Rubashkin's Response to Our Comments

After many readers commented on the letter issued by Moshe Rubashkin in the name of the Va’ad HaKohol, we received a response from the Va’ad addressing issues raised by individual's comments.

Presented in the extended article are the responses to the comments along with letters from Rubashkin in response to; Harav Mangel, L. Nash and C. Sprelin.

Replys to comments:

Can we have some information regarding each candidate: ie. schooling, background, accomplishments, etc., current residence?

Each of the candidates is well known, highly regarded and has extensive experience as a working Rov with the Crown Heights Beis Din. The Rebbe was emphatic that all dayanim must have "shimush" – practical experience, not merely lomdus. The Beis Din would be fortunate to have any or all three these outstanding candidates serving our kehillah.


Can we perhaps have also Rabbi Schwei's name on the ballot to reconfirm that he is indeed elected as our Rav?

Important questions have been raised pertaining to Rav Schwei’s legitimacy as a Rav for several reasons:

1. He ran unopposed in the last election;

2. He had been on the private payroll of a local businessman, and hence his objectivity might be questioned;

3. His election was predicated upon his accepting Rav Segal and Rav Raitport as colleagues – which he subsequently reneged upon;

4. His joining the Beis Din has resulted in a period of unprecedented divisiveness and public discord.

Nevertheless, in the interests of Sholom Bayis, the Vaad has decided not to alter the status quo in the hope that additional Rabbonim will help nurture an atmosphere of tranquility and clear majority opinion.


What's the difference? CH is not part of USA where information is disseminated. Obviously, we are still in "Communist Russia" where you get to vote yes or yes. Can't you people "SEE" what our "so called Chairman" is trying to accomplish?

Sadly the above correspondent is turning the facts on their head. The last election (which predated the current Vaad) was indeed a Soviet style election with no choices and only single candidate being offered on a take it or leave it basis.

The current election is open to any and all candidates. The Vaad has issued repeated calls for nominations, and remains ready – at this late date – to add additional nominees to the current list of candidates, regardless of who or where the nomination comes from. If the writer of this letter has any candidates to suggest, we are totally receptive.


There is no need for much information. Rabbi Segal was appointed to work in the beis Din by rabbi Osdoba and with the haskama of rabbi Schwei, Rabbi Raitport is a known talmid chochom and Posek very respected not only in Lubavitch but in Boro Park and beyond. Rabbi Yitzchok Zirkind is a very brilliant talmid chochom very sharp. he is compassionate and very understanding. He knows the job of a Rov. His whole life he has dealt in halacha.

Indeed all these are true facts.

All of the current candidates are tried and proven Rabbonim with genuine "shimush" per the Rebbe’s directives.

If we want a true SHALOM in the neighborhood, I think that ALL present Rabbonim be on the list as well. Then they will have to be all equal and there can be no more fighting and perhaps peace will prevail in our Shechunah and perhaps the young generation will have something to look forward to.

Once a Mara D’Asra is elected to serve as a Rav it is an appointment for life. Rav Osdoba has been a Rav with the Rebbe’s approval for two decades. As for Rav Schwei, there are strong arguments for having him run in a legitimate election, especially as he has chosen to reject the terms on which Rav Osdoba allowed him to become a candidate in the first place. However (see above) in there interests of sholom bayis we are not changing his status quo.


Why was it that in the last elections it was stated EXPLICITLY that only if the candidate Will garner more then 50% of ELIGIBLE voters (not "actual" voters) will he win? why isn't the same applicable now? (it was at the direct order of Rabbi Osdobo).

The last elections was not a bona fide election. At best it was a referendum since there was but a single candidate. Hence the need for approval by 50% of eligible voters. This Sunday’s election is a genuine election with three (or more) viable choices. Thus a simple majority of voters is sufficient. Anyone who chooses not to vote has no right to complain about the outcome.


Even more so, when this "askon" announces openly - (after trying to speak quietly behind the scenes, and did not help) – that if his candidate for Rov will be elected, then he will give money etc., and if not he will not give … and through this he wants to force on the entire community his opinions – there is no bigger shochad (bribe) then this!

We can only assume who wrote this disgraceful letter, and what his personal agenda might be. The fact is, this election is precisely the opposite – an honest, objectively monitored election that is open to ALL candidates.

This is in marked contrast to the last election in which alternative candidates were kept off the ballot. At that time private interests, by eliminating any competition, forced the community to accept a single candidate, one who was being paid for years by private balebatim. It is interesting that it is precisely the people who engineered the last election who are now accusing the current Vaad of doing what they themselves did and are trying to do again. Kol ha-posel mumav posel.


