Analysis
of the Pashkvil
We are presenting here
some answers to the recent pashkvil that was disseminated as part of
the series of personal attacks on Rabbi Braun called “From Under
the Desk of the Badatz”. The pashkvil is full of such outright,
and easily disproven, lies, distortions, and calumnies, that it
should require no response. Yet, based on the principle that “the
bigger the lie, the more some people believe it”, it would seem in
order to point out its deceptions clearly. Most of the issues it
raises are clearly shown as lies by simply referring to the documents
already on the site.
It should be pointed out
that many people feel it is common knowledge who the author of the
pashkvil is, and that he is a signatory on the Shtar Birurin. If so,
he would appear to be “m'sarev the Beis Din," for this pashkvil, as
well as many more matters.
Charges
Made in the Pashkvil
I. Fitness to be on the
Beis Din
- Rabbi Braun does not have Semicha
- Rabbi Braun does not have shimush.
- There was no letter of recommendation.
- He did not meet the age requirement.
- He left his position in Sydney against the Rebbe's instructions.
Answer:
All these objections were made to the Rosenberg Beis Din Zabla. All
five Rabbonim heard the issues and discussed the case. All parties
agreed to be bound by the decision of the Rabbonim and signed on the
Shtar Birurin which can be found in the tabs on top of the screen.
The Psak Din is also found in the tabs on top of the screen. In
brief, it says that Rabbi Braun's semicha is valid, and that he was
properly elected. Furthermore, all the Rabbonim must serve with him,
and the kehilla is obligated to give him the proper kovod as Rav.
- Rabbi Heller was thrown off the Beis Din.
Answer:
It is well known that Rabbi Heller resigned from the Beis Din many
years ago, [as is even recounted in the pashkvil in the prior
section!] and, despite many attempts to bring him back, including
just before the elections, he refused. Furthermore, anyone can ask
him directly, and Rabbi Heller will tell them this.
III. Rabbi Zinner's
letter of semicha was forged, and Rabbi Zinner confirmed this.
This section also
accused Rabbi Rosenberg somehow of complicity in fraud, as well as
that the psak din confirming the semicha was only from Rabbi
Rosenberg.
Answer:
This is the same answer as point I. Above. The complete Psak Din is
in the tab at the top of the screen. It should also be noted that
continuing to make these charges after the psak din was issued, and
in light of signing the Shtar Birurin, amounts to being in the
category of mesariv the Beis Din. It should also be noted, that when
Rabbi Zinner was asked about Rabbi Braun's expertise in Torah and
ability to rule on Torah law, he answered “Maybe better than me.”
Anyone can verify Rabbi Zinner's opinion of Rabbi Braun's
qualifications by asking him directly.
However, when Rabbi
Zinner was put under tremendous pressure by certain elements in the
community, he asked that the Semicha that he gave not be used to
contribute to machlokis in the community. This issue was adjudicated
by the Beis Din Zabla (see the Psak Din above) and it was ruled that
the semicha is valid.
- Rabbi Rosenberg resigned from the Beis Din Zabla, and “members of the community” had the right to go to a different Beis Din. Specifically, they were allowed to call Rabbi Braun to the Beis Din of Rabbi Kraus.
Answer:
Rabbi Rosenberg did not resign, on the contrary, he committed himself
to continuing the Din Torah. However, he made several conditions.
First, he wanted everyone to be present in person, (not to hold
hearings on the phone,) all the Rabbonim and both sides. Second, he
wanted all parties to agree to come, not that hazmonos would need to
be issued. Third, all issues that either side wanted to bring up
would be heard and rulings issued. In fact, a date in mid-August
was agreed to by all parties.
This means that there
is an ongoing Beis Din that is in the midst of adjudicating all
issues and that both parties accepted their authority. Obviously,
any claims to the contrary are false, and no other Beis Din can
interfere, and certainly not issue binding hazmonos or rulings.
- Rabbi Braun, after Rabbi Rosenberg allegedly resigned from the Beis Din, served Rabbi Osdoba with a lawsuit.
Answer:
Although the pashkvil is full of outright lies, this is probably the
biggest among giants. The only legal actions pending are:
- The motion to record the Rosenberg Beis Din findings in the Courts, which the Beis Din explicitly specified, and which Rabbi Osdoba is fighting in the Courts. See the tabs above.
- A lawsuit that Rabbi Osdoba filed against Rabbi Braun. See the tabs above.