Pearl Engelman: Who is Nechemia Weberman?

The following originally appeared on Yerachmiel Lopin's blog. Because of the importance of publicizing Weberman's trial on October 30th - he asked that I republish it here with the permission of Pearl Engleman and Yerachmiel Lopin. The full text is found here  Frum Follies

How an Entire Community Of Sheep Were Deceived By Weberman

Guest Post by Pearl Engelman

As I write, I hold a list of 8 other victims. Can it really be that our community is so gullible as to believe the PR campaign for Weberman? Can it really be that our community is so willfully ignorant? That we WANT to believe that which makes us more comfortable despite the damage to innocent victims?

Many of my friends and acquaintances assumed my presence and media outspokenness at the protest against the fundraiser for accused sexual abuser Nechemia Weberman was due to my bitter experience with my son Yoiely’s molestation case. Not exactly wrong but not the whole story either.

This past Monday, May 14th, I received a call from an unknown woman asking if she could speak with me confidentially. When I assented she said “my daughter was sexually abused by Nechemia Weberman!” I listened in shock as she told me “when my daughter was 15 years old she began to dress differently than our family’s dress code and my husband and I were very worried about what this signified. We were advised to take her to Nechemia Weberman, the chassidishe (Hasidic) therapist for “troublesome” girls. We trusted Weberman fully, as he was also my husband’s good friend. During the 2 something years my daughter was in “therapy” with him she did not tell us what went on during almost every session.” I glanced at the caller ID and realized she was calling from upstate NY. My caller continued – “After my daughter’s wedding, one day she told me,

Mommy if you would know what Necehmia Weberman did to me you would kill yourself! He showed me sex videos, he made me do ——- to him, he did —— to me, and he told me that I should never, ever tell anyone because no one would ever believe me as I was known as a “troublemaker” and he was known as a very chosheve (prominent) person; I would have no credibility and would only damage my reputation further! He tried to convince me that no one understood me, cared for me or loved me as he did. For sure my parents did not understand me or love me!

To say the caller took my breath away is an understatement. Listening to the sorrowful tone of her voice was awful. Then she said “in hindsight I now remember that whenever I called him for a progress report or an update on my daughter a strange thing happened. He would actually instigate me against my daughter! I used to wonder why doesn’t he say something like – Don’t worry – we are working with her – there is hope for improvement – instead he would say what an ‘azas ponim (brazen girl) she was, how she would burn in gehenim (hell)  for her behavior!’ I would be so very angry at her and she at me; we were going at each other all the time.”

And then my caller told me her name! This family is not “nobody”, this is a well known, beautifully functional family! Very frum (observant) family! She explained to me that because her husband’s livelihood was dependant on the Heimishe (ultra orthodox) public they could not openly expose Weberman. Being from the community they knew the backlash would be directed against their daughter and themselves. And because their daughter was happily married they did not want to rock that boat either.

Her story continued: “When the campaign in support of Weberman was started this winter and I saw the signatures of the Rabbonim (rabbis) I couldn’t bear it anymore. I myself went to Rabbi Teitelbaum (son of the Satmar Rebbe, Zalmen Leib) and to Rabbi Pollack and told them my story. They were shocked,  Oiy, oiy vey, we didn’t know, we were told he was the victim of a bilbul (libel). However, you should know – we are still yiddishe kinder (Jewish children) and for this Weberman doesn’t have to sit in jail. We will take care of him and he will never do this again, and do not hinder us from protecting him!”

How do we say it? REVICTIMIZING THE VICTIM! In essence they are telling this poor mother – go home, choke your feelings and do not stop us from supporting and helping the man who violated your child! Has there ever been anything as cruel, as pitiless, as UNJEWISH? Is this really us? Don’t we stand for the emes (truth), for yoisher (rectitude)? A thought just occurred to me: Al pi torah (according to the torah) what was their responsibility after hearing from the mother?

I gently asked her what could I do to help? Her sorrowful answer was: “I don’t know”. Why did she call me now? Because she feels so terribly sick when she sees the fundraising campaign for Weberman. [...]