…sounds pretty democratic, either vote for them, or don't, in any case they win...how many are we electing? all 3? are we having 5 Rabonim? wow...

Untrue and unfair.

Voters have a right to choose one, two or all three candidates. Only a candidate who has garnered 50% of more of the popular vote will be named to the Beis Din. Thus it is entirely possible that the outcome will be only one additional Dayan, two additional Dayanim or even three. The complexion of the Beis Din will be radically different depending on how the community votes. And, once again, the roster is open to additional candidates. The write is welcome to make his own nominations.


Because when the people on top, compete, fight, hate, don’t get along, automatically all those under them tend to do the same.

Precisely. Which is why the election is so important. It is worth noting that there was no fighting or hatred in the Beis Din until the last election. Rav Osdoba was a Dayan for 15 years and there was never any public discord among the Dayanim.


... like in the first elections that each candidate needed approval from other Rabbonim that he is appropriate for it ....

True.

Which is why Rav Schwei needed Rav Osdoba’s approval to run for Rav in the last election. This approval was given conditionally, pending Rav Schwei’s acceptance of Rav Segal and Rav Raitport as colleagues.


At least with Rabbi Schwei's, election it had Rabbi Osdoba's, 100%, full approval, BEFORE the Election, for him to even be considered to be eligible to be a Candidate - Now, it has absolutely "NO ONES" Approval!

Once again, Rav Schwei received Rav Osdoba’s conditional approval, and these conditions were not honored subsequently. Hence it is moot whether Rav Schwei approves the candidates as they have already been approved by Rav Osdoba and have been rejected by Rav Schwei in abrogation of the terms of his original candidacy.


What a Chutzpah!, to step all over all 3 Elected Rabbonim of the Badatz - ignoring them and forcing an election against the will of Rabbi Heller and against the will of Rabbi Schwei and against the will of Rabbi Osdoba!

Rav Osdoba’s approval of the candidates and acceptance of them as colleagues is long-standing. Rav Heller chooses to abstain. Rav Schwei has, through his own actions, demonstrated that he does not accept the need for an existing Rav to approve candidates.


What's wrong with the Rabbonim we have now?

Two Rabonim are insufficient for a proper Beis Din. The Shulchan Aruch requires a minimum of three and ideally five, so that a proper majority opinion can be reached where there is no unanimity.


Shouldn't getting along with BOTH Rav Osdoba and Rav Schwei be important. One of the people running does NOT get along with Rav Schwei and has been brought to a din torah (and refused to show up!) Certain members of the election committee have also done that.

There is no precedent for a Rav to call his fellow Dayanim to a Din torah simply because he does not agree with them. And they are under no obligation to heed such a hazmana. While harmony among Dayanim is the ideal – and was the rule for 20 years prior to the last election – it is hoped that the current election will once again restore dignity and cooperation to the Beis Din as it was exemplified under Rav Osdoba, Rav Heller and Rav Marllow z"l.


The 3 candidates listed have all served as Dayanim in Dinei Torah on the BaDaTz together with one or more of the previously elected Rabbonim and have therefore been implicitly accepted as competent Rabbonim.

Absolutely, which is why the choices before the electorate are all outstanding and all 100% suited to the role of Dayan and Moro D’Asro.


The Crown Heights Anash would like to know weather the new elected Rabonim will have the same power as Rabbi Osdoba or will they be 'third class citizens'?

If the case is that they will not have the same power as R Osdoba then it's only fair that they be notified before hand to make sure that they still want to run even though they will remain '3rd class citizens'.

Every legitimately elected Rav becomes an equal with the other Rabbanim and is a Moro D’Asro in his own right.


Rabbi Schwei's election only brought machloikes and public mudslinging to the community unparalleled in any other Bais Din in the world. (Maybe R. Osdoba had the foresight to this tragedy that the rest of us did not). By the way how can he counsel couples on Shalom bayis if he washes all the community laundry in public? At least after this election the majority will rule and if the dissenting opinion chooses not to abide let him fight with the guy he sees in the mirror.

Thank you.

There are things we as the Vaad Hakohol are abstaining for stating. But, "chochom einav b’rosho."


They have my vote. R. Raitport is poshut a gaon olam, who is kol kulo torah & avodah. Rabbi Segal has the patience and the understanding of people to make a real difference in the community.

Thank you.


All this griping is coming from the old Netzigim gang that held the executive committee until 770's netzig was asked not participate and their junta fell apart.

