Israeli Beis Din Acted with No Representation of Victims, Chicago, or Torah Umesorah

Rabbi Aharon Feldman

Rabbi Aharon Feldman

According to this morning’s post on Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn’s Daas Torah blog, “Seminary Scandal: Clarifying Rav Aharon Feldman’s role” (8/10/14)  Rabbi Aharon Feldman writes:

Although I signed on the shtar beyrurin (arbitration agreement) as the official to’en (legal advocate for a party), I was never appointed by anyone to represent him nor did I ever intend to supply you with substantiation of any claims for the simple reason that I did not have this information. My role in this affair was merely to serve as a liason between the Chicago Beis Din and Torah Umesorah who asked me to do this.

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Shafran

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Shafran

I even asked Rav Shafran, the Rosh Bes Din, before the hearing of his Beis Din to be excused because I had no information to add and the first question I would be asked would be, “Who appointed you as a toen?” But Rav Shafran asked me to come nevertheless. Out of respect for his request I came and sat for a while.

When the first question of the counsel for defendant was exactly as I had predicted, Rav [Menachem Mendel] Shafran’s reply was that the counsel was correct but that we did not need a to’en since the defendant had already confessed to the charges and the trial was dealing with the damages the defendant was liable to and the culpability of the principals. When I asked permission from Rav Shafran to leave after I sat and listened to the testimony of two people, Rav Shafran—nor anyone else—did not ask me to stay to supply any evidence because everyone knew and I had made it clear that I had none. Especially there was no purpose for me to stay since Rav Shafran had conceded that I was not an empowered to’en.

Torah Umesorah Let Dissociating From Shafran-Malinowitz-Gartner Israeli Beis Din July 18 2014 Nojowitz re MeiselsThis is a very strange message and even a stranger legal process. R. Feldman says he is a to’en but concedes no one appointed him. An ad hoc rabbinical court like the Israeli Beis Din (IBD) has no standing to try a claim for damages without a plaintiff advancing those claims in that particular court. By R. Feldman’s own admission, nobody appointed him, and hence there was no plaintiff.

Rabbi Feldman also says, “My role in this affair was merely to serve as a liason between the Chicago Beis Din and Torah Umesorah who asked me to do this.” Liaison is a vague word which implies interacting but does not necessarily imply any power beyond being authorized to send messages. However, Torah Umesorah (TU) (the umbrella group for many ultra-orthodox day schools) insists it has no dog in this fight. Rabbi David Nojowitz, TU’s National Director of Torah Umesorah stated this in writing:

Torah Umesorah never retained any Beis Din in Israel regarding any seminary. We have no jurisdiction in Israel, no do we have any opinion as to which seminary in Israel girls should or should not attend.

Thus we have the strangest of phenomena, a victims’ representative who admits he is not delegated to represent them. Moreover, we have someone he insists he is a liaison for Torah Umesora (TU) even after TU issued a letter that disavows any role whatsoever in this matter.

Rabbi Feldman refers to a signed shtar berurin (binding arbitration agreement authorizing the IBD to judge a matter). The signatures of the defendants are Meisels and four administrators from his seminaries. The plaintiff signature is by R. Feldman with a notation that he is an apitropos, a guardian, but the signature line does not indicate for who. Nowhere are there signatures by any victim or by the Chicago Beis Din.

P.S., Rabbi Eidensohn’s blog has been launching attacks attacking the Chicago Beis Din (CBD) with rising frequency. This morning’s batch included, “Seminary Scandal: RICO claim – Yerachmiel Lopin of Frum Follies view & my rebuttal.” In it, he takes a comment I submitted in response to a question he directed to me about whether I found the RICO complaint in the lawsuit plausible. He turned it into a post (as is fully his right), inserting his critique between my numbered paragraphs.

I disagree with his critique. I also wish he had let the reader get through the entire argument since some of his criticisms of the earlier paragraphs are addressed in subsequent paragraphs. I also wish I had anticipated it becoming a post. Because I thought it was a comment inside an internal argument among pretty rabbinically knowledgeable readers, I used some short hand jargon and did not translate or explicate some of my comments.

If you decide to read that post, I suggest reading it through without the lengthy critique annotations and then returning to read his critique.

On the other hand, i do appreciate his preface where he treated me as an otherwise credible blogger, notwithstanding the gulf that separates us on this case. He wrote,

Mr. Lopin has been the most active blogger dealing with this scandal and has been the source of many important leaks from the Chicago Beis Din and opponents of the Israeli Beis Din. We have been in contact for a  number of years and I generally agree with his analysis and concern for establishing the truth as well as his genuine concern for the victims of abuse.

