The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind - to a halt.
What a shocking state of affairs.
A family with 6 children from Bnei Braq (lets call them the Golds) ran into financial difficulties, and decided to move out of the home they owned and rent it out, whilst they moved into far cheaper rental accommodation near Modi'in Illit. This was not an easy decision for the Golds to make, nor an easy step to take, but circumstances were such, that they were forced into making the move.
Their tenants, (lets call them the Smiths), a family with eight children, also ran into in financial difficulties and fell 3 months behind in their rent. As the Smiths weren't paying any rent to the Golds, the Golds were unable to pay any rent to their landlord. Being fine upstanding people, they contacted their landlord and explained their situation to him, and negotiated to relinquish their lease and to vacate the flat immediately.
They got back to Bnei Braq, and went to their flat to tell the Smiths that as they hadn't paid any rent for 3 months, they - the Golds - had been unable to pay their rent and ישג returned the flat to the landlord, and would the Smiths do the same, i.e., move out.
The Smiths viewed the events in a different light, not having paid any rent does not alter the fact that they are tenants. You can't just march into your tenant's flat and ask them to leave. That is harassment! In response to which, the Smiths called the police.
(As an aside, I was under the impression that Bnei Braq "charedim" considered going to the police as Mesirah.)
When the police arrived, they informed the Golds that the Smiths were right, and you cannot get them out of the flat without obtaining a court order.
I don't know about Israel, but in the UK it takes a good 6 months, at least, and is not a free service.
But - Now here's the good bit - the Israeli courts are in RECESS, the entire country's judiciary has shut down, the courts are in recess and there is nothing to be done until after Yom Tov!
The Golds have been forced to put up a makeshift tent in the grounds of their building, where they have to live, eat and sleep, all 8 of them, in the heat of Bnei Braq, with no running water, no kitchen, no hygiene facilities. Whilst his scrounging tenants are sleeping in his beds, sitting comfortably on his couch, keeping their food fresh in his fridge, cooking in his oven and keeping cool using his air conditioning.
I'm sure that the tenant, who must be a big Yorei Shamayim, is only doing this, Leshem Shamayim, I mean, what kind of a Yomtov would he be giving his wife and children if he moved out now???
וצדקינו במשפט
I am the anonymous commentator who replies to your post about Grynhaus.
ReplyDeleteThey are not allowing any further comments from me and have also edited my previous ones.
Bear this mine that I cant answer you there.
Welcome, ברוכים הבאים.
DeleteSince youre not moderated will reply here.
ReplyDeleteSo this is not moderated.
To my knowledge Grynhaus is older than padwa feldman freedman dunner. He has also been there longer than all of them. I dont know about Roberts.
I also wrote that you try to spell dayan in all sorts of ways and can never get it right.
Halpern unlike Grynhaus has it seems admitted to what is said about him at least i dont think he has ever denied it but says it was necessary and is allowed.
Grynhaus may have a negia but imagine if he was found guilty he Grynhaus would be a laughing stock if he wasnt one already.
His sons ex wife goes parading round Broughton Park with a dark skinned infant in tow.
His son in Edgeware wears beketshe long peyot blue tsitsits but no hat and a kappel so small that it cant be noticed on his head. His head is more uncovered than covered.
I don't believe in censorship; and as long as whatever you post to this blog is legal, it will not be moderated or edited. Of course if you libel or defame anyone, which is of course illegal both in civil and halachic law, you would be held responsible for what you write.
DeleteReturning to your comments. Although age is a pretty good guide it is not the ultimate definition of seniority; which is usually indicated by position or length of service. In any event - including age - I doubt he is more senior to DADD, he is certainly not more senior/older than RPR & REH. I don't know how okd REP is, but his position alone gives him seniority over everyone.
My varied spellings of Dayan was to encompass all varieties of reading the transliteration so that everyone can understand.