The Vaad welcomes the idea of netzigim, and is hopeful that in future they will all be legitimately elected representatives of their mispalelim with no personal agendas other than to serve the community.

-------------------------------------------------------------


Letter to R. Mangel

Rabbi Mangel,

As the duly elected Vaad Hakohol of Crown Heights, and as individuals who greatly respect your enormous contributions in making the Rebbe’s Siddur accessible to the general public and your signal role in educating literally thousands of Jews in the ways of Torah, Yiddishkeit and Chassidus, we are pained and puzzled by your attaching your good name to recent partisan actions intended to de-legitimize Rav Shlomo Yehuda HaLevi Segal shlita’s role as a Dayan on the Crown Heights Beis Din, and by extension the Vaad Hakohol.

These partisan actions – by definition – do not represent the will of the majority of the Crown Heights Kehilla, or its best interests – and disrupt the long overdue attempt to restore functionality and integrity to the Crown Heights Beis Din.

We quote a letter from Rabbi Yaakov Schwei shlita dated 5 Iyar 5752 written on Beis Din stationery to this effect:

"What is in the interests of the community is up to a majority of the community to decide … and, according to the instructions of the Rebbe, even a Rav has no right to interfere, and as I was told by Rabbi Yitzchok Hendel, no one has the authority to interfere with someone who represents the community."

Furthermore, as you very well know, Rabbi Schwei’s position as a Rav on the Crown Heights Beis Din – assuming his election to the Beis Din was a priori legitimate – is contingent on the formal approval of Rabbi Avrohom Osdoba shlita. Rabbi Schwei’s candidacy was approved by Rabbi Osdoba on the condition that Rabbi Shlomo Yehuda HaLevi Segal serve as a Dayan on the Beis Din. Indeed, to the extent that Rabbi Schwei’s election had any validity at all, it was dependent on his accepting Rav Raitport & Rav Segal as colleagues on the Beis Din.

Hence, to label Rav Segal as a ‘minuy chodosh’ a new appointee, and demand that he step down from his work as a Dayan is deeply troubling. Furthermore, no Rav acting alone without the consent of his colleagues on the Beis Din has any right to summon a sitting Dayan to a Din Torah regarding that Dayan’s legitimacy.

For this reason, Rav Segal is not and cannot be in the category of ‘mesarev’ (refusing to answer a summons to a Din Torah) as he has no business responding to a frivolous summons that has no halachic basis. Indeed, Rav Segal is under orders from the senior member of the Beis Din, Rav Osdoba shlita who was elected under the Rebbe and has been Moro d’Asro in Crown Heights for some 20 years, to ignore any such summonses as they are without basis in Halacha and fly in the face of the very basis on which Rav Schwei is serving as a Rav.

I further call your attention to a response signed by Rav Marlow z"l, Rav Osdoba shlita and Rav Heller shlita dated 19 Av 5748:

"...There is (in Crown Heights) an absolute need (for an elected Vaad Hakohol) as has always been the practice throughout the Jewish world…
"Regarding its parameters … (citing numerous rabbinic sources); if there are more than seven elected members then they are responsible for all the needs of the community. If there are fewer than seven, they must clarify as to what they were appointed for, or declare that they are responsible for all the community’s needs.

"It is possible (for the Vaad Hakohol) to make an amendment establishing that a general meeting be called in the event that a predetermined number (that number to be established by the Vaad) of people request such a meeting … but until such time as there is a general meeting, the decision of the Vaad Hakahal must be accepted…"

What has come to light is that that there were indeed other candidates who were to be included on the ballot, but whose names were forcibly removed as a result of pressure from third parties who wanted to guarantee the outcome of that election – an outcome that could only result from a single candidate running unopposed, which was then – and continues to be – contrary to the wishes of a majority of Crown Heights ANASH.

The other candidate who withdrew under pressure from the list was Rabbi Yitzchok Raitport shlita.

At that time you, unfortunately broke your leg twice in two different places and you told people in the community that it was a sign ‘Min Hashamayim’ not to get involved in the Beis Din. Recently, the moment you signed the letter against the Mora d’Asro of over 20 yrs, you were laid up in bed with a Roiz on your foot and were incapacitated for many days.
With regards to yourself, what disturbs us especially is not only that you allowed yourself and your good name to be used to defame a Talmid Chacham whose role in the Beis Din is not open to dispute. What troubles us is that you would affix your signature to a letter which:

1. Refers to our Moro d’Asro with utter disrespect, referring to Rav Osdoba shlita as "he" and "him";

2. Refers to Rav Segal shlita as a "minui chodosh" when this is patently false;

3. Includes a third signatory who is from outside the community and is widely viewed as a troubled soul with no legitimacy whatsoever vis a vis anything to do with the Crown Heights Kehilla;

4. Legitimizes outright mesira by approving a civil legal action – something that is the ultimate prohibition, and guaranteed to result in a massive chilul Hashem and the utter undoing of the Rebbe’s community.
It is no secret that the Rebbe counseled you not to get involved in community Rabbonus. This is something you discussed openly. At the time, many of us were surprised by the Rebbe’s position in light of your signal contributions to Chabad-Lubavitch and your peerless record as a scholar, teacher and guide to thousands of talmidim.

