How Science Mimics Faith

Scientific American   Religion provides a sense of meaning and comfort for believers, and studies show that such beliefs intensify during threatening situations. Now research suggests that some people's faith in science may serve the same role.

Miguel Farias and other researchers at the University of Oxford and Yale University investigated whether it is belief in religion that is beneficial or in fact any belief about the world's order and our place in it. In two related experiments published in November 2013 in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, the scientists developed a scale to measure belief in science—the view that scientific inquiry offers a superior guide to reality. As expected, belief in science was inversely correlated with religious beliefs. Next the researchers assessed whether belief in science increased in threatening situations.. [...]

“It is likely that some people use their ideas about science to make sense of the world and for emotional compensation in difficult situations in the same way that religious people use their supernatural beliefs,” Farias says. “Our findings suggest that it may be belief itself, regardless of its content, that helps people deal with adverse situations.”

The New York Asifa by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

update: Rabbi Hoffman's rebuttal of Rabbi Slifkin's comments

update Rabbi Slifkin sent me this rebuttal

Five Towns Jewish Time   This is a response to my good friend Reb Barry Jacobson’s remarks on the Asifa this past Sunday in Manhattan.  It also addresses his inquiry printed in the Five Towns Jewish Times about Torah sources regarding Bnei Torah continuing to study rather than serving in the army.  There is no question, of course, that the soldiers who are protecting the nation against the enemies of the Jewish people are fulfilling a remarkable task and a holy role.  Certainly, all of us who are beneficiaries of their bravery and dedication should express our sincere hakaras haTov and pray for their welfare and well-being.

The leading sages of America, Degel HaTorah, Agudah in Eretz Yisroel and the sages of Shas – the Sefardic Torah organization had all signed on for the call to join in the mass gathering in the Wall Street area.  The mass gathering was to show solidarity with the Torah community in Israel that is facing the unprecedented law in the state of Israel’s history to draft Yeshiva students into the armed forces.

This response is an explanation and a historical overview about the confluence of army service and Torah study.   Not everyone will agree with the explanations and positions set forth here.  However, those that do not agree must realize that they do come from a very different socio-religious milieu than those in the Chareido world who have been brought up with and raised with a deep appreciation of Torah being the only definition of true life.

Serious-minded Chareidi Jews do not merely recite the words of the blessings of the Shma perfunctorily.  No.  When they recite the words, “Ki haim chayeinu – for they are our life – v’orech yameinu and the pathways of our life..” – they truly mean it. [...]

What is missing in all this, however, is the realization that we are all children of the same mother and father.  We are all parts of the same body and we should treat each other with the respect and love that we must have for our family members – even if we do disagree as to what approach should be emphasized or adopted.   Recently, we have seen two conflicting PR Youtube videos to a song entitled “Anu Mashkimim v’haim Mashkimim.”  The song explains how we awaken early for the right purposes, they awaken early for useless purposes.  The song was used by both sides of the debate to denigrate the other side.  Both uses of the song are wrong.  We stand now in the month of Adar.  The Manos HaLevi, Rav Shlomo Alkabetz, explains that the concept of Shalach Manos is to further brotherly love and ahavas Yisroel among ourselves.  It is to counter the statement of Haman that the Jewish nation is Mefuzar and Mefurad throughout the nations because of their lack of unity.  The month of Adar should counter the spirit of disunity and contribute to family love.

May Hashem speedily grant mutual respect and unity among us.  Amain!

Schlesinger Twins: Dr. Schlesinger refuses to let Chief Rabbi hand twins to mother

This is documentation that Dr. Schlesinger refuses to let the Chief Rabbi hand over the twins to their mother for free. He insists that she continue paying 50 euros to a government agent to do the same. See further information here

Schlesinger twins: Documentation of Dr. Schlesinger canceling a visit

A number of Dr. Schlesinger's supporters have denied that he has canceled Beth's visits with her children and have demanded documentary evidence. Here is an email from the latest cancellation.

========================

From: Christine Schlotter
Date: 2014-03-09 19:08 GMT+01:00
Subject: AW: Besuchscafe Aneli mj. schlesinger
To: Beth Alexander

Sehr geehrte Frau Schlesinger,

ich bin nicht sicher, ob ich Ihnen schon gesagt habe:

Herr Schlesinger kann die Kinder am 16.3.2014 nicht bringen.

