Meir Pogrow: Learning Torah from morally disgusting individuals: The gag reflex

The current focus on the ban of Meir Pogrow from teaching Torah and communicating with women raises an important question. Should the thousands of Torah lessons that he has recorded be removed from the Internet and not be used to learn Torah. 

The Beis Din did not comment on this question so far. I was told that that the teshuva of Rav Moshe Feinstein regarding the music of Shlomo Carlebach was utilized ONLY to decide that the shiurim were not TECHNICALLY prohibited. And this was the only comparison made.

 It is important to note that the "bad report" of singing to a mixed audience that Rav Moshe Feinstein addresses is much less serious than what Meir Pogrow has been accused of.  (As a side point, I once met Shlomo Carlebach on a flight to Toronto and asked him about the teshuva. He got flustered and explained that he got along very well with Rabbi Feinstein and that they were on good terms.) .

It can readily be seen that while there is no actual prohibition of listening to the music  - Rav Feinstein indicates that there is the natural revulsion factor. Would you serve an exquisite and expense dinner in a bathroom?  Would you eat from plates and drink from glasses that had just been rinsed in the toilet? Would you serve food out of garbage can? What about eating food that someone had chewed on then put it back on the serving plate? While physically the food is the same food - but the context should initiate a gag reflex that would prevent consuming the food. 

This of course is separate from the question as to whether the shiurim contain information or attitudes that are heresy or even problematic. I am not familiar with the shiurim regarding its content - but it is clear that what we are dealing with is a smell test. Here is Rav Moshe Feinstein's teshuva. The shiurim are apparently not prohibited but if you ask a rabbi he would like tell you that you shouldn't learn them.

This question has been address to the Beis Din and I will publish their response when it becomes available.

שו"ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק א סימן צו

בדבר ניגונים שעשה אדם כשר שאחר זמן נתקלקל וסני שומעניה אם יש לנגנם על חתונות כ"ב אייר תשי"ט. מע"כ ידידי מהר"ר שמואל דישון שליט"א.

בדבר אחד שהיה בן תורה בחזקת כשרות כמה שנים והוא מנגן שעשה ניגונים על שירי קדש ולשיר לחתונות והורגלו כמה בני תורה לזמר אותם בשמחות של מצוה ועתה אין שמועתו טובה שמכנס בחורים ובתולות יחד ומזמר לפניהם, ושואל כתר"ה אם מותר עתה לזמר בניגוניו שעשה תחלה כשהיה בחזקת כשרות. לע"ד איני רואה בזה שום איסור מכיון שהם ממה שעשה בכשרותו. וראיה שהרי מצינו בתקנות יוחנן כהן גדול שנקראו על שמו במתני' סוף מע"ש ובפ' עגלה ערופה בסוטה ויש שסוברין שהוא זה ששימש שמנים שנה בכהונה גדולה ולבסוף נעשה צדוקי עיין במלאכת שלמה במע"ש שם, ואף ששם לא היה אפשר לבטל התקנות הגדולות שתיקן ונתקבלו בישראל ונעשו הלכות קבועות, מ"מ לא הי"ל לקרא אותם על שמו אלמא דכיון שתיקן אותם בכשרותו יש לקרא על שמו אף שעתה הוא רשע ומין כיון שנקרא על השעה שהיה כשר.

איברא שהרמב"ם רפ"ט ממעשר כתב שהוא יוחנן כהן גדול שהיה אחר שמעון הצדיק וכתב הכ"מ לאפוקי שלא נאמר שהוא אותו יוחנן כ"ג שנעשה צדוקי לבסוף, מ"מ מסתבר שאינו משום שסובר הרמב"ם שהיה אסור לקרא על שמו אם היה אותו יוחנן כ"ג שנעשה צדוקי לבסוף, שאין לנו לעשות מחלוקת בחנם וא"כ מדידהו נשמע שגם הרמב"ם יודה שמותר לקרא על שמו מה שתיקן בכשרותו, אלא שיודע מאיזה מקור שהיה זה יוחנן כ"ג הקודם לזה שנעשה צדוקי. וגם הא מצינו מאמר באבות פ"ד מ"כ מאלישע בן אבויה אף שהוא לו זכרון גדול והוא משום דאמר זה בכשרותו.

ולבד זה הא מוכרח כן דהא כל המקור לאסור הוא לטעם הרמב"ם בס"ת שכתבו מין שישרף שהוא כדי שלא להניח שם לאפיקורסים ולא למעשיהם, והא זה ברור שבנעשה מומר אחר שכתב הס"ת היא כשרה ממש אף לקרות בו עיין בפ"ת יו"ד סימן רפ"א סק"ב אלמא דכיון שכתב כשהיה בכשרותו הוי הנחת השם לזמן כשרותו שלזה ליכא קפידא. ואין לדחות דבכתב בכשרותו הרי קידש את השמות שהיה אסור לשרוף אף בכתבו מין כדמשמע שם ברמב"ם, דמ"מ היה לן לפסול ולהצריך גניזה, אלא צריך לומר דכיון שהנחת השם הוא לזמן כשרותו ליכא קפידא גם להרמב"ם. ולכן גם בעובדא זו הניגונים שעשה כשהיה בכשרותו שאף אם נימא שיש בזה ענין הנחת השם לעושה הניגונים אין לאסור דהרי הוא הנחת השם על זמן כשרותו שליכא קפידא בזה ומותר. ואף לבני תורה ובעלי נפש אין מקום להחמיר.