Your recent actions have made clear why the Rebbe advised you to steer clear of community matters. We plead with you to follow the Rebbe’s advice and continue your heretofore unblemished record of doing what you do best.

Please note that this Vaad Hakohol, throughout its 14 month tenure, has scrupulously avoided any negative pronouncements, choosing instead to focus on positive activities, helping those in need, and shoring up the community’s infrastructure and services. It is unfortunate that a handful of individuals who are incapable of respecting the halachically mandated legitimacy of the Vaad Hakohol, are attempting to hijack the community and impose their will through secret pressure, terror tactics and outright deception. Under such circumstances we have no choice but to respond accordingly. We plead with you to distance yourself from these individuals and allow us to do our job – namely to restore the dignity and functionality of our Beis Din through legitimate and open elections. This is our job. It is why we were elected. It is what the Rebbe wants.

Yours truly,

Moshe Rubashkin

In the name of the Vaad Hakohol of Crown Heights

---------------------------------------------------------------------


Response To Mr. Nash

To the Editor:

The letter by my fellow Vaad member Leibish Nash (Crown Heights Chronicle 4/7/06) is an offense to basic decency, to common sense, to the rules of law, and to Halacha especially the Halachos against motzi shem ra.

Above all it is an offense to the entire community of Crown Heights because he uses both innuendo and sheker to destroy the one democratically elected institution that, in its current incarnation, works tirelessly to improve the conditions and quality of life for the entire Jewish Community of Crown Heights without regard to politics or partisan issues.

The Vaad Hakohol, the Crown Heights Jewish Community Council, of which Mr. Nash is a board member, was democratically elected by the community to represent its best interests. It is my privilege to serve as its Chairman.

The record of my administration speaks for itself in terms of our ceaseless and successful efforts to address the needs of ANASH, especially those who because of widowhood, divorce or poverty lack the muscle and the loud voice to play the game of kol d’alim gvar,: victory to the most violent.

Indeed for the first time in its history, the Vaad Hakohol is being run as a democratic institution and therein lays its strength, its character and, above all its success. This Vaad is actually doing something. And we are doing it by simple majority vote, and we are doing it despite being saddled with some holdovers from the Vaad’s more Bolshevik past, when there was no democracy and, therefore no accountability to the one person we are accountable to: the man, woman and child on the street.

Yes, Mr. Nash is nostalgic for the good old days of smoke filled rooms and old boy politics. And when his voice is in the minority he resorts to outright lies and innuendo, such as "Two of the five rubber-stamped the deal after the fact" Of course, he mentions no names or dates, nor does he offer any evidence of any kind.

For the record, the Vaad meets almost daily. What's more, as secretary it was Mr. Nash’s job to record the minutes of the Vaad meetings. To date he has refused to provide any of his notes or minutes. Worse yet,our effort to hire a qualified secretary to record the minutes, Mrs. S, Yunick, were thwarted by none other than Mr. Nash himself.

Is it any wonder that Mrs. Fayge Hurwitz who was the best executive director quit because of Mr. Nash. Mr. Shaya Boymelgreen quit as a Vaad member because of Mr. Nash. Joseph B. Spielman has not spoken to Mr. Nash in 8 years, etc.

Mr. Leibish Nash and Mr. Yisroel Best met and employee of the Jewish Community Council and asked that she give them something to fight Moshe Rubashkin with. Then Mr. Nash and Mr. Best called the employee to apologize for having said something that never took place at a meeting, in order to defame Moshe Rubashkin. The Council’s employee wrote an affidavit and had it notarized detailing exactly what happened in this incident. This affidavit is on record.

Mr. Nash believes that merely by saying something it becomes true - especially if it appears in print.

Mr. Nash writes; "I was under the impression that if two Yidden have a disagreement, the Torah provides for a civilized and effective means of resolution." Except for the fact that we are not dealing here with a case of "two Yidden having a disagreement" that requires resolution. Rather, we are dealing with a board of five officials who were elected to govern the community and make decisions that effect the community by a universally accepted process called majority rule.

