Why has there not been a [proper] Din Torah until this day and why I think there will [probably] never will be.
This case was in middle of a Din Torah, Spritzer took it to court.
In court the original directors (Hershkops, Goldman and Heber), agreed to return this case to Bais Din, but Spritzer
repeatedly refused. All this has already been documented and discussed in Parshas Machne Menachem, (under: Who Is Making A Chillul Hashem?). Even back then, the original Directors agreed to go to a Zabla, but again Spritzer refused (Read Rabbi Hebers Letter to the judge and Spritzers Lawyer).
TRYING TO HAVE THE LONG AWAITED DIN TORAH.
On the suggestion of the Crown Heights Bais Din, the original directors seek to have a Din Torah out of Crown Heights.
It was decided to go to the Bais Din Machon Lehoraya Monsey.
Update: Spritzer played the Monsey Bais Din for over a year. After a year of back and forth Spritzer makes a request for a Zabla. The Bais Din of Monsey does not deal with Zabla, so they suggest that the Din Torah take place with the Bais Yosef Bais Din (located in Boro-Park) who deal with Zabla. The Monsey Bais Din informed the MM directors that they will monitor the situation, if Spritzer plays his usual games, then they will come out with a Siruf against Spritzer. This all happened Tammuz time (5769). Since that time the Bais Din Bais Yosef has been avoiding the Din Torah. It has recently come to our attention from information coming out of the Bais Din itself, that its not for no reason the Din Torah has been delayed.
The reason they gave was that they had received information from “various parties” that the Hershkop family where involved in a criminal preceding were it would be proved that they are a violent gang and therefore the camp in any case can not go to them, making the argument that there is no need for a Din Torah. The case they were informed about was the now famous Shomrim Six case. What has been known to myself all along and now becoming more apparent is that many people (including Spritzer) were banking on the g-d forbid prosecution and conviction of 6 innocent Jews just to satisfy their own agendas. It’s also becoming very obvious (I personally didn’t need this prove to teach me this fact for as I stated, this is something I could have told you mouth ago), that this whole case from it’s conception had nothing to do with what happened (or did not happen) in 749 on the night of December 29,2007. סוף מעשה במחשבה תחילה
Following is a history on Machne Menachem (“The Corp.) and an abbreviated version of the court cases, and proceedings which lead to the current claim.
Machne Menachem was established in 1996 as a not for profit Corp. The Corp. was established to operate as a summer camp for the benefit of Jewish children. In 1997 The Corp. purchased a property in Lackawaxen, PA. The Corp. was run by the Board which consisted of Mendel Hershkop, Shmuel Heber, Yackov Spritzer, and Yosef Goldman.
In 1997 Mr. Spritzer submitted a claim in Federal Court on the basis of RICO charges against the other directors. In October, 2002 the Court decided in favor of the Board of Directors, dismissing charges against them, and giving the opinion that MR. Spritzer had acted against the law.
In December of 2000, while the proceedings in the NY court were still active, Mr. Spritzer filed for bankruptcy for the Corp. in the State of Pennsylvania. Judge Glasser (New York) assessed that Mr. Spritzer filed for bankruptcy to disrupt the proceedings in New York which at that time were not working in his favor. At the time there was no reason (financially) to file for bankruptcy. The camp was well funded via government programs and camp tuition.
To substantiate his claim, Mr. Spritzer claimed that the Corp. owed him $1.3 million which he had loaned to the Corp. He also submitted claims for his partner (Mr. Schriber), his children, and his son-in-law. One month before filing for bankruptcy Mr. Spritzer placed a lean on the camp grounds for his claim (against the law).
After Judge Glasser’s decision, The Board resumed operating the Corp.
The Boards objective at first was to disprove all of the claims submitted against the Corp.
The Board was advised by its counsel to keep the case in Bankruptcy Court so that it could recover the documents which would be used to refute the claims. They were also advised that this would allow them to recover funds they claimed Mr. Spritzer owed the Corp.
After receiving part of the information demanded from Mr. Spritzer, The Corp. accountant confirmed that the claims were unsubstantiated. Furthermore, Mr. Spritzer was advised by the board (around 1998) not to loan money to the Corp. It was further established that relatives of Directors were not allowed to work for pay. This and much more was submitted to Mr. Santura at Hourigan, Kluger, and Quinn. The Board requested of Mr. Santura that he submit a motion regarding these claims, as refutation of those claims would prove the entire bankruptcy proceedings illegitimate.
After several meetings with Mr. Santura at the offices of H.K.Q., The Board was finally promised that such a motion had been submitted. Mr. Santura provided a copy of this motion with his signature (copy available).
