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

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.

I reminded [Reb Tickle] that a special B[eis] D[in] was set up years ago & held preliminary hearings. When the police opened a file the case was suspended. When the police closed the matter discussions were held to reopen the Din Torah, & it was planned that certain ladies would present evidence – fine. The other side insisted that they should be able to cross-examine them; the ladies all refused to agree. The BD ruled that such a situation would be unfair; any defendant has the right for witnesses to be cross-examined. Therefore the case had to be left hanging.

Sorry for the delay in reply. I note what you say but I cannot agree.

I’m at a distinct disadvantage as I don’t have access to a fraction of the information that you have but subject to that caveat I’ll say this:

  1. The entire BD process at the time was farcical. The story broke immediately after Simchas Torah and the BD announcement came a few days before Chanukah, so a delay of about 2 months. During that time the community was dragged through the mud with no one able to assert authority. I don’t intend repeating the details and the records are there for all to see. At no point did anyone say anything about the victims or even breaches of kedushe and tznius which we claim first and foremost to stand for. There were reliable reports that Reb Sholem F. had raised the issues in the Elul prior to the story breaking or thereabout and it was hushed up. Someone told me that they had heard from a victim in 2011 while the story broke in October 2012.
  2. The BD announcement was extracted from an extremely reluctant establishment who could no longer resist the clamour for some kind of action. We all remember the horse trading over its composition, the ambush of Rav Padwa in GG, the letter and retraction and retraction of retraction of CH’s shul remaining a UOHC member, and the months’ long farce when the system broke down. Once again the plight of his victims and the issue of him continuing to see women was forgotten in the circus. CH had an input in the BD but I don’t recall the victims being consulted or having any voice. There weren’t reports of the Rabbinate or their representative meeting with victims. The rabbonim may have had sufficient information as it is but it would have been assuring to the victims and the community that the allegations were taken seriously.
  3. There was a fog surrounding the entire BD and other than its existence no further details were released. The remit and parameters of the BD were never made clear. It would have been akin to a professional misconduct hearing because as far as I know no one was demanding money from him and of course the BD would have no powers to punish him except for communal sanctions. But what were they looking for? Criminal activity, acts forbidden al pi haloche or chasidus or simply conduct unbefitting a rov. Most importantly, would the findings have been made public? Some of these may be technical points, but the BD was set up to assure the public and how could the public be assured if the entire process was shrouded in secrecy with the leadership that had betrayed them in control? And if he was found guilty, what would happen next? If his conduct was criminal would he be reported to the police? If his conduct was halachically forbidden would he face communal sanctions? Would the rabbonim apologise to the victims and the community for the chilul hashem? I think we can reliably guess the answers.
  4. When the BD finally sat, it was widely reported at the time of women being intimidated with Moshe H. and other CH supporters including his son being present at the venue. The women he saw/sees are vulnerable at the best of times and especially after they’d been through his “treatment”. Many were also in abusive marriages and they could have no faith in the BD. I do not recall any assurances given to witnesses on their safety and wellbeing. One victim said that she drove past and kept going after seeing who was milling about outside. She said it would have been like walking into a ‘lion’s den’.
  5. The points above relating to the BD and its remit apply equally to the current “investigation”. There are reports of the appointment of a KC which is assuring but still we are in the dark. The KC (assuming this to be true) will presumably be instructed by UOHC who will pay the fees, set the parameters and decide on the consequences. So what are they? It may be early days but no one’s holding their breath. Even now with more allegations, has anyone from UOHC been in touch with the girl or her parents or with other victims? Has someone independent with a clean, solid reputation and with experience in this field been appointed as a representative for the victims so they can be contacted in confidence and he or she can then relay the allegations and concerns to the Rabbinate and lay leadership?