ובעצם מסופקני אף בהניגונים שעשה אחר שסני שומעניה, אם הם ניגונים כשרים שאין בהם קלות שראוין לנגנם, אם יש לזה ענין הנחת שם למעשה רשעים, דמסתבר דרק בעניני קדושה ככתיבת ס"ת שהוא חשיבות הנחת שמם בדבר קדושה הוא אסור להרמב"ם אבל בעניני חול אין בזה שום חשיבות במה שיהיה שמם עליהם ואין לאסור. וכמו שפשוט שמותר להשתמש וגם לקרא שמם על עניני חדוש ברפואות ומאשינעס /ומכונות/ וכדומה אלמא דרק בעניני קדושה הוא גנאי להניח שם לאפיקורסים ולא בעניני חול. וא"כ גם הניגונים הם עניני חול דאין להם שום קדושה ולכן אף שעשו לנגן בניגונים אלו דברי קדושה אפשר אין להחשיב שהוא הנחת שם להרשע בדברי קדושה כיון שבעצם הניגונים שחידש אין בהם קדושה. וא"כ אף ניגונים אלו שעשה אחר שסני שומעניה נמי יותר נוטה שאין לאסור לנגן בהם. אך באלו יש לבני תורה ובע"נ להחמיר כיון שיש גם טעם לאסור אף שהוא טעם קלוש.

והנה בעובדא זו שהסני שומעניה אינו בעניני כפירה אלא בעניני קלות ראש לנגן בפני בחורים ובתולות יחד שודאי אין להחשיבו כמין ואפיקורס ואף לא כמומר לתיאבון דהא רק לדבר אחד דקלות ראש ופריצות הוא עבריין לתיאבון מסתבר שעל אדם כזה אין למילף שיהיה דין וחיוב שלא להניח שם לו ולמעשיו. ואדרבה הא ברור שהס"ת שיכתוב איש כזה יהיה כשר, ומפורש ברדב"ז סימן תשע"ד הובא בקיצור בפ"ת שם שס"ת שכתב אחד מהקראים אסור לשרוף ובעצם היה מותר גם לקרות בו רק משום שאפשר שלא נעשה כתקון חז"ל עיין שם והא במין ואפיקורס שכתבו ס"ת אף בהיה ידוע בעדים שכתבו כדין היה אסור לקרות בו להרמב"ם כדי שלא להניח שם להאפיקורסים, מטעם שחלק הרדב"ז שאף שהם בכלל הכופרים כיון שעכ"פ מאמינים בקדושת השם ובקדושת התורה אין קפידא בהנחת שמם בקדושה שמחזיקין. א"כ כ"ש שמומר לתיאבון כשמאמין בקדושת התורה שכשר לקרות בו. וכ"ש בעבריין רק לדבר אחד לתיאבון דכשר הס"ת שיכתוב. וא"כ כ"ש הניגונים שעושה שרשאין לנגן בהם ואין להחמיר אף לבני תורה ובעלי נפש. ואם סני שומעניה גם לעניני כפירה אז הוא כדכתבתי לעיל שאלו שעשה מתחלה אין מקום להחמיר כלל ואף אלו שעשה אח"כ מסתבר יותר שאין לאסור כיון שאינם ענין קדושה אבל לבני תורה ובע"נ ראוי להחמיר, ידידו מוקירו, משה פיינשטיין

Meir Pogrow: Rav Chaim Malinowitz' response to the question of whether Pogrow's Torah shiurim should be removed

update: Just informed that that Torahdownloads has removed the recordings

update:Just was informed that Kol HaLashon has removed the recordings

כתבנו מעט מזעיר ממעשיו הגרועים.ואף זו ברמיזה בלי פירוט.

לדעתי, ואני מדבר רק בעד עצמי,  זו בזיון התורה ללמוד תורה מן נואף, ממי שעושה  מעשה זמרי, ממי  שעבר על איסורים חמורים במזיד מאות פעמים בחייו --וד''ל. לדעתי זו בושה וחרפה לכם  להגיש  שיעוריו  לציבור. לא מדובר במי שנכשל בעבירה--מדובר במי שחי חיי פרא אדם , לוכד נשים במרמה והרבה הרבה פעמים הרס בזה חייהן.

איזה בושה! איזה חילול ה'! איזה בזיון! וכי תורה היא צעצוע שלנו?

אני מלמד זכות עליכם שאתם לא מבינים המדובר פה, כיון שלא פירטנו יותר ממה שכתבנו.

אני מדגיש עוד פעם שאני מדבר אך ורק בעד עצמי.

מסתמא יש לכם רבנים לשאול להם שאילות שיש לכם, לכו תשאלו אותם.

חיים זאב הלוי מלינוביץ

 Rav Gershon Bess wrote

 I agree completely with Rabbi Malinowitz 

Translation of above =====================================

Question: Should Kol HaLashon remove the shiurim of Meir Pogrow?

Answer:

We have written in the  psak of the Beis Din only a small fraction of his disgusting deeds and even then it was only done with hints without going into detail.

In my view, and I am only speaking for myself, it is an insult to the Torah to learn Torah from a predator of women - from one who does ma'aseh Zimri, from one who has transgressed extremely severe prohibitions deliberately at least hundreds of times in his life. That description should be sufficient for you to get the picture.

In my view it is an embarrassment and disgrace for you to offer his shiurim to the public. We are not talking about someone who had a temporary lapse and succumbed to temptation. We are talking about someone who lived an unrestricted licentious life - trapping women through deception and many many times destroying their lives.

What an embarrassment! What a chilul HaShem! What a disgrace! Do you think that Torah is a mere trivial plaything for us?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you have not understood the seriousness of what we have talked about in our psak since we deliberately have left out the details. But the answer as to whether the shiurim should be removed is obvious.

Let me emphasize and repeat that I am speaking only for myself and not the other dayanim

You obviously have your rabbinical advisors to ask this question. Please go and ask them for their psak.

Stefan Colmer - convicted molester has moved to Passaic - Rav Eisenman requested that this be publicized

I recently received this email

Rabbi,

Rabbi Eisenman emailed me giving his expressed permission he wants his email re Colmer on your blog and internet given danger presents

Thank you

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

From: R. Y. Eisenman <rabbi@ahavasisrael.org>
Date: Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:02 PM
Subject: Important

Important

Please be aware that Stefan Colmer, whom I spoke publicly about a few years ago and who was subsequently arrested, convicted and imprisoned for sexually abusing minors, has moved back to his home on 38 John Street.

Congregation Ahavas Israel, together with all the Shuls in the Passaic-Clifton area has prohibited him from entering our premises; he is also not allowed in any of the Yeshivas.