NYC votes to Regulate MBP Circumcision Rite

Tablet Magazine  The New York City board of health has unanimously passed a regulation requiring that parents sign a consent form before the circumcision practice known as metzitzah b’peh can be carried out by a mohel. The rite, in which the mohel uses his mouth to remove blood from the incision, is a prevalent custom in some ultra-Orthodox communities.  

In recent months, rabbis, citing infringement on religious practice, have threatened to sue the city if measures against the rite are enacted. On the other side of the issue, a number of medical professionals have spoken out heatedly against the practice being allowed at all. After the measure passed (which has seemingly toothless penalties), one of the panel members, Dr. Joel A. Forman said that “it’s crazy that we allow this to go on.”

In many ways, this measure is a happy medium between allowing a controversial religious custom to continue unfettered and banishing the practice altogether. As expected, neither side is happy though.

Rav Dessler: Nature of women IV p 116

‏בחירתם של האיש והאשה וענין דו פרצופיך

אמרו ז"ל (עירוביך י ח: ) בתחילה בבראו אדם וחוה בגוף אחד אלא שהיו לו שני פרצופים, ואחר כך הופרדו" עיין שם (:

והנה "גוף" פירושו הבחינה התחתונה שבנפש (כמבואר אצלנו במקום אחר). ושם בחירת האדם. ומה שבתחילה היה לאדם וחוה גוף אחד היינו שלכתחילה לא נבראה האשה אלא להיות כלי לאיש לענין העמדת תולדות ולא היתה לכל אחד מהם בחירה בפני עמצו, אלא בחירתם – "גופם" היתה אחת. 

‏והנה אדם הראשון היה חכם גדול מאד. היינו שהשגתו באמת היהתה גדולה כי היר קרא שמות לכל בעלי החיים, היינו שהכיר את תוכנם ותפקידם האמיתי בבריאה: ונאמר "וכל אשר יקרא לא האדם...הוא שמו" היינו שהסכימה דעתו לדעת המקום (חזקוני) . והוא בעצמו לא היה חוטא בשום אופן ולא היה מעלה על דעתו כלל לחטוא. כמו  שנראה שגם אחר כך לא אכל מן העז אלא לעשות רצון האשה כי  השגותיו היו גדולות כל כך שבהיותו הבוחר היחידי אי אפשר היה לשטן לפתותו  ‏ואז לא היה משקל שוה בין יצר טוב ליצר רע. ולכן הפריד ממנו השי"ת את האשה, היינו שנתך לה בחירה בפני עצמה, ועל ידי זה נתחזק כח היצר הרע עד שבין שניהם הושוה המשקל ביו יצר טוב ליצר רע. (כמובן הכל מדובר לפי מדרגת גן עדן עיין כרן ב, עמ' 137 ‏ ואילך) . 

‏והטעם למה לכתחילה נבראו באופן זה. שלא תהיה כניסה כלל ליצר הרע, היה כדי להעמיד את צד הטוב על חזקתו, שתתחזק הכרת האדם באמת.‏זה יהיה לו לסיוע אחר כך כשתהיה הסתה מצד היצר. ובמצב הראשון היתה האשה רק כלי לאיש בלי בחירה משלה, כמבואר לעיל.

‏ובאמת גם  עתה גדרה ובחירתה הם להיות כלי לאיש, באמרם ז"ל ‏(סנהדרין כב.) "האשה גולם היא ואינה כורתה בברית אלא למי שעושה אותה כלי" וטבע האשה להרגיש כבודה וחשיבותה בכבודו וחשיבותו של בעלה. והענין בזה הוא, כי תכלית האשה היא בבחינת "נר מצוה" וזו של האיש בבחינת "ותורה אור" (עיין זהר תרומה קסו.). והיינו שבחירת האשה היא בתיקון הגשמיות במצוות ומעשים טובים להכין את הנר (הכלי הגשמי, דהיינו הבית) ובחירתו של האיש – להתעלות בתורה ולהדליק את הנר באור תורה, שאור התורה הרוחני ימלא את הבית, וכמו שנר בלי אור אינו כלום, כך אור בלי נר אינו יכול להאיר (זהר שם) והיינו שבחירת האיש ובחירת האשה משלימות זו את זו)

Anti-Muslim film producer is apparently a Coptic Christian - not a Jewish Israeli

AP  The provocative anti-Muslim film implicated in mob protests in Egypt and Libya received logistical help from a man once convicted of financial crimes and featured actors who complained that their inflammatory dialogue was dubbed in after filming.

