Wednesday, June 2, 2010

Aviner Is At It Again

20 Sivan 5770

Aviner made the news again....

What the Ha'Aretz article (below) neglected to mention was issue of Shlomo Aviner's rulings on niddah, ketamim, and marot which caused former Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu to call him to appear before his bet din.

Shlomo Aviner wrote to Rabbi Eliyahu, in his own hand, saying that he would appear,...but then never did.

Because he refused to appear, and because he is suspected of instructing Jews to transgress issurei karet (prohibitions punishable by being cut off from our people), Rabbis Lior, Y. Yosef, E. Levanon ruled that one may not ask Shlomo Aviner any questions of Jewish Law or read his articles or books.

Whether he is correct or incorrect on the issue at hand, sperm donation, is irrelavent. His "rulings" are to be ignored until he appears before the bet din to answer for his rulings on toharat hamishpahah (family purity).

Settler Aviner

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Haveil Havalim Blog Carnival #183

25 Ellul 5768

We would like to thank Jack for posting our translation of Rabbi Elba's response to on this week's edition of the Haveil Havalim Jewish and Israeli blog carnival.

Saturday, September 13, 2008

Response to, part 1

14 Ellul 5768

The following is part one of a translation of the extensive response by Rabbi Ido Elba, Rosh Kollel - Cave of the Patriarchs Kollel, Hevron, to (27 Iyar 5768). is a site which was set up in an attempt to defend the various actions of Shlomo Aviner.

The original in Hebrew can be viewed here on


I will preface by stating that I am the husband of one of the women who has complained about Aviner, about five years ago. And I served against Aviner a suit handled by six different rabbinical courts (due to Aviner's evasiveness) which disagreed with the resolutions brought on the site.

Recently, Aviner established a new site in which he tries to respond to that which is brought on the site (Hebrew). In spite of the fact that it is not mentioned that he is the author, this is understood, because all of the letters brought there are the letters which were sent to him personally. And all of the explanations to the facts are things which were not brought about him all other evidence only his explanation.

I have already written in one of the responses more than what there is to learn than from what is written there, there is to learn from there from what is not written, because this is clear that about the things that one does not write he does not have even reliability of an answer.

1. He does not at all address the tape that is brought on the site in which he permits looking at nude pictures - he has nothing to say.

2. Thus, he does not at all address the evidence that he said to a pregnant woman about blood that she saw the color does not contaminate and also what she continues to see will not contaminate {Here he does not know what she will continue to see} - he has nothing to respond.

3. Thus, he does not at all address the evidence that he said to a nursing women about the blood that she sees is pure because a nursing woman does not have any menstrual blood. He has nothing to answer.

4. Thus, he does not at all address the evidence that he said to a woman after a miscarriage that she is clean because it's just a "little" blood - he has nothing to say.

5. Thus, he does not at all address the evidence that he said to a young couple about virgin blood that does not contaminate, because it's just a wound - regarding this, he has nothing to answer.

6. Thus, he does not at all address the evidence that he said to a ruling of the Jerusalem rabbinical court which determined that he is one who refuses [to attend the Bet Din], and it is forbidden to ask him anything nor to give credence to his opinions - he has nothing to say.

7. Thus, he does not at all address the evidence that he said to a ruling of the rabbinical court which has determined that he purposefully obstructs, and that it is forbidden to read from his books. Those who have signed this include Rabbi Ya'qov Yosef, Rabbi Dov Lior, Rabbi Karelitz supports this. Recently the ruling that was publicized even included the head of the Jerusalem Area Bet Din Rabbi Avraham Kalev (and who worded the letter), and Rabbi Eliakim Levanon. Rabbi Shmu'el Tal, and the rabbi of the moshav Nachalim, and other rabbis have signed it - he has nothing to answer. (Even if one assumes that it is actually because of the letter this new website of his supporters was established)

Also, if all of what Aviner has written on his new website was 100% correct, these things to which he does not answer at all would actually be enough for any intelligent man to separate himself from him, to remove his books and articles from his house, and he would not dare go to him with any question regarding Jewish observance. Also, if someone had a rabbi who taught him another it is forbidden for him to listen to him, according to what we have clarified in our articles presented on about trust in hachamim with regard to a rabbi who says that right is left.

a. On the issue of the prohibition against lashon hara, Aviner brings the ruling of the Area Bet Din of Marheshvan 5766

1) In spite of the fact that Aviner himself claims that he knows who authored the booklet [of information related to the diyun against him] on, The Area Bet Din did not invite anyone to the proceedings regarding this issue. It is possible to see this in the decision itself in which only the name of the petitioner was written (his representative Mittleman came), and not any second party. As such, according to halachah, there is no validity to the Bet Din's decision, nor to the decision of Rabbi Eliyahu (if Rabbi Eliyahu was even involved with this. See below).

