Was Rabbi Shain Fired?

Was Rabbi Yudel Shain fired from B'datz Mehadrin because of his opposition to Rubashkin shechita or did Rabbi Shain quit in protest as he has claimed?

One hint might be that Rabbi Shain's resignation letter appears to have been sent out before the B'datz Mehadrin letter now being circulated was written.

Another hint might be that the B'datz Mehadrin letter was sent to and is apparently being publicized by Rabbi Menachem Meir Weissmandal, who is one of Rubashkin's kosher supervisors.

The B'Datz letter (in Hebrew) can be downloaded here as a PDF file.

Comments

[Dov Wachmann]

Your posting should have been better entitled "Is the Lubavitcher Rebbe still alive and did Yehuda Shain resign?"

I confronted Shain on Monday with the following statement in a posting to the piece about his "resignation", "He is not resigning out of protest he knows that after all his bomb throwing he no longer has a job." http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2005/01/us_head_of_bdat.html

Shain, not generally known for his shyness and reticence, deliberately avoided my statement and instead made a hullabaloo about the location of a Galil plant.

Later in the thread when he thought he had me on the ropes he insisted on manipulating the discussion solely towards the Rubashkin video. He probably thought that he'd get away with it.

I posted again stating that he wouldn't get away with it because I had a copy of Rabbi Rubin's letter dismissing Yehuda Shain. I offered to send it to any and all who expressed interest. In fact I only had one taker, none other than our host, Shmarya who is Shain's partner in arms http://www.mentalblog.com/2005/01/rabbi-shain-shmarya-in-postville-iowa.html .

I suspected that it might take a while for it to be posted and that rather than Shain answering me directly in the original discussion as he had been doing that Shmarya would probably post it separately and at the same time sneak in implied trial balloons of defenses "One hint might be that Rabbi Shain's resignation letter appears to have been sent out before the B'datz Mehadrin letter now being circulated was written. Another hint might be that the B'datz Mehadrin letter was sent to and is apparently being publicized by Rabbi Menachem Meir Weissmandal, who is one of Rubashkin's kosher supervisors."

Why hints? Unlike the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Rubin is still alive.

Is Rabbi Rubin prepared to come out and defend Shain's version and say that this is a Weissmandel forgery as Shain's defenders want to imply? Is Rabbi Rubin prepared to back Shain that he resigned? Or is Yehuda Shain now adding Rabbi Rubin to his endless and growing list of untrustworthy Rabbis?

There's an old joke, "An elderly gentleman was driving along the interstate highway when his cell rang. It was his wife: "Honey," she said, "I was worried about you. I just heard on the radio that there's a car driving the wrong way on the interstate, near where I know you must be. Please be careful!"
"One car?!" said the man, "There's hundreds!!!"

Shain is telling us that hundreds of Rabbis are lying. There's a simpler, better and truer answer there's only one person lying and it's Yehuda Shain.

[Shmarya]

Who in the world is implying that the letter is a "Weissmandel forgery"?

The facts seem clear:

1. Rabbi Shain speaks and writes what is on his mind.

2. Rabbi Rubin asked Rabbi Shain to lay off Rabbi Weissmandal.

3. Rabbi Shain did so for a brief time – about two weeks.

4. Rabbi Rubin asked Rabbi Shain to keep quiet a little longer.

5. Rabbi Shain refused.

6. At this point Rabbi Shain resigned.

7. Concurrently, or shortly after, Rabbi Rubin wrote the letter to Rabbi Shain and copied it to Rabbi Weissmandal.

Rabbi Shain may be extreme in his views, but I don't see a forgery here or a lie.

Further, you have failed to bring even one correct fact in support of your allegations. From the original location of Galil shechita to the facts of that case, every 'fact' you have presented has turned out to be false.

Rabbi Shain may be an unpopular man and extreme in his kashrut views, but that does not make him a liar or a forger. It also doesn not make his views on the Rubashkin situation incorrect.