Mr. Colmer's picture and the details of his criminal record can be found here:

http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/SomsSUBDirectory/offenderDetails.jsp?offenderid=36837

JFS will be hosting a forum within the next few days that will address concerns and appropriate steps on how to keep one's children safe. The details will be communicated to you shortly.

Ron Yitzchok Eisenman, Rabbi, Congregation Ahavas Israel, Passaic, NJ  

The problem of a convicted sex offender using threats of lawsuits to prevent publicizing his activities

Yesterday we witnessed a convicted sex offender threatening me with a lawsuit if I didn't take down all mention about him. What he wanted taken down consisted mainly of newspaper accounts of his conviction as well as the fact that he is now living in Israel with his family. He mentioned that I was violating the privacy of his children by stating where he lives and that they exist. Information which is vital for the protection of neighborhood children and classmates who might end up going to his home. Strangely this same sex offender had given me permission to post material -such his psychological tests - last year. He is a careful reader of this blog and the material was posted lasted year - and yet he did not ask that the material be removed then.

Suddenly after 9 months of not even a new mention of his name on this blog, his lawyer demanded that I take down the posts mentioning him by the end of the day or else face the legal consequences. As you know I did in fact take down the posts.

This morning I received additional emails from the sex offender saying that he wants me to meet together with his lawyer next week to close the matter.

[ As a point of knowledge, Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz was also sued by the same sex offender in Israel and ended up having to pay a fine. Apparently that case has not resolved yet.]

This person has not threatened legal action against any of the other blogs who have discussed his case nor has he sued the newspapers or social agencies or the New York Police department - all of whom have reported his conviction as a sex offender, imprisonment and current listing on the sex offenders list. As far as I know it is just Rabbi Horowitz and myself who have incurred the wrath of this individual

So what is the significance of all of this?

A person who is a sex offender - especially one who is on the public list of offenders in America - is not someone that you should feel comfortable  being around children without supervision. The urge to molest children doesn't simply go away with time or punishment. As a basic principle of Torah of "Not standing idly by the blood of your fellow man" there is a need to make people aware of that potential danger.  In general in America it is accepted that public information which is true does not constitute slander. Thus publicizing newspaper articles or documentation relevant to this concern are totally legal and not susceptible to lawsuits. Even if the information is felt to be false by the person - as long as you are simply reporting what is in the newspapers or from social agencies - you are protected. Though the newspapers and social agencies that are the source of the information can be sued.

Intimidating others from publicizing information that is in the public domain is clearly harmful for the public welfare. This is not only for bloggers but it also works to prevent victims reporting their abusers for fear of being sued for slander - aside from being sexual abused. It is very important for the protection of society that this information be distributed in the public domain..

Bottom line - reporting this information is a Torah obligation. If the convicted sex abuser is convinced of his innocence then he should be directing his attention to the source of the information - the courts, newspapers and social agencies. Those who report this information should not be targeted and intimidated. Using lawsuits as a weapon of intimidation is harmful for society as well as being a violation of the Torah prohibition of mesira.

Until I get further clarification of the legal issues - I am not publishing the name of this sex offender nor will I allow it to be mentioned in comments. I am well aware that he is reading this post as well as the fact that he feels rejected, angry  and lonely as a result of his conviction and that he strongly wants to be accepted by others and not be viewed as a pariah. 

However striking out at the messenger does not aid his cause nor the welfare of his children. Bizarrely he is generating more negative publicity for himself and his family by threatening me - especially since his name has not been mentioned for 9 months here. He would have accomplished much more by simply making a quiet private request.

Yoel Weiss and Rivky Stein: Update

update: Just received this comment which makes a number of important points

There is much to learn from the saga of Yoeli. Reading the comments on this post, I think too many people are missing the real lessons. 

Reconciliation is a good thing. Therapists, in contrast to accusations made by too many people, are dedicated to הבאת שלום בין איש לאשתו. We are not divorce hungry, and we do not make such decisions for our clients. 

This reconciliation is a rare exception, and a special tefilo for its longevity would be appropriate. As is typical for many cases, the sale to the public that the woman is the victim of an abusive husband is fairly easy and popular. It is ignorant to deny that there are abusive husbands. Very close to 50% of all marriages in which there is abuse, the perpetrator is the woman, and the victim is the husband. Yet, any woman with a difficulty in the marriage can buy the world's pity and support with claims of victimization. And the current unbalanced systems built to protect victims of domestic violence support this reverse victimization of men. I am in as much awe of the reconciliation as I am of the blindness that afflicted those who pushed themselves as advocates for women in this saga. I remain appalled at the extremes of falsehood and fabrication with non-existent dayanim, and the pumping of these fraudulent messages to the secular media. The chilul Hashem aspect of all this is outside of the realm of humans to judge, and HKB”H will deal with this as He sees fit. 

I will not comment specifically about any organization. But the efforts to intervene here without knowing facts were clearly in the wrong, and I would daven that they, too, learn some lessons. 

Lastly, I pray that the children, who were made into victims by the incessant efforts to cut them off from their father, become truly resilient and never experience any ill effects of what was inflicted upon them.

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

Statement from Yoel Weiss:

As my wife and I are very public figures who have aroused much interest and strong feelings regarding the breakup of our marriage – I would like to publish an update regarding our current situation.

Baruch HaShem – we have reconciled and are living together as a family with our children. We are aware that this is probably the least expected outcome given the accusations that were made and publicized in all the media. But it is true. We are both firmly committed to making our marriage work and with G-d's help we will succeed.

How this all came about is not something which is appropriate for the present – there are still very sensitive issues that are being addressed. We would appreciate if you would respect our privacy and allow the healing process to work without making us and our children a subject of gossip and Monday morning quarterbacking. Someday it might be possible to calmly explain what happened – but now is not the time.

In addition we have both learned much from recent events regarding saving marriages as well as what not to do when the marriage can not be saved. We have succeeded in helping a number of couples regarding these issues and are looking for a way to help others avoid the pain and degradation that we have experienced. We are presently working on making this advice available in a more structured and useful format. I will update the public as we work this out.