2) Although the truth is that no order signed by three rabbinical judges, prohibiting the publication [of information regarding the ruling against Aviner] was brought out in my suit. Anyway, I was careful not to publicize a thing until I saw with my own eyes that Aviner himself publicized the ruling of the Bet Din. Of course, it is impossible to obligate one party to remain silent, when the second party is doing whatever it wants.

3) It is astounding that Aviner dares to use this decision [of the Bet Din], when on the same website, he publicizes the Bet Din's ruling with part of its reasoning, and in fact speaks out regarding this decision in a brief.

4) Of course the Area Bet Din does not have the authority to prohibit of a decision which was signed by three other rabbinical judges, when they themselves want it to be publicized. Incidentally, we are operating under the direction of the rabbinical judges who sat on a panel appointed by Rabb Mordechai Eliyahu.

To Be Continued....

Thursday, May 8, 2008

Response to

3 Iyar 5768

Rabbi Ido Elba of Kiryat Arba-Hevron has written a response to, the attempted response to all of the evidence and questions raised on

The response is in Hebrew. We hope to have it translated into English soon, so stay tuned.

Rabbi Elba basically points out how does not really address any questions nor concerns raised on, which are essentially those raised by Rabbinical Courts and Avrechim.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Elon Moreh's Rabbi Levanon Speaks

5 Nisan 5768

The authenticity of the letter recently re-published and distributed reminding the Torah-observant public that one may not trust in Shlomo Aviner's books or articles, nor one may ask him questions regarding ANY issue, has been called into question.

This is a feeble attempt to discredit those of us demanding answers and justice.

Anyone of the rabbinic signatories on the letter may be contacted. The letter's authenticity may be confirmed very easily.

One recent event in the Shomron demonstrates just how desperate Aviner's followers are to legitimize their leader's actions.

A rabbi, who is a resident of Elon Moreh, put up poster-sized announcements bearing the aforementioned letter in his town.

Within a short span of time, the posters were ripped down, even though the very Rabbi of Elon Moreh, Rabbi Eliakim Levanon, is one of the letter's signatories.

Rabbi Levanon called a public meeting in which he was to clear up any doubts about the issue and about his position. In this meeting, he explained that yes he did agree with the letter, and gave his approval to sign his name. He pointed out one of the most compelling problems was Shlomo Aviner's refusal to attend the hearing.

Not all of the residents received the answer they wanted. However, several residents who were previously doubtful, were convinced and recognized the importance of heeding the town's rabbi's opinion on the issue of such public announcements, however unpopular they might be.

Once again, anyone of the rabbinic signatories on the letter may be contacted.

Sunday, December 23, 2007

Noa Yaron-Dayan and her Book "Mekimi"

14 Tevet 5768

Former television star Noa Yaron-Dayan's book Mekimi recently incurred criticism by Shlomo Aviner.

Shlomo Aviner was asked, "Is it appropriate to read the book Mekimi?"

"Certainly not," he ruled. "The author intended it for the non-religious. But it is not appropriate for them either, because it is superficial and immodest."

Mekimi describes the author's journey from a secular upbringing to Breslover Hassidic Judaism. The book has garnered a great many positive reviews, including some from the religious establishment. Even the Ma'ayanei HaY'shu'a movement, in whose weekly Parsha sheet Shlomo Aviner's response to the question as to whether one should read this book, has been publicized, has been distributing the book as part of its Torah outreach operations.1

Elisheva Federman, Religious Zionist activist, suggests a possible reason for the strong reaction from Shlomo Aviner: fear. In her review of the book Mekimi, Federman points out that the focus of the book is love.

"In a generation which venerates wit, wisdom, and logica, we are a people whose souls are choked and crying out. HaShem is found in the heart of every Jew. The soul feels, searches, and asks."

Everyone whom she has asked about the book felt touched in a deep place, thus Shlomo's Aviner's description of "superficial" does not seem to fit.

Federman suggests that rabbis like Shlomo Aviner fear losing a hold on their "flocks," ...losing followers. It seems difficult for her to grasp how "the truth which touches the Jewish heart lovingly searching for HaShem" could invoke such a reaction of disapproval.2

After all Shlomo Aviner is a well-known advocate of "Ahavath Hinam," unconditional love.

