזה ענין הנחת שם למעשה רשעים, דמסתבר דרק בעניני קדושה ככתיבת ס"ת שהוא חשיבות הנחת שמם בדבר קדושה הוא אסור להרמב"ם אבל בעניני חול אין בזה שום חשיבות במה שיהיה שמם עליהם ואין לאסור. וכמו שפשוט שמותר להשתמש וגם לקרא שמם על עניני חדוש ברפואות ומאשינעס /ומכונות/ וכדומה אלמא דרק בעניני קדושה הוא גנאי להניח שם לאפיקורסים ולא בעניני חול. וא"כ גם הניגונים הם עניני חול דאין להם שום קדושה ולכן אף שעשו לנגן בניגונים אלו דברי קדושה אפשר אין להחשיב שהוא הנחת שם להרשע בדברי קדושה כיון שבעצם הניגונים שחידש אין בהם קדושה. וא"כ אף ניגונים אלו שעשה אחר שסני שומעניה נמי יותר נוטה שאין לאסור לנגן בהם. אך באלו יש לבני תורה ובע"נ להחמיר כיון שיש גם טעם לאסור אף שהוא טעם קלוש.

והנה בעובדא זו שהסני שומעניה אינו בעניני כפירה אלא בעניני קלות ראש לנגן בפני בחורים ובתולות יחד שודאי אין להחשיבו כמין ואפיקורס ואף לא כמומר לתיאבון דהא רק לדבר אחד דקלות ראש ופריצות הוא עבריין לתיאבון מסתבר שעל אדם כזה אין למילף שיהיה דין וחיוב שלא להניח שם לו ולמעשיו. ואדרבה הא ברור שהס"ת שיכתוב איש כזה יהיה כשר, ומפורש ברדב"ז סימן תשע"ד הובא בקיצור בפ"ת שם שס"ת שכתב אחד מהקראים אסור לשרוף ובעצם היה מותר גם לקרות בו רק משום שאפשר שלא נעשה כתקון חז"ל עיין שם והא במין ואפיקורס שכתבו ס"ת אף בהיה ידוע בעדים שכתבו כדין היה אסור לקרות בו להרמב"ם כדי שלא להניח שם להאפיקורסים, מטעם שחלק הרדב"ז שאף שהם בכלל הכופרים כיון שעכ"פ מאמינים בקדושת השם ובקדושת התורה אין קפידא בהנחת שמם בקדושה שמחזיקין. א"כ כ"ש שמומר לתיאבון כשמאמין בקדושת התורה שכשר לקרות בו. וכ"ש בעבריין רק לדבר אחד לתיאבון דכשר הס"ת שיכתוב. וא"כ כ"ש הניגונים שעושה שרשאין לנגן בהם ואין להחמיר אף לבני תורה ובעלי נפש. ואם סני שומעניה גם לעניני כפירה אז הוא כדכתבתי לעיל שאלו שעשה מתחלה אין מקום להחמיר כלל ואף אלו שעשה אח"כ מסתבר יותר שאין לאסור כיון שאינם ענין קדושה אבל לבני תורה ובע"נ ראוי להחמיר, ידידו מוקירו, משה פיינשטיין

Meir Pogrow: Rav Chaim Malinowitz' response to the question of whether Pogrow's Torah shiurim should be removed

update: Just informed that that Torahdownloads has removed the recordings

update:Just was informed that Kol HaLashon has removed the recordings

כתבנו מעט מזעיר ממעשיו הגרועים.ואף זו ברמיזה בלי פירוט.

לדעתי, ואני מדבר רק בעד עצמי,  זו בזיון התורה ללמוד תורה מן נואף, ממי שעושה  מעשה זמרי, ממי  שעבר על איסורים חמורים במזיד מאות פעמים בחייו --וד''ל. לדעתי זו בושה וחרפה לכם  להגיש  שיעוריו  לציבור. לא מדובר במי שנכשל בעבירה--מדובר במי שחי חיי פרא אדם , לוכד נשים במרמה והרבה הרבה פעמים הרס בזה חייהן.

איזה בושה! איזה חילול ה'! איזה בזיון! וכי תורה היא צעצוע שלנו?