However at the present, all that is relevant is that we are Baruch HaShem a family again.

Wife is subordinate to her husband to the degree he is subordinate to G-d - Netziv

Netziv (Bereishis 2:24): Therefore a man should leave… and cleave to his wife. From that time on there is no way to get a help mate as intended by creation and according to how a man feels when he doesn't have a help mate - except by leaving his father and his mother and cleaving to his wife. And then they will be one flesh as he loves her since they are now as one being. As is stated in Yevamos (62b). And if he loves his wife as himself…[he will have domestic tranquility]. But even so she is not totally subordinate as the first woman who was considered to be part of Adam and but rather they will be one flesh. Just as he is concerned with his own good and he wants her to totally fulfill what he wants so it is with her that she wants her own good and that he will totally fulfill what she wants. Nevertheless it has already been established with the first woman and it has become part of the female nature that women remain helpers even though it is not like the original circumstances but rather is is like what happened after eating from the Tree of Knowledge as we will explain in Bereishis (3:2) and it is included in the sixth day of Creation. But it is only someone who merits it will get the love of his wife with total subordination as it was with Eve before the Sin. Because of this there were two manners of the cleaving of Adam and Eve in order that there be in future generations two different ways that a woman would be supportive of her husband. Therefore on the sixth day of Creation there were two ways that Eve loved Adam in order that that there should be two ways that a woman loves a man and as we explained that there are two different manners of serving G-d. All of this was done on the first day that they were created as we explained on verse 4. This created the nature of love of a woman and her life with her husband. This is like what Ben Azai said at the end of Kiddushin [(82a)] , "I was created to serve my Master and they were created to serve me." And to the degree that he serves G-d, will his wife serve him. Or alternatively she will serve him according to his mazel - as all events in the life of man happens according to Divine Providence according to his deeds. And this with either a good mazel or bad. Because this is the say G-d established His Kingdom in the world.

A prominent Baltimore Rav comments to me, "You should know that Rav Dovid Feinstein and Rav Nota Greenblatt are good friends"

This morning I had a discussion with a prominent Baltimore Rav who I have known for many years. He is known for not only for his knowledge of Torah, but as having sharp insights into complex situations and an ability to deal with all types of people with sensitivity. He also is known to keep his cards close to his vest and that he reveals only a fraction of what is actually on his mind. Equally as important he has been involved in this issue.

I hadn't seen him in a long time, but after davening he came over and asked how I am doing. He listened patiently as I explained my distress over the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt heter. I told him that the heter was clearly obtained through the use of a false psychiatric report and was not valid. 

He asked me what my involvement was in this matter and I explained that I had made a major contribution to publicizing the matter which had led to the involvement of many rabbinic authorities. 

I noted that it was commonly agreed that it was not just a problem with the immediate case but it was the fact that this was setting a precedent for other cases. He interjected that there was such a thing as a valid heter because of kiddushei ta'os. I agreed but noted that when the Rackman and the Krause beis dins had tried to create leniencies - there was an uproar against the beis din itself. I noted that in this case those who had created the heter are not being criticized. It is just being said that the heter is no good this time.

I noted that things had come to a stand still in dealing with the wider concerns, after Rav Dovid Feinstein had issued his psak that the heter was no good and that Rav Shmuel had simply said that he would abide by his psak. Rav Kaminetsky had not expressed any regret. There was no statement that the process of producing the heter was wrong. There was no redressing of the harm that had been done against Aharon Friedman. Of greater importance - nothing was being done to protect the community against this being used as a precedent for other cases.

When I noted that Rav Greenblatt had not retracted and the couple was still living together - he expressed suprise. I explained that Rav Greenblatt had stated that once he gave the psak it is valid independent of the quality of the facts that the psak was based on. 

I noted that at the present time as a result of the psak of Rav Dovid, the validity of the heter has simply become a machlokess in halacha between Rav Greenblatt and Rav Dovid Feinstein. As long as Rav Dovid does not criticize Rav Nota for producing the psak there will be no progress and the matter will not be properly dealt with.

Before the Rav turned to take care of some pressing business he said the following, "You should be aware that Rav Dovid Feinstein and Rav Nota Greenblatt are good friends."

The importance of secular studies

I would like to bring some sources which indicate that secular learning is important - not just because it is required by the government. I will be adding sources and commentaries over a few days - so check back for updates.

[I] Shabbos(75a): R. Zutra b. Tobiah said in Rab's name: … he who is able to calculate the cycles4 and planetary courses but does not, one may not praise him … R. Simeon b. Pazzi said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi on the authority of Bar Kappara: He who knows how to calculate the cycles and planetary courses, but does not, of him Scripture saith, but they regard not the work of the Lord, neither have they considered the operation of his hands.7 R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in R. Johanan's name: How do we know that it is one's duty to calculate the cycles and planetary courses? Because it is written (Devarim 4:6), "for this is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of the peoples", what wisdom and understanding is in the sight of the peoples?9 Say, that it is the science of cycles and planets.

Rashi (Shabbos 75a): In the eyes of the nations – because it is a self-evident wisdom because the accuracy of his words is testified by the movement of the sun and constellations. For example he says that this year will be rainy and it is is in fact so or that this year will be hot and it is so. That is because the nature of the seasons are determined by the movement of the sun and the constellations and their influence. Everything is determined by the stars and the time that the sun moves and interacts with the stars

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

We see from the above that it is important for a Jew to be knowledgeable about astronomy and astrology

1) The goyim view it as wisdom and therefore a Jew who lacks this wisdom is viewed as inferior This principle means that a Jew does not have basic knowledge of science, history or biology is viewed as inferior and surely if he has trouble speaking or reading the lanuage of the land. This is a chilul Hashem.

2) Being able to predict events because they are caused by the mechanical and fixed movements of the stars shows that idolatry is wrong. That is because the predictions from the movements are rule governed and thus there is no need for appealing to the god of the sun or other heavenly bodies. 

