Rebbe, Incorporated

Following the Nazi holocaust in Europe, many of the insular religious Jewish groups transplanted themselves to America so that they could (A) live; and (B) maintain their insularity.  But the world has changed, and it is very difficult to remain insular when you are based in a large city such as New York.  For one thing, if you borrow significant sums of money, you are subject to all of the lender's remedies if you default on the loan.

One of these groups is the followers of the Siget (or Sighet) chassidic dynasty, which consists of somewhat in excess of 300 individuals living in the Borough Park section of Brooklyn (which would be, at a maximum of maximums, 50 households, and probably closer to 40).  The group became an entity under New York's Religious Corporation Law, and is legally known as the Congregation Atzei Chaim of Siget.

In 2008, the Congregation, with due permission of the Court, took out a 10-year $499,000 mortgage loan, secured by their existing synagogue building located at 1511 50th Street in Brooklyn.  But times got difficult, and they fell behind in the loan payments -- far enough behind for the lender to bring a mortgage foreclosure action.

Due to the time, difficulty, and expense involved in foreclosing real property, mortgage lenders will go to great lengths to find alternatives to foreclosure.  The foreclosure action was apparently filed in late 2012, which indicates that the default probably occurred relatively early on in the life of the 10-year loan.

Valley National Bank, the mortgage holder, having lined up all of the required papers, moved for foreclosure.  The Congregation opposed the foreclosure judgment, claiming that the Congregation's leader, Rabbi Jacob Teitelbaum, the Siget Rebbe, who resides in the mortgaged premises, was not properly served with the required notice of the foreclosure action, and Rabbie Teitelbaum was the true owner of the property.  [As mentioned in a recent post, I have no problem with making mortgage holders run the gauntlet before they can foreclose on mortgaged properties, but, once the gauntlet has been run, the foreclosure right has been duly established and should be expedited.  If lenders could not enforce collection of their loans, then nobody would lend money at reasonable rates, and no person or business would be able to have a home.].  The Rebbe said that the Congregation was just his nominee, apparently a ploy to benefit from the touted advantages of incorporation. 

Nothing doing, said Judge Demarest to the Rebbe!  The mortgage was a commercial mortgage and not a residential mortgage.  The mortgage document specifically indicates that the premises would not include residential properties.  Rabbi Teitelbaum was not a signatory to the mortgage or its note.  And (for both the individual rights activists on the right side of the political spectrum and the advocates for the homeless on the left side of the political spectrum), merely depriving the Congregation (which, according to the Rebbe, is one and the same as the Rebbe himself) of ownership of the property would not in and of itself dispossess the Rebbe of his living quarters.

[Zooming in on the Street View of Google Maps, (which is reproduced in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle article), one can see that the building has three mailboxes by the front door.  There also is a balcony upon which is set up a beach chair of the type used by residential households.  The photo accompanying the article in the New York Law Journal indicates that an additional story has been added to the building subsequent to the Google Maps photo.].

The advantages of incorporation are widely touted in the classrooms, in attorney's and accountant's offices, and on the streets.  But if you are a corporation, then you do not enjoy the benefits of being a natural person.  These range from the famous Miranda Rights of warning upon arrest, to the right to personal notice of a mortgage foreclosure on your property.

Another Rabbi Behaving Poorly

Here we go again!  Another rabbi behaving poorly.

New York State Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman (who reportedly goes into rage mode when referred to as "Eric Schneiderman" without the initial "T") has just announced the court-ordered temporary (for now) shutdown of 19 charities operated out of Brooklyn by one Rabbi Yaakov Weingarten.

[It is with profound shame that I now admit to having personally donated to a few of those charities, albeit only in the two figure range.].

The problem was that the 19 charities, mostly purporting to aid needy causes in Israel, did not send any appreciable amounts of money to those causes.  Instead, during the past 5 years, there have been questionable expenditures from the charities' bank accounts amounting to millions in the aggregate.  These include utility bills, dental care, video rentals, mortgage payments, and an Atlantic City casino trip.  And let us not forget some significant home improvements to the house owned by Weingarten's wife.

While there are no sure things here, there may well be some criminal charges in the coming weeks or months.  And it is very tempting to speculate as to what excuses and/or mitigational assertions might be tendered by Weingarten and/or his supporters and sympathizers.

Two issues that have not been so visibly addressed in the Jewish blogosphere are the following:

A.  The modus operandi of the charities has been for various individuals to make telephone solicitations, often but not always falsely claiming that a pledge allegedly made by the recipient of the telephone call has yet to be fulfilled.   There were several telephone callers involved, each using their personal cell phone or some other "boiler room" phone bank.  Query:  What did the individual callers know and when did they know it?  How knowingly complicit were they in Weingarten's scams?  How much did they benefit?

