רב אנס נערה בת 15 בבית כנסת

Walla

רב של בית מדרש בפתח תקווה ירצה חמש שנות מאסר בגין שורת עבירות נגד ארבעה אחים, שתי נערות ושני נערים, בהן אונס, מעשים מגונים, תקיפה והתעללות – כך קבע בית משפט השלום בעיר. בפרקליטות אמרו כי האיש בן ה-42 ניצל באופן ציני את אמונתם של המתלוננים באלוהים ובו: "ניהל אותם באמצעות כוחו המאגי כבובות על חוט".

מגזר הדין עולה כי שלושה מארבעת האחים, בן ושתי בנות, הגיעו ללמוד אצל האיש במהלך שנת 2009 שכן הוא היה ידוע בתור מי שמעניק שיעורי תורה לילדים במצוקה. אחותם הגדולה הגיעה מידי פעם לנקות את בית הכנסת המדובר. כבר בתחילה הוא החל להפעיל מניפולציה על ארבעת האחים, וטען בפניהם בין היתר שיש לו כוחות נסתרים. בהמשך הפכו ההבטחות לאיומים – שאם האחים יעזבו אותו הם ימותו, ושאם הבנות לא יפסיקו ללכת עם גופיות הן יחלו במחלות עור.

Tamar Epstein's view seems to be that divorce has no major long term impact on children

Listen to Tamar Epstein at about 39 minutes where she seems to assert that once the divorce is done children will adjust and that the damage from divorce is the initial shock which is being prolonged because of her husband refusing to divorce her. It seems clear that her  cost-benefits analysis together with her view of "painless" divorce expressed here - led her to too readily abandon her marriage without devoting proper time and effort to save it

Recent research indicates that divorce can cause lifelong damage to the children. Unexpected Legacy of Divorce by Wallerstein & Lewis     North Carolina State University  NY Times    The Telegraph     update: National Affairs The Evolution of Divorce by W. BRADFORD WILCOX

The divorce revolution's collective consequences for children are striking. Taking into account both divorce and non-marital childbearing, sociologist Paul Amato estimates that if the United States enjoyed the same level of family stability today as it did in 1960, the nation would have 750,000 fewer children repeating grades, 1.2 million fewer school suspensions, approximately 500,000 fewer acts of teenage delinquency, about 600,000 fewer kids receiving therapy, and approximately 70,000 fewer suicide attempts every year (correction appended). As Amato concludes, turning back the family-­stability clock just a few decades could significantly improve the lives of many children.

Skeptics confronted with this kind of research often argue that it is unfair to compare children of divorce to children from intact, married households. They contend that it is the conflict that precedes the divorce, rather than the divorce itself, that is likely to be particularly traumatic for children. Amato's work suggests that the skeptics have a point: In cases where children are exposed to high levels of conflict — like domestic violence or screaming matches between parents — they do seem to do better if their parents part.

But more than two-thirds of all parental divorces do not involve such highly conflicted marriages. And "unfortunately, these are the very divorces that are most likely to be stressful for children," as Amato and Alan Booth, his colleague at Penn State University, point out. When children see their parents divorce because they have simply drifted apart — or because one or both parents have become unhappy or left to pursue another ­partner — the kids' faith in love, commitment, and marriage is often shattered. In the wake of their parents' divorce, children are also likely to experience a family move, marked declines in their family income, a stressed-out single mother, and substantial periods of paternal absence — all factors that put them at risk. In other words, the clear majority of divorces involving children in America are not in the best interests of the children.

Marranos: Portuguese shul criticizes Shavei Israel and Michael Freund

El Jueves, 9 de enero, 2014 2:42 P.M., Info CIP escribió:

Dear Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn,

Shalom. 

We present the following situation regarding an organization named Shavei Israel.

On 07.01.2014, the JTA published the following news: JTA

“Portuguese priest prompts protest with Jewish museum plan

 (JTA) — The rabbi of Porto urged the Catholic Church of Portugal to block a local priest’s plan to open a museum commemorating Jewish presence in the city. Rabbi Daniel Litvak made the appeal in a letter this week to the Patriarchate of Lisbon against a plan promoted by Father Agostinho Jardim Moreira to open The Center for Jewish Memory. “It would be improper and a travesty for a Catholic priest to try to distort history and possibly benefit financially from a museum in memory of the very people whom the church expelled,” Litvak told JTA on Tuesday. Porto, which has a Jewish community of several dozen, used to have tens of thousands of Jews before their 16th century expulsion and forced conversion into Christianity. Moreira wants to open the museum inside a building that once belonged to Jewish owners before its confiscation, Litvak said. “Porto has a Jewish community with Jews from 14 nations and if anyone should be running a museum, it should be that community,” he said.