Nächster Termin ist 23.3.2014 9:00 Uhr.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Christine Schlotter

==================================

translation

Dear Mrs Schlesinger,

I an not sure if I already told you:

Mr Schlesinger cannot bring the children on 16. 3.2014.

The next appointment is 23.3.2014 at 9am,

Kind Regards,

Christine Schlotter

Beth Schlesinger: Purim is not just about external enemies

 Guest Post by Beth Schlesinger

This Purim, like last year, I will not be spending with my children. My Sunday visit is cancelled. This year, like last year, I have no idea how Sammy and Benji will celebrate, if they even have a costume or if they will even be taken to a Purim party to be with all the other children. I sincerely hope so. Even if they can't celebrate this joyous day with their mother, I wish them all the fun, laughter and happiness in the world.  

As I think about my own personal tragedy, I reflect on the story of Purim and try to find new meaning behind the traditional and superficial story we tell our children. 

Since my boys attend the Chabad kindergarden, where better to look for a Purim lesson than in their teachings?

I found the following:

Purim teaches us that in a time of crisis, faced with a ruthless enemy like Haman, we must turn all the more tenaciously to our source of strength, and show that we are “the People of Mordechai, who would not kneel nor bow down” to anything that is contrary to Yiddishkeit.

As a child and even into adulthood, I was always taught and naively believed that our enemies are external; dangerously lurking on the other side of the fence ready to pounce, while we stand united with our Jewish brethren, smugly secure within the tightly protected confines of our communities. It is only now, as an adult after tasting the bitter pill of reality that I realise how childishly simplistic the story is told. Haman versus Mordechai, Vashti versus Esther. The goodies pitted squarely against the baddies, neatly delineated into 2 camps: Haman the evil gentile who tried to destroy us, the good and innocent Jewish victims. But we, the chosen People, stood together as one and defeated the menacing enemy. Everyone celebrated and was happy until the next existential threat rose up to conquer us once again.

But what happens when there is a Haman within our midst? When not everyone in the Jewish community is a Mordechai or Queen Esther? When elements within our own camp seek to mercilessly destroy us and rejoice over our downfall just like Haman tried and failed to do. What do you do when the lines blur so that you can no longer be sure who are your enemies and who are your supporters?

Kol Yisroel areivim zeh bazeh. All of Israel are responsible for one another, we are told. If only more people were to realize this dictum and take heed. 

Purim is an elusive festival. It is a story wrapped in disguise, hidden behind a costume, concealed behind a mask. While it may appear frivolous merry making from the outside, behind the costumes and spiels, a meta-story unfolds.  Just when Haman arrogantly believed his plot was all sewn up, everything suddenly turned on its head. Instead of destroying, he was the one destroyed. He tried to inspire hatred for the Jews but instead, he emerged as the hated one. 

 

Purim is traditionally associated with childish fun but there is also a serious adult message to take home.The word Purim comes from 'Pur;' the lots which Haman drew to murder the Jews but it is also related to the Hebrew word `porer, ' which means to dismantle, break, destroy, break into crumbs.  It is perhaps at times we assume we are most in control that we can be so wrong. Hashem may unexpectedly reveal His hidden hand at any moment and that is why even in the depths of darkness and despair, we must cling on to our faith and not lose hope. 

Purim Sameach

The gender-free revolution crashes on the rock of reality

Time     This week marks the 40^th anniversary of an event close to the hearts of gender activists everywhere. On March 11, 1974, ABC aired Marlo Thomas’ “Free to Be…You and Me” — a musical program celebrating gender-free children. Thomas and her fellow co-neutralists envisioned a world where the sex distinction would melt away. Instead of “males” and “females,” there would be mutually respectful, non-gendered human persons. The project resulted in a platinum LP, a best-selling book, and an Emmy. More than that, the idea of gender liberation entered the national zeitgeist. Parents everywhere began giving their daughters trucks and sons baby dolls. Like so many dream boats floating on the utopian sea, this one crashed and sank when it hit the rocks of reality.