  6. Putting all this aside, the BD issue, as important as it is, was just one of my points. That vulnerable women were sent to CH after all that was known about him, or even rumoured about him, beggars belief. The BD constantly makes pronouncements on far lesser issues and acts much faster but here was something that goes to the root of who we are but we remained silent. If there is one thing that is irrefutable it is that rumours have swirled round him for years yet no one stopped women from seeing him. And all the more so vulnerable women who require counselling. I had heard over the last ten years that he was still seeing women which I found difficult to believe but now I see that I knew not half of it. When a tailor on Dunsmure Road was rumoured to be striking up inappropriate “friendships” with local women, UOHC issued a notice about him. So where was the notice for CH? Speakers and events are banned at almost no notice for far lesser crimes. So what discrete representations were made to rabbonim and communal figures who deal with sholom bayis and similar issues to stop people being sent to him? He is said to have admitted to hand wrestling women with some phoney heter. In any other context such practices would be decried in the strongest terms and rightly so. Yet here nothing was done and he was just allowed to continue.
  7. Separately, was CH warned that if he didn’t stop seeing women he would be shamed? Did he have any conditions imposed on him and if so who was to supervise him to ensure he complied? Whether he was banned from seeing women or he was subjected to strict conditions which he then disregarded, it is clear that he breached his “bail conditions” so to speak but nothing happened as a consequence and no action was taken. I’m referring here both to investigations and beth dins and also that no simple precautionary measures to protect women were taken.
  8. This is of course not an isolated case and not long ago there was the cover up with Roth and Paltiel S’s notorious letter in defence of a notorious abuser plus a string of other cases. It’s hardly a defence to say that UOHC isn’t unique in the Charedi world and probably not the worst either. There is a fundamental inability in our leadership to face up to one of the most serious problems of our times and which is one of the main reasons of our youth falling away in increasing numbers. This is besides the huge chilul hashem of the well-founded accusation that we tolerate abuse in our midst. It’s no good pointing to the Harvey Weinstein case because he was prosecuted in the end and he’s locked up. Abrahams was sacked in no time, the Chief Rabbi issued a letter and that was the end of it. But here it rumbled on for a decade and it’s still not over. There has been a complete culture change in the wider world but when ofsted raises safeguarding in our schools we protest. And when scandals like this break we do nothing and just hope it will go away. Even for reasons of self-preservation it would have been prudent to deal with it decisively and move on, but which hasn’t happened. 
  9. This is a true situation of במקום שאין איש. We have an aging rabbinate and the two new recruits hardly represent a large swathe of Stamford Hill. The extremists may make a lot of noise but there’s a huge crowd completely detached and whom UOHC has nothing to offer. If you don’t believe me go and see how GG restaurants are full of our locals, see how readily people will institute their own eiruvin and the terror tactics needed to stop them, listen to the contempt that our communal institutions are held in. These repeated incidents of abuse and the way we handle them blacken our name and do immense damage to our communal image externally, casting a shadow over our many positives, plus it erodes trust and confidence in our rabbonim and leadership internally. These points may not concern you or others at the top, but people are watching and drawing their own conclusions. Whether by ignoring and ridiculing rabbonim and communal bodies or leaving Yiddishkeit altogether.
  10. Doing nothing was never an option though it might have worked in the past. But not anymore. Ban smartphones as much as you like but the statuses tell a different story and I can assure you that people don’t pull out flip phones when they’re chatting to me. I don’t have all the answers but few things are as black and white as the impunity we as a community allow for abusers. And I can only repeat במקום שיש חילול השם אין חולקין כבוד לרב.