אני מלמד זכות עליכם שאתם לא מבינים המדובר פה, כיון שלא פירטנו יותר ממה שכתבנו.

אני מדגיש עוד פעם שאני מדבר אך ורק בעד עצמי.

מסתמא יש לכם רבנים לשאול להם שאילות שיש לכם, לכו תשאלו אותם.

חיים זאב הלוי מלינוביץ

 Rav Gershon Bess wrote

 I agree completely with Rabbi Malinowitz 

Translation of above =====================================

Question: Should Kol HaLashon remove the shiurim of Meir Pogrow?

Answer:

We have written in the  psak of the Beis Din only a small fraction of his disgusting deeds and even then it was only done with hints without going into detail.

In my view, and I am only speaking for myself, it is an insult to the Torah to learn Torah from a predator of women - from one who does ma'aseh Zimri, from one who has transgressed extremely severe prohibitions deliberately at least hundreds of times in his life. That description should be sufficient for you to get the picture.

In my view it is an embarrassment and disgrace for you to offer his shiurim to the public. We are not talking about someone who had a temporary lapse and succumbed to temptation. We are talking about someone who lived an unrestricted licentious life - trapping women through deception and many many times destroying their lives.

What an embarrassment! What a chilul HaShem! What a disgrace! Do you think that Torah is a mere trivial plaything for us?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you have not understood the seriousness of what we have talked about in our psak since we deliberately have left out the details. But the answer as to whether the shiurim should be removed is obvious.

Let me emphasize and repeat that I am speaking only for myself and not the other dayanim

You obviously have your rabbinical advisors to ask this question. Please go and ask them for their psak.

Stefan Colmer - convicted molester has moved to Passaic - Rav Eisenman requested that this be publicized

I recently received this email

Rabbi,

Rabbi Eisenman emailed me giving his expressed permission he wants his email re Colmer on your blog and internet given danger presents

Thank you

 ==========================================

From: R. Y. Eisenman <rabbi@ahavasisrael.org>
Date: Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:02 PM
Subject: Important

Important

Please be aware that Stefan Colmer, whom I spoke publicly about a few years ago and who was subsequently arrested, convicted and imprisoned for sexually abusing minors, has moved back to his home on 38 John Street.

Congregation Ahavas Israel, together with all the Shuls in the Passaic-Clifton area has prohibited him from entering our premises; he is also not allowed in any of the Yeshivas.

Mr. Colmer's picture and the details of his criminal record can be found here:

http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/SomsSUBDirectory/offenderDetails.jsp?offenderid=36837

JFS will be hosting a forum within the next few days that will address concerns and appropriate steps on how to keep one's children safe. The details will be communicated to you shortly.

Ron Yitzchok Eisenman, Rabbi, Congregation Ahavas Israel, Passaic, NJ  

The problem of a convicted sex offender using threats of lawsuits to prevent publicizing his activities

Yesterday we witnessed a convicted sex offender threatening me with a lawsuit if I didn't take down all mention about him. What he wanted taken down consisted mainly of newspaper accounts of his conviction as well as the fact that he is now living in Israel with his family. He mentioned that I was violating the privacy of his children by stating where he lives and that they exist. Information which is vital for the protection of neighborhood children and classmates who might end up going to his home. Strangely this same sex offender had given me permission to post material -such his psychological tests - last year. He is a careful reader of this blog and the material was posted lasted year - and yet he did not ask that the material be removed then.

Suddenly after 9 months of not even a new mention of his name on this blog, his lawyer demanded that I take down the posts mentioning him by the end of the day or else face the legal consequences. As you know I did in fact take down the posts.

This morning I received additional emails from the sex offender saying that he wants me to meet together with his lawyer next week to close the matter.

[ As a point of knowledge, Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz was also sued by the same sex offender in Israel and ended up having to pay a fine. Apparently that case has not resolved yet.]

This person has not threatened legal action against any of the other blogs who have discussed his case nor has he sued the newspapers or social agencies or the New York Police department - all of whom have reported his conviction as a sex offender, imprisonment and current listing on the sex offenders list. As far as I know it is just Rabbi Horowitz and myself who have incurred the wrath of this individual

So what is the significance of all of this?