[II] Rav Yisroel Belsky told me that his success in dealing with kashrus processes - and his ability to deal with these issues better than other rabbis - was due to the fact that he took his secular studies seriously.  It is obviously that if one wants to deal with metzius issues that one needs to have the basic background in physics, biology, and chemistry. A basic understanding of the scientific method of validation. Being able to read precisely and to be able to communicate accurately in writing as well as speech.

 From Making of a Gadol

My father related that he was told by someone whose oldest son had just reached school age that he had decided not to send the child to a school with secular studies so that the boy would be able to devote all his time to learning Torah. My father protested, "But your son will be unable to read even the street signs to know where he is standing." When the unbending father replied, "R' Hayyim Soloveichik also did not read Russian," our protagonist, who felt that the child's development would be impeded altogether by the abnormal education his father was charting for him, argued, "Yes, but R' Hayyim had a shamosh who knew Russian and read the signs while escorting him through the streets. Do you expect your son to have a shamosh when he grows up?"

 It is noteworthy that when asked as an octogenarian whether young students at a Monsey yeshiva may be permitted to read light English literature (which would pass faculty censorship), my father- with the caveat that he would be "considered a leftist" for the ruling - referred to this experience of his own to prove that such reading is not harmful. He mentioned that he read Russian translations of such classics as the science fantasies of Jules Verne and the Sherlock Holmes stories of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle :. He added that the licentiousness of present-day society and literature mandates that contemporary secular books be carefully screened before being put onto a permitted-reading list. The principal of the secular department in Mesivta Torah Vodaath, R' Moshe Lonner, reported d that my father suggested students study certain plays by Shakespeare "because in olden times there was less reference to topics to which yeshiva bahurim should not be exposed", and referred to his own reading of these classics in the Russian language. (He added at the time that we should not think that people of the Elizabethan and Victorian ages were better than those of latter times - "there was simply more ,nr, [shame] then".)

 Also like my father, R' Aaron Kotler dabbled in secular studies at this time. He was more interested in literature than in the sciences which attracted my father's interest. My father stated to his son-in-law R' Yisrael Shurin that R' Aaron was proficient in all of classical Russian literature'L This was corroborated when, during a visit with a young, intellectual protoge of the Hazon-Ish who headed a yeshiva in Ramlah, R' Aaron blurted out, "This was expounded by Aleksander Pushkin" - as reported to this author by the yeshiva head '. The Ramlah Yeshiva was visited by R' Aaron Kotler, R' Shmuel Graineman and the Kopycznitzer Rebbe, R' Avrohm-Yehoshua' Heschel, in the summer of 5714 (1954). At the same time, Moshe Bar-Sela', director of the Labor and Social Affairs Ministry and a Pushkin buff, dropped by for a glass of tea and a chat - people were wont to stop off in Ramlah on the then long drive from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv. When Bar-Sela' quoted a line from the poem Yevgeni On'yegin without naming the author, R' Aaron reacted as reported. (Pushkin was a Russian author favored in Jewish intellectual circles. This author came across an interview of French Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas by Francois Poiri in "Emmanuel Levinas, Qui etes-vous?? ''° which has the thinker relating, "A few years ago an Israeli born in Eastern Europe paid me a visit. Upon entering my home, he noticed that I had the complete works of Pushkin on the bookshelves. 'You can see right away,' he said, 'that this is a Jewish home.'"

[to be continued]

Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter: New letter from Rav Shlomo Miller

בס"ד ז אדר ב' תשע"ו לפ"ק

לכבוד ידידי הרב מנחם מענדל סענדרוביץ שליט"א

אחדשה"ט.

הנה בשבוע היאהרצייט של הגאון בעל אג"מ זצוק"ל באתי לעורר אף שהי' אוהב שלו' ורודף שלו' מ"מ כשהרב גורן התיר ממזרים שלא כדין הי' מהעומדים בפרץ נגדו. ועל כן לענין היתר אשת איש של האשה תמר עפשטיין אין לפחד שאם הב"ד יאמר האמת שהיא אשת איש יש כאן בזיון ת"ח ולא תגורו מפני איש קאי גם 

אם האיש ת"ח [והרב גורן הי' ת"ח מופלג הרבה יותר ממי שהתיר האשת איש הנ"ל]

ואף שדרך כלל אינני רוצה לומר לב"ד מה לעשות אבל כאן אני חש מאד על כבוד הב"ד אם לא יאמרו כל האמת כמו שהוא 
והנני מברכו בכל טוב כל הימים

ידידו 

שלמה אליהו מילר

In honor of my dear friend Rav Menachem Mendel Senderoric (3rd dayan of Rav Feinstein's Beis Din)

Now that it is the week of the Yahrtzeit of Rav Moshe Feinstein - I am am writing this to encourage you. By stating that even though Rav Moshe loved peace and he pursued peace - nevertheless in the case of Rav Goren who gave a heter for mamzerim against the halacha - he strongly opposed this breach in Torah observance. Therefore in the present case of giving a heter to a married woman Tamar Epstein [to remarry without a Get] you should not be afraid -that if the beis din says the truth that she is in fact a married woman who is remarrying improperly without a Get - that you will disgrace a talmid chachom [Rav Greenblatt]. The Torah says not to withhold judgment out of fear from any man - and that means even if he is a talmid chachom. [And the fact is that Rav Goren was an exceedingly greater talmid chachom than [Rav Greenblatt] who issued the heter to Tamar Epstein.]

So even though in general I don't tell a beis din what they should do, but in this case I am very concerned for the reputation of the beis din if they do not say the whole truth as it actually is.

Rav Tzadok: The dangers of being on a high spiritual level

Common wisdom is that the fight with the yetzer harah occurs for the common people. The wicked  are wicked because the yetzer harah has won while the righteous are righteous because they have conquered the yetzer harah.

In fact this is not necessarily so. The yetzer harah gets stronger if it is regularly conquered because a balance of forces is needed in order to have free-will. 