[Dov Wachmann]

Shmarya,
Let's try and keep this honest.

1) You ask "Who in the world is implying that the letter is a "Weissmandel forgery"?" If all along you meant that both letters are genuine what exactly then did you have in mind when you wrote, "Another hint might be that the B'datz Mehadrin letter was sent to and is apparently being publicized by Rabbi Menachem Meir Weissmandal, who is one of Rubashkin's kosher supervisors."? If you admitted that the letter is genuine what difference does it make who it came from even if it would have come from none other than Shain's arch-enemy Rabbi Heinemann?

2) First you said it's one or the other,
"Was Rabbi Yudel Shain fired from B'datz Mehadrin because of his opposition to Rubashkin shechita or did Rabbi Shain quit in protest as he has claimed?"
Now you say it's not one or the other it's both. Make your mind up, you can't have your cake and eat it.

3) The only fact that I presented that was directly relevant to your posting about Shain's "shocking" "resignation" was that Shain was fired. Shain conveniently and curiously ignored that fact, focusing instead on the totally tangential and inconsequential question of where a Galil plant was. In addition not only do I have proof of the fact that Shain was fired, you yourself agree that this is established fact. Except, that you now expect us to believe that Shain had resigned first but in a most unusual and uncharacteristic fit of modesty and shyness didn't want to say so when challenged.

3) Shain's arguments are steeped in technical terms with which he tries to bamboozle the reader. In addition he is waiting for someone to fall for his trap of getting into a never-ending spiral of claims and counter-claims over his nonesense.

I issued him a simple challenge to which he still refuses to respond. Give me the contact information of even one widely respected kashrus authority who will classify Shain's allegations against Rubashkin as fair, balanced and accurate. Strangely you defend him as being extreme in his kashrus views. That's not a defense that's a damning indictment. If he wants to be extreme let him be extreme for himself. What right does he have to accuse other people of being corrupt for being less extreme than he? By far this comment of yours is the most ridiculous assertion you are making. Taken to its logical conclusion you are basically saying that he is well meaning but he should be locked up anyway.

In fact why don't we take a look at what Rabbi Rubin himself wrote about Shain in the dismissal letter instead of getting into ridiculous arguments about did he resign first/later? He wrote in Hebrew about Shain's letters, "you are publicizing against Rabbonim, Geonim, Chasidim and Anshei Maaseh and their shechito. We disassociate ourselves from this behavior and protest this behavior to the fullest extent. As a result you no longer have any right to represent Badatz Mehadrin in any shape or form"

Rabbi Rubin is one of the world's most respected kashrus authorities. Even Shain is reluctant to attack him directly. He is protesting Shain's letters and you expect me to take them seriously. Have you totally lost your mind?

[Shmarya]

Again, every 'fact' you have presented has turned out to be wrong.

Further, Rabbi Shain's criticsm of Rabbi Weissmandal and Rubashkin have been publicly circulating for more than one month. If Rabbi Rubin and B'datz Mehadrin wanted to fire Rabbi Shain for his views, they certainly waited a long time to do so.

As for Rabbi Shain's allegations against Rubashkin, I have confirmed *some* but *not* all of them, including the mislabeling of product and confusion of supervisions.

What may be confusing for you is Rabbi Shain's focus on general operating procedures rather than individual incidents. As an example, years ago I did a Pesach product supervision job for a major kosher certifier. My co-worker and I met the agency's regional coordinator at the plant. As he gave us a tour I noticed not-kosher-for-Passover ingredients stored next to Passover ingredients. Worse yet, the packaging was almost identical, the only real difference being a slight difference the color of the label. I wanted to sequester the not-kosher-for-Passover ingredients. The Agency's RC refused. As soon as he left the plant my co-worker and I decided to watch every ingredient load – something we had been specifically told not to do. Sure enough, a day or so into the processing in the middle of an overnight shift, a worker mistakenly took a bag of the not-kosher-for-Passover ingredient, brought it to the loading point and prepared to dump it. I saw the mistake and pointed it out to him. The worker was aghast, apologized profusely and quickly corrected the situation. Before the day shift started, my co-mashgiach and I had a brief meeting and decided to sequester the not-kosher-for-Passover ingredients.