It is hard to complain about one’s rhetorical lashing when it was proceeded with such a generous drum roll.

Advertisements

52 thoughts on “Israeli Beis Din Acted with No Representation of Victims, Chicago, or Torah Umesorah

  1. What really happened behind the scenes with Rav Feldman’s role gets more and more confusing and obscured with each new revelation and “clarification”. But several things are very clear:

    1) The IBD has NOT made the safety of girls a priority. Rather the continuation of disastrously failed institutions is their true priority — with the protection of associated jobs and the preservation of institutional finances being shamefully non-negotiable and sacrosanct.

    2) The IBD is NOT interested in any recognizable process of just, reasonable, halachically appropriate judicial protocal as we can clearly see from their willingness to “pasken” without hearing testimony from anyone authorized to represent the victims, nor having evidence they admit they need (by having requested it from the CBD).

    3) The IBD in NOT interested in even a modicum of respectful dialogue with the CBD as Malinowitz wont even call them a beit din. Note: If Malinowitz cant bring himself to refer to CBD as a beit din due to his obvious bias, egoistic anger, pettiness, then be doesnt deserve the title of “Rav”.

    4)The Daas Torah blog is surprisingly not willing to allow strong criticism of the IBD. Rav Eidesohn has refused to post my highly critical comments of the IBD that were written with 100% civil language and in the spirit of truthful discourse. Rav Eidesohn, despite his strong record in the defense of victims of abuse, apparently cant objectively process criticisms of rabbonim that he is directly associated with. It is a stain on his otherwise commendable record.

    .

    • By all means save copies of the comments you submit to Eidensohn’s blog and paste them here with the link to the article and some brief preface to suggest the context. Then the public can decide whether or not they found his moderation reasonable.

      I am very puzzled by R. Eidensohn’s strident defense of the IBD process and the authority of their rulings. I would not presume he is guilty of bias because of personal connections though I also cannot preclude it. In these and most matters I prefer discrediting an argument to inferring miscondcut when that may not be at play.

      • It’s not just strident. He actually bashes and belittles those who don’t kowtow to his worldview on this particular topic. I’ve followed him with interest in the past. Heck, I even have his useful sefer. But something has gone sideways with him recently. His tone is different, and he just isn’t talking sense.

        • There was definitly a switch from pro-CBD to pro-IBD in the “Daas torah” posts somewhere along the line, so either it is based on personal connection, or on local intimidation…

          • Agreed. i noticed the obvious shift as well, which Rav Eidensohn will claim was prompted by new “evidence”i.e. “the smoking gun” which he trumpets to be the shtar brurim signed by Rav Feldman.

            But as we see from Rav Feldman’s letter in the above post, this is the most non-sensical, extra-judicial shtar brurim since the creation of matter. It is a shtar brurim where the signee, Rav Feldman says he was not authorized to represent anyone. He says he serves no function other than as a liason and he himself is obviously not a party to the action. Sounds like this shtar brurim should me renamed “a shtar choshech” as a seems its only purpose was to further the IBD’S master scheme to create the illusion of a coherent legal process while perpetrating a grotesque fraud on both victims and families of girls to be enrolled for the coming year. .

    • Eidensohn’s response would be the following: You don’t know what you’re talking about and you don’t understand the issues and you didn’t read the post.

      Therefore, I’m right and you’re wrong. And also you’re ignorant.

      • This is absolutely correct. Yerachmiel, your chosen words for DT blog is pretty respectful but I have zero respect for a man, not simply because he tends to defend those who deserve no defense, but rather how he speaks to those who disagree. He constantly lambasts people, people I might add who are anonymous to him so he has no idea what sort of comprehensive expertise they may have, with vitriol such as “you are ignorant” “you rant” “you Bellow” “you are self righteous” “you have no understanding of halacha”. If he is attempting to represent any sort of daas Torah he is doing a very poor job of it lately. His lashon towards people and his obvious inclination to not even post some comments that disagree with him lead me to believe nothing other than he has an agenda and it is a biased one. It’s pathetic at this point.

        • I hear where you are coming from. What can I say? I feel life and people are complicated. I am willing to concede some real good deeds among some of the worst sex abusers and some truly nasty conduct by people I admire. I prefer evaluating each act on its own terms instead of trying to simplistically type individuals unambiguously. I have no doubt that Meisels, Dovid Weinberger, even Baruch Lanner extended themselves, were kind, and really helped some people.