B.  The standard line used by the insular religious Jewish community whenever one of theirs gets foul ink in the press is that he (or sometimes, she) is an aberration.  I once heard a certain spokesman reply to a query by a reporter regarding some poor behavior by a high school student, to the effect that the insular Jewish community has 1 or 2, the Catholic schools have 10, and the public schools have 100 such bad actors.  This, perhaps, has some validity, though the exact statistics may not be so exact.

But be that as it may, I have to wonder whether Weingarten is the only player in his league.  One key reason my wife and I do not live in such communities (and have taken pains to avoid locating ourselves in such communities) is the degree to which everyone insinuates themselves into everyone else's personal business.  Therefore, if Weingarten is living such a charmed lifestyle, it surely has been noticed.  And neighbors and friends desirous of such a life would naturally attempt to emulate Weingarten's means of supporting such a modus vivendi.

And how could a major trip to an Atlantic City casino escape notice?

If Weingarten and his cohorts were not shunned by the community, then it would not astonish me in the least if there are a few more just like him.

A little more than a year ago, I publicly stated at a certain conference that I expected some sort of financial scandal to arise involving some charitable organizations within the insular religious Jewish community.  Painful as it is, I must now thank New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman for vindicating me from the naysayers at that conference.

Hurricane Sandy's Nonphysical Damage

Various prior postings to this blog have mentioned the technophobia of the various insular religious rabbinical authorities, who have at various times banned internet access in the home, text messaging, social media such as Facebook, et cetera.  And incidents of rejection or expulsion of students from private religious schools on account of having an internet connection in the home, an e-mail account and/or a Facebook or Twitter presence, or a cell phone have been legion.

I could not agree more that the internet poses some significant major league moral and ethical obstacles to society.  But the internet also provides significant advantages and efficiencies in the communication of valid and useful information.

Many insular Jewish religious communities were devastated by Hurricane Sandy.  And it turns out that many individuals who nominally are members of those afflicted insular Jewish religious communities have made use (and continue to make use) of one or more of the banned evil technologies in order to, quite literally, weather the storm and its aftermath.  For some, the use of those evil prohibited technologies have no doubt made the difference between life and death.

Yes, the insular religious rabbinical authorities can continue to deny that the new electronic technologies are of any good to their constituencies.  But due to the recent and ongoing Hurricane Sandy experience, those denials can no longer command much credibility by the rabbis' followerships.  

Smoking Out the Tobacco Problem

For the record, I am a nonsmoker, and my house is and has always been a smoke-free zone.

As detestable as the interventionist policies and practices of the government may be when it comes to the use of tobacco, the fact is that tobacco use is a severe health issue.  This is a matter in which none of the major players have clean hands:  Not the tobacco companies, not the smokers, and not the government. 

And understand that the victims include more than just those who are addicted to the substance.  The livelihoods of the small business enterprises such as retailers and individual tobacco farmers have been and continue to be manipulated by the government's inconsistent and contradictory policies.  And the cure purveyed by the government threatens personal autonomy within the walls of the homes of those who happen to be tobacco users.

It is difficult for me to draw solid bold lines on what my stance on the tobacco issues should be, but I do favor the free transmission of accurate and objective information.

Hamodia, a newspaper of the insular religious Jewish community, has published an article in its "Inyan" magazine [Hamodia, Inyan Magazine, August 22, 2012 / 4 Elul 5772] entitled "Smoking:  A Preventable Addiction."  The use of the Internet amongst the insular religious Jewish groups is a very controversial issue, but Hamodia does have a closely circumscribed Internet presence, including the aforementioned article (at least a part of which is not in the proprietary zone of the Hamodia website).

The article describes Rabbi Yechezkel Ishayek's efforts to reduce the incidence of tobacco use amongst the insular religious Jewish community, a practice I do applaud in light of his use of the objective accurate information model (though I am not totally unconcerned about the potential for coercion in future efforts by others which might conceivably follow on to Rabbi Ishayek's project).

A few matters in the article struck me as remarkable (and I am in good company, because my wife made similar observations when she read the article).  In no particular order:

A.  Rabbi Ishayek noted that he "heard testimony from world-renowned experts and came to the conclusion that one of the reasons why the smoking rate did not decrease in the religious world as much as it did in the general population is because, baruch Hashem, we are not exposed to the secular media. While it is a wonderful thing that we avoid the spiritual dangers inherent in that  media, we are also not adequately exposed to information about the dangers of smoking."

Yes, many of the people in the community truly lead very sheltered lives.  But then, on the other hand, there are many, many who have very excellent knowledge of world current affairs.  As valid as Rabbi Ishayek's observation may or may not be, methinks that it is an oversimplification and that there is more to the story.  Specifically, I will suggest that a social group which has effectively been taught from early age to hold science and the scientific method in contempt would be a natural for ignoring, minimizing and invalidating the information on the hazards of smoking which was in fact sent out amongst them.