Recently, we were made aware of another possible reason behind Shlomo Aviner's strong reaction against the reading the book Mekimi. A conference was arranged by Shlomo Aviner, at which Noa Yaron-Dayan was to speak.

After being approached, and provided with documented information supporting our concerns over Shlomo Aviner, Noa Yaron-Dayan canceled her scheduled appearance.


1 NRG, Dec. 13, 2007
Click here for the complete story in Hebrew.

2 NRG, Dec. 17, 2007
Click here for the complete story in Hebrew.

Monday, November 19, 2007


9 Kislev 5768

In 5765 (2005), the investigations into Shlomo Aviner's instruction on Niddah cumulated in the ruling by a Rabbinic Council convened by Rishon LeTzion HaRav Mordekhai Eliyahu SHLIT"A that

This Rabbinical Council was comprised of:

Rabbi Ya'acov Yosef SHLIT”A
Rabbi, Giv'at Moshe, Jerusalem, Hazon Ya'acov Foundation

Rabbi Dov Lior, SHLIT”A

Rabbi of Qiriyath Arba-Hevron

Rabbi Mordekhai Eliyahu SHLIT”A
Rishon leTzion
Former Sefardi Chief Rabbi of Israel

Rabbi Zalman Nehemiyah Goldberg, SHLIT”A
Member, High Rabbinical Court

Rabbi Avraham Elqanah Kahane Shapira ZTZ"L
Rosh Yeshivah, Merkaz HaRav, Former Ashkinazi Chief Rabbi of Israel

Since then, many other respected rabbis have added their names to the list of halachic scholars instructing the public to refrain from turning to Shlomo Aviner, regarding various issues. These rabbis include, but are not limited to:

Rabbi Shlomo Fisher, SHLIT”A

Dayan, High Rabbinical Court of Jerusalem

Rabbi Nissim Karlitz, SHLIT”A
B'nei Braq

The aim of this blog is to bring forth such documents and evidence, and make it more accessible to the English-speaking public.

This blog also intends to investigate such confounding questions as:

1. How is it that so many Jews in the Binyamin Region are sill unaware of these Rabbinic rulings, even though the Binyamin Religious Council was specifically instructed to publicize the original ruling of 5765?

2. How is it that those Jews who are aware of the various rulings against Shlomo Aviner side with him, instead of following the dictates of the greatest rabbis of our generation?

3. How is it that so Jews seem to believe that rulings of Rabbinial Courts are nothing more than Lashon HaRa (forbidden speech), when in fact the halacha says exactly the opposite?

For clarity, the dates of each blog post match the dates of the letters and documents, or the approximate date of their release, in order to keep to the time line of the various investigations and rulings.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Video Testimony: Shlomo Aviner In Gush Katif

The following video (Hebrew subtitles) was posted on 2 Marheshvan 5767 (24 October, 2006). It is of journalist Shlomo Wollins testifying as to what he witnessed in during the expulsion from Gush Katif: Shlomo Aviner's attack on protesting Jews!

Friday, September 1, 2006

Rabbinic Announcement to the Torah Public, 5766

The following Rabbis wrote and signed their names to the following announcement to the public. The original Hebrew letter can be found below.

Rabbi Dov Lior

Rabbi and Chair of the Rabbinical Court of Qiriyath Arba-Hevron

Rabbi Ya'acov Yosef
Rabbi, Giv'at Moshe, Jerusalem, Rosh Kollel and Rabbinical Court Chair

Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Kalev
Judge, Jerusalem Area Rabbinical Court

Rabbi Eliyakim Levanon
Rabbi of Elon Moreh

In addition, the following rabbis have publicly stated their agreement with said public announcement:

Rabbi Nissim Karlitz
Rabbi and Rabbinical Court Chair, B'nei Braq

Rabbi Dov Levine

Rabbinical Court Chair, Jerusalem

Rabbi Shlomo Fisher

Rabbinical Court Judge, Jerusalem

To our brethren in the Torah observant community

More than a year has passed since the Bet Din (Rabbinical Court), comprised of three of our greatest rabbis, was appointed to investigate the many complaints lodged against the instruction of Rabbi Shlomo Aviner. With the presentation of explicit evidence, it was made clear that with regard to the issues of menstruation and marital relations (the areas which were checked), he has been permitting things which are completely prohibited under halacha (Jewish Law) And this is not one the issues which carry differing opinions amongst adjudicators and experts, but rather is among the very serious and clear Torah prohibitions which have never been matters of disagreement; and not just one incident, but rather a systematic removal of family purity from amongst those who inquire of him and listen to his instruction. Accordingly, it has become clear that the Bet Din stands by its ruling, yet the aforementioned individual continues to mislead those who make inquiries of him regarding these matters.