          If nothing else, R. Eidensohn’s blog helped educate me. Reading it has made me a better blogger on the issue of abuse. I completely disagree with him about this case, even if he occasionally raises some specifics worth considering. I disagree with him almost completely about divorce. Still I think more is accomplished by attacking his arguments than him.

          Maybe I am defensive because I have been at the receiving end of too many ad hominem attacks.

          • My comment was indeed based on people disagreeing with his comments, not attacking him. I have never attacked him and like others was called “ignorant”. It is like going to someone’s home for dinner, they bring up a topic of conversation in their home and express their opinion, you disagree, even bringing discrepancies in halacha many times and the person calls you, ignorant, ignorant of halacha and tells you to stop ranting. That is not very hospitable. So who wants to keep visiting … except the people who are willful followers of him, even if they do so blindly. It is the other visitors who get attacked, even if we have not attacked him. What sort of blog is that? It is void of intellectual integrity.

            • In fact, some commentators drew his attention to the fact that his haughty and depreciative response to many comments (“You know nothing”, “You don’t know to read”, etc, etc) was not conducive to a serene discussion, and those comments would just get censored. But it did not alter his style.

              I was particularly shocked at his position in favor of extortion by withholding a get and his support to disgruntled husbands who think that their wives should be sexually available to them whenever they want, even if the wife happens not to want.

              this is complete contradiction to his work about domestic abuse.

  2. There is a big difference between your blog and his. In a nutshell , you are sticking to known facts, while he is busy making assumptions and allowing obvious false facts and hyperbole to make his case. The way you analyze the facts are simple and straightforward . He seems to enjoy bashing gedolim, while you ask questions on them. A very big difference. I’m sticking with you.

  3. No da’as and no Torah is a muck raker of the lowest order. Why do you feel good about his aprobation?

    The Driving of his life seems to be protecting any and every husband who tries to use a get as a bargaining chip or a torture device.

    It is no wonder he and his equally nutty brother love the sex offender protector Chaim Malinowitz. Any excuse to degrade any woman in any way at any time. The more I read on from this mushchas the clearer it becomes that he has a woman problem.

    I’d love to know what went on in the Eidenson home when these two menuvalim should have been growing up.

    • It is always good when you are credited with honesty, accuracy and sincerity by those attacking your positions.

      My point of contact with Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn (RDE) has been sexual abuse. We sometimes collaborate productively to accomplish more in that arena than either of us can alone. I absolutely have never attempted to work with him on issues related to divorce because we have virtually no common ground. He and his Monsey-based brother, R. David Eidensohn concede some husbands are jerks or worse in withholding gittin from their wives, but they feel there is no remedy in halacha or law, nor can there be. At times this also leads them into wife-bashing.

      I would not call them menuvalim. In current frumspeak that implies that they theselves are sexual miscreants. I have absolutely no reason to believe that. If I did, I would not work with RDE. But I could see you choosing to call the brothers misogynists and they are obviously very anti-feminist when it come to divorce. I might even say they are feminism-phobic. I guess they fear that if women get more empowered about Jewish divorce it will fuel feminism in other areas of orthodoxy. In that they are part of a much wider trend in the right wing of orthodoxy which fears women’s prayer groups, women wearing tefilin, and the adoption of the halachic pre-nup.

      • YL, I think we may have had this exchange a long time ago. I know nothing re “frumspeak” not being frum. But in Modern Hebrew, and also a very very widely used word in blogs by a very well known Torah satirist, the use of minuval has no connection to sexual activities whatsover. I do not know if it is OK, to mention the well known satirist’s blog name here, so I shall not. He uses the word very profusely, and I read all of his drashot, and never once have I seen him use “minuval” or “menuval” to indicate sexual misbehavior. He is frum (maybe just not “in the know” re other frum edot slang?). So, I politely beg to differ with you re the terminology being inaccurate. It is accurate. My copy of Dan ben Amotz’s Hebrew slang dictionary is not immediately available to me, at my current location.. And being that it was written many many years ago, not sure how he would have defined it.

        • addendum to my previous comment, as yet unmoderated. Minuval, in non-frumspeak, is, more or less, simply an SOB raised to the power of infinity.

          • Actually not to the power of infinity (apart from the logical problems with that proposition). But certainly sleezy to a serious degree, not just a lapse in one transaction. It implies a continuing character flaw.