The self-proclaimed director of "Innocence of Muslims" initially claimed a Jewish and Israeli background and said he had gone into hiding because of the international controversy set off by the movie. But by day's end Wednesday, others involved in the film said his statements about his background were contrived, and evidence mounted that the film's key player was a southern Californian Coptic Christian with a checkered past.

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, 55, told The Associated Press in an interview outside Los Angeles that he managed logistics for the company that produced "Innocence of Muslims," which mocked Muslims and the prophet Muhammad and may have inflamed mobs that attacked U.S. missions in Egypt and Libya.

Debate over MBP & written consent

NYTimes    The city estimates that metzitzah b’peh is used in some 3,600 local circumcisions each year. The city’s health department says that, between 2000 and 2011, 11 babies contracted herpes as a result, and 2 of them died. This spring, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared that the procedure created a risk for transmission of herpes and other pathogens and was “not safe.” 

So on Thursday, the city’s Board of Health is scheduled to vote on a proposal that would require parents to sign a consent form indicating that they are aware of the risk of herpes transmission when a circumcision procedure, or bris, includes direct oral contact. 

The measure, which Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg strongly supports, would probably be the first governmental regulation of the ritual in the United States, rabbis say. It would not affect the way most Jewish ritual circumcisions are performed — gauze or a sterile pipette is used to pull blood from the wound — nor would it ban the practice. But the issue being raised in New York coincides with moves in Denmark, Germany and other countries toward restricting or banning infant circumcision. [...]

“There is no safe way to perform oral suction on an open wound in a newborn,” said Dr. Jay K. Varma, the city’s deputy commissioner for disease control. If the measure passes, he said, circumcisers who do not comply could face warning letters or fines.  

Ultra-Orthodox leaders plan to sue the city if the regulation is passed, arguing that the measure would constitute an unconstitutional infringement on their religious freedom. Some 200 ultra-Orthodox rabbis published a decree in late August warning adherents that it was forbidden “to participate in the evil plans of the New York City health department,” according to a translation by Yeshiva World News. And a Jewish religious court in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, went further, stating that oral suction was a mandatory part of the procedure that should be promoted.

MBP: IDSA Letter to Mayor Bloomberg

IDSA Letter to Mayor Bloomberg on MBP 091212

Lesbian couple awarded NIS 60,000 after turned away from wedding hall

Haaretz  The Jerusalem Magistrate's Court has ordered the owners of an Israeli reception hall to pay damages to a lesbian couple after refusing to host their wedding for ideological reasons. 

Following the precedent-setting ruling, the Moshav Yad Hashmona events hall must now pay the couple, Tal Ya'akovovich and Yael Biran, NIS 60,000 in damages.

The court has also ordered the owners of the reception hall to pay NIS 20,000 in legal and court fees. According to the judge, the fines are meant to teach the public a lesson about the value of equality and tolerance, in addition to compensating the same-sex couple.

The plaintiffs were married in England in 2008 in a civil ceremony, and wished to host a wedding party for their families and friends in Israel. The couple approached the reception hall in Yad Hashmona, and reached a deal with ownership to hold the event. When the reception hall owners realized that the wedding party was for a lesbian couple, they informed Ya'akovoich and Biran that the hall does not hold events for same-sex couples, and canceled their reservation. 

Kadosh (i.e., like angels) - men but not women?