B.  The rabbinical leaders of the various factions within the insular religious Jewish community, individually and collectively, have already demonstrated their ability to regulate the behavioral impulses of their followers when they so choose.  Knowing the tobacco usage habits amongst such social circles, I have to wonder just how much of a priority those rabbinical leaders place upon decreasing tobacco usage.  See "A" above.

C.  I will note that until relatively recently, the city of Bnei Brak in Israel, which is overwhelmingly populated by the insular religious groups, had a cigarette factory in operation on its main drag, Rabbi Akiva Street.

Facilitation Comes in Many Forms

"I was wrong" and "I was wrong, but" are two separate and distinct attitudes.

Certain incidents in Israel of purportedly religious Jews behaving poorly have made the international MSM news [I will not be explicit in this posting; you have probably read about it.]. And some of the more insular rabbinical leaders and organizations, in Israel and in America, have finally issued statements regarding the behaviors involved, stating, quite appropriately and correctly, that the poor behavior on the part of a few misguided individuals is not an exemplar of the overwhelming majority of religious Jews.

Except that many of the aforementioned statements expend more ink on whining about how the news media is spinning the stories against religious Jews than in condemning the ill behaviors.

This, in my opinion, is an attempt to dodge the real issue: The poor behaviors involved are natural and logical consequences of the stances taken by the rabbinical leadership. The appropriate thing to do would be to unequivocally condemn the behaviors, and then follow up such condemnatory statements with support for and facilitation of civil if not criminal consequences against the wrongdoers.

Once upon a time, the religious Jewish community was viewed by the public as exemplars of honesty, rectitude and wholesomeness. By not standing up to the corruptors with vested interests, the rabbinical leadership has, of late, yielded the high moral ground, and their followings have been led astray.

Methinks that the impetus for many of the recent condemnatory statements has been the public embarrassment of the rabbinate, and not the despicable acts of the rabbis' followers. Had these matters not gone viral, I suspect that many of the rabbis would have been content to let their followers do the damage they have done.

By not speaking out unequivocally and definitively, many of these rabbinical leaders have facilitated the poor behavior of their followers. Perhaps, in at least some cases, that was what was intended.

The Talmud, Water and Cell Phones

A few weeks ago, my Rabbi admonished/begged the congregation that we need to be more fervent and concentrating in our praying during the services. He's not wrong on that score. We all do our share of talking during the services, which we really shouldn't be doing (though it isn't nearly as extensive as certain other congregations with which I am acquainted). Every once in a while, we need to be reminded of Whom we stand before.

This evening, the talking during the davening was relatively restrained. The problem was that someone's cell phone went off. Not quite four years ago, I posted on this issue, noting that when the cell phone that distracts our concentration belongs to a rabbi then there's much rabbinical credibility to be lost.

[I note that there are a number of rabbis besides our main "pulpit rabbi" who join us on a somewhat regular basis for the afternoon/evening services. They do things like oversee kosher food preparation at the local old age home, or watch over the dead at one of the local funeral establishments, or, in one case, the "pulpit rabbi" from a congregation in a neighboring town (who happened to have been my son's 6th grade Religious Studies teacher at the Jewish day school) whose own congregation has trouble during the week with making Minyan (a minimum prayer quorum of 10 Jewish males over the age of 13).].

In any event, the cell phone one of these other rabbis went off during the davening, so what did this rabbi do? He kept on davening until he was finished, which took perhaps a minute or two. And the other guys in the Minyan (about 14 of us) were all distracted.

Afterward, I went up to our congregation's "pulpit rabbi" and asked him what happens in the following situation: Two men are traveling in the desert, away from civilization. One has a canteen of water, the other does not. The man with the canteen has enough water to make it to civilization, but if he shares his water with his companion, the neither will be able to reach civilization alive.

That hypothetical was answered almost 2,000 years ago by Rabbi Akiva, who ruled that it is better that only one man perish than to have both men die. Rabbi Akiva's ruling is recorded in the Talmud [Bava Metzia 62a]. In modern times, it comes up with some degree of frequency in discussions regarding health care rationing.

So, of course, my Rabbi quoted Rabbi Akiva's pronouncement to me (as though I had never heard of the Akiva's famous ruling). He wondered what my ulterior motive was, and didn't have to wait long to find out.

I then asked him, "Which is preferable, one man being distracted from prayer for a few seconds to turn off the cell phone which should have been turned off before he began davening in the first place, or fifteen men being distracted because the first guy does not turn off his cell phone?"

The Rabbi laughed. It would not surprise me if, after I left, he had a little private discussion with the other rabbi who wouldn't turn off his ringing cell phone.