Skip to main content

Of Making Many Books

And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end (Ecclesiastes 12:12) A pdf version of this essay  can be downloaded here [*] Years in brackets refer to an individual’s or book author’s year of birth Thought experiment for the day: Anyone born 1945 would be pushing towards 80 and mostly past their prime. So name any Charedi sefer written by someone born post war that has or is likely to enter the canon, be it haloche, lomdus, al hatorah or mussar. Single one will do for now — IfYouTickleUs (@ifyoutickleus) July 27, 2022 A tweet in the summer which gained some traction asked for a book by an author born from 1945 onwards that has entered the Torah and rabbinic canon or is heading in that direction. I didn't exactly phrase it this way and some quibbled about 'canonisation'. The word does indeed have a precise meaning though in its popular use it has no narrow definition. Canonisation, or ‘entering the canon’ is generally understood to

Justice, Justice shalt thou pursue (and drive it out of town)

Catching up on what I missed while away I came across Geoffrey Alderman's article in the JC on the introduction of elements of religious law into UK law. While the debate is largely driven by Sharia law, rabbis of the realm must be rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of laying their hands on officially sanctioned powers. And we underlings should quake at the thought of them being engaged not only on God's service but also On Her Majesty's Service. Rarely will Her Majesty have had in her employ servants so diligent in carrying out their official duties and never will rabbis have been so meticulous in applying dino demalcuso, or the law of the realm. They will render unto Ceasar with the zeal of rendering unto God, and render unto God with the power and force Ceasar shall put at their disposal.

Rather than argue the pros and cons of granting power to religious courts allow me to provide a flavour of justice as dispensed round here so as to savour and look forward to the day we are fortunate enough in having the powers of the Beth Din sanctioned by Parliament.

Recently a notorious, alleged, paedophile was, allegedly again, caught 'in the act'. The matter was referred to the rabbonim who on the whole acted in the time hallowed tradition of doing nothing. There is one new broom in town and he decreed that the offender be kicked out of his shul. In addition, mark this, as punishment the alleged offender was ordered to pay for his victim's psychological treatment. As the Old Testament might have put it, a session for a session.

In another case a man charged abroad with paedophilia related offences spent the summer in a family camp where children roamed freely unsupervised. As for the Shomirm, I couldn't put it better than Luzer Twersky quoted in this article on the Brooklyn Shomrim: Borough Park is a very safe neighbourhood for adults. It's just not very safe for kids

Well, sex does scare the hell out of chareidim and kids are ok for sentimentality though they never trump the adults so there is some explanation albeit far from being logical. But there are other laws too. A parent of a child rejected by the school that is more famous for rejection than acceptance made a Freedom of Information request relating to the school's finances. He had barely filed his request when he was summoned to the Beth Din. Sitting there was not one rabbi, nor three rabbis who usually constitute a court but the entire rabbinate made up of the Chief, his henchman, enforcers and even specimen imported from Golders Green.

Summoned was not just the offending father but also the mother because as the 'rabbi' is wont to say, women round here are equal but different. And since the mother’s dress usually forms the reason for rejection she must have been central to the proceedings. A Star Chamber you might want to call it as the accuser himself was nowhere to be seen, though that did not prevent the rabbis from threatening to throw all 20 volumes of the Talmud at them. Mind you given the size of many of the rabbis a rump parliament would probably be more accurate. Needless to say the FOI request was never responded to and the information sought never imparted.

The above cases were still not formal courts and one might contend that in a formal hearing with two opposing parties justice does prevail. So last but not least we come to the notorious case of the wife who divorced in the Beth Din after some 30 years of marriage, during which she brought up several children, looked after the household and suffered more than the occasional hiding. For her troubles she was awarded the grand sum of £500. This works out at approximately a fiver per bruise give or take a slap or two which is about the going rate. The husband on the other hand walked away with the house he had ruled with an iron fist and undoubtedly deserved something for his troubles. When the woman woke up to her situation she was warned off by the Beth Din that challenging the agreement could invalidate her divorce which was a blatant lie. She was however allowed to retain the £500. Equal but different indeed.