        • Certainly that was true at some point and in some usages. In contemporary Yiddish and frumspeak, a menuval is not merely a lowlife, but implies some sexual misconduct (it could be consensual philandering). I am not governing the usage choices of others, just inserting a caution. The English language and Yiddish is full of marvelous ways to insult people. Giving the sensitivity of the issue, I just wanted to be clear, that whatever my criticisms of RDE, I would never say he is a menuval.

          • In his post on Friday Aug. 8, DT compares the filing of a RICO claim in secular court to be comparable or tantamount to claiming that the Jews have a conspiracy to kidnap and kill Goyim in order to obtain blood to bake Matzah.
            The next “logical” tactical step is to call the CBD and YL Nazis. That is usually the denouement of dirty play, of the “big lie”.

      • I used the term menuval to describe these two mushchasim not in the currently popular sense of sexually depravity. They are simply depraved, not, as far as I know, sexually depraved.

        On the other hand, their defense of dirt balls no doubt protects some conventional menuvalim.

      • Herein lies the problem. Many big poskim allow to protest against a get refuser, they consider themselves the final say in the matter and are willing to twist Halacha and to passel gittin to feed their own selfish honor. His brother feels all gittin from Toronto are pasul because they are forced,which is total BS. When the famous dodelson versus Weiss fight went public, his brother said he would pasul the get. They have no one backing them, yet they mislead you saying they represent daas Torah . His seforim are not accepted in yeshivas . He does his best best to be מרבה מחלוקת.
        It seems with his latest post he is attacking you. I don’t believe he is playing with a full deck. As they say,he’s not just missing a screw,,he’s missing the whole tool box.

        • They are a couple of muck raking knuckle dragging Neanderthal with major issues with the female half of the human race.

          I don’t know if either of them is married to an actual woman but I know that their father would have done the world by sticking to the inflatable variety.

      • Though I strongly take issue with how Rav Eidesohn is presenting and moderating criticsm of the IBD, I do not believe he is a mysoginist. I suspect he is like many, blind to objectivity because of close affiliation.

        I do agree with Rav Eidesohn that a get should be given with the psak of a mutually accepted beit din , as per Rav Moshe Feinstein. i also believe some women are so intent on destroying father-child relationships (such as in the high profile recent divorce of Gitel DoddlesonIn) that in those kinds of.
        cases, it is esential for the well-beong of the child to withold the get until legal protection is in place to sssure approximately equal time for both larents to raise their child.

        • In general, get-withholding achieves the contrary. They cite the Meir-Lonna Kin case on the self-appointed “Daas torah” blog, where the father is not invited to his son’s Bar Mitzwa… So what did the father achieve by withholding the get?

  4. Yes, I must painfully agree with RF. DT’s approach on this entire manner is completely disingenuous and obtuse, and that’s being generous. לא זו דרך התורה

  5. torah umesorah is the most inept, self-serving body perhaps in the history of american orthodox jewry (ok, maybe agudah is more self-serving, but at least they are not inept). to bring them into this fight is like standing behind your own shadow…cause thereain’t nothing there, folks

    • Yeah, but TU provides the perfect conspiracy theory for the Meisels Weasels. They can speculate about Gottesman and the CBD getting together to benefit some friend of theirs allegedly, who operates a seminary, or something. It all makes sense!!

      The major problem with their fantasy is that don’t know or willfully ignore that the CBD is three of the most un-corruptible dayanim on the planet. If you compare the amount of speculation required on their part, any sane human would understand that the CBD position makes logical sense, whereas the Meisels Weasels have based their claims on a conspiracy theory that takes an awful lot of imagination.

      • Six thumbs up for the hilarious genius of the highly appropriate moniker “Meisels Weaels”!

  6. At least the posters saying how “amazing” EM is have completely disappeared. Poor brainwashed girls had to reorient themselves to reality.
    Do we see anyone defending him anymore?
    That- rabosai is a start.
    Btw, Haaretz just started covering the story. Finally.

    • Sara, that’s great that a mainstream paper has finally started reporting. We will never be able to catch and punish all of the sex abusers out there but the bais yaakov schools can do a whole lot more to keep girls safe by educating them about the warning signs and “grooming” techniques used by sex abusers and especially by teaching the girls that anyone can be an abuser even a prestigious charismatic rabbi or a trusted male relative or friend.