Sukkah(52a) R. Judah expounded: In the time to come9 the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring the Evil Inclination and slay it in the presence of the righteous and the wicked. To the righteous it will have the appearance of a towering hill, and to the wicked it will have the appearance of a hair thread. Both the former and the latter will weep; the righteous will weep saying, ‘How were we able to overcome such a towering hill!’ The wicked also will weep saying, ‘How is it that we were unable to conquer this hair thread!’ And the Holy One, blessed be He, will also marvel together with them, as it is said, Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, If it be marvellous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in those days, it shall10 also be marvellous in My eyes.

While the point of free-will varies widely amongst people [Michtav M'Eliyahu] - the basic principle of free-will requires a stronger and smarter yetzer harah. This idea is expressed by the statement in Sukkah (52a) - the greater the person the greater is his yetzer.

Our Rabbis taught: ‘But I will remove far off from you the hidden one’,27 refers to the Evil Inclination which is constantly hidden in the heart of man; and will drive him into a land barren and desolate28 means, to a place where there are no men for him to attack; with his face toward the eastern sea,28 [implies] that he set his eyes against the First Temple29 and destroyed it and slew the scholars who were therein; and his hinder part toward the western sea28 [implies] that he set his eyes against the Second Temple and destroyed it and slew the scholars who were therein. That his foulness may come up and his ill-savour may come up28 [means] that he leaves the other nations in peace and attacks only Israel.30 Because he hath done great things.28 Abaye explained, Against scholars31 more than against anyone;32 as was the case when Abaye heard a certain man saying to a woman, ‘Let us arise betimes and go on our way’. ‘I will’, said Abaye, ‘follow them in order to keep them away from transgression’ and he followed them for three parasangs across the meadows. When they parted company33 he heard them say, ‘Our company is pleasant, the way is long’.34 ‘If it were I’,35 said Abaye, ‘I could not have restrained myself’, and so went and leaned in deep anguish against a doorpost, when a certain old man36 came up to him and taught him: The greater the man, the greater his Evil Inclination.

Of course it is important to realize also that the nature of choice changes as one becomes more righteous. As many commentators have pointed out - a righteous person is unlikely to be persuaded to eat a ham sandwich. But he might be persuaded that speaking lashon harah or stealing is a mitzva - in situations where is is simply not so. What I would like to present is an interesting piece by Rav Tzadok dealing with the dangers inherent in reaching a high spiritual level. A gadol has a bigger yetzer harah which has a different strategy to make him sin  then for the average man.

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2008/08/jesus-shabsai-tzvi-fell-from-high.html

ספר מחשבות חרוץ - אות א

וחטא אדם הראשון היה במחשבה כמו שמובא בתיקוני זוהר שם ושם, וזהו הדמיון שהכניס בו הנחש במה שאמר (בראשית ג', ה') והייתם כאלקים וגו' כי זהו שורש של כל המחשבות של תוהו והבלים ודמיונות שבאדם לדמות עצמו שיהיה באיזה מעלה וענין שהוא למעלה ממנו ושאין ראוי לה כל אחד כפי השגתו, ואדם הראשון שהיה בתכלית השלימות על דרך (תהלים פ"ב, ו') אני אמרתי אלקים אתם וגו' הכניס בו דמיון שיהיה ממש כן:

ועל זה הוצרכה תורה להזהיר קדושים תהיו יכול כמוני תלמוד לומר וכו' (ויקרא רבה סוף פרשה כ"ד, ט') כי כשהוא בתכלית המדריגה מקדושה עד שידמה למלאכי השרת הוא בכח הבחירה שבו אין היצר הרע מניחו לעולם כלל ומסיתו שיוכל להתקדש כביכול כמוהו ממש, ומזה יוכל להפילו מאגרא רמה לבירא עמיקתא חס ושלום כמו שקרה להאיש ולשבתי צבי שם רשעים ירקב על ידי ריבוי פרישותם גבר כח הדמיון שבהם לחשוב שיוכלו לדמות לעליון ובא להם על ידי שחשבו עצמם תחילה קדושים, וזהו שורש הסתת הנחש שמתחיל במועט עד וכו' ותחילתו במחשבה ודמיון ובלבוש החיצוני של מחשבה אלא שנוגע לכל מדריגות שבמחשבה כדאיתא שם:

וכל זמן שלא נתקן חטא אדם הראשון לגמרי שיהיה על ידי משיח המקווה במהרה בימינו אין המחשבה נקיה לגמרי עדיין מדמיונות כל אחד כפי מדריגתו, והקדוש בקדושתו יוכל לטעות גם כן בדמיונות שונות שנחשבות למחשבת הבל ותוהו אשר מזה נגרם גם למעשה דאין אדם צדיק בארץ אשר יעשה טוב ולא יחטא, דהצדיק הוא העושה רק טוב אך היצר מתלבש גם בו לדמות לו שהוא טוב והוא חוטא בהטוב כי אינו טוב אלא כפי הדמיון של היצר המתעהו, וזה מצד הדמיונות שבמחשבה אבל כל זה אינו ענין למחשבה שהוא עיקר האדם דזהו החכמה שבמוח שהוא נשמה שנתת בי טהורה כידוע דנפש רוח נשמה הנשמה היא במוח והיא מה' יתברך כמו שנאמר (בראשית ב', ז') ויפח באפיו וגו' מאן דנפח וכו' חלק אלוה על כן היא טהורה:

ועל זה אמרו (שיר השירים רבה ה', ב') הקדוש ברוך הוא לבן של ישראל כמו שנאמר (תהלים ע"ג, כ"ו) צור לבבי וחלקי וגו', כי מוחא וליבא תרין רעין כנזכר ועל ידי שהוא שוכן במוחו דזהו נקרא חלקי ממילא הוא גם בלבו, וכל הדמיונות הם לבושים חיצונים המקיפים המחשבה הפנימיות דעל כן המשילו (סנהדרין מ"ד.) החטאים לחילפי הסובבים האסא שהוא עיקר האדם הישראלי שבפנימיות לבו ומוחו, וכידוע דברי רמב"ם (סוף פרק ב' מהלכות גירושין) בטעם כופין עד שיאמר רוצה אני, אלא שמכל מקום הלבושים דמחשבה פועלים לפי שעה קצת גם בפנימיות והיינו בלבושין שבפנימיות כי גם בפנימיות המחשבה יש מה שדא לבושא לדא וכמו שנתבאר:

Purim and the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter

Purim is the time we celebrate the salvation of the Jewish people - brought about by an apparent sinful act of the heroine - Esther. Despite being already married, she agreed to marry Achashverus in order to save the Jewish people. She did this with the brave psak of Mordechai - who was one of the gedolim of those times.