All one can really say is that if there was no element of palm tree justice there may well have been some greasing of the palm which rabbinical ingenuity can sometimes find to form a kosher substitute.

Comments

  1. You forget to mention if this husband was an employee of kedassia which would really explain it. If they offered more he would demand more wages.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And here's another one: There is a shul in GG that is spending a huge amount of money building (another) mens' mikva - why this is the priority when some mosdos in the area cannot pay their rebbeim is beyond me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Quite simply building a mikva isnt money down the drain. Only the water ends up there. Paying rebbes who are never satisfied with what they get is. And according to the din shouldnt be charging for teaching only for babysitting. That is all they deserve which they get.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous - Perhaps your kids didn't learn much in school, but I would have presumed that we expect a bit more from our rebbeim than that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Theoretical question:

    Would you give others a chance and permission to publicise and report information they have about you, be it undeclared income, past and present, tax/benefit fraud, past and present, building regulation violations etc.?

    Alderman, mean spirited as he is, at least has the decency to sign his name and leave himself open to reverse scrutiny.

    Just an entertaining thought.

    Shana Tovah to all.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

UPDATED REMINDER: PLEASE REFRAIN FROM USING ANONYMOUS!
I've been requested to remind commenters to stick to a handle so that discussions can be easily followed. Thank you!

Popular posts from this blog

Of Making Many Books

And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end (Ecclesiastes 12:12) A pdf version of this essay  can be downloaded here [*] Years in brackets refer to an individual’s or book author’s year of birth Thought experiment for the day: Anyone born 1945 would be pushing towards 80 and mostly past their prime. So name any Charedi sefer written by someone born post war that has or is likely to enter the canon, be it haloche, lomdus, al hatorah or mussar. Single one will do for now — IfYouTickleUs (@ifyoutickleus) July 27, 2022 A tweet in the summer which gained some traction asked for a book by an author born from 1945 onwards that has entered the Torah and rabbinic canon or is heading in that direction. I didn't exactly phrase it this way and some quibbled about 'canonisation'. The word does indeed have a precise meaning though in its popular use it has no narrow definition. Canonisation, or ‘entering the canon’ is generally understood to

“A Victim’s Perspective”

The following is a letter from one of Todros Grynhaus’s victims who testified at the trial when Grynhaus was convicted. The letter is addressed to 3 named so called ‘askonim’ who were involved in Grynhaus’s defence. The letter was written during the first trial when the jury were unable to reach a verdict . Grynhaus was convicted this week after a second trial. This letter is published with the written consent of its author. [Name and address] 8th March 2015 Dear Mr [], Mr [] & Mr [] I am addressing this letter to you, as part of the leading askonim looking to protect, defend and ultimately exonerate the notorious criminal in regards his current court case; I am aware that there are many other askonim involved and I am happy that they all take note of the points I put forward. Of course we are all mindful of that fact, that now that case has started, there is little your team can actually do, aside sitting and fidgeting in the public gallery ea

UOHC Writes to Reb Tickle

For those increasingly concerned that Reb Tickle may gradually be joining the Arsekonim class we have some disappointing news: Reb Tickle is corresponding directly with that august body known as UOHC. The only thing I can say in my defence is that they started it by writing to me first and myself being deferential to authority and submissive to Daas Torah had no option but to reply, about 10 lines for each line of theirs. The missive was in response to Reb Tickle's recent droshe. The sender must I'm afraid remain without a name - no UOHC officer with the right hashkofeh would be seen here even in their finest Purim mask - and the cc list, which reads like an A-class shiduchim list, must also remain classified. But due to UOHC's deeply held conviction on the public's right to know permission for republication was graciously granted and hope is being expressed in certain quarters of awarding Reb Tickle in due course a serving of the recently stewed Keddasia alphabet soup.