I have not been present, so I have no first hand knowledge, but it is alleged that if halpern has admitted anything it's to having stroked a clothed arm with the additional barrier of a towel. He most certainly denies any other wrongdoing whatsoever. Halpern senior has stated that his son has done no wrong, is a righteous Tzadik and is the victim of an evil plot. On the other hand, Grynhaus senior has said his son has not committed the acts he is accuwed of. He certainly has not elevated him to the levels of tzidkus that Halpern has been elevated to.
If either of these 2 boys were guilty they would be turned into quite a laughing stock.
The man cannot be held responsible for the actions and choice of sleeping partners his son's ex wife, nor the colour of the child's skin. Nor can a nan be held responsible for the size, shape, colour, etc., of his son's head covering. And none of this has any bearing to the fact that a father does not necessarily know what his son has or hasn't done. Neither does it affect or have any connection to his kashrus rulings.
I do know how old REP is and his older brother, and Grynhaus is older and has been there longer than them and all the others. I did write active which perhaps you didnt read and that means to exclude REH.
DeleteThis was all explained in detail on the other site but the owner there didnt think to accept it for some unexplained reason.
A man is responsible for his son. I wont go into detail but I am told that when they were younger they were hefker. That is also why he lost his whole minyan who went to Dunner instead. The gemoro in succah at the end which of course you are unaware of says a child follows his parents. If his son dresses up like that it shows that his parents made a mockery of it and now his son follows suit publicly.
Since you are not well versed in Jewish subjects you of course have no Jewish values. Yours are taken from the non Jewish or reform Jewish blogs you frequent. I must add they are all reform and non represent Jewish values although they call themselves Jewish like failed moshiach mi yodaia hirhurim emmes which has more sheker than any of them.
Halpern what ever he may have done I doubt if it can be found to be against secular law. Being an unlicensed therapist is not such a terrible crime which is really all he can accused of.
For the sake of bringing this debate to a tachlisdik point, and as I don't have the dates of birth nor the dates of appointment to dayonus of the beis din, let's assume that DDG is the most senior active. The balance of your original statement is still invalid. Unless DDG is well versed in חכמת הפרצוף or is a בעל רוח הקודש, has had גילוי אליהו or any other Divinic visitation, no father can determine whether his son, in his late forties, and lives in another city 200 miles away, did or did not commit a crime.
DeleteFurthermore, the testimony of a father in this scenario, even in the secular judicial system, would only count as a character witness. Not accepting his OPINION regarding his son has no bearing on his dayonus or rulings on kashrus matters.
The new argument you base on the Gemorroh at the end of Succos, that a father is responsible for his son, is inherently flawed and I would suggest that you should go to someone who can teach you properly how to learn. But it certainly contradicts your original statement, claiming that as the senior active dayan, who knows what his son didn't do, we must accept his opinion. Now you claim that he had no idea how to bring up his own children or community, and has lost his community to Dunner.
The tickle blog now mentions the GG eiruv.
ReplyDeleteThere is no reason why Stamford Hill cannot have one on the same terms meaning excluding the main road like Stamford Hill and Clapton Common.
Why is no one clamoring for this to be done.
According to one of the comments; they're scared that they will get an ok to proceed, soend money putting it up and then REP will retract his permission.
DeleteI think it's far simpler. This is not a kehilla project. A few askonim are carrying this project on their own backs. They involved the Rabbonim who fall within the boundaries out of political expediency, the real Rabbonim who head the vaad hahalocho on this eruv are ME &MH.
In the past there have been numerous street or streets wide eruvin. Grosvenor Gardens had one, until the rov who gave the initial haskomoh moved the goalposts. The same rov also did the Woodlands eruv, which then had to be repositioned because it was extremely questionable. He did the Parkway eruv. Highfield Gardens had one. Similar to the Brookside scheme there is one off Green Lane encompassing the first turning and goes all the way round to the second turning and also includes all the Danescrofts. Green Walk has one - which had to exclude one house who refused to participate, Heriot Road had, which stopped being maintained a few years after the nwl eruv was erected, as the only people who didn't rely on the town eruv didn't require a street one either. Etc.