In one “Free to Be” song, two babies discuss their life goals: the female wants to be a fireman; the male, a cocktail waitress. Another tells about a girl who liked to say, “Ladies First” — only to wind up being the first to be eaten by tigers. The songs drive home the idea that we are all androgynous beings unfairly constrained by social stereotypes. “William‘s Doll” is memorable. “A doll, said William, is what I need. To wash and clean and dress and feed.” In the end his kindly grandmother buys him the coveted toy.[...]

In 2009, David Geary, a University of Missouri psychologist, published the second edition of Male, Female: The Evolution of Human Sex Differences. This thorough, fair-minded, and comprehensive survey of the literature includes more than 50 pages of footnotes citing studies by neuroscientists, endocrinologists, geneticists, anthropologists, and psychologists showing a strong biological basis for many gender differences. And, as Geary recently told me, “One of the largest and most persistent differences between the sexes is children’s play preferences.” The female preference for nurturing play and the male propensity for rough-and-tumble hold cross-culturally and even cross-species. Researchers have found, for example, that female vervet monkeys play with dolls much more than their brothers, who prefer balls and toy cars. Nor can human reality be tossed aside. In all known societies, women tend to be the nurturers and men the warriors. Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker points to the absurdity of ascribing these universal differences to socialization: “It would be an amazing coincidence that in every society the coin flip that assigns each sex to one set of roles would land the same way.” [...]

The writer Andrew Sullivan is right when he describes the sex difference as “so obvious no one really doubted it until very recently, when the blank-slate left emerged, merging self-righteousness with empirical delusion.” That delusion was jumpstarted in 1974 with the advent of “Free To Be… You and Me.” Today, an army of gender scholars and activists is marching in support of the genderless ideal. But these warriors forget that ignoring differences between boys and girls can be just as damaging as creating differences where none exist. “Free to Be” is a cautionary example of how an idealistic social fantasy can turn into a blueprint for repression.

Science and Objective Reality: "Is It Solipsistic in Here, or Is It Just Me?"

Scientific American     The book, Trespassing on Einstein’s Lawn, is the story of my 17-year journey with my father to figure out the nature of ultimate reality and what we discovered, quite frankly, is not what any marketing team wants to hear. Quantum mechanics, relativity, black hole physics, cosmology and string theory all point to the same radical, paradigm-shifting conclusion: every observer’s reference frame defines its own universe, singular and complete, and even though any reference frame is as good as any other, we can only speak about one at a time. [...]

My belief in this cosmic solipsism is a sad lesson in irony, really, because this whole thing – my career, my universe, my book—began with a conversation. I was fifteen years old, having dinner in a Chinese restaurant, when my father leaned over and asked, “How would you define nothing?” He told me that he was trying to understand how you can get something from nothing, how a universe could be born. [...]

Our first major breakthrough came when we realized that physics can pin down what’s real and what isn’t. It’s one of those things that’s somehow stupidly obvious and yet deeply profound: something is real if it’s invariant. That is, something is real if it remains unchanged from one reference frame to the next. Just look at a rainbow. You’ll see one in the sky if you’re in just the right reference frame with the Sun shining in from behind you, and droplets of water in the atmosphere refracting the light. It’s pretty, but good luck trying to grab it. A rainbow is not a physical object stapled to the sky. It’s a product of your reference frame. Which is to say, it’s not real.

Ok, so what is real? Space? Time? Particles? Forces? Well Einstein showed that space and time aren’t real– they change from one reference frame to another. However, something remains invariant in the process: a unified, four-dimensional spacetime. “Space by itself and time by itself are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality,” the mathematician Hermann Minkowski declared.

And the thing my father and I learned is that ever since Einstein, theoretical physics has been one long death march for invariants. With his infamous discovery that black holes radiate, Stephen Hawking declared particles observer-dependent (along with fields and the quantum vacuum to boot). String theory did away with the invariance of dimensions and M-theory did away with the invariance of strings. By studying what happens when stuff falls into a black hole, Leonard Susskind discovered that the unified spacetime Einstein had left unscathed is itself observer-dependent. As for nature’s four fundamental forces, Einstein did away with gravity (“We are able to ‘produce’ a gravitational field merely by changing the system of coordinates,” he wrote) while the development of gauge theory took care of the other three. Every last one of the so-called fundamental ingredients of nature has turned out to be a shadow. Unreal.[...]

