update - this is a modified version that Rabbi Hoffman gave permission to post
By now, many people are aware of an unfortunate scandal in four of the religious seminaries for women in Israel.
The case was first taken up by the Chicago Beis Din and then handled
by Rav Mendel Shafran’s Beis Din in Bnei Brak, Israel. The latter
distinguished Beis Din did ensure that the offending party was no longer
involved in the education of the seminaries, and declared that the
seminary environments were safe.
The Chicago Beis Din still had some serious reservations about how the matter was being handled by the latter.
Generally speaking, when an untoward situation exists, it is
necessary to completely “clean house” and ensure that there is
absolutely no control or influence of an offending party over students
or staff. This would include even being in charge of the building
facilities, educational programming, and financial responsibility. It
is also necessary to make sure that any new owner not be tied to the
offending party in any manner or form. These criterion were not met to
the degree that the Chicago Beis felt necessary.
The Rabbonim of the Chicago Beis Din have spent more than three
months conducting intensive investigations both here in the United
States as well as in Eretz Yisroel. In fact, it held multiple hearings
in four different locations. The Rabbonim also interviewed multiple
complainants, and numerous other witnesses. They both consulted with
mental health professionals and reviewed many documents. These
documents included e-mails and text messages. They also heard testimony,
including admissions of critical facts, by the defendant.
In the past, we as a Torah community have not been very good at effectively preventing such abuse within our ranks.
There is no question that there are halachic authorities that
sanction the past methods of minimal and quiet intervention where we
handle all such matters internally. However, experience has shown that
this either doesn’t work anymore, or never even worked in the first
place.
There are numerous Mitzvos involved in taking decisive action to ensure
that future victims are protected. The verse in Parshas Ki Taytzai
(Dvarim 22:2) discusses the Mitzvah of Hashavas Aveida – returning an
object with the words, “Vahashaivoso lo – and you shall return it to
him.” The Gemorah in Sanhedrin (73a) includes within its understanding
of these words the obligation of returning “his own life to him as
well.” For example, if thieves are threatening to pounce upon him,
there is an obligation of “Vahashaivoso lo.” The psychological
repercussions that victims develop often causes them to, r”l, ideate
suicide and also to abandon Judaism. This can be confirmed with experts
in the field.
Lo Saamod Al Dam Rayacha
There is a negative Mitzvah of not standing idly by your brother’s
blood as well. This is mentioned both in Shulchan Aruch (CM 426:1) and
in the Rambam.
Lo Suchal l’hisalaym
There is yet another negative commandment associated with the
positive commandment of Hashavas Aveida, and that is the verse in Dvarim
(22:3), “You cannot shut your eyes to it.” This verse comes directly
after the Mitzvah of Hashavas Aveidah. The Netziv (HeEmek Sheailah)
refers to this Mitzvah as well. We as a community cannot shut our eyes
to this type of activity anymore.
V’Chai Achicha Imach
The Sheiltos (Sheilta #37), based upon the Gemorah in Bava Metziah
62a, understands these words to indicate an obligation to save others
with you. The Netziv in his He’Emek She’ailah understands it as a
full-fledged obligation according to all opinions. He writes that he
must exert every effort to save his friend’s life – until it becomes
Pikuach Nefesh for himself. Thus, even when faced with intense
pressure, it is our communal obligation to stop this type of activity
within our midst.
V’Ahavta l’Rayacha Kamocha
The Ramban, Toras haAdam Shaar HaSakana (p42-43) understands the
verse of “And love thy neighbor as yourself” as a directive to save him
from danger as well. Although he discusses the issue of medical danger,
it is clear that this is an example, and it would apply to danger from
activities of molestation as well. Even without the Ramban, however, it
is clear that defending and protecting someone from danger is a
fulfillment of this Mitzvah.
Our Ineffectiveness
The repercussions of our ineffectiveness have led to four very
unfortunate situations. It has led to untold suffering on the part of
the victims themselves and on the part of other students who have
attended these seminaries and now are at a loss because their spiritual
guide has fallen. It has also led to a situation where the public has
lost much of their trust in their teachers and Rabbis. And finally, it
has led to untold suffering and embarrassment for the families of the
perpetrators themselves.
The efforts of the Chicago Beis Din, however, with the haskama of
leading Gedolim, represent a sea-change in how we are dealing with these
types of scandals internally. The Beis Din has handled the situation
with a strength and sensitivity that, unfortunately, in the past has
been rarely seen.
The growth we have witnessed in how these matters are handled
involves a greater sensitivity to the needs of the victims in terms of
both closure as well as counseling and a firm commitment to ensure that
the situation not repeat itself again. This can only happen if we adopt
the idea that “Sunshine is the best disinfectant.”
Which approach is most ideal when dealing with such a horrific topic?
Do we follow the lead of the Chicago Beis Din where we need to
completely “clean house?” Perhaps the field of Kashrus may be
instructive here. In kashrus, when an owner is caught selling tarfus,
changing the management is not adequate. Recent events have born that
out. Shouldn’t our children be treated with at least as much dignity as
our meat?
The author can be reached at
yairhoffman2@gmail.com