This is not a disagreement between "two Yidden".

When a disgruntled minority member of a governing body is unhappy with the result of a democratic vote, this does not entitle him to go crying to a makeshift trio of Rabbonim and demand a Din Torah.

Imagine what havoc this would do to a community if every majority decision were subsequently paralyzed because the loser didn’t get his way.

To blithely claim, as Mr. Nash does, that "Halacha takes precedence over democracy" reveals his ignorance of Halacha and his flouting of democracy. And when brandishing his ignorance, illiteracy and Bolshevik mentality to bully his way doesn’t work, Leibish Nash resorts to name-calling and referring to those he disagrees with as "inexperienced newcomers." Yes, we all know what the experienced veterans did when they held the keys to the Vaad – effectively nothing.

Russia had its experienced government which, thank G-d, was replaced by inexperienced newcomers. New York once had its experienced Tammany Hall hacks. Thank G-d they were replaced by inexperienced newcomers. And now, Boruch Hashem, Crown Heights is blessed with a solid majority of inexperienced newcomers on its Vaad Hakohol to help undo all the damage and self-serving backroom deals of the old boys who were swept out of office.

So, by al means, let Mr. Nash play the perennial crybaby running to his crony Rabbonim and jury-rigging ad hoc Zablo Beis Dins for relief. Let him calls us names and hurl adjectives such as "sham" and "gross" and "rubber stamp". Let him refer to genuine democracy and majority opinion as "manipulation". As we say, "kol ha-posel mumav posel." Mr. Nash can do his homework and look up what these words mean.

Finally there is some openness and clarity and blue sky in Crown Heights, and the people’s interests are finally being addressed. One cannot blame Leibish Nash for pining for the bad old days. But if he expects to bring them back he is going to have to do so by running his own slate for the next Vaad Hakohol and hoping it gains a majority.

Until such time he should act like a Mensch and play by the rules.

Sincerely,

Moshe Rubashkin



Response To Mr. Sprelin

To the Editor:

Our colleague Chanina Sperlin would have the reader believe that he has been kept out of the loop vis a vis the Vaad HaKohol’s scheduling elections for new Rabbonim. In fact this is not the case. Mr Sperlin has been involved in the process from the very beginning, and represents the minority view on the Vaad. It goes without saying that the Vaad has an obligation to issue materials that inform and educate the voters before they go to the polls. That Mr. Sperlin would prefer to keep the voters in the dark is understandable, coming from someone who wishes to torpedo the elections and maintain the terrible status quo.

He then goes on to assert that "If any of the Rabbonim (on the Beis Din) object to a candidate, that person shouldn’t be able to run since there is a psak din from the Chasam Sopher and the Tzitz Eliezer that no new Rov can be installed in a community without the approval of the existing Rov…"

Mr, Sperlin is 100% correct in this regard, and our existing Rov, Rav Osdoba shlita, has no objection to the candidates being fielded for election, including the candidacy of Rav Schwei shlita.The problem has been that Rav Schwei’s current position on the Beis din (for which he was allowed to run unopposed) was contingent on Rav Osdoba’s approval, per the very psak cited by Mr. Sperlin. However Rav Osdoba gave his approval only on the condition that Rav Schwei accept the presence of Rav Raitport shlita and Rav Segal shlita on the Beis Din. Unfortunately, Rav Schwei has chosen to flout this proviso, and has rejected and defamed both Rabbonim. Hence Rav Schwei’s position as Rov, based on the Chasam Sofer’s psak, is a priori null and void, and he must stand for election once again, this time in a bona fide vote against real candidates.
Mr. Sperlin then writes "I personally feel we should elect only one more Rov because the Rebbe said that a Beis Din means three Rabbonim."

Mr. Sperlin’s personal feelings are irrelevant. Further the Beis Din needs at least two more rabbonim as it now has only one legitimate Rov, namely Rav Osdoba. As for the Rebbe’s position – it has always been consistent with the Shulchan Aruch; Three Rabbonim are a minimum, not a maximum.

On a final note, Mr. Sperlin believes that Rabbonim should be nominated by "a panel of independent Rabbonim, or at least by businessmen that (sic) know something about Rabbonus." In this he truly flies in the face of the Rebbe’s teachings that our community Rabbonim should be picked by Anash. After all, "Asei lecha Rav" is not speaking just to businessmen. We are all in this together - and our Rabbonim must serve the needs of all people not just the interests of businessmen.

Yours Truly,

Moshe Rubashkin

Rosh HaKohol