In the spirit of Purim, it seems clear at this point that we have 3 Mordechais who have decided that the salavaton of the Jewish people requires comparable brave deeds. Deeds that clearly seem to be direct violations of Torah law and thus threaten their eternal Jewish souls. 

R Shalom Kaminetsky who seems to be the driving force behind this "act of salvation", Rav Shmuel Kaminetksy who recognizes his son's greatness and seems willing to do anything to help a loyal support. And finally Rav Greenblatt - who admits he doesn't know whether the "facts" of this case are true - but he has loyalty to "Daas Torah" i.e., Rav Kaminetsky and he is willing to do whatever he can as a halachic technician to bring about the halachic changes that he has been told are required.

Of course, it wouldn't be Purim without Esther. Tamar of course is Esther. Who without regard to her own well being is willing to sacrifice her Olam HaBah to bring about "freedom" for the agunos of the world. She doesn't care whether she commits adultery and produces mamzerim - she wants to "save" yiddishkeit from its antiquated halachic traditions.

Now of course you are wondering who Haman is in this upside down world of Purim. The answer is obvious, especially if you have read Rav Aharon Feldman's letter. Worse than the sin of adultery is the sin of BLOGGING. In particular for claiming that certain gedolim not only are mistaken as to what they are doing but that they are deliberately doing horrible damage to the Jewish people.

These bloggers have succeeded in convincing certain gedolim that what Mordechai and Esther have done is wrong. This of course parallels the facts that many of the Sanhedrin thought that Mordechai and Esther had gone off the derech.

However soon we will find out whether Rav Dovid Feinstein agrees with the Purim Rebbes or whether he agrees with his own father. We look forward to a Purim this year which will bring true salvation to the Jewish people

Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter: Purim Special! A woman's do it yourself guide to annuling marriage - with haskomas from Gedolim

For Purim I have decided to stop fighting the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter and have decided - as a public service - to describe how any woman can create her own Heter. I obtained this information from hundreds of hours of great effort observing and analyzing the activities of the Kaminetskys and Rav Nota Greenblatt and now I am willing to share it with you.

No need for expensive Gittin which can drag on for years and cost thousands of dollars. No need to accept the status of a divorcee.  I guarantee you will be able to marry the Cohen of your desires without anyone mentioning your previously married state.

No need to hire a lawyer to make up lies about your husband being a child molestor, rapists or mafia member. No need to mortgage your parent's home to pay for his services.

No need to hire Jeremy Stern and the marching band of ORA to officiate at protests outside your husband's parents home.

Furthermore I will reveal the secret of how to do it without wasting precious time currying favor with a rabbi with well placed bribes. You no longer need to have your family or yourself to be life long financial supporters of a rabbi's yeshiva or chesed organization.

You will also learn not to feel guilty about making up lies and slandering your husband. Special yoga breathing techniques have been combined with hourly shots of whisky to blot out all feelings of shame.

As a special bonus, I will also describe how to avoid using the expensive services of a psychiatrist. I will teach you the halachically significant formula that "magically" dissolves any marriage - with 25 words or less.

A specially generous bonus from me, is how to deal with being accused of adultery and your children labeled being mamzerim. This took a lot of time studying the deeds of contemporary gedolim. But Baruch Hashem, I have distilled the procedure down to a mere two pages of instructions that anyone can follow.

In short, I will teach you the secret of distorting and corrupting Yiddishkeit for your own selfish benefit. The secret of effortless destruction of your present marriage. You will learn how to ruin your children with much greater effectiveness and damage than if they were merely children of a divorced couple. I will give you complete freedom over your destiny and the techniques for nullifying any and all halachic objections. I will teach you the secrets of Daas Torah.

Daas Torah in America: A layman - especially a blogger - can never ever criticize a Rabbi. Even it means adultery or any other crime will be committed

I had a peaceful flight yesterday which consumed about 20 hours with a stopover in Russia. However when I landed the fireworks began.

On the way from Kennedy airport I called up a rabbi I know and respect who has a very close relationship with the Kaminetskys. I also have a positive relationship with him despite the fact that I have a Blog. 

I asked him if he had any information about the Tamar Epstein case. His reply was that he never heard about it. 

Welcome to America!

I asked him if he would be interested in knowing about it since it was a very critical issue involving adultery and the nature of Gittin and that he might be of help resolving the matter. I noted that  many rabbis had gotten involved but at this point critical issues had not been resolved.

"I have nothing to do with these issues - it is only for major rabbis!" "You don't understand. These issues are not for the layman but for major rabbis. A layman has no right to publicly criticize rabbis - for anything. These type of matters can only be dealt with by major rabbis - behind closed doors. They are not for public discussion - especially on a Blog. It is the clear and unanimous view of American rabbis that Blogs are prohibited. They serve only to denigrate rabbis and foment hate and lashon harah. Even if the present situation results in adultery it is none of my business. It is only for the major rabbis. Even if you know that a rabbi robs banks with a machine gun - it is not your business. It is up to other rabbis to take care of the matter and if they don't - IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!!!!

I noted that this is not the view of halacha. That in fact there is no such prohibition but rather all Jews are responsible for the actions of all other Jews - including Rabbis. Furthermore that it is clear that there is a Torah mitzva of chastisement - and no distinction is made whether the critic is a layman or a rabbi or whether the person being criticized is a rabbi or a layman.  Therefore in a situation where the rabbis are in fact not dealing properly with the issue - it is not only permitted but an obligation for a layman to get involved. In a case of Chilul HaShem - there is no kavod given to the Rav. He responded with impatience.