A person who is a sex offender - especially one who is on the public list of offenders in America - is not someone that you should feel comfortable  being around children without supervision. The urge to molest children doesn't simply go away with time or punishment. As a basic principle of Torah of "Not standing idly by the blood of your fellow man" there is a need to make people aware of that potential danger.  In general in America it is accepted that public information which is true does not constitute slander. Thus publicizing newspaper articles or documentation relevant to this concern are totally legal and not susceptible to lawsuits. Even if the information is felt to be false by the person - as long as you are simply reporting what is in the newspapers or from social agencies - you are protected. Though the newspapers and social agencies that are the source of the information can be sued.

Intimidating others from publicizing information that is in the public domain is clearly harmful for the public welfare. This is not only for bloggers but it also works to prevent victims reporting their abusers for fear of being sued for slander - aside from being sexual abused. It is very important for the protection of society that this information be distributed in the public domain..

Bottom line - reporting this information is a Torah obligation. If the convicted sex abuser is convinced of his innocence then he should be directing his attention to the source of the information - the courts, newspapers and social agencies. Those who report this information should not be targeted and intimidated. Using lawsuits as a weapon of intimidation is harmful for society as well as being a violation of the Torah prohibition of mesira.

Until I get further clarification of the legal issues - I am not publishing the name of this sex offender nor will I allow it to be mentioned in comments. I am well aware that he is reading this post as well as the fact that he feels rejected, angry  and lonely as a result of his conviction and that he strongly wants to be accepted by others and not be viewed as a pariah. 

However striking out at the messenger does not aid his cause nor the welfare of his children. Bizarrely he is generating more negative publicity for himself and his family by threatening me - especially since his name has not been mentioned for 9 months here. He would have accomplished much more by simply making a quiet private request.

Yoel Weiss and Rivky Stein: Update

update: Just received this comment which makes a number of important points

There is much to learn from the saga of Yoeli. Reading the comments on this post, I think too many people are missing the real lessons. 

Reconciliation is a good thing. Therapists, in contrast to accusations made by too many people, are dedicated to הבאת שלום בין איש לאשתו. We are not divorce hungry, and we do not make such decisions for our clients. 

This reconciliation is a rare exception, and a special tefilo for its longevity would be appropriate. As is typical for many cases, the sale to the public that the woman is the victim of an abusive husband is fairly easy and popular. It is ignorant to deny that there are abusive husbands. Very close to 50% of all marriages in which there is abuse, the perpetrator is the woman, and the victim is the husband. Yet, any woman with a difficulty in the marriage can buy the world's pity and support with claims of victimization. And the current unbalanced systems built to protect victims of domestic violence support this reverse victimization of men. I am in as much awe of the reconciliation as I am of the blindness that afflicted those who pushed themselves as advocates for women in this saga. I remain appalled at the extremes of falsehood and fabrication with non-existent dayanim, and the pumping of these fraudulent messages to the secular media. The chilul Hashem aspect of all this is outside of the realm of humans to judge, and HKB”H will deal with this as He sees fit. 

I will not comment specifically about any organization. But the efforts to intervene here without knowing facts were clearly in the wrong, and I would daven that they, too, learn some lessons. 

Lastly, I pray that the children, who were made into victims by the incessant efforts to cut them off from their father, become truly resilient and never experience any ill effects of what was inflicted upon them.

========================================

Statement from Yoel Weiss:

As my wife and I are very public figures who have aroused much interest and strong feelings regarding the breakup of our marriage – I would like to publish an update regarding our current situation.

Baruch HaShem – we have reconciled and are living together as a family with our children. We are aware that this is probably the least expected outcome given the accusations that were made and publicized in all the media. But it is true. We are both firmly committed to making our marriage work and with G-d's help we will succeed.

How this all came about is not something which is appropriate for the present – there are still very sensitive issues that are being addressed. We would appreciate if you would respect our privacy and allow the healing process to work without making us and our children a subject of gossip and Monday morning quarterbacking. Someday it might be possible to calmly explain what happened – but now is not the time.

In addition we have both learned much from recent events regarding saving marriages as well as what not to do when the marriage can not be saved. We have succeeded in helping a number of couples regarding these issues and are looking for a way to help others avoid the pain and degradation that we have experienced. We are presently working on making this advice available in a more structured and useful format. I will update the public as we work this out.