The point of this story is that agencies make these mistakes. Rabbi Shain publicizes them. Kosher supervising agencies don't like to be outed. They exist based on their reputations.

Rabbi Shain wants to fix *systems* to prevent future problems. Agencies often believe their systems do *not* need fixing, and maintain this position until it is proven false. Rabbi Shain may be more perceptive in this regard than many kosher supervising agencies. Or he may be overly so.

Rabbi Rubin is, as you have written, "one of the world's most respected kashrus authorities." Rabbi Shain worked for Rabbi Rubin for many years. During that tenure, Rabbi Shain made his views very well known. Yet Rabbi Rubin did *not* fire him. If Rabbi Shain had been lying all these years, and if, as you claim, this 'fact' was well-known and proven, then what you are actually claiming is that Rabbi Rubin and B'datz Mehadrin knowingly aided and abbetted Rabbi Shain's 'campaign of deceit.' So too did all of the other supervising agencies that employed Rabbi Shain during that time.

[FNU LNU]

I know none of you three personally (Shmarya, R' Shain, Dov Wachmann):

Just on the basis of what I've seen on this blog, two of you (at the least) have agendas that are more narrow then those of the general Orthodox community - Shmarya and Dov Wachmann. Shmary'a agenda is pretty clear from his blog name. Dov Wachmann appears to really have it out for R' Shain.

Now, as it happens you can have an agenda and be right. All in all, on the Rubashkin issue, I do not agree with everything Shmarya says but he has had many, many good points that I wish the leadership would either more honestly or more coherently address. Dov Wachmann makes intelligent arguments and too does research into the issues, to his credit, but he is being inconsistant and is, if he is right, holding back basic facts that he needs to make to make his case.

You first accused R' Shain of making a forgery and have retracted this statement acknowledging it was false. You did not ask for mechila. You then said you had a letter he was fired so he's a liar after all. R' Shain should clarify the order of events now that the issue has come up but its not necessarily clear which came first, firing or quitting (assuming both happened).

Dov, why are you against R' Shain? What has led you to make the effort to fact check every line of his statement with others and to continue to go on the attack even after your first main point turned out to be untrue? Why, if anything are you becoming more strident? What has R' Shain done? Your credibility is now at issue too.

R' Shain, what was the order of event in terms of your firing or quitting. If you were fired why did you say you quit? If you quit why did they make the effort to say you were fired?

You can be vigilantly meticulous in every point you make, yet be completely wrong because you miss the bigger picture. The best untruths are truths with one or two false twists. Dov accuses R' Shain of this and I have no way to know whether he's right. Dov should beware himself. So should anyone with an agenda (and I include myself).

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

The problem is that although there is a natural disinclination to engage in this type of character assassination - and valid concerns about it, as others point out - R' Shain himself makes it a legitimate issue when he holds himself out as a kashrus expert while engaging in his various attacks. If his ostensible stature is to be used to besmirch various rabbonim, then it is legitimate to raise the issue of just how reliable he really is.

Dov Wachman may have picked one particular episode that was not backed by facts, but R' Shain has a very long track record, and a well known reputation, even among those inclined - as he is - to be skeptical of kashrus certifying agencies. In the previous thread I noted another - recent - instance of R' Shain putting out misleading information in the name of Israeli gedolim - only to be contradicted by the Lakewood roshei yeshiva, who verified their info themselves.

Bottom line is that R' Shain is at times a useful muckraker, but his claims have to be independently verified before being taken seriously.

[FNU LNU]

Dov Wachman portrayed it as their being a communal understanding that R' Shain did X, and therefore he assumed it was true. But it was not true.

You say R' Shain did Y but, as far as I know again details and specifics are murky. How am I to know if R' Shain did something legitimate are not?

