1. According to was stipulated on the shtar borrerus, that even if one or two dayonim remove themselves, the zabl"o is still able to pasken, and clearly the zabl"o is still in its full authority.
2. Also, authority is with the zabl"o to make judgements, even after the psak din, regarding conflicts that arise regarding the implementation of the psak and regarding any complaints about the psak.
3. The zabl"o (while still in its original membership) offered Horav Avrohom Osdoba shlita the opportunity to submit his complaints and appeals, and guaranteed that they would be considered. This indeed happened (e.g. the complaints and appeals have indeed been previously submitted to the attention of the Bais Din Zabl'o).
4. In fact, we are still obligated to consider many of these things. The Av Beis Din, in his resignation, wrote that if the zabl"o would appropriately convene, then he would reconsider his resignation. This implies that there is, in fact, what to consider.
Because of this, we are notifying both sides that there are two options:
1. To continue proceedings before us, and if we can render a majority opinion then so much the better;
2. To take the proceedings to another Beis Din that will be agreed upon by both sides.
If, for whatever reason, they are not able to exercise the first option, each side will have the right to go to another Beis Din with their claims, and that Beis Din should be regarded as all batei din in Israel, and according to the accepted principals.
It is clear and obvious that if they go to another Beis Din that they may judge only new proceedings and claims, that were not already judged and decided by the zabl"o.
The judgements that were already judged and decided are the two piskei dinim that were written with the consent of the entire zabl"o (even if it might be a majority decision). The first being that of 30 Nissan, 5770 and the second being that of 27 Teves, 5771.
Regarding all other claims, there have been a variety of opinions written by individual rabbonim , obviously they do not have authority of a psak.
is there a working link to the 2nd psak? (27 Teves, 5771)?
ReplyDeleteAlthough this changes everything. I still feel that its important for Zaki to post his letter to the Beis Din.
ReplyDeletePlease post
We Live in Moshiach Times!
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing that Rabbi Kuperman was the one who signed the letter which was sent to CH Motzoey Shabbos!
Rabbi Kuperman is Rabbi Osdoba's "PICK" in the Zabla and even he affirms that RO side indeed lost in all their claims against Rabbi Broan which Rabbi Kuperman says was already ruled on in the Letter of the Zabla of Teves of this year.
Rabbi Kuperman which is RO hand picked Zabla pick, signs his name this Motzoey Shabbos that indeed that letter we have which has only Rabbi Rosenbergs signature, is indeed signed with the approval of the entire majority Zabla Beis Din ! (a major argument of the RO team that since it only had R Roisenbergs signature it was not authentic and not in agreement of all the others - now RO own man affirms the prior letter which states that A L L 5 Zabla (or clear majority) had agreed that there is no valid complaint about Rabbi Broan's Smicha and that even RO hand picked Rabbonim agreed that Rabbi Broan is in fact the elected Rav and it's 100% kosher and proper no matter what argument they had raised which KNOCKED DOWN by the Zabla Beis Din of Teves of this year.
Yes, there are some issues that were not addressed yet and which Rabbi Kuperman (RO's hand picked rav, of the Zabla) agrees that there are issues that still needs to be ruled on and some of those issues, which still need to be ruled on:
ReplyDeleteSome of the issues are those which were raised by Rabbi Schwei's team: namely that Rabbi's Scheis adversary-side, is not listening and not following the Psak, (Regarding Rabbonus authority of the CHK and more) in which case the litigants can be sanctioned if the Zabla hears the case and agrees.
For example:
The Psak says that NOW all 3 elected Rabbonim, Rabbi Osdoba, Rabbi Schwei and Rabbi Broan need to sit together as a united Beis Din, RIGHT NOW, and if if any of these 3 refuse to cooperate to sit together, then that 1 Rav, who refuses, (whoever it may be) can be sanctioned.
Rabbi Kuperman agrees that this issue needs to be heard and if agreed, action or sanctions may need to be taken against any party in the Psak Din who refused to follow the Psak, right now.
The litigants can't say "lets first finish fighting" and then we will listen to the Psak because that fighting is endless and of course the sore looser (whomever that may be) will always keep on arguing endlessly so the universal rule is NAASEH KODEM LENISHMA i.e. first the litigants need to actually DO every detail of the Psak and then later - if and when they have time - they can continue arguing and "appeal" if and when all parties involved have the time needed for endless 'appeals' to the Beis Din - but until any appeals are heard the current Psak is in full force and any litigant who refuses to follow the Psak is considered in Siruv by default - Rabbi Kuperman (all all other members of the Zabla) agrees in the latter of Motzoey Shabbos
ReplyDeleteat the end of the day zaki you showed us how you can twist any psak to fit what you would like to do with the Crown Heights Bes Din!! if you were smart you would stop and have nothing to do with rabbi braun until this matter gets resolved 100% with all 5 rabbonim or at least 3 will tell you what to do. as the letter says you must have 3 our of 5 to sign and you can not listen to only 1 rov about his personal opinion!!
ReplyDelete