The death of the last remaining invariants is a new development in physics, but the specter of solipsism has been looming for decades, ever since the first generation of quantum physicists struggled to understand what the theory meant. “It is conceivable we must give up on any ‘one-world’ view of physics,” the legendary physicist John Archibald Wheeler scrawled in his journal as he wrestled with the mystery of the quantum. Quantum theory seems to go haywire when you assume that multiple observers occupy the same universe. I might open Schrodinger’s box to find a dead cat, but what if the cat, the box, and I are sitting inside an even bigger box, one that some other observer—my father, perhaps— hasn’t opened yet? To me, that cat is dead, but to my father it’s simultaneously dead and alive, and so am I. If there’s only one reality, which one is it? Quantum mechanics is just boxes within boxes – unless you stipulate that there’s only one box, in which case the whole issue of writing books becomes a little thorny.[...]

Advice for turning a manuscript into a published book

I thought the following description of the process of turning a manuscript into a book would be helpful to motivate some of you want to publish but really had no idea of how to do it. This is not to be construed as an endorsement of the services of Moshe Cohen as I have never used his services.

Guest post by Moshe Cohen

Before you publish...

Books distribute in two general paths:

1. A publisher thinks your book is a money maker and distributes it. Sometimes they even fund publishing. 2. The author or his agent does so, on his own dime.

A publisher or distributor will take a sefer only if he gauges it a winner. He can probably tell just from a sample. One person you might want to contact is Mr Yoni Posen of Y'fei Nof. He will give you his honest opinion on if your sefer is profitable. Most seforim are not.

On the other hand, although most books are not popular best-sellers, that does not mean they ought not be printed. Why?

• People publish a book to establish themselves as an expert. An author is instantly an expert. Often, that turns into more clients.
  
  
• A therapist will sell his client a workbook to cement their commitment, or to add another product to their service. In place of therapy alone, they offer a book too.
  
  
• Speakers often sell their books from a small table in the back of the lecture room. 
  
  
• People write to impact or inspire others - they want to get their message out.
  
  
• Writing itself is often the goal. For some it spurs their growth - writing a book is an excellent focuser. For others its therapeutic, healing and enlightening.

Profit is nice, but not always essential. And besides, books can sell online too, cutting out the need for extensive distribution or printing many copies. So although most people dream of Feldheim, Gitler, Yfei Nof or Artscroll distributing their book, perhaps that focus is misplaced. (The publisher/distributor will often take three quarters of all profits. It may still be worthwhile, but be aware of this.) 

How to start:

Stage 1: Type the book. Hand written notes cannot be published. Type it out yourself, or give a typist your manuscript or audio. Typing is usually charged per character, expect to pay $2 for each thousand characters, meaning that a normal page is about $4.50, either Hebrew or English.

Stage 2: After the typing, edit. Rearrange the content into the most logical sequence, add or subtract material and add a table of contents and index. Do it yourself or get a pro. Anywhere between $10 and $30 an hour is reasonable.

Stage 3: Proofreading: check for mistakes and typos. Again, can be hired out.

Stage 4: Typesetting, or layout is $2 to $5 per page, depending on if its a single text, or multi-text, such as a main text and a perush or footnotes. This will also furnish that professional look a real sefer has, with its varied fonts and typefaces.

At this point you can admire your finished, handsome, print-ready pdf file.

Stage 5: Cover design. This is for a pro, unless you have something really plain in mind. Graphics for a sefer run $200 to $500

Stage 6: Printing. What paper are you using? How many pages? Oh well. Ballpark, printing can be $4 to $9 each book.

Comment:

Often graphics are incorporated in the sefer [not just the cover]. Allocate pages for haskomos, iluy nishmas, divider pages between chapters and so on. Just saying...

You will notice that each stage can be done alone. It can be done part by part, as your time and resources permit. Do take note of that, for many worthwhile seforim went unwritten because the author thought its all or nothing. (It was Nothing...)

What are some bear-traps and problems to look out for?

When you come to an agreement with an editor, take pains to ensure that the agreement is understood the same way on both sides. Did you intend that your editor would recast the text, but he thought to skim over it with a light hand, only taking out obvious errors? Well, you are heading for a misunderstanding and disappointment.