This motion included a request for repayment from Mr. Spritzer on the amount owed by him to The Corp.
The Board trusted Mr. Santura’s word that he had submitted this motion. Any time Mr. Santura was asked why he was not more actively pursuing this he would answer that the Judge was busy and had not had time to review it.
During this time Mr. Santura left H.K.Q. and formed a partnership with Mr. Bresser. The partners were retained to finish the case and were paid tens of thousands of dollars both from Corp. and private funds.
The Corp. determined it would submit a separate claim in State court against Mr. Spritzer and paid Mr. Bresser $5000 for that case. Mr. Bresser promised that this had been done, but any demands for paperwork pertaining to that case were ignored. Regardless of his having been paid, and regardless of the critical impact that case would have had on the Machne Menachem case, Mr. Bresser neglected to ever file the case he had promised and been paid for.
In 2004 The Board wanted to rent the grounds to a Yeshiva. They raised this issue with Mr. Santura who drew up a contract to be used for this purpose. He also gave the Board the go ahead to rent it out without Court permission (which they later found out is against the law). As a direct result of this, the Court appointed a trustee which ultimately led to the Boards loss of the property.
At several points in time reference was made to the above mentioned motion and lawsuit on the stand in Court with Mr. Santura present. At no point in time did he ever admit that those motions and the case were never filed.
As a direct result of the lies, deceit, and false promises by Mr.’s Santura and Bresser, the Court accepted Mr. Spritzer’s claim and ultimately appointed a trustee over the Corp. Since then, the trustee has given ownership of the camp property over to Mr. Spritzer for the sum of $1.3 million which was given as security. Those funds were mostly distributed back to Spritzer related claims leaving the Corp. without camp grounds or money.
MR. CONWAY – COURT APPOINTED TRUSTEE
After Mr. Conway’s appointment as trustee in 2006 he neglected his responsibilities as a trustee for Machne Menachem (“The Corp.”). In place of working with the Corp. for the good of the Corp., Mr. Conway worked against the Corp. and refused to meet with the Board of Directors (“The Board”). He also submitted several motions against the Board of Directors which were rejected by the Court.
In spite of the Board ‘s insistence that Mr. Spritzer’s children were not owed any money, and in spite of the objections filed to these payouts, Mr. Conway paid the Spritzer’s children’s claim to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars.
In spite of Mr. Conway’s knowledge of the Board’s objection to Mr. Schriber’s claim, Mr. Conway paid the claim as submitted to the tune of over $100,000.
Mr. Conway paid claims to creditors despite the Boards objection. Many of those claims had already been paid, and some had failed to provide proof of claim. One of those companies (Ahava) had already failed to prove its claim in court. Nevertheless, Mr. Conway paid that claim.
Despite Mr. Conway’s knowledge of the fact that Mr. Spritzer was not allowed to use the Corp. funds to pay his lawyers, and despite a motion filed by the Corp. to recover the funds already taken by Mr. Spritzer to pay his lawyers, Mr. Conway paid tens of thousands of dollars more to Spritzer lawyers – against the interest of the Corp., from the Corp. money.
In place of acting as a trustee and confident of the Corp., Mr. Conway conspired with Mr. Spritzer, meeting with him and discussing the case on several occasions, while refusing to acknowledge the Board.
As of Today the Board has still not received an accounting of the 1.3 million dollars in the trust. There has been no information provided by Mr. Conway on payouts, only as the Board has learned from Court proceedings. It stands that there is around $500,000 still left, which means that Mr. Conway paid out around $800,000 without the Board’s knowledge or consent.
On May 6, 1997, the plaintiffs, a not-for-profit Corporation and Yaakov Spritzer, filed a complaint against seven named defendants consisting of 167 paragraphs extending over 50 pages and asserting eleven claims as follows:
(Have in mind, the above is not even getting in to the criminal Case, that’s a different story, perhaps for another day).Some Background:
Following the incident at 749 Eastern Parkway where Shomrim members were ambushed and gang assaulted, the Tzfatim went to the police and filed false and trumped up charges against 6 members of Shomrim and had them arrested by the police.
“The conclusion that is compelled by his testimony is that the affairs of the Corporation were conducted by Spritzer as though it was his personal fiefdom with occasional allusions to board approval at meetings which are nowhere documented and by resolutions which were adopted and action taken only because Spritzer divines that they were”.
(Judge Glasser Final Ruling Against Yaakov Spritzer)
Funny how things ended up. Even the Rightful (majority) directors and owners could not work and get paid in their own camp. Except of course for Spritzer and his family.