But Michael Freund, chairman of Shavei Israel — an Israeli NGO that runs a Jewish heritage center in Trancoso near Porto as part of its outreach to former Jews — offered a passionate defense of Moreira and condemned Litvak’s letter. Moreira’s project “is a welcome and long-overdue initiative, and it has won the support of Portuguese Jewry,” Freund said, adding it would help raise awareness to that community’s endurance and revival despite persecution. “It is disgraceful that Daniel Litvak has taken the inexcusable step of criticizing Father Moreira and this project, and I think his criticism is completely without merit,” Freund told JTA. (…)”

After Freund planted, 1 year ago, completely false news in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA), associating Shavei Israel and “marranos” to the 75^th anniversary of the Oporto Synagogue - http://daattorah.blogspot.pt/2013/02/portuguese-synagogue-protests-false.html; after Freund planted false information on the internet, saying falsely that Rabbi Litvak is a Shavei Israel Rabbi - http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Daniel-Litvak/16558858; after Freund planted false information in the Kashrus Magazine’s Kosher Supervision Guide, associating Shavei Israel to the Oporto kashrut (Please see attachment); after Freund, in face of so many forgeries, was prohibited from entering the Kadoorie Synagogue Mekor Haim; after all this, Freund’s new adventure is to support a Catholic priest who wants to create a Center for Jewish Memory probably to falsify history and make money from Jewish tourists and visitors. 

Of course the Center for Jewish Memory will disseminate the message that matters to Shavei Israel, which is that, even today, there are tens of thousands of marranos (crypto-Jews) in Portugal. There will also be the attempt to create, around the Center, an artificial community of false marranos, for massless conversions. 

We have already stated that it is the opinion of the Religious Committee of the Jewish Community of Oporto, as well as of reputable scholars, that there are no longer any marranos in Portugal, just as there are no longer any samurai warriors in Japan, and it is misleading to imply that there are. The matter is now one for the history books, local culture and tourism. 

In the time of Captain Barros Basto, the marranos came from families who, lost in the clouds of the centuries, separated for a long time from the entire Jewish culture, still elevated, in spirit and in truth, their praises and prayers to Hashem, practicing their ancestors’ religion in secret, at home, or in isolated places in the field and keeping Jewish matrilineal descent through the choice of spouses within the congeneric family settings. There were not mere individuals who claimed willingness to become Jews or claimed chances of having existed Jewish converts among their ancestors. 

Captain Barros Basto represented the last hope for the Portuguese marranos and died in 1961 at a time when, with the exception of the community of Belmonte, which kept the ritual traditions and the family spirit at weddings, the majority of the crypto-Jewish families from other latitudes witnessed the weakening of religious ties, the assimilation and the intermarriage with non-Jews, circumstances that were irreversibly aggravating during the following decades with the advent of the open society.

Freund knows perfectly that there are no marranos in Portugal. The last marranos were those of Belmonte. This fact contradicts his plans. But he insists. The Catholic priest is his new instrument. 

In July and August of 2013, the referred Catholic priest talked to the Jewish Community of Oporto and explained us his project to create the Center for Jewish Memory. At the time, the Community didn't know that Freund commanded the priest, so we expressed readiness to make a partnership with him, provided that the project complied with the historical and religious truth, to be protected by the Jewish Community of Oporto, by his Rabbi and his religious Committee. Faced with the negative response from the priest, the community opposed the project, as is our duty. 

It is obvious that if the intention of the Priest were the inter-religious dialogue, he would have not rejected the partnership with the Jewish Community of Oporto, nor would he be so eager to spend so much energy with the project. Today it is clear that all of this has to do with material and advertising interests on the part of Shavei Israel. 

The Jewish Community of Oporto hopes Shavei Israel finds many marranos, but in countries where they exist.

Rabbi Daniel Litvak

Religious Committee

Board of Directors

Jewish Community of Oporto

http://comunidade-israelita-porto.org/x#0

Below is the example of misrepresentation that Rabbi Litvak belongs to Shavei Israel

 

Google's automatic email invitation causes man to be jailed for violating restraining order

abc news   In what one expert on Internet privacy calls "a worst-case scenario," a Massachusetts man was jailed for sending his ex-girlfriend (who had a restraining order against him) an email invitation to join Google+. 

But Thomas Gagnon contends he didn't send it; Google did, without his knowledge or consent. 

When his ex-girlfriend received the invitation, according to the Salem News, she went to the police, complaining Gagnon had violated the restraining order by sending her the email. Police agreed and arrested him, the News reported. He was jailed then released on $500 bail.[...]