When you are making a cover, you surely have some picture in mind. Does your graphic artist share that picture. Are you SURE? When one of you speak English and the other Hebrew, please double check everything. Yes, it does seem redundant.... until you receive the wrong color imprint for your cover!!!! (Actually happened to us!)

Ok, thats pretty much it. With so much time and resources needed, sometimes Yiush sets in, and the bustle of life blocks this worthwhile endeavor. There are people who specialize in all this hachanah l'dfus, and do explore using them. They are working with editors, typesetters and printers regularly, and can often save you much time, money and effort!

About the author: Moshe Cohen prepares books and seforim for print and looks forward to working with you. Contact him at moshe @ wedoseforim.com. His website is www.wedoseforim.com

First of alleged Epstein-Wohlmark Get torture ring - confesses

update NY Times   (Reuters) - Two Brooklyn brothers have admitted participating in a violent ring with rabbis that threatened Jewish husbands to agree to grant their wives a religious divorce, and they face possible lengthy prison terms, prosecutors said on Tuesday.

Avrohom Goldstein, 34, and Moshe Goldstein, 31, were among 10 men, including their father and two Orthodox Jewish rabbis, arrested last fall in the alleged scheme in which they hired themselves out to unhappy wives who wanted their husbands kidnapped and beaten until they agreed to divorce, according to New Jersey U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman. [...]

 Last week, David Hellman, 31, a New York personal trainer, also pleaded guilty to being part of the violent ring. Hellman's sentencing is set for June 12.
==================
Wall Street Journal  A Brooklyn man has admitted to traveling to New Jersey to coerce a Jewish man to give his wife a religious divorce - called a 'get' - through threats of violence.

The U.S. attorney's office says David Hellman pleaded guilty Thursday in federal court in Trenton.

Prosecutors say the 31-year-old personal trainer was part of an alleged plot involving several men, including two rabbis, which arranged religious divorces through torture and kidnapping.

10 Reasons Why Handheld Devices Should Be Banned for Children Under the Age of 12

Huffington Post   The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Canadian Society of Pediatrics state infants aged 0-2 years should not have any exposure to technology, 3-5 years be restricted to one hour per day, and 6-18 years restricted to 2 hours per day (AAP 2001/13, CPS 2010). Children and youth use 4-5 times the recommended amount of technology, with serious and often life threatening consequences (Kaiser Foundation 2010, Active Healthy Kids Canada 2012). Handheld devices (cell phones, tablets, electronic games) have dramatically increased the accessibility and usage of technology, especially by very young children (Common Sense Media, 2013). As a pediatric occupational therapist, I'm calling on parents, teachers and governments to ban the use of all handheld devices for children under the age of 12 years. Following are 10 research-based reasons for this ban. Please visit zonein.ca to view the Zone'in Fact Sheet for referenced research. 

1. Rapid brain growth
Between 0 and 2 years, infant's brains triple in size, and continue in a state of rapid development to 21 years of age (Christakis 2011). Early brain development is determined by environmental stimuli, or lack thereof. Stimulation to a developing brain caused by overexposure to technologies (cell phones, internet, iPads, TV), has been shown to be associated with executive functioning and attention deficit, cognitive delays, impaired learning, increased impulsivity and decreased ability to self-regulate, e.g. tantrums (Small 2008, Pagini 2010). 

2. Delayed Development
Technology use restricts movement, which can result in delayed development. One in three children now enter school developmentally delayed, negatively impacting literacy and academic achievement (HELP EDI Maps 2013). Movement enhances attention and learning ability (Ratey 2008). Use of technology under the age of 12 years is detrimental to child development and learning (Rowan 2010). [...]

After Seeing His Family Crumble, Vindicated Whistle-Blower Has Little to Smile About

NY Times  [...] Five years ago, Mr. Kellner, a 52-year-old Hasidic Jew, chose to step off a cultural cliff. He spoke out about the sexual abuse of his 16-year-old son by a prominent Hasidic cantor. And he helped a police detective ferret out other victims of this cantor, whose connections ran to the most powerful reaches of the Satmar community.

Retribution became daily fare for Mr. Kellner. His rabbi denounced him as a traitor. Yeshivas locked out his sons. He pawned his silverware.