You are not listening so I will repeat myself. It is the unanimous view of American rabbis that a layman has no business criticizing rabbis - especially not publicly and clearly not on Blogs. A layman has no business to be concerned with what he thinks are the crimes or errors of Rabbis. Even if you find some rabbis who approve of criticizing rabbis some of the time - they are clearly a minority view.

 It is important also to be aware that Israeli rabbis view American rabbis as not having been given the Torah and they don't accept the view of American rabbis on anything. So even if you have rabbis in Israeli who agree with what you are doing - it is only because of the contempt they have for American rabbis. Rabbi Belsky is a good example of a major talmid chachom who was not even allowed to speak with Rav Eliashiv to defend his views. Therefore in regard to the American Torah understanding - the rule is categorical. No criticism is allowed by a layman and especially publicly on a blog - no matter what the alleged crime or sin is.

In conversations with Israeli rabbis regarding American Torah Judaism - it is understood that American laymen (and rabbis) are naive - and deliberately so. They do not wrestle with issues because it is none of their business.  While you do find similar rules voiced in Israel - they are often ignored and as consequence Israeli's are more likely to have views and argue about a wide range of subjects.

As one person said, "This is a clear example of evolution. American have been successfully taught not to use their brains to consider major real life issues and their brains have atrophied for these matters."

Rav Nosson Kaminetsky: Those who questioned the validity of the Chofetz Chaim's dibbuq

page 678 in Making of a Godol

It is definite that the Chafetz-Chaim's family made short shrift of the entire dibbuq story. This author has spoken to present-day ancestors who question its veracity. R' Shlomo Fisher reported that his mekhuton, the late R' Hirsh Zaks, grandson of the Chafetz-Chaim, quashed the story. R' David Mostofsky divulged - that R' Mendel Zaks, the examiner at his alma mater, Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary (RIETS), scoffed at it. R' Benzion Sobel disclosed , that R' Rephael Wallerstein, "someone very close to R' Mendel Zaks", had informed him that R' Mendel denied the entire story. When R' Benzion asked R' Mendel directly if the story was factual, he retorted, "Who is the one who supposedly told the story?" And when R' Benzion replied, "R' Elchonon," R' Zaks was simply silent - which implies that, while denying the story, R' Mendel did not want to clash head-on with R' Elchonon. The Chafetz-Chaim's oldest son, R' Aryeh-Laib Poupko, reprinted in his ככח"ח an article written a month after his father's passing in the newspaper הדרך under the pseudonym מחר הלוי by someone claiming to have been "close to the Chafetz- Chaim's house". R' Poupko introduces the piece positively with the words, "[The article's] words and descriptions are without exaggeration. They are exalted and sublime and are true." Inter alia, the article tells the following: "The Chafetz-Chaim's outlook was clearly rational without mystical fogginess and 'climbing on ladders, without delusions, without superstitions. They tell how aggrieved and broken Jews once brought him some young girl who crowed like a cock and uttered odd sounds. 'Our holy teacher,' the Jews cried bitterly and supplicated him, 'save us! A dibbuq has entered the girl - may the Merciful One spare us - and you, our master, must expel it from within her.' The Chafetz-Chaim commiserated with them, comforted them, spoke kindly to their heart: 'It is not a dibbuq,' he said. 'It is a kind of sickness. Go to the doctor - he will be the Holy One's messenger and heal her...'" It is clear from the context, that מחר הלוי discounted all stories of the occult pertaining to the Chafetz- Chaim, and from R' Poupko's approbation it is clear that he agreed with 'מחר הלוי R' Shlomo Wolbe reported that R' Yeruham Levovitz, the Mashgiah of Mir, who played a part in the dibbuq story, held that it was no dibbuq that entered the young girl in question; rather, she was suffering from mental illness. R' Yoseph-Shlomo Kahanneman, the Ponivezher Rav, who was another of the participants in the dialogue with the girl ", told his protoge in London, R' Yaakov Levison, that the fact that she - "a daughter of R' Nahum Strelcer from the small, Polish hamlet of Fascoli" - was using foul language while in her state of seizure in- dicated that she was not "possessed" by a spiritual creature. (The Ponivezher Rav added that it seems possible for a spirit to speak words of heresy and blasphemy, matters of a philosophical nature, but not [obscenities].) R' Yoseph-Shlomo maintained that the Chafetz-Chaim had smiled approvingly when this opinion was expressed, leaving the impression that the master, too, did not believe a dibbuq had overtaken the young woman. R' Kahanneman believed that the reason the Chafetz-Chaim did not declare openly that the young woman had no dibbuq but a mental condition was so that the stigma of insanity not mar the good reputation of the young lady and of the entire Strelcer family -,. My son R' Yoseph related that, according to R' Noson Shulman, R' Naphtali Trop had denied the dibbuq story - though his name had been linked to the tale. (When R' Noson's uncle R' Binyamin Shulman, a Radin talmid of the middle 5680's [1920's] who was present when his nephew made the statement, objected that the dibbuq story was common knowledge in the Yeshiva of Radin in his day, R' Noson rejoined facetiously that this was not the first case of his uncle disagreeing with what R' Naphtali said.) Also cf. מאיר עיני ישראל where another Radin talmid, R' Kalman Farber, who came to the yeshiva somewhat later than R' Shulman, reports, "The [yeshiva people] declined to talk about the [dibbuq] tale and tried not to publicize it because they were concerned that people would not believe it and laugh at it." Also cf. ibid. where another Radin talmid who arrived there later yet, R' Shlomo Epstein - he joined the yeshiva in 5690 (1930) - goes further in his account, to wit, "The Chafetz-Chaim did not permit (emphasis added) talking about the story of the dibbuq - in fact, I cannot recall that it was spoken about during all the time I spent at the yeshiva, and except for R' Elchonon Wasserman, not one of us knew its full details. The Chafetz-Chaim knew the true story, but he did not allow it to be spoken about." It seems that as time went on, the story of the dibbuq was being progressively suppressed in Radin.