How this case got to Federal Court when it should have went [straight] to State Court (being a dispute in property ownership), Is all a result of Yaakov Spritzer and Friends (Spritzer, Meir Schreiber and Yossi Spalter) trying to have fellow Jews locked up with a Viscous Mesira. [If Spritzer would have started this case in state court, the issue would have been resolved almost immediately (the verdict, that all are rightful directors), Spritzer knowing this, comes up with a plan of Mesira, to force the camp away from it’s rightful owners, as you see].
For those who excuse themselves (and send your children to “Spritzers” camp) by saying “I don’t get involved in politics”, you are going to discover that this is not simply a case of two sides disputing over a piece of property (which is meant to help you and your children in the summer months), this goes much deeper then that, Mesira to the worse degree.
In time all will be exposed, there will be no excuse of “oh, I did not know”.
Added:(March, 8th, 2009) After reading thorough stacks of material on this case, I have come to a conclusion, that in essence the only thing I would have really needed (to make a case against Spritzer) is this Verdict and PMM. Meaning: if I was to just make a site posting this Verdict, it would be enough . If you really want to get a true picture of what went on, I advice to read this verdict more then onc
The Bais Din’s Latest Psak Regarding Machne Menachem
Wednesday 24 Adar, 5767
To R’ Spritzer and the Brothers R’ Meir and R’ Mendel Hershkop Sheyiehyu.
As there was no conclusion and Psak Din (ruling) with regard to the ownership of Machne Menachem. And there are complaints over the partnership of the above mentioned camp. We are notifying with this letter that until these complaints will be discussed and concluded by a Bais Din that deals with monetary issues on a steady basis in accordance with our holy Torah, there is no permission for anyone to open the camp (even under another name) and use it as his own. We are putting an (ikul) injunction on R’ Yaakov Spritzer not to open the camp and not register any children or hire workers for the camp until the complaints will be adjudicated at a Bais Din.
On this I sign
In the name of the Bais Din
Rabbi Yitzchak Raitport
LACKAWAXEN TWP. – Pennsylvania State Police at Blooming Grove have determined that a man found Wednesday night in Lackawaxen Township stabbed to death, is a victim of a homicide.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2009 at approximately 10:30 p.m. the body of an unidentified male was found in a cabin at Camp Chayoiel Hamelech, off Masthope Plank Road, Lackawaxen Twp., Pike Comity. The victim died from an apparent stab wound.
An autopsy was conducted Friday at Lehigh Valley Hospital and ruled a homicide, The victim is a 50 year old white male possibly of Eastern European descent.
The investigation is ongoing. Anyone with any information about this death is asked to call Pennsylvania State Police at (570) 226-5718.
In the summer of 2001, there was a shooting in the camp, under Spritzers management…read all about it here…Shooting on campgrounds.
In the summer of 2002, when the camp was under Spritzers management, the caretakers house was burned to the ground by some of the other employees. They had gotten in to a fight with Spritzer over money and as a result burned the house down.
More stories to come (I have a feeling we are going to hear much more).
Exit Question: This happened two days ago (July 15, 2009), why are we only hearing about this now (for the first time on, July 17, 2009)?
Camp legal name: Summer Recreation for Children Inc.
“Did your father send you to take pictures of the empty buses?”
(Folly Spritzer to the photographer, Chaim H.)
“My father didn’t send me, but you are correct in your assertion about the empty buses” (Chaim H.)
The truth be told, I did not expect this. Baruch Hashem there are those that still take their Yiddishkeit/Jewishness/Religion/Shulchan Aruch/Torah serious.
I thought that all hope was lost, that people just don’t care anymore about whats right or wrong, left or right, and will just do what is good for them.
Seeing these photos and the photos on COL have strengthened my desire to push forward and continue spreading the truth with more vigor. I think it is safe to say that for the first time (when it come to this case of Machne Menachem), I was wrong. People do care!
To them I say… ארור משיג גבול רעהו ואמר כל-העם אמן
There is a G-d in this world keeping a calculation, to him it makes no difference if you steal a blade of grass or a million dollars, you may have saves a few pesos now, but you will pay much much more later.
UPDATE 8-24-09: To see pictures of This past summer in Chayolei Hamelech (a.k.a The Kings Soldiers), Click Here,Click Here, and Click Here(or just go to Chabad.info and search Chayolei Hamelech).
Rabbi Avtzon must learn to practice what he preaches!
Yeshivas Lubavitch Cincinnati, under the directorship of Rabbi Gershon Avtzon, is pleased to announce that it will be returning this summer to Camp Chayolei Hamelech for the second consecutive summer. The program will be directed by Hatamim Menachem M. Friedman and the Yeshiva Staff and Shluchim. Talmidim interested in joining this special Yeshivah program should contact firstname.lastname@example.org or 347-581-7474. (chabad.info)
Last year (5768) when it became known to the rightful owners of Machne Menachem that Rabbi Avtzon was [indeed] planning use the property that belongs to Machne Menachem, Reb Meir Hershkop contacted him to inquire on who gave him permission.