      • Tova, I agree that education is crucial. General sex ed would be even better. There are so many young women and men who are ill prepared for marriage and for life regarding sex. All they learn in seminary is not to talk to boys.

        However, just as important is for the seminary and yeshiva teachers to re-learn Torah values themselves. Keeping quiet in order to protect a Mosad, or because it is lashon harah or chllul Hashem, is so wrong, and goes against everything the Torah requires of us. They teach so much about mesiras nefesh and self sacrifice, but when it comes to whisle blowing no matter how many people will be saved from being raped, nobdy seems to everyone seems to feel that somebody else should do it.

        Why do they think this hypocrisy is lost on all of the girls and boys?

  7. The DaatTorah blog is ridiculous. So many irrational emotions which serve as the basis of his “arguments”. He uses the blog simply to publicize his feelings on topics. He is not Torahdik in the least bit. His comments to ppl on the blog are rude and outrageous.

    The profile picture of his with the beard does no justice to the “moral and righteous” image he tries to portray to ppl.

    I think I’ll be spending more time here on FF than on “Rabbi” Eidensohn’s blog. Please no one give me a speech abt “how much good” he has done. Meisles also did a lot of good in the world. Means nothing. Eidensohn’s posts on topics (ex-including Meisles) is quite embarrassing/ sexist/ extreme/ downright rude and he pretends to me a super frum Jew yet at the same time spreads an enormous amount if l”h on his site.

    I have heard by quite a few that he refuses to approve many posts which do not agree with his thinking.

    Sorry, just need to put it out there. Everyone can think for themselves of course.

  8. It is up to the parents. If they continue to follow like sheep the plan of Daas Torah and spend tens of thousands of dollars for their kids to go to “acceptable” yeshiva and BY’s in order to get “good” shiduchim our generation is doomed. We certainly cannot expect change to come from the top, which is totally corrupt and moraly bankrupt. A non Jewish law enforcement officer was said to have complained that Jewish parents are worse than Catholics. They love their rabbis more than their children.

    What is new and a breath of fresh air in this case, is that parents have taken a stance against the hypocrisy and evil. They are banding together and suing. How can we build on this momentum? Keep supporting bloggers and the press. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

    And we need to encourage other victims of abuse to come forward proudly and courageously with our full support. Let us protest and confront all institutions that have made the blood of innocent Jewish children cheap and have institutionilized sexual abuse, rape and defiling of our Yiddishe kinder. There are websites like Adkan and Rabbi Horowitz that have supported victims in the past by gathering hundreds of letters/emails thanking the victims who came forward and showing solidarity. The victims do not put themselves through hell on top of their original hell for their own agendas. They find it healing and redemptive to protect others from coming to the same harm. They are heroes and should be honored as such.

    Parents should not wait until it is too late. Even if your daughter was fortunate enough to have gone to another seminary or to have escaped Meisels’ clutches, we all must remember that other girls deserve our care as well. We all need to demand transparency and accountability from the schools. Just as the schools these days make parents sign contracts about tuition and religious commitment, parents need to force schools to sign contracts to stop protectingand covering up for abusers, to educate the students, and to put into place real protocols that prevent abuse and stop abusers in their tracks.. I hope we can start by one school at a time becoming an “abuse and cover up-free zone.”

    Organizations like “Magenu,” “Aleynu” and “Shomrei Yaldeynu”, (and “Molestaynu?”) that teach little children how to say no to molesters are not nearly enough. They put the onus for sarety on little children. When the children do speak up and tell about molesters, adults consistently betray them by staying silent (not to make a shanda) and do nothing to publicize the danger or to involve law enforcement.

    For once rabbis have paused for a moment from their ridiculous love of inane bans (Lipa Shmeltzer concerts, the internet, Vosizneias, reading intelligent books like The Making of a Gadol and Rabbi Slifkin’s books, etc.), and actually banned a “Torah” organization. A fraudulent establishment like so many others that was turned into a bais zonos, (where Jewish girls were used as sexual objects) not by Nazis, Romans, Arabs or Cossaks, but by Rabbis, Rebbetzin, Mechanchim and Mechanchos.

    I do not know why in this case Rabbis chose to finaly do the right thing. It would not be overly cynical to suspect that some of the victims had powerful parents or friends who had clout with the Rabbinate. Whatever the case may be, I am not complaining. Mitoch Sheloh Lishma, Ba Lishma. Now that the Rabbis in Chicago have begun to do the right thing, we are moving in the right direction. What would have been unimagineable just a few short years ago, has happened once, and proven that it can happen again.