Then the former Brooklyn district attorney, Charles J. Hynes, who had proved a most considerate ally of Hasidic leaders, drove a stake into Mr. Kellner’s heart. After gaining a conviction of the cantor, Baruch Lebovits, Brooklyn prosecutors turned around and indicted Mr. Kellner. Basing their case on the questionable testimony of a prominent Satmar supporter of the cantor, they accused Mr. Kellner of trying to shake down Mr. Lebovits.

Mr. Kellner faced decades in prison. He posted bail, only to watch as Mr. Lebovits’s lawyers used his indictment and other technicalities to persuade a state appeals court to overturn the cantor’s conviction. 

“My father was an Auschwitz survivor; right away he got sick,” Mr. Kellner recalls. “Within six months, he died. Then my mother had a devastating stroke.”

He pauses, like a sprinter catching his breath. “How do I tell my daddy, ‘I was found not guilty, it was just a libel, just bad people’?” he said. “The government needs to understand it did a pretty good job of killing me.”[...]

Still, an image that remains from Friday was that of a Hasidic father standing in court, rocking slightly, as an assistant district attorney described wildly inconsistent statements and witnesses who lacked any shred of credibility. 

The people, the prosecutor said at last, “do not have a credible case.”[...]

The Trial That Unleashed Hysteria & False Accusations Over Child Abuse

NY Times   Early in the 19th century, two unmarried women who ran a school for girls in Edinburgh found themselves accused by a student of being lesbians. The charge, quite grave in that era, was baseless, and in time the women won a libel suit. But not before they had lost everything, including their school. If this story rings a bell, it may be because Lillian Hellman used it as a starting point for “The Children’s Hour,” her 1934 play about a couple of schoolteachers whose lives similarly come unraveled after a malicious student falsely accuses them of lesbianism.

It has long been said, in varying language, that a lie travels halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on. You do not have to reach back 200 years to Scotland to find enduring wisdom in that adage. You need return only to the 1980s and to the subject of this week’s Retro Report documentary video, part of a series re-examining news stories from the past. This week’s subject is the notorious McMartin Preschool abuse trial.

Starting in 1983, with accusations from a mother whose mental instability later became an issue in the case, the operators of a day care center near Los Angeles were charged with raping and sodomizing dozens of small children. The trial dragged on for years, one of the longest and costliest in American history. In the end, as with the Scottish women, lives were undone. But no one was ever convicted of a single act of wrongdoing. Indeed, some of the early allegations were so fantastic as to make many people wonder later how anyone could have believed them in the first place. Really now, teachers chopped up animals, clubbed a horse to death with a baseball bat, sacrificed a baby in a church and made children drink the blood, dressed up as witches and flew in the air — and all this had been going on unnoticed for a good long while until a disturbed mother spoke up?

Still, McMartin unleashed nationwide hysteria about child abuse and Satanism in schools. One report after another told of horrific practices, with the Devil often literally in the details.

Criminal cases of dubious provenance abounded. One that received great attention involved Margaret Kelly Michaels, convicted in 1988 of rampant sexual abuse at the Wee Care Day Nursery in Maplewood, N.J., where children said she had sexually abused them with knives, spoons and forks, and had urinated in their mouths. None showed signs of injury. Six years later, Ms. Michaels’s conviction was overturned. Another prominent case from those days involved charges of rape and sodomy brought against the operators of the Little Rascals Day Care Center in Edenton, N.C. As with McMartin, there were bizarre allegations early on about babies being murdered and children thrown in with sharks. Though defendants were found guilty, their convictions were later overturned and charges were dropped.[...]

Mamzerim - THE WOLMARK and EPSTEIN ISSUE

anonymous Guest Post       update NY Times

Unfortunately the ostrich syndrome has taken hold of the Klall and everyone has their head in the sand and nothing is being said or done about the phenomenal spread of ממזרות    thru the use of  גיטין מעושים   

I would like to state one principle which would enlighten many people to the severity of the situation. A lady who marries receives the status of an אשת איש . This status can only be removed thru a נט given by people who have a חזקת כשרות. We find the exact same paradigm by שחיטה. The only way a person can eat a cow that was נשחט was if the שוחט that performed the שחיטה had a חזקת כשרות. If the שוחט lost his חזקת כשרות and went ahead and was שוחט a cow there is no way that this cow can be eaten. If the meat was cooked in a pot the pot becomes Trief and is not allowed to be used. Now we can go back to אשת איש . 

