Friday, June 29, 2018

protest against beis din annulling marriage

rav Sternbuch says above attribution is false


  1. so small, can't even read the first page
    gedolei poskim? which ones?

  2. It is not a very impressive letter, and it is not comprised of Gedolei Yisraoel. It makes claims to be on the same level as the brother + sister case of the 1970s. the only interesting signatory is R' Nevenzahl, however it is otherwise not the major Hareidi gedolim. Norman Eisenstein, Avroham Sherman, the usual suspects. None of the big names, nobody from America. it is about as significant as the Badatz hechsher for Barkan wine.


  4. Rav Sherman had enough weight to throw the conversion of thousands of people into question. Rav Machpoud runs an important kashrut organization. They may not be the top but they have weight.

    Having said that, I didn't see any other site mentioning this story.

  5. Rav Shternbuch is denying involvement in this protest?

  6. he just said the claim that he was involved is forged

  7. FedupwithcorruprabbisJuly 1, 2018 at 10:44 PM

    DT, you left out the rest of R. Gestetners letter???

  8. presumably they are using the adage that if you want to boost the validity of your claim, make it in the name of a great person!

  9. FedupwithcorruprabbisJuly 1, 2018 at 10:50 PM

  10. FedupwithcorruprabbisJuly 1, 2018 at 10:51 PM

  11. FedupwithcorruprabbisJuly 1, 2018 at 10:52 PM

  12. FedupwithcorruprabbisJuly 1, 2018 at 10:52 PM

  13. Hello Stan

    long time no see, hope you are well!

  14. This is off topic, but I want to get some clarity on this matter:
    This article describes the famous meeting between the secular Pm David Ben Gurion , on one hand, and (lehavdil, if you may) one of the major Gedolei Torah and perhaps creator of Hareidi ideology on the other, the Chazon Ish ztl.
    What is well known, is The Chazon Ish's parable of the camel laden with a burden (Torah students) vs the camel with no burden (secularists).
    BG involved in maase u'matan with the Chazon Ish, and asked, what about the Army and the mitzvah of protecting the lives of all Jews, including the yeshivas?
    The response, reported by Navon (the only other person in the room) was that it is because of the Torah studies that the army wins its battles.
    This is commonly repeated even today , especially regarding the Hareidi draft.
    It seems to me there is no rational basis to this statement. It is hard to accept that the Gaon would make such a statement.

    If there is such a rule, Why were the great Yeshivos and Gedolim in Europe massacred? Why were they massacred by the Cossacks and other pogroms?
    In fact, the temple was destroyed at the time of Rav Yochanan ben Zakkai, and the Bar Kochba rebellion was destroyed under the leadership of Rabbi Akiva, H'YD who himself was murdered by the Romans.

    These were all great generations in their learning, much greater than we have today or in 1967.

    I would appreciate your comments, thank you

  15. Makkos 10a
    א"ר יהושע בן לוי, מאי דכתיב "עומדות היו רגלינו בשעריך ירושלים", מי גרם לרגלינו שיעמדו במלחמה, "שערי ירושלם" שהיו עוסקים בתורה
    בשעריך, בשביל שעריך

  16. Perhaps this was in King David's time or King Chiziyahu. The problem i raise is that that the churban of Bayit Sheini was a kind of peak of Torah of Rebi Yochanan ben Zakkai, and rebbi Akiva at the time of the the razing of the Jewish presence in Israel. Maybe Rav Shlomo Goren's legendary learning was what helped him win the 6 day war, who knows !

  17. You apparently have overlooked this Midrash (Shochar Tov, Tehillim 18:1):
    ,ר' יודן אומר בשם ר' יהודה אמר, כל מה שאמר דוד בספרו, כנגדו, וכנגד כל ישראל וכנגד כל העיתים אמרו

  18. What a lovely midrash, thank you.

  19. You're welcome.
    Bearing this Midrash in mind, going back to the Gemara in Makkos, we have good grounds to say that it applies to all generations.

  20. There are certain moments in history, where good is promised - eg with Adam HaRishon, also Noah, Avraham, and the generation that left Egypt, David, Solomon. As far as I know, most of these failed and then felt the wrath of G-d (not sure if Noah failed or the next generation). So David is also promised everything by Nathan, but after his "sin" with bathsheva, he is told that the sword will never depart from his house, and Shlomo Hamelech also continues with his failures, and hence the same problem of Adam seems to occur in each generation, in each critical point of choice. [Maybe throw in the Golden calf on top of all this]

    So the ideal blessing for David is nullified. I think it also happens with Yirmiyahu's generation, when the Jews decide to go against him, and move to Egypt instead of rebuilding the Temple permanently, ie not to be torn down again.

    there are decisions made, which might even supercede Talmud Torah - yes the midrash is ideal and perhaps Tehillim has the power even today to release us from our troubles. But David's Kingdom and his throne was torn down, despite it being promised to be permanent and forever. So the blanket protection from Talmud torah is no always there - there are other maasim. TT is one mitzvah but not the entire Torah - is is kneged kulam but does not exclude the the rest of the torah.
    In any case, the historical facts are that in previous generations it didn't give total protection, not even the Golem of Prague could do that.