Shear noted: "Google is going through every one of your contacts and sending them an invitation, whether it's your doctor, your lawyer, your mistress, or your ex-fiancee who's got a restraining order against you." 

He called this, "a perfect example of what happens when a company oversteps its bounds."

Schlesinger Twins: Beth loses custody appeal to Supreme Court

Jewish Telegraph     BETH Alexander, the Manchester mother at the centre of a tug-of-love case in Vienna, has lost her appeal for custody of her four-year-old twins.[...]

Beth’s case is now being handled by Martin Preslmayer, who told the Jewish Telegraph yesterday that it was extraordinary a decision had been reached so speedily when appeals normally take three to four months.

He said: “The case is finally closed but Beth has the right to open a new custody case and the strategy [this time] will be different.

“Hopefully, this time she will be treated better.

“It is quite unusual that some judges not even working on that case intervened with the relevant judge in the first instance. That is information I have gained from the client but not been able to check.

“What also seems strange is that so many lawyers suddenly withdrew their power of attorney from the case without reason. [For further reading on this subject click here]

“It is unusual that some decisions took such a long time and some others, especially those not in favour of Beth, were actually issued within a couple of days.”

Dr Preslmayer added that he would be seeking a new psychologist’s report on the children.

The others seen by the court he described as “very, very questionable”. [...]

Promoting divorce with children and without serious cause: Writing a new ending for Masechta Gittin

Guest Post:

It is understandable that someone who wants out of a marriage would be happy (at least temporarily) upon believing that they are “free.”  But Barbara Sofer misses the irony in her unqualified assertion that “Joy spread throughout the Jewish world” upon the news that one such woman is “free.”  [http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/The-Human-Spirit-Free-at-last-but-how-336906]  Really?  Perhaps for those in the “Jewish world” who reject Jewish laws, customs and traditions deemed inconsistent with the values of the 1960s counterculture in which a woman’s right to divorce is absolute and the devastating effects of divorce on children are irrelevant.  In contrast, Chazel’s final word on divorce at the very end of Masechta Gittn [90b] concludes that the destruction of a first marriage is so tragic that even the mizbeach sheds tears (R’ Elazar) and that G-d despises the perpetrator of such action (R’ Yochanan).  And the Gemara is particularly forceful in decrying divorce where there are children involved (for example, Eruvin 41b and Pesachim 87b).

But some in the Jewish world apparently believe the Gemara’s approach to be outdated, and have written a happy new ending to Masechta Gittin in which mourning is replaced by pure joy, and condemnation by legitimization: “Though marriage can offer a rewarding path to personal growth, it is important to remember that it cannot provide a secure or permanent status. Many people will make the decision between marriage and singlehood many times throughout their life. Divorce represents part of the normal family life cycle. It should not be viewed either as deviant or tragic, as it has been in the past. Rather, it establishes a process for ‘uncoupling’ and thereby serves as the foundation for individual renewal and ‘new beginnings’.” [A distillation of “modern” high school and college textbooks by Barbara Defoe Whitehead, “The Experts' Story of Marriage.”]
The women in both “agunah” cases much discussed on this blog and in the general media would have each received a get long ago if they been willing to be reasonable regarding custody arrangements, or at least acted in good faith. Instead, they, and the rabbonim backing them, have decided to turn their cases, which could have been and should have been treated as private matters, into very public debates (carried out in the likes of the New York Post, New York Times, Washington Post, etc.) about completely uprooting Jewish Law and tradition regarding the role of family and the fundamental definitions of marriage and divorce.

Even if one believes that these women should not have been expected to stay in marriages that they wanted out of for whatever reason, it is hard to see any reasonable argument that either had what are generally considered serious cause (domestic violence, substance abuse, infidelity, or even an unwillingness of their spouses to work on their marriages) to destroy their families, especially given that each had just been blessed with a child. Rather, after being married for a year or two, they found themselves being miserable post-partum and felt incompatible with their spouse. Indeed, that is the whole point. They have chosen, with the encouragement of the rabbonim backing them, to become poster children for the worldview that the decision to divorce should not be regarded in Judaism as deviant or tragic, but as the foundation for a woman’s absolute right to seek individual renewal and new beginnings. And each must have full custody of the children because her decision to divorce must not come with unwanted consequences such as recognizing that the children should be allowed to have significant relationships with their fathers.