However at the present, all that is relevant is that we are Baruch HaShem a family again.

Wife is subordinate to her husband to the degree he is subordinate to G-d - Netziv

Netziv (Bereishis 2:24): Therefore a man should leave… and cleave to his wife. From that time on there is no way to get a help mate as intended by creation and according to how a man feels when he doesn't have a help mate - except by leaving his father and his mother and cleaving to his wife. And then they will be one flesh as he loves her since they are now as one being. As is stated in Yevamos (62b). And if he loves his wife as himself…[he will have domestic tranquility]. But even so she is not totally subordinate as the first woman who was considered to be part of Adam and but rather they will be one flesh. Just as he is concerned with his own good and he wants her to totally fulfill what he wants so it is with her that she wants her own good and that he will totally fulfill what she wants. Nevertheless it has already been established with the first woman and it has become part of the female nature that women remain helpers even though it is not like the original circumstances but rather is is like what happened after eating from the Tree of Knowledge as we will explain in Bereishis (3:2) and it is included in the sixth day of Creation. But it is only someone who merits it will get the love of his wife with total subordination as it was with Eve before the Sin. Because of this there were two manners of the cleaving of Adam and Eve in order that there be in future generations two different ways that a woman would be supportive of her husband. Therefore on the sixth day of Creation there were two ways that Eve loved Adam in order that that there should be two ways that a woman loves a man and as we explained that there are two different manners of serving G-d. All of this was done on the first day that they were created as we explained on verse 4. This created the nature of love of a woman and her life with her husband. This is like what Ben Azai said at the end of Kiddushin [(82a)] , "I was created to serve my Master and they were created to serve me." And to the degree that he serves G-d, will his wife serve him. Or alternatively she will serve him according to his mazel - as all events in the life of man happens according to Divine Providence according to his deeds. And this with either a good mazel or bad. Because this is the say G-d established His Kingdom in the world.

A prominent Baltimore Rav comments to me, "You should know that Rav Dovid Feinstein and Rav Nota Greenblatt are good friends"

This morning I had a discussion with a prominent Baltimore Rav who I have known for many years. He is known for not only for his knowledge of Torah, but as having sharp insights into complex situations and an ability to deal with all types of people with sensitivity. He also is known to keep his cards close to his vest and that he reveals only a fraction of what is actually on his mind. Equally as important he has been involved in this issue.

I hadn't seen him in a long time, but after davening he came over and asked how I am doing. He listened patiently as I explained my distress over the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt heter. I told him that the heter was clearly obtained through the use of a false psychiatric report and was not valid. 

He asked me what my involvement was in this matter and I explained that I had made a major contribution to publicizing the matter which had led to the involvement of many rabbinic authorities. 

I noted that it was commonly agreed that it was not just a problem with the immediate case but it was the fact that this was setting a precedent for other cases. He interjected that there was such a thing as a valid heter because of kiddushei ta'os. I agreed but noted that when the Rackman and the Krause beis dins had tried to create leniencies - there was an uproar against the beis din itself. I noted that in this case those who had created the heter are not being criticized. It is just being said that the heter is no good this time.

I noted that things had come to a stand still in dealing with the wider concerns, after Rav Dovid Feinstein had issued his psak that the heter was no good and that Rav Shmuel had simply said that he would abide by his psak. Rav Kaminetsky had not expressed any regret. There was no statement that the process of producing the heter was wrong. There was no redressing of the harm that had been done against Aharon Friedman. Of greater importance - nothing was being done to protect the community against this being used as a precedent for other cases.

When I noted that Rav Greenblatt had not retracted and the couple was still living together - he expressed suprise. I explained that Rav Greenblatt had stated that once he gave the psak it is valid independent of the quality of the facts that the psak was based on. 

I noted that at the present time as a result of the psak of Rav Dovid, the validity of the heter has simply become a machlokess in halacha between Rav Greenblatt and Rav Dovid Feinstein. As long as Rav Dovid does not criticize Rav Nota for producing the psak there will be no progress and the matter will not be properly dealt with.

Before the Rav turned to take care of some pressing business he said the following, "You should be aware that Rav Dovid Feinstein and Rav Nota Greenblatt are good friends."