Kol tuv

[Reb Tickle]

Comments

  1. אתה לא מפחד לדבר סרה נגד צדיק יסוד עולם? וכי אין אתה יודע שכל מי שיצא נגדו אז קיבל ענשו? וכי אין אתה יודע שמרן הגאב"ד בעל מנחת אפרים שליט"א לרפו"ש הוא על ערש דווי בגלל שאז הוא האמין להבאבע מעשיות נגד האי גברא קדישא??? כ"ק האדמו"ר מוויזניץ ג"כ חלה מפני שלא יצא מספיק חזק נגד רבני ג"ג. עקיצתן עקיצת עקרב ונגיעתן נגיעת נואף.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a stupid comment. Putting it in hebrew makes it no wiser. There were some well-known & outspoken supporters of CH going back to 2013 who have suffered severe illness since then or are no longer with us. No-one is crowing over that or trying to look behind Hashem Yitbarah’s hanhagot.

      Delete
    2. I take huge umbrage at those who point to the troubles that have befallen some of those who took a stand 10 years ago.
      קללת צדיק אפילו על תנאי הוא בא.
      IF these are in fact a result of the "Holy Father's" curses. Then the Holy Father and certainly CH have blood on their hands.
      The fact that people are afraid to start with the H family due to fear of spells that may be cast on them is not a sign of their chashivus, it's evidence of their malice.
      To CH I say, Yosef Hatzadik saw his father's face before him, this stopped him from committing an immoral act.
      Contrast that with Chaim Horosho, who sees his father's face and says, I can do as I please 'Cos nobody will start with my father...
      שם רשעים ירקב

      Delete
    3. I think the last words make it abundantly clear that it was written as a joke (and not a bad one too!)

      Delete
    4. Regardless of whether or not the author is speaking tongue in cheek, there are many CH supporters who do keep a body count and use it as proof that their support for him is justified.

      Delete
  2. Nah. The fact that they sufferred yesurim shows the truth of their claims and their tzidkus in standing up and acting. As in, Tzadik v'ra lo. The biggest tzaddikkim suffer the biggest yissurim.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Consider the consensual affair with a married, wealthy, powerful woman, married to his schoolboy friend, a woman of approximately his own age. An utter betrayal: Conduct unbecoming to any friend, husband, father, Jew, Rav, Dayan. A grievous fault,
    and grievously has he answered it, resigning in disgrace with some dignity - before he could and would have been booted. What a foolish, broken man.

    But the non consensual serial predation of dozens of vulnerable women and girls? The shallow charm, the carefully calculated risks, the careful preparation, the manoeuvres to occupy positions of trust, the obsessive planning, the stalking, the threats spiritual and physical, the recruitment of enablers, the gaslighting and the motivated networking. This is not relatable human behaviour. This is not human weaknesses, but a sterile dearth of humanity.

    A dirty onanistic voice pleasuring itself in the night in the third person: but behind the sordid towel, nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wouldn't the simplest way to finish this saga for 99% of the community is to get an independent 'voice/forensic expert' to verify CH's voice?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quote from Headlines host, Rabbi Ari Wasserman, at 06:00 of the latest Headlines show:

      "There was recently, just a number of days ago, a news report by a reporter, on an Israeli channel. It's actually the largest news channel in Israel, Channel 12. And he ran a segment on a rov in London. There is an allegation against him by a 21 year old woman, who said that she was sent to consult with the rabbi and he got up and locked the door and he touched her inappropriately and the like; it's discussed on that news channel, I'm not going to go into detail. I will say that I spoke with that reporter and I asked what was the methodology they went through and the verification process they went through in order to verify the claims and the facts, allegations, in that news report and he did walk me through some of the validations and verifications they did, including the recordings, numerous recordings they have of this rabbi propositioning this woman and looking at all the time codes of the calls from his home to her and the detail on all the verification processes that they do and indeed a channel of this nature, the largest news channel in Israel, does not take chances.

      They dot the i's, cross the t's before they would put anything on the air. So that is very important. There's certain people who are claiming that the recordings are fabrications; in fact on that very channel the rabbi himself said they're bobbe maises, but having said that I did speak with that reporter and it seems that they did a very good job in the verifications that they did."

      http://podcast.headlinesbook.com/e/12322-%e2%80%93-shiur-397-%e2%80%93abuse-and-abuse-coverups-in-our-communities/

      For anyone with half a brain, the saga is over already. For those who don't, nothing will help. If CH has a problem with Channel 12's report, let him sue them. I'm not holding my breath.

      Delete
  5. Look, we've all done things wrong in our life. Whatever Reb Chaim did or didn't do with this woman (or the others), the fact is that he has been a tremendous source of support to hundreds of people in NW London and far beyond and he has given of himself endlessly for decades. Doesn't he at least deserve some gratitude for that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ****************02 December, 2022 15:01

      That's God's department - or a sentencing judge. A mitzvoh does not permit aveiros. A crook cannot run a country, whatever good he does. An alleged abuser should not run a shul.