Maharal (Nesiv Pirushus 1): discusses the idea of kedusha as a distancing from gashmiyus based on Yevamos (20a) where Rava says that a person should sanctify himself by restricting things where are permitted. The Maharal adds that someone who works on avoiding or minimizing gashmiyus not only has the attribute of kedusha but is called a kadosh. He notes that being a kadosh is being like an angel who has no connection to gashmiyus. Kedusha comes from  minimizing such material activities as eating or sexual involvement 

I  couldn't find the concept of kadosh applied to women but it seems exclusive to men. On these lines is the fact that a man wears a kitel on Yom Kippur to be like an angel - but not a woman because the Magen Avraham (610:10) says that women can not be like angels.

Magen Avraham[1](O.C. 610:5): To be like angels – according to this women should not wear white on Yom Kippur because they can’t be like angels as it states in Misheli (21:22) A wise man scales the city of the mighty men. [This refers to Moshe going to heaven to be with the angels] It refers to the Heaven as the  “city of the mighty men”. Thus only men are capable of being like angels

---

[1] מגן אברהם (תרי:ה): דוגמת מלאכי - ולפ"ז אין הנשים לובשין לבנים דאין יכולים להיות כמלאכים דעיר גברי' כתיב כמ"ש מט"מ גבי טבילה ומ"מ הקיט"ל יכולים ללבוש שיכנע לבם, אפי' מי שלובש שק מחמת תשובה אסור ללבשו ביה"כ (ס"ח תרט"ו ר"ש הלוי סימן ו'), איתא בילקוט שופטים דף ט' ע"א לעשות פתילות עבות בבה"כ

Vayikra Rabbah[1](31:5): R. Joshua of Siknin in the name of R. Aha cited, A wise man scaleth the city of the mighty--gibborim (Prov. XXI, 22).1 The written form is gebarim’ (men), for all of them are males; there are no females among them.

---

[1] ויקרא פרשה (לא:ה): ר' יהושע דסכנין בשם ר' אחא אמר (משלי כא) עיר גבורים עלה חכם גברים כתיב שכלם גברים ואין בהם

 It seems clear from Bereishis (6:2) which discusses fallen angels as being male and sexually active - that fallen angels are men. So just as men can elevate themselves to be a kadosh i.e., angel, Angels can degrade themselves to be men.

This seems rather strange to me since I don't know of any other mida which doesn't apply both to men and women. It points to a very fundamental concern when trying to understand the distinction between  men and women.

I would appreciate any references to this matter - either in showing me that being a kadosh applies also to women or in showing me sources that reinforce this distinction. Alternative showing that women can reach the level of angels or show additional sources that they can't.

Charedi couples fuel Israel's real estate boost

Haaretz   Who says young couples don’t have money to buy apartments? They flooded back into the market in the second quarter of the year, purchasing 19% more apartments than they did in the second quarter of 2011, and 8% more than in the first quarter of this year, according to data published by the State Revenue Administration. Investors also came back into the market, and purchases of investment apartments have been on the increase for six months running now, for the first time since 2009. 

It appears that the social protests of last summer are fading from the public consciousness, and the housing sector − one of the protests’ main targets − is back at the sales volume observed during the peak years of 2009 and 2010. The price of new homes decreased in the second quarter by 0.8% versus the first quarter. [...]

Haredim pushing up prices

The report makes note of one of the most important factors affecting the market − who the buyers are − and less on how prices changed. There was a 12% increase in transactions in the second quarter, after four consecutive quarters of decreases, it noted.

In total 24,500 apartments were purchased in the second quarter. The most significant increase based on region was in and around Jerusalem, where 807 new homes were purchased, most of them in ultra-Orthodox developments in Beit Shemesh.

Bishop tolerates pedophile priest, "It was only pornography!"

NYTimes   On the surface, the Rev. Shawn Ratigan was just the kind of dynamic new priest that any Roman Catholic bishop would have been happy to put in a parish. He rode a motorcycle, organized summer mission trips to Guatemala and joined Bishop Robert W. Finn and dozens of students on a bus trek to Washington for the “March for Life,” a big annual anti-abortion rally. 