The only issue so far that has some hold on me, is the fire v. quitting issue as there is a letter. So now I'd like to hear both 'sides' stories, the evidence they have, and then I'll make my own decision.

PETA has an awful reputation as far as I'm concerned but they have the video and that trumps the words of Rubashkin, their attorney Nat Lewin, or Agudah's initial resolution, again to my mind. Actually, now Rubashkin themselves, I have no faith in their words because they fail to acknowledge what my eyes can see and what I read the experts say.

How am I to know if you are engaging in ruining a man's name (livelihood?) or if he has earned is comeuppance.

The certifiers rely on their good name to put food in our houses. On the one hard to falsely attack them is to remove their business and needlessly remove choice from the kosher community. A great sin. To needlessly hold back on claims is to allow potentially non-kosher food in the homes of those who want only to keep kosher and also to allow a liar to persist in lies harming others. Also a great sin.

If R' Shain has real questions and is knowledgable, he should raise them. Is he knowledgable? Are his issues legitmate.

Anyway, you and Dov are on the attack and not merely seeking information or R' Shain's view/spin on rumors before attacking. If R' Shain is discreditable, thank you for raising questions; consider how to better raise issues in the future. If you and Dov are wrong or acting on mere rumor, you are committing incredibly great sins. Your actions are public; I am not sure how you can do kapara. If you only are attacking R' Shain on the basis of rumors you should both be ashamed. Please present evidence like the letter.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

Sorry, there are some things that don't lend themselves to being proved over the internet. The events that I refer to were manifested in a publication mailed out to the Lakewood community and a sign in the yeshiva there. Not having made copies or taken pictures, I have nothing to share with you. If you want to verify it, perhaps speak to people in Lakewood. If you can't be bothered or otherwise don't believe it, that's also fine. The world does not turn on what you believe.

WRT the PETA issue, I believe you are confusing two issues. 1) is whether there is a pain-and-suffering issue. I am inclined to agree with you on that count. 2) is whether this raised any kashrus issues. This is a matter for rabbonim and people conversant with the laws of shechita, not PETA or laymen looking at videos.

[FNU LNU]

Honestly, until you told me I thought the world revolved around me. Thanks for teaching me otherwise. Perhaps next we'll discuss my supposed belief in the Chanukkah elf.

If you are not trying to sway people to your point of view then why are you bothering to post allegations in the first place? Are we supposed to be so weak minded that we are to take word on the basis rumor, no evidence, provided by 'Fotheringay-Phipps?'

Most comments here are just different takes on the same facts, myself included, so fine, take us or leave us based on your own inclinations. I post my name for anonymity too, let my words themselves be the basis on whether you put stock in them. Your words require outside evidence and you provide none.

You miss the point: kashrut of the plant was at issue for the first three days. Since then, what? The kosher issue since seems merely a defense by Rubashkin to make their detractors appear anti-Semitic so no part of their assembly line can be questioned.

The people who have stopped eating Rubashkin or think maybe you should not are basing themselves on the mistreatment of the animals shown in the video. And maybe on Rubashkins utter lack of public contrition.

You seem to have come to same conclusion as have I, the practices at Rubashkins were wrong, Rubaskin has not been honest about it, the kashrut organizations (therefore) should have been more vigilant on this issue whether or not the meat met the technical minimal requirements of kashrut (or even went a bit beyond).

And Shmarya has raised valid issues like why the kashrit organizations may have been imvolved in lobbying the second cut, why they haven't come up with a consistant explanation about that double cut even within the same organization, why they cut meat to Israeli standards they themselves deem inferior when the Israeli market has been closed to them for a long while, etc. Issues that raise the issue of sloppiness and show that the animal welfare may not have been a value at all to the certifiers or Rubashkin,

The issue is why Rubashkin set up a system that they are still defending that needlessly causes pain, that they needlessly made the rabbanon of Agudah back something that should not have been backed, that they continue to put an attack on their operations as an attack against kashrut? Why are they still being backed on this when they continue to needlessly embaress the frum community?