As of Oct 13 Wolmark,Epstein, the 3 דיינים at the warehouse, and the םופר have all lost their חזקת כשרות. Any גיטין post that date in which they are involved are פסול.

The retroactive issue is much more complex. A blog would not be the proper place to discuss this since it involves a great deal of literature, a more appropriate place would be a Torah Journal. However since Hellman has stated that on Aug, 2011 he participated in a similar event in Flatbush it is incumbent on the Rabonim of Flatbush to fully investigate this issue. If it is found that this was also a גט מעושה שלא כדין  then they must follow thru with the ramifications that those supervising that incident have lost their חזקת כשרות and all subsequent ניטין given by those in charge are void. This an issue of לאפרושי מאיםורא דאשת איש and the women who are the recipients of these invalid ניטין must be told they cannot remarry and those who have remarried must be told to leave their new marriage. All those who shirk their responsibility are עתיד ליתן את הדין

A Primer on Shalach Manos by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

Five Towns Jewish Times  

 THE MITZVAH

Mordechai and his Beis Din enacted that on the day of Purim each person must send a gift of at least two portions of food to a friend. This is seen from the verse in Megilas Esther, “Umishloach manos ish l’reyehu.”

THE REASONS

What is the reason behind the mitzvah of shalach manos? Two reasons are brought down. The Terumas HaDeshen (Siman 111) writes that it is to ensure that the recipients not run out of food items to serve for their meals.

The Manos HaLevi on Megillas Esther (9:19), written by Rav Shlomo Alkabetz and cited by the Chasam Sofer, writes an altogether different reason: to increase peace and brotherly love.  This is the opposite of the characterization of the Jewish people by Haman as a nation “Mefuzar umefurad” spread and standing apart on account of internal arguments.

PREAMBLE AND INTENTIONS

The Yesod v’Shoresh HaAvodah writes that one should recite the following preamble before fulfilling the Mitzvah:

לשם יחוד קודשא בריך הוא הריני מוכן ומזומן לקיים מצות עשה של דברי קבלה “ומשלוח מנות איש לרעהו.”

When performing the Mitzvah one should not just perform it perfunctorily, but should focus on the qualities of the recipient and place within his heart a strong love for his fellow man.  He should intend to honor him and to strengthen his inner joy with this package of Shalach Manos.

WHO IS OBLIGATED 

Men and women are both included in this mitzvah. The halachah is that men send to men, and women send to women. Women are obligated in the mitzvah because, according to the Mishnah Berurah, “they too were involved in the miracle.”  A child should be instructed to fulfill the Mitzvah just as one instructs a child to fulfill all the other Mitzvos.  The child may send to another child, as the other child is considered his or her peer.

Even a poor person is required to fulfill the mitzvah of mishloach manos. The mitzvah of mishloach manos may not be fulfilled with money, clothing, or other non-food or non-drink items. The mitzvah may only be fulfilled with kosher items.

HOW FANCY

Another little-known halachah about shalach manos is found in an esoteric Biur Halachah (written by the Chofetz Chaim) in Orach Chaim 695. He writes that the Chayei Adam has proved from a passage in the Talmud Yerushalmi that if one sends a Purim package to a wealthy individual, the package must be a respectable one.

Thus, one should not send something below the kavod of the recipient. The poskim have ruled that a lollipop is not considered chashuv for an adult, nor is a bottle of Poland Spring water or seltzer.  To fulfill the Mitzvah, the portions must convey sufficient regard for the recipient.  

The Biur Halachah writes that the Ritva’s comment on his version of the Talmud Bavli agrees with the Chayei Adam. A careful reading of the Ritva, however, reveals that the Ritva and Chayei Adam are not exactly the same. Both of them require an upgraded Purim package on account of wealth; of that there is no question. However, the Ritva’s requirement is of the wealth of the giver—not the recipient. In other words, according to the Ritva, if the giver is very wealthy, his package must reflect that as well and he cannot fulfill the mitzvah with a meager package. Since the Biur Halachah does quote both the Chayei Adam and the Ritva, both would seem to be authoritative.

Therefore, one should not send something below the kavod of the giver or the recipient. [...]