To our regret others have arisen, who without having clarify the facts very and without having approached any members of the Bet Din, have come to strengthen his position against the Bet Din's ruling and to clarify "his approach," and who have been misled by him through various distortions about which there is insufficient room to elaborate them. And, Indeed, it is very difficult for anyone who knows the aforementioned as one who strikes at the Torah and at the very Fear of Heaven, to accept that there is a such personality here, who on one hand brings Jews back to Torah with contradictory language, and on the other hand maliciously teaches the transgression of prohibitions, punishable by excommunication. You cannot judge a book by its cover.

And, here in the conclusion of the Bet Din, the explicit halacha is that regarding one who causes the public to stumble through his teaching on issues punishable by excommunication, one is not to listen to his teachings or guidance on any other matter.

Therefore we are warning every Torah-observant community, those who are interested in the sustenance of Israel in its land through the Word of the Almighty, not to ask nor to accept any instruction or guidance from the aforementioned individual, and thus, not to rely on any of his books or articles. We also turn to all institutions and organizations, and to all who allow the teachings and guidance of the aforementioned written or verbal, and all those who give him validity and public power, not to share in any activity with at all, and not placing any stumbling block before the public, Heaven forbid.

With this, we call on those, who up until now have innocently followed his teaching and guidance, not to be discouraged, inasmuch as they have been innocently following, should adhere to other rabbis from now on. to be truly strengthened in the the path of the Almighty and in the Fear of Him.

We have come to this by the virtue of our obligation to remove a stumbling block from the path of our people and "...for the ways of the LORD are right, and the just do walk in them; but transgressors do stumble therein." (Hoshea 14:10) He who hears will hear, and he who does not will not. May it be the Will of the Holy One, Blessed Be He that He implant a pure spirit from on high upon the entire community of His people Israel, and speedily bring forth for us a complete redemption.

(Click to enlarge)

Friday, July 29, 2005

Letter To Binyamin Religious Council, Tammuz 5765

The following is a translation of the ruling of the Rabbinical Council comprised of the rabbis listed. The Hebrew version may be viewed at

The Words of the Rabbanim HaGa'onim

Rabbi Ya'acov Yosef SHLiT”A
Rabbi, Giv'at Moshe, Jerusalem, Hazon Ya'acov Foundation

Rabbi Dov Lior, SHLIT”A

Rabbi of Qiriyath Arba-Hevron

Rabbi Mordekhai Eliyahu SHLIT”A
Rishon leTzion, Former Sefardi Chief Rabbi of Israel

Rabbi Zalman Nehemiyah Goldberg, SHLIT”A
Member, High Rabbinical Court

Rabbi Avraham Elqanah Kahane Shapira SHILT”A
Rosh Yeshivah, Merkaz HaRav, Former Ashkinazi Chief Rabbi of Israel

(Listed according to the order of signatures)

To: Mateh Binyamin Religious Council
B”H 22 Tammuz 5765

We, the members of the Rabbinical Council appointed by the honorable “Rishon leTzion” Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, Shilt”a, to check the complaints and the concerning the rulings of Rabbi Shlomo Aviner on issues of family purity. After reviewing much testimony, both verbal and written, and in the absence of cooperation from the side of Rabbi Aviner (who did not come to the despite our requests), we announce that in light of the data which is in our possession, we are convinced that there are things he teaches which are not according to Jewish Law, and there are things which are which appear to the public as permitting the forbidden” (Yoreh De'ah 242:10).

And thus, we have arrived at the conclusion that it is forbidden for Rabbi Shlomo Aviner to provide instruction of Jewish Law on topics of marital relations (menstruation, stains, appearances, the prohibition of a woman to her husband, and those related issues).

We request that the Religious Council bring these things to the attention of the public, primarily in Bet-El and the surrounding area, and to announce that one should not turn to him for these questions.

Ya'acov Yosef
Dov Lior


B”H Surely I have seen the written and signed above, and I join it.

Mordechai Eliyahu


Trustworthy are the words of Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, SHILT”A, and I share in his opinion.

Zalman Nehemiyah Goldberg


To the Council of Rabbis
Peace and Blessing

Surely I have seen the letter of the honorable council: Rabbi D. Lior, Rabbi Y. Yosef, with the addition of signatures from the Rishon leTzion Rabbi M. Eliyahu and Rabbi Z. N. Goldberg, and it is self-evident.

Avraham Shapira