R' Shain's allegations on the link we were given go well outside the video to labelling and other kashrut issues that this blog has not really addressed nor have you. For him your attack is not on his issues but charachter assassination, and maybe its right and maybe its wrong, I don't know, but you now say you can't provide any evidence.

Anyway, I've had my word. I have work. So, for now at least, the last words can be yours.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

I'm sorry but your last post is a bit rambling - I have a hard time figuring out what your point was in the context of our discussion, for the most part. I'll respond to the part that seemed coherent.

I am not expecting anyone to accept as gospel the internet posting of some anonymous poster. My intention was for people to look into things themselves and not be swayed by the ostensible qualifications of R' Shain. If people disregard everything I've said but take his words with a grain of salt and look for verification on their own, my work has been done.

[Dov Wachmann]

Shmarya,
The problem with Yehuda Shain is much more than his views. It's one thing for him to suspect wrongdoing, it's another for him to allege it but, either way, there can be no excuse whatsoever for the reckless and terrible accusations that he has been spewing out and that you have been so assiduously promoting on your blog.

Shain is so busy fighting his battles against the kashrus establishment, you are so busy jumping on the animal rights bandwagon to fight the Orthodox and Charedi establishment and in the process neither of you has been able to see beyond the end of his nose.

Are you both so blind and foolish that you are totally unaware that the impression you are creating to anyone who visits this site is that Frum kashrus and Frum Rabbonim are totally corrupt?

It is bad enough that you may both believe it but the magnitude of the evil of grievously slandering, with total abandon, entire groups of Rabbonim is staggering. It is this very evil that Rabbi Rubin was addressing when in reference to Shain's letters he wrote, "you are publicizing against Rabbonim, Geonim, Chasidim and Anshei Maaseh and their shechito. We disassociate ourselves from this behavior and protest this behavior to the fullest extent."

But that was not enough for Yehuda Shain. When finally his behavior had come back to bite him and in payback Rabbi Rubin had dismissed him do you think that for a moment he took stock of how far he had allowed himself to become carried away? Was he repentant?

On the contrary, in a final dastardly deed he attempted to cast aspersions not only on the Rabbonim in America but on Rabbonim in Eretz Yisroel as well. He manafactured a "resignation" that never was as if it were selfless mesiras nefesh on behalf of the US Kosher Consumer. The reaction on this blog and other blogs was the same "This is truly, truly SHOCKING!!!!!". Shain was in effect bringing down with him the credibility of the entire olom hakashrus.

Even if Shain had always been responsible enough to ensure that over the years his allegations were all fair, balanced and accurate that as much as possible they were directed at systems and not people he should never, ever, ever have expressed them anywhere that they could circulate beyond the olom who are truly mehader in kashrus.

The truth of my remarks can be very simply demonstrated.
I challenge Yehuda Shain to firstly, recognize that his principal contribution is in the area of hiddurim and to therefore permanently cease and desist spreading any and all kashrus information in any medium that could find its way beyond the olom hatoro. Secondly, I challenge him to ensure that any and all information he gives out is done in partnership and conjunction with a widely respected kashrus authority. Accountability is not only for hechsherim. Yehuda Shain should hold himself to the same high standards of accountability that he would hold others.

If he has the courage to take up these two challenges I will be more than happy to retract EVERYTHING I have written about him here and elsewhere.

[Shmarya]

You seem much more concerned about the potential for shaming the community than you are for the facts of the matter.

Perhaps you should also address you complaint to Rubashkin, KAJ, the OU, etc.

[Shmarya]

"On the contrary, in a final dastardly deed he attempted to cast aspersions not only on the Rabbonim in America but on Rabbonim in Eretz Yisroel as well. He manafactured a "resignation" that never was as if it were selfless mesiras nefesh on behalf of the US Kosher Consumer."

Do you have proof for this statement?

Again, Rabbi Shain's resignation letter seems to have been written *before* Rabbi Rubin's letter.