 But in December 2010, Bishop Finn got some disturbing news: Father Ratigan had just tried to commit suicide by running his motorcycle in a closed garage. The day before, a computer technician had discovered sexually explicit photographs of young girls on Father Ratigan’s laptop, including one of a toddler with her diaper pulled away to expose her genitals. 

 The decisions that Bishop Finn and his second-in-command in the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Msgr. Robert Murphy, made about Father Ratigan over the next five months ultimately led to the conviction of the bishop in circuit court on Thursday on one misdemeanor count of failing to report suspected child abuse. It was the first time a Catholic bishop in the United States had been held accountable in criminal court in the nearly three decades since the priest sexual abuse scandals first came to light. 

Both Bishop Finn and Monsignor Murphy, as ministers, were required by law to report suspected child abuse to the civil authorities. But they were also required to report under policies that the American bishops put in place 10 years ago at the height of the scandal — policies that now hold the force of canon law.[...]

After Father Ratigan was arrested, Bishop Finn met with his priests. Asked why Father Ratigan was not removed earlier, the bishop replied, according to the testimony, that he had wanted “to save Father Ratigan’s priesthood” and that he had understood that Father Ratigan’s problem was “only pornography.”

Gay couple turns to rabbis for divorce

YNet  The judges at Israel's rabbinical courts have seen many divorce cases in their lives, but none of them were prepared for what happened last week, when a gay couple arrived at the Tel Aviv Rabbinate and filed for divorce. The two are Prof. Uzi Even, the first openly gay Knesset member, and Dr. Amit Kama. They had a civil marriage ceremony in Canada eight years ago, becoming the first Jewish Israeli male couple to marry each other. [...]

Following the historic decision, the Interior Ministry registered the marriages of additional male couples married abroad. But the couple which paved the way experienced marital problems and split three years ago.

After the separation, Prof. Uzi Even met another man and the two decided to get married abroad. But before being able to remarry, he must get a divorce – a procedure which appears to be quite difficult for a gay couple in the Jewish state.

According to Israeli law, the rabbinical court is the only body authorized to annul the marriage of Jewish citizens in Israel. However, the rabbinical court has never recognized same-sex marriages.

Even and Kama cannot divorce in Canada either, as Canadian citizens are the only ones allowed to file for divorce there.[...]

Dinah went out: Meaning of Yatz'anit in Rashi's commentary

This is a continuation of a previous post regarding our Sage's  attitude towards Leah. It is clear that there are two opposing and conflicting views whether Leah was a model of modesty or whether she was too assertive and free in her behavior. This attitude is clearly reflected in their attitude towards her daughter Dinah and how they discuss her rape and the context which is presented in detail in the Torah - and the two are linked.

This is the Medrash that Rashi utilized in his commentary

רש"י בראשית (לד:א) בת לאה - ולא בת יעקב, אלא על שם יציאתה נקראת בת לאה, שאף היא יצאנית היתה, שנאמר (ל טז) ותצא לאה לקראתו (ועליה משלו המשל (יחזקאל טז מד) כאמה כבתה