  21. "But David's Kingdom and his throne was torn down, despite it being promised to be permanent and forever."

    Ramban (Bereishis 49:10) explains that it does NOT mean to be "permanent and forever."
    אין ענינו שלא יסור לעולם וכו', אבל ענינו שלא יסור שבט מיהודה אל אחד מאחיו, כי מלכות ישראל המושל עליהם ממנו יהיה, ולא ימשול אחד מאחיו עליו.

    The Drashos HaRan (end of Drush 7) learns it a bit differently, but also agrees that it does not mean to be "permanent and forever."
    אבל מכל מקום אין כונתו שלא תהיה מלוכה וממשלה לאחד מאחיו, אבל הבטיח שלא תפסק מן שבטו הממשלה לגמרי כל זמן שתהיה המלוכה לישראל. אבל בהיות ישראל בגלות, אין מלך ואין שר, לא הובטח שבט יהודה שתשאר לו ממשלה.

  22. "So the blanket protection from Talmud torah is no[t] always there - there are other maasim."

    There is always the concept of שמא יגרום החטא.

    My point is, that the Torah study on the home front, helps the soldiers on the front, in the battlefield. As bad as it may seem on the front, without those who engage in Torah, it would always have been worse.

  23. You mean those on the front help Torah study, in the homes and yeshivos. Without those who engage in warfare, then chas v'shalom the nazis may have won and finished off the jews almost completely. they got Reb Elchonon H'YD, who was the greatest Gadol left in Europe, so it didnt protect him or his yeshiva. Also in Israel, without the IDF, the Arabs intended to drive all the Jews into the sea, including the CI. Why go to war at all, if you have The chazon ish, or Rav Shach shteiging all day?
    A story was told of Rav Levi Yitzhak of Berdichev , whose friend the Alter rebbe was arrested by the Russians, I think in Petersburg. So Rav Levi Yitzhak said that the rebbe could destroy Petersburg (the city) by just wiping his forehead.

    Unfortunately I don't believe any of these things to be literally true. The examples seem to contradict every case where there has been destruction. why did Rabbi Akiva lose his wars, teh bayit sheini was destroyed when Rav Yochanan b. Zakkai was the gadol hador, yet a secular-ish army, beat 7 arab armies in 1948, and in 1967? Perhaps it was because rav Goren kashered the kitchens? Or maybe he blew the shofar when going into Jerusalem (that's a Torah commandment, at least to use Silver trumpets).

  24. Sherman's basis for a claim on the conversions is very convoluted. His first argument is that the BD of R Druckman was posul because they are apikorsim and rashaim. why? becasue they are not converting people sincerely and dependent upon them accepting the Torah. Yet, there are frum people who were converted by the BD. So he cites R' Shternbuch who says even the people who accept the Mitzvot and are converted properly are not jews, because the BD is posul! why is it posul? because their converts do not accept the mitzvot. So these are circular arguments and fallacies. Sherman was actually posulled as a dayan by Rav Lichtenstein - a gadol who was 1000x more knowledgeable than sherman. Also the Av Beit Din possulled Sherman, and he went against the Av BD (Rav Amar), and set up his own ad hoc BD.
    There are other halachic irregularities. The original problem was by Rav Attia, who posuled a conversion and said the woman doesn't need a get. Rav Amara set up a BD including Rav Daichovsky, and Rav Sherman, and a third dayan. Sherman was voted 2-1 against, but he would nto accept the majority (zakein mamre). he was instructed to acept the majority, but he refused. he then used a get out clause saying "I don't know". Rav Amar and Rav Daichovsky said this is not valid, among st other reasons, he had already published his opinion, saying that he does know. I am curious what is the status of a dayan who plays games and tells lies to get out of the halachic responsibilities of being a dayan?
    Next, Sherman and Eisenstein supported EJF, which was converting the intermarried. Quite apart from the sex scandals of rabbi Tropper, EJF was preaching to the intermarried and converting people based on their marriage to Jews. This effort was backed by Rav Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and a lot of other Hareidi leaders in America. Now, Rav Shternbuch was the single voice who opposed EJF, but he calls the Druckam BD apikorsim for converting people for marriage. However, thsi was supported in the EJF by Rav Elyashiv, (whom Sherman professes to follow), the Feinsteins, Rav Shmuel kamenetsky, and even R Sternbuch's brother in law, Dayan Ehrentreu. etc.

    So Is Rav Shternbuch also implying that the Gedolim who backed EJF (prior to the sex scandal) are apikorsim like the Druckman BD? Is Sherman bifurcating, accepting R' Shternbuch's attack on Druckman but not on R' Elyashiv?
    Is sherman an apikorus by his own defintion, since he supported and spoke to EJF, knowing ful well they conveert people for intermarriage?


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.