Likewise Stamford Hill has a series of individual eruvin. Bo clamour in Golders Green and no clamour up on the hill.
Manchester has now a huge eiruv up and coming. It has detractors mainly so called talmidai chachomim who have no idea of hilchos eiruvin. They invited the two world experts (who have written and printed huge seforim on the subject) to make a feasibility study. How any rov who has never written anything can say he knows better beats me. But that is the world today.
DeleteThe same can be done in SH. Invite these two rabbonim and have them make a such a study. If the kedassia has money to waste to invite rabbonim to sort out the Halpern saga surely they also have for this much more important thing.
It is up to the delegates to press for it. If Dovid Frand has enough pressure he will give in. The amount of chillul shabbos in SH is increasing daily or should I say weekly. People are going already in wheelchairs who can walk without them. Instead of at least going to the nearest shul sometimes just opposite them they are going further afield and crossing the main roads of Stamford Hill and Clapton Common.
As you already realise from the Tickle blog the laws of Eiruvin are open to a huge amount of 'interpretation'. And when they do it themselves everything is kosher and when others do it, its traifoh or posul even exactly the same thing. So whatever will be done will always have someone saying its posul unless he is 'also' invited to belong to those doing it.
The only way is like I wrote earlier to have the world experts doing it.
Those world experts came to Golders Green and where very satisfied with the hidurim of the eruv. Nevertheless, RPR opposed it and got REH to oppose it too. Thenthe late Rav Padwa was asked to rule. He didn't say it was treif. He merely suggested (most likely at the insistence of REH allegedly) that as we've survived all these years without one, we should not change the status quo.
DeleteThere is no way that kedassia could allow a large scale eruv in North London. And a small local eruv doesn't need kedassia.
I think youre wrong for Stamford Hill. An eiruv the size of the one now being made in GG will never be allowed by kedassia in SH however small you call it.
DeleteStamford Hill is not really 100% 'dominated' by the union.
ReplyDeleteSatmar 26 one of the largest shuls and their many branches has its own rov and dayanim who do not take orders from them.
The Moshiachistim are not part of the union.
Belz with their own meat hecsher are also not really part.
R Y Gokovitski's shul and the one 'under' it are also not part.
There may be others I have not mentioned.
Everyone knows that Dayan Dunner is really also for an eiruv.
What it really needs is for someone to somehow ask the residents of Stamford Hill if they really want one. To get people to vote on it. If people were aware that it can be done according to halacha like it has now been done in Manchester and GG, and London is really no different to Yerusholaim which also has 600000 people, Dovid Frand would soon change his tune.
They have to service the tsibbur not just with kashrut and mikvaot. An eiruv is no less important.
According to the tickle blog its not D Frand running the union.
DeleteWho would you say is really running it.
Meir Says
ReplyDeleteSo to SH educated. If its not D Frand running the union who would you say is really running it.
I am sure everyone would like to know. That is if you or anyone does know. Most likely a rich man using it somehow to kosher his money. That is a 'service' they surely provide. I have also had such 'dealings' with them but in the end they couldnt get me to pay.
How D Dunner's signature is on something he doesnt believe in is not really a good question. The opposite would be a better one.
The meshichistin want to belong to the union but unlike all the other split factions where both belong the other 'branch' have said they will quit the union if they are accepted. D Frand is scared of this happening and has therefore refused them although he is supposed to be using their vouchers.
http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/files/mendel-epstein-et-al-superseding-criminal-complaint-10-10-2013.pdf
ReplyDeleteWhy cant we do the same here with yemenite who already has another wife.
http://lukeford.net/Images/photos/belsky.pdf
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/a-rabbis-tale-of-abuduction-torture.html
http://privateinvesigations.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/monsey-supporters-rally-behind-get.html
This woman is a daughter of the brother of our rebitzen Schneebalg.