    Bereishis Rabbah (80:1):    1. AND DINAH THE DAUGHTER OF LEAH WENT OUT (XXXIV, 1). Behold,everyone that useth proverbs shall use this proverb against thee, saying: As the mother, so her daughter (Ezek. XVI, 44). Jose of Maon1 expounded in the synagogue of Maon: Hear this, O ye priests, and attend, ye house of Israel, and give ear, O house of the king, for unto you pertaineth the judgment  (Hosea V, 1). Said he: In the future the Holy One, blessed he He, will make the priests stand in judgment, saying to them, ‘Why did ye not toil in the Torah: did ye not enjoy from My children the twenty-four priestly dues?2 To which they will reply, ' They gave us nothing.’ Then ' " Attend, ye house of Israel ": why did ye not give them the twenty-four priestly dues, as I prescribed for you in the Torah? ' To which they will answer: ‘Because the members of the house of the Nasi3 took away everything.’ Thereupon, Give ear, O house of the king,’ for unto you pertaineth the judgment: [were those privileges] yours, [which I intimated in the verse], And this shall be the priests’ due [lit. ‘judgment’] from the people (Deut. XVIII, 3)? Therefore against you will judgment be turned. When Rabbi heard of this, he became enraged.5 Toward evening Resh Lakish went up to pay his respects to him and to pacify him. Said he: ‘Rabbi, we ought to be thankful to the heathens who bring clowns into their theatres and circuses and amuse themselves with them, so that they should not converse with each other; yet Jose of Maon spoke words of Torah, and you become angry with him!’ ‘Does he then know [anything of the Torah]?’ he asked. ‘Yes,’ was the reply. ' Has his instruction been transmitted to him [by proper teachers]? ' ' Yes.’ ' And if I question him, will he be able to answer? ' ‘Yes,’ he replied. ‘If so, let him come here.’ So he went up to him, and he asked him: ' What is meant by the verse."Behold, every one that useth proverbs shall use this proverb against thee, saying: As the mother, so the daughter "? ’ Said he: ‘Like the daughter so is the mother, like the generation so is its leader (nasi), like the altar so are its priests.’ Kahana saysl: According to the garden so is its gardener. ‘You have not yet completely appeased him for the first,’ Resh Lakish exclaimed, ‘and you are already bringing him another! What is really the meaning of this verse? ' ' A cow does not gore unless her calf kicks; a woman is not immoral until her daughter is immoral,’ he replied.2 ‘If so,’ said he, ‘then our mother Leah was a harlot! ‘3 ' Even so,’ he replied; ‘because it says, And Leah went out to meet him  (Gen. XXX,16), which means that she went out to meet him adorned like a harlot’; therefore AND DINAH THE DAUGHTER OF LEAH WENT OUT. 

In contrast to this Rashi & Medrash, Abarbanel and Malbim insist that Leah & Dinah were both the epitome of modesty.  

This is an article written by R' GILAD J. GEVARYAHU which appeared in JEWISH BIBLE QUARTERLY

Bishop convicted of shielding pedophile priest

NYTimes   KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A Roman Catholic bishop was found guilty on Thursday of failing to report suspected child abuse, becoming the first American bishop in the decades-long sexual abuse scandal to be convicted of shielding a pedophile priest. 

In a hastily announced bench trial that lasted a little over an hour, a judge found the bishop, Robert W. Finn, guilty on one misdemeanor charge and not guilty on a second charge, for failing to report a priest who had taken hundreds of pornographic pictures of young girls. The counts each carried a maximum penalty of one year in jail and a $1,000 fine, but Bishop Finn was sentenced to two years of court-supervised probation. 

The verdict is a watershed moment in the priest sexual abuse scandal that has plagued the church since the 1980s. Bishops have been eager to turn the page on this era and have put in place extensive abuse prevention policies, which include reporting suspected abusers to law enforcement authorities. But the Kansas City case has served as a wake-up call to Catholics that the policies cannot be effective if the bishops do not follow them.

Exonerated charedi soldiers to receive compensation

YNet  A military appeals court in the Kirya base in Tel Aviv ruled this week that the military would compensate two troops in the Netzah Yehuda haredi battalion with a total sum of NIS 24,000 ($5,980) who were falsely accused of assaulting a Palestinian police officer in 2008.

The Palestinian police officer who filed the original complaint testified during the trial that the two soldiers were "unquestionably and resolvedly" not the two that assaulted him. Yet in spite of his testimony, the military prosecution chose to go ahead with the indictment.

The two, now civilians, decided to demand compensation from the IDF after they were incarcerated in military prison for nearly two months after the launch of the investigation against them and their subsequent indictment.

The two were accused of aggravated assault and if convicted they faced a long sentence in military prison. They were also accused of conduct unbecoming due to claims that they assaulted the Palestinian police officer when they were on duty at the Bekaot checkpoint.  

Ultimately the charges were dropped by the deputy Military Advocate General. The soldiers claimed during the trial that saw them exonerated that "we were severely hurt (by the case), our reputation and liberty and the fact that we were suspended from our duties as combat soldiers."