Friday, June 24, 2016

Meir Pogrow: Gedolim directed the English Yated to publish the warning from Beis Din - baruch Hashem for progress!

A Bais Din of leading rabbonim, gathered information, heard from credible witnesses, and determined that Meir Pogrow (of Beit Shemesh – and the US) has inflicted serious damage on numerous women who fell under his influence.
We are obligated to publicly warn women not to have any interaction at all with him and to distance themselves from his presentations, talks, classes in person or over the internet.
We advise men as well to cut off any connection with him, for our Rabbis have warned: “Do not associate with an evil person.”
Rabbi Yitzchok Berkowitz
Rabbi Gershon Bess
Rabbi Elimelech Kornfeld
Rabbi Chaim Zev Malinowitz
Rabbi Mordechai Wilig

For a copy of the p’sak write:
This notice is published at the request of gedolei yisroel.


  1. Of course they publish it. It's not being directed by a secular Court, it was done the Jewish way.

  2. Did you ever see a notice about sexual abuse in the Yated before? Did they report on the Meisels seminary scandal?

  3. Was there ever a clear obligation for them to do it?
    Did Bais Din ever rule to put the public on notice, to stay away from him?
    I could be mistaken, but I don't recall.

  4. That in itself is a chiddush.

  5. BH for the progress !! But I am wondering if there were other factors to make this the case to go so public. Was what he did worse than others? Was it actually proven more than the other he said she said? Was he warned more often? Is he less connected to people with less collateral damage on family members, other schools and individuals?

  6. Meisels had (significant) protexia. Pogrow obviously doesn't. Maklev also has.

  7. Meisels was aguda royalty. Pogrow has no yichus (aish of denver doesn't count for much; besides, they fired him.)

  8. asides from attempting to slander those involved - your explanations adds nothing to the discussion.

  9. Pinny Lipshuch wrote about Tropper, though without using his name. However, his side-kick, did post about Tropper.

  10. If you familiarize your self with the facts of the cases - they are not the same.

    As to the timing I will simply repeat what I have said a number of times already - there wasn't sufficient evidence to go public before - please reread the comment of unorthodox Jew.

  11. If he's not involved in public teaching, what's the purpose?

    If the argument is the website, they're losing credibility. Its just another anti internet screed.

  12. He still had influence and was respected in certain circles.

  13. please reread the comment of unorthodox Jew.

  14. you can go to his blog or see the excerpt I posted


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.