Remaining silent - when it is required to speak - causes the same spiritual damage as lashon harah

The Klausenberger Rebbe explained the reason behind the Chofetz Chaim's great dread of speaking lashon harah as that one needs to view it spewing a nerve gas into the environment. Chofetz Chaim  clearly feels that it is better to err in not speaking rather than causing the great destruction if you mistakenly speak lashon harah. Fear of lashon harah combined with fear of mistakenly saying lashon harah effectively produces a very strong bias towards silence.

I just found this Shem M'Shmuel who has a different view. He asserts that remaining silent when one needs to speak up e.g., child abuse, fraud, or poor shidduch  - produces the same spiritual damage that saying lashon harah does. Consequently you are not safter remaining silent and being machmire when ever there is a doubt. He thus is claiming that there is no safety in silence and one must speak - even if you risk speaking lashon harah - when there is a to'eles to speak.

שם משמואל - פרשת וישב - שנת תרע"ז

ויש לומר נמי ביוסף כי השתיקה והעדר הדיבור במקום שראוי לדבר נחשבו לו כפגם דיבור וכלה"ר וכמלה בישא, וזה עצמו הביאו להביא דבתם רעה אל אביהם בפועל ממש כי עבירה גוררת עבירה. אף כי גם בזה לא היתה הכוונה ללה"ר ולעבירה ח"ו, אלא שאביהם יישירם, מ"מ לצדיק כביר כזה גם זה נחשב לחטא וכמו לה"ר ממש. ולפי"ז י"ל דגם הא דקלקול ירבעם לא ממנו הי' אלא מן הקלקול הקדום של יוסף הצדיק שלרגלי מעלתו נחשב, לקלקול ועבירה, ועדיין לא נתקן לגמרי עד עשרה הרוגי מלכות כידוע, קלקול זה המעט שבשורש שהוא ענין פירוד והבדל, כאמרם ז"ל (ערכין ט"ז ע"ב) הוא הבדיל וכו' לפיכך אמרה תורה בדד ישב, פרה ורבה בענפים עד שבירבעם שהי' מזרע יוסף משכהו לקלקול גמור ופירוד וקיצוץ בנטיעות, כמו שהאריך רבינו בחיי (בפ' ויצא) מענין חטא ירבעם. ואף שחטא בבחירתו הרע, דאל"ה לא הי' עליו עונש, כי השכר והעונש תלויים בבחירה, מ"מ כבר נסתלקה השמירה העליונה של רגלי חסידיו ישמור ולא יאונה לצדיק כל און, והי' החטא שבשורש מושך אותו לרע, ושוב אין תימה מה שאדם גדול כמוהו נלכד בפח זה:

ולפי האמור יש ליתן טעם מה שהמלך הראשון קודם דהמע"ה לא הי' מזרע יוסף, אחר שזרע יוסף הי' אז עלול לחטא ואמרו ז"ל ראוי' היתה מחלוקתו של ירבעם להיות בימי שבע בן בכרי, אלא שא"כ לא היתה מתיסדת מלכות דוד ולא הי' נבנה ביהמ"ק ע"כ נסתלקה עד ימי רחבעם, כ"ש אם הי' המלך הראשון מזרע יוסף, ובאשר הי' עלול לחטא הי' נשחת ח"ו כל הענין של מלכות ב"ד ובנין ביהמ"ק, ע"כ ניטלה אז המלוכה מזרע יוסף וניתנה לזרע בנימין שגם הוא מזרע רחל וגם הוא ראוי לענין זה כנ"ל:

והנה ענין שתיקה במקום הראוי למללא שנחשב לפגם הדיבור, מצינו נמי ביהודה שהורידוהו אחיו מגדולתו כשראו בצרת אביהם אמרו אתה אמרת למכרו אילו אמרת להשיבו אל אביו היינו שומעים לך. ולכאורה אינו מובן מה קושיא היתה להם עליו יותר מעל עצמם, ונימרו אינהו לנפשייהו שחשבו שימות תחתיו בבור ברעב ובצמא. אך לפי דרכנו יובנו הדברים ששתיקה במקום הראוי לדבר נחשבת פגם הדיבור וכמו לה"ר שמבדיל ומפריד בין איש לרעהו. ובאשר תעודת המלך היא לאחד ולחבר את העם וע"כ נקרא מלך בשם עוצר כמ"ש (שמואל א' ט' י"ז) זה יעצור בעמי, הנה זהו היפוך מדת המלוכה, וע"כ הורידו את יהודה מגדולתו באשר חשבוהו לפוגם במדת המלוכה, וכמו שאיתא במפרשים הטעם בהא דאמרו ז"ל (יומא כ"ב ע"ב) שאול באחת ועלתה לו דוד בשתים ולא עלתה לו, כי חטא שאול הי' בענין המלוכה ובאשר פגם במלוכה נסתלקה ממנו המלוכה, אבל חטאו של דוד לא נחשב לחטא בענין המלוכה, ע"כ די הי' לו עונש אחר, כן נמי באשר חשבו ליהודה פוגם בענין המלוכה ע"כ הורידוהו מגדולתו:

ולפי האמור יש לפרש הפלוגתא דרב ושמואל אי קיבל דוד לה"ר, דאלו ואלו דברי א"ח. דכמו שאמרנו לעיל בענין יוסף דמקלקול מועט בשורש פרה ורבה בענפים וזה משך את ירבעם לחטא, כן נמי יש לומר בענין יהודה, ששתיקתו של יהודה במקום הראוי לדבר גרמה לדהמע"ה למשוך אותו לקבל לה"ר, אבל לא ממנו הי' לקבל לה"ר כי הי' איש מרכבה ולבו חלל בקרבו, ולא הי' מעותד אף לשגגה קלה אפי' שראה במפיבושת דברים נכרים כבש"ס שם, אלא מחמת מעט דמעט הפגם שבשורש דהיינו יהודה שבשבילו הורידוהו מגדולתו זהו שגרם למשכהו לשגגה קלה כזו לקבל לה"ר מציבא, וא"כ מר דאמר לא קיבל דוד לה"ר דיבר ממהות דוד המלך ע"ה בעצמו, ומר דאמר קיבל דוד לה"ר מדבר מגרם הפגם בשורש, ומ"מ ניכרת מעלת דהמע"ה ממה שאנו רואים בירבעם דמעט דמעט פגם שבשורש הביאו לחטאים גדולים מאד ועבירה גוררת עבירה חמורה הימנה, אבל בדהמע"ה לא היתה ביכולת ההמשכה מחמת הפגם שבשורש למשכהו אלא לשגגה קלה כזו שקיבל לה"ר אחר דחזי בי' דברים נכרים, וניכר יתרון אור מן החושך:

The Eidah finally severely criticizes the Sikrikim

bhol

פרסום ראשון: לראשונה תוקפת 'העדה החרדית' את פלג ה'סיקריקים', שבוע לאחר שאנשי הפלג הקיצוני ניסו לחבל בעצרת של 'העדה'.

הבוקר (חמישי) מתפרסמת בעמוד הראשון של הבטאון 'העדה', הודעה רשמית של הנהלת 'העדה החרדית', המגנה את הסיקריקים.

לפני שבוע, בערב ראש חודש שבט, נערכה עצרת תפילה ברחבת בניני זופניק בירושלים, ואנשי הסיקריקים ניסו לחבל בה בשל השתתפות הראב"ד הגר"מ שטרנבוך. הללו שפכו באזור שאריות של דגים מרקיבים וגרמו לבאשה עזה באזור העצרת.

תחת הכותרת 'זעקה גדולה ומרה' נכתב: "אוי לו לדור שכך עלתה בימינו שכמה יצאו אנשים בלי עול, קומץ קטן של יהירים עזי פנים, ריקים ופוחזים משולי המחנה, לחבל כרם בד"צ עדתינו החרדית שיסודה בהררי קודש ובראשה עומדים רבותינו חברי הבד"ץ".

What does it mean that the Torah is the greatest mitzvah?

 Guest Post:

When I was becoming frum, I learned about mitzvos. They were the big challenge: shabbos, niddah, kashrus. Now all I hear about it Limud Torah, as if it's the only mitzvah. I hear often, Limud Torah is the greatest mitzvah. What's the source for this I ask people. They say, "Talmud Torah c'neged culam." This doesn't seem a good source. Cneged doesn't mean greater. It doesn't even mean equal as "shekul" should be a better word for that. R' Joseph Soloveitchik said  "Talmud Torah c'neged culam" doesn't mean Torah is greater than mitzvos but it teaches us about mitzvos, helping us to do them.  (The Rav Thinking Aloud, p. 69) This explanation goes better with the word cneged. Additionally, there are other statements of chazal such as "tzit tzit are equal to all the other mitzvos" and "yishuv ha'aretz is equal to all the other mitzvos." I asked a Rav recently who told me the source is a posuk somewhere that says "the purpose of the world is Torah study." But the Vilna Gaon, even shelaimh, 1, says the purpose is to fix middos.

So is there a source for this idea that Torah study is the greatest mitzvah?

I find the whole concept of Torah study as everything a tremendous turnoff considering I have to spend 65 hours a week earning a living and I start wondering why I'm working so hard to keep mitzvos when they are not important.

New perspectives - what's wrong with TED talks? Benjamin Bratton

Move On - Shua (A Victims Response To Sexual Abuse)