[FNU LNU]

Dov Wachmann,

I simply note that you have moved from attacking R' Shain's past actions to attacking him and Shmarya for being involved in the current issue.

Is your strident opposition to him because you see him as opposing the rabbanon here? Because he and Shmarya continue to discuss this issue? This is a shift from what you wrote earlier about his history being the source of his discredibility

What is his history? Tell us what he has done? Has he harmed you ever?

You have scored one blow against R' Shain (the resignation letter) but have not explained how you understand his thought process or how you are knowledgable about the order of the facts. On that note, it would be nice, were he available for R' Shain to provide his view on this.

You may be right, you may be using common sense, you may be utterly wrong.

Again I am ignorant of R' Shain outside of this blog. If it hasn't been, linked to hear I know nothing of him.

[Shmarya]

I received this via e-mail from Rabbi Shain's wife:

Yesterday Wednesday, January 4th, my husband and I had the opportunity and zechus to visit with Rebetzin Pam, zohl zein gezunt, in a rehab center. Rebetzin Pam is the Almonah (widow) of the late venerated Rosh Hayeshiva of Torah Vodath and Gadol Horav Avrohom Hakohen Pam, Zt”l.

We knocked at her open door and I introduced us as the Shain’s. During our conversation, the Rebetzin mentioned various Rabbi Shains whom she knows. One is a brother, one is a cousin, etc. The elderly Rebetzin Pam then asked “which Rabbi Shain are you?” I responded for my husband (Reb Yehuda) “this is the Rabbi Shain who by request of the Rosh Hayeshiva went through your kitchen a few years ago with Rav Pam” (and spent time with the Rebetzin & Rosh Hayeshiva in the various kashrus clarifications of the Rebetzin & Rosh Hayeshiva.)

At that point she exclaimed “Oh!”, then Rebetzin Pam struggled to use her walker next to the wheel chair to raise herself up to a full standing height and remained standing until we begged her to please be seated, and the conversation continued to other topics.

Apparently, Rav Pam felt that Rav Yehuda Shain qualified to be his inhouse kashrus consultant.

I remain,

Bernice Shain

[FNU LNU]

What was that letter from Rebbetzin Shain for?

It can not address the vendetta of Dov Wachmann and the possibly separate persona Fotheringay-Phipps. They provide no public reason for their hatred (or, rather, in the case of Dov, changes the reason in email to email) and Dov still, to my knowledge, refuses to express real regret and ask for public forgiveness for publicly making an accusation he later found to be false.

On the other hand, Dov Wachmann has provided a letter that R' Shain should at least address, I think.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

And another thing:

What is the meaning of the statements "Rabbi Shain's resignation letter appears to have been sent out before the B'datz Mehadrin letter now being circulated was written" and "Again, Rabbi Shain's resignation letter seems to have been written *before* Rabbi Rubin's letter"?

In what way does this letter "appear" or "seem" to have been written first? I don't see the slightest indication. Please share.

It's the good old "you can't fire me, I quit!"

[Natan]

The Massiah will have to be HOLY, there are 3 classifications of a person (from Bnei Israel ONLY) being "HOLY to HASHEM" in thouse words from the TORAH. therefore the Torah classifies what a holy person is. A Levi is "HOly to HaShem" a Kohen is "Holy to HaShem". So I could come and say "you have to be born holy, if I am not A Levi or a Kohen I cannot be Holy????" The Torah comes and says in PArashat Naso. "Ish ki Yafli lindor neder NAZIR" therefore it is a brit, brit mila, the brit of the tounge, as we know there are 2 britot between us and HaKodeshBoruhHu. The Torah continues and classifies a NAZIR being HOLY to HAshem. so Any Ben ISREAL can come and become holy. Therefore Massiah as we know from descendants of David Ha Meleh is not a A Levi and therefore not A KOhen. Therefore he HAS to be A Nazir because is has to be HOLY person walking on Earth.

Natan