    What a Kiddush Hashem that Rabbis intervened publicly BEFORE a lawsuit, before exposure in the media or even the story being broken by Yerachmiel!

    We need to thank bloggers, advocates and most of all survivors of abuse for the hard thankless work they have done to bring us to this point. Let us pray that their efforts continue to yield success in protecting Jewish children and uprooting the evil from our midst.

  9. DT’s main case in favor of the IBD is there being appointed by the CBD however there is no evidence supporting this appointment
    from
    the original CBD letter we see them saying the IBD is already dealing
    with the case seems they were told to back off by IBD whom someone else
    had already brought in to case if they were indeed appointed by CBD lets
    see some evidence
    From all appearances thus far if the CBD did not involve them they must have been brought in by the Meisels supporters how much creditability does that give them? and before you say but they are chashuva rabonim so was meisels

    • the words used by the only document in which the CBD mentions the IBD are “because these institutions and mr. meisels are located in Israel … IBD has ASSUMED responsibility for this matter”

      DT”s alleging that RAF RZC & RG went to Israel to arrange for the IBD to take care of the matter has no proof and even if true in no way makes the IBD the sole authority on the matter. what more likely happened is that when the IBD “assumed” authority the CBD said OK we will at least send some over site when they realized the IBD was just going to proclaim the sems kosher and allow all to carry on they felt the need to step in and write there letter

      • I literally don’t understand what that guy (DT) is talking about. He made a whole cholent about issues that are irrelevant to the CBD. There was only one issue that the CBD concerned itself with FROM DAY ONE, and that was the safety of the girls. That’s it.

        Now, he’s bringing in all kinds of things that have nothing to do with it, in an attempt to smear the CBD which will accomplish nothing. The only things that matter now are the same things that have always mattered. Specifically, how are girls supposed to be safe when the staff there knew about, ignored, or were ignorant about abuse going on there?

        Without all the conspiracy theories or the letters flying back and forth, or even the interview of the new owner (who has absolutely NOOO negiahs, himself, right??), the issue of the girls’ safety with the old staff has not been addressed.

        This could have been handled a while ago, but instead they focus on everything else like which BD is really in charge and which letter said what. So much obfuscation when the main issue just sits there unaddressed.

        And because of this, there is now a secondary issue, that of the refunds. Assuming that the sale of the sems was a valid sale, then why didn’t the new owner address these things? He could have simply done so without all of the fighting and the letters. That’s what stinks, and that’s why no sane parents will send there unless major changes are made.

        • Eidensohn has a major problem recognizing the truth. It’s been that way in most of his posts and on many subjects. He is constantly belittling other rabonim that disagree with him. Most rabonim ignore him and his brother completely. Many do not return his phone calls and consider him a complete nut case. He will defend any shmendrik that won’t give a get to his wife, even if the rabonim paskened that he must. He lives off his own made up theories and actually believes it. Now he is out to put down Mr Lopin since he did the biggest sin of disagreeing with him. So far, Mr Lopin did the right thing by ignoring him.
          He is now attacking the CBD with lashon haroh,rechilus etc. the man is a complete Chilul Hashem, and the best way to deal with him, is to ignore him.

  10. I think that this “daas torah” guy is getting senile. He clearly lacks reasoning capacity, as he proved in his latest post. But because he is so stubborn, he won’t hear reason and cannot even understand why his reasoning is wrong. That he wants to deny refunds to parents who paid deposits seems scandalous to me.

      • Excuse me, YL, but a couple of people wrote how he had extreme turnabout in his approach, that is unusual. Have you seen a brain scan showing the absence of amygdaloid plaques? LOL, I think….

      • Well, actually it was not really meant as an insult. What I meant was that I believe he has/had high intellectual capacities, but that they are declining without his fault or his noticing.

        What drew my attention was the “meat”-mashal which is completely inappropriate, and several commentators told him, but he fails to understand. Something similar happened a few weeks ago when he cited a t’shuva by R. Moshe Feinstein and could not understand that it was not applicable to his case…
        http://daattorah.blogspot.ch/2014/07/rivky-stein-yoel-weiss-mill-basin-beis.html

        • I have often see people of sound mind use poor judgment when they become defensive or obsessed or unwilling to lose an argument. I agree the meat example was not pertinent to my argument about a mekach taus.

See Commenting policy ( http://wp.me/pFbfD-Kk )

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s