      Delete
    2. Shabsi Tzvi YM"S did tremendous chesed, made tens of thousands of Baalei Tshuve, was an unbelievelbe Baal Mofes, was very good looking, he smelled naturally like an esrog, & most of Gedolei Yisroel were on his side.
      R' Yaakov Sasportas OB"M was a lone voice against him, he was practically banned for opposing him, by Gedoilei Achronim, who we still learn their sforim ad hayom.
      He finally started the wife swapping stuff, & saying that it was al pi kabolah, then some parted when he converted, most left.
      Chesed , best Rav etc all possibly true, but...
      Many people are vested in a kehillah or Rabbi.
      Take someone who belongs to a chasidus, they daven in the s Shul, send their kids to the mosdos, eat the hechsher, marry off their kids within, etc. The rich buy buildings donate sifrei Torah, sit upfront at dinners, etc. You get it. Now the Rebbe dies & the son who is lets say for arguments sake is a mechalell Shaboss, takes over. The easiest route is to deny it, or believe his denial, starting off all over after such investment doesn't work. In the business field it is called throwing good money after bad money.
      Now think about those people who have cult like invsted in a rabbi. Are you going t tell them they wasted 20 years in that place, and they will accept it just like that?
      Look at that big Breslover cult in Israel, and a bunch of smaller ones, no matter how much the boss sits in jail, even if he conpired to murder, or sent hit men, he still keeps a massive following. Then you have those sympathisers, who always make the perp into victim, & it goes on, nothing new here. nothing will change, no one will change. Its just how it is.
      Sorry spell check isn't working.
      To be quite honest I never lived in GG, & haven't live in SH for more than 40 years, so I don't really know the whole .., just my ..

      Delete
    3. to Reb Mandel I respond

      Only God can balance up Chaim's zechusim vs his averos

      What the man on the street needs to be concerned with is Uviarto Hora Mikirbecha and Lo Saamod al dam Rayecha

      Females who are abused can be messed up for life. They suffer, if they get married their husbands and kids suffer. As experts in the field say, it's mamesh retzicha

      He could have helped thousands in the past; fact is, if he presents a danger currently or in the future, he must be prevented from doing so.

      Delete
  6. Hasn't Reb Chaim faithfully examined thousands of knickers, late at night, and provided detailed feedback to their owners?

    Has he not spent hours of his time attempting to broker the cover-up for Mendy Levy's paedophilic predilections?

    Surely he deserves some Reb Chaim time with high quality girls, just rewards for his exertions. Who here can truthfully say they haven't groped 31+ vulnerable girls and women without consent?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Here's an update on where things stand. I can't vouch for the accuracy of every detail, but it should get the broader picture right.

    The UOHC Rabbinate members have no real doubt as to the accuracy of the Channel 12 report, but they're not sure what to do about it. Contrary to their announcement, which stated that an investigation would be launched "immediately", they have as yet done no such thing, and are still considering their options.

    The UOHC received considerable pushback from the Stamford Hill street to their rather parev "lemeichash mibo'iy" letter, with many people there struggling to accept the idea that causing embarrassment to a chassidishe rov, who acts the part in public, and his family, can ever be justified. That said, Treitel Brandsdorfer does not have anywhere near as much backing as he did last time, reflecting the fact that REH is no longer alive, RMH is more restrained (partly because his shul's committee have demanded this), and also because CH's mechuten, YB Wosner, is no longer rov of Satmar here, and instead is busy spreading anti-vaxx conspiracies from Bnei Brak.

    Rabbis Greenberg and Freshwater have been pushing for a more activist stance, but it's not clear they're getting very far. Remarkably, the UOHC and its Rabbinate members (including Rabbis Greenberg and Freshwater) have yet to speak to a single person with access and information regarding the latest victim, except CH himself. This is particularly bizarre given that the recordings of CH are far more extensive than those snippets which were played on the Channel 12 report, as the report itself made clear ("we have spared you the majority of them", as the reporter Yossi Mizrachi stated). Rabbi Zimmerman, on the other hand, is in possession of far more detailed information.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Betrayed Former Supporter05 December, 2022 09:04

    just like the Bais din from last time !!! the Rabinat are a waste of space!!!! they do nothing and only care about themselfs!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. so no news is bad news then...as per 10 years ago this seems to be fizzling out so that eventually everything will go back to status quo, well done once again our (non) leaders in NW London for once again being as weak as you always are, when braindead parents start sending bnos yisroel to non licensed sex therapists in a few months time you will be the ones to blame as much as the abusers..

    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