English Translation Erev Pesach 5769 To Anash and the Crown Heights Community
Greetings and Blessing!
As the summer approaches and the children will go to camp or Yeshiva Kayitz, you, as parents, are busy thinking about camp and deciding which one will be best for your child. Thank G-d there are many summer camp options to choose from.
We do not want to convince or persuade you where to send your child this summer, but rather, to make you aware of the present situation with the Camp Chayolei Hamelach which is under the management of Rutman and Spritzer and located in Lackawaxen, Pennsylvania.
For the past year, there has been a restraining order, an Ikkul, placed on Rutman and Spritzer by the Bais Din of our community. They are not to open the camp until there will be Din Torah decision concerning the camp’s rightful owners.
In addition, Mr. Spritzer has been called over a year ago to the Bais Din Machon L’Horaya –Monsey- and has not yet agreed to come. It is therefore clear that the restraining order, the Ikkul, is still in force upon him. If anyone sends their child to the Camp Chayolei Hamelach, he is participating with Spritzer in the travesty.
Further more, we are reminding everyone that it is stealing, gezel, to use the property without permission from its Owners. We do not allow anyone— a camper, counselor, or teacher, etc.—to use our property which is located in Lackawaxen, Pennsylvania, which in its time was known as Machne Menachem.
We reserve the right to eventually demand full compensation from the parents that went against the restraining order, the Ikkul, and illegally used our property(Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat, Siman 363).
…“After they were informed by the bank, Spritzer and Schreiber, at the end of winter, 1997, decided to sue us in Federal court under RICO for over $2,000,000! Concocting a bunch of libels and falsehoods, they accused us of terrorizing, mail fraud and embezzlement, that Meir Hershkop had taken money for himself and tried to gain control of the camp by hiring his son-in-law as its manager.
This was a diversionary tactic to enable them to seize full control of the camp.They succeeded at first giving the judge a negative impression of us. They brought false witnesses including Joseph Spielman, Yaakov Herzog, and Yisroel Sandhaus, who all testified falsely against us in court! Spielman testified that his van had been burned and he believed it was Hershkop who did it. This testimony persuaded the judge to reopen the bank account for them and issue a restraining orderagainst us, forbidding us to come in contact with the plaintiffs or with the camp.”
Read for yourself and come to your own conclusion!
יראה העם וישפוט
On May 6, 1997, the plaintiffs, a not-for-profit Corporation and Yaakov Spritzer, filed a complaint against seven named defendants consisting of 167 paragraphs extending over 50 pages and asserting eleven claims as follows:
חבל It's a real pity the judge did not let him (Spritzers lawyer) finish. I would have really liked to know what this was REALLY about! Here I was thinking this was about the children of Crown Heights!
"The Box"- 5 Jews were arrested and charged in criminal court over a $20 box. An arrest that was made all because of political presser from Yankle Spritzer and Chanina Sperlin. It ends up that to begin with the box belonged to the people who damaged it. The box belonged to Machne Menachem.
Submitted to court, by Rabbi Meir Hershkop, May 3rd, 2001. For the Mesira , stroll to the bottom
Although Spritzer continuously claims that he has and always had the publics best interest in his handling of the camp, many things prove this to simply not be true.
The following is one of the original directors account of how he chanced upon an attempt by Spritzer to simply sell the grounds so that he can ‘take the money and run’.
Meir Hershkop writes:
In 1999,I myself found out through a matter of pure luck and Divine Providence, that Mr. Spritzer planned on selling the camp to the Bobov Chassidim for approximately 2 – 2.5 million dollars. I let Judge Glasser know this and gave him the proof I had that he plans on selling the camp, and Judge Glasser placed a restraining order against Mr. Spritzer, forbidding him from selling the camp.
To address the question being asked by the public:
Why wasn’t the camp open for our children when the original directors got back their camp (between the years of 2003 to 2006)?
The original directors’ and owners intentions and purpose, were to insure the best camp for our children. The first year of the camp, 1995, was successful beyond all expectations. The enrollment was initially 250 children, which rose to approximately 400/500 children and it was expected to increase.
This letter was written by one of the Directors of Machne Menachem to a “concerned” resident of the Shchuna. [This director was also part of Spritzers viscous Mesira].
November 24, 1998
To my dear friend R’ Y. S;
Greeting and Blessing,
Approximately two weeks ago, you approached me in “770” and presented your concern and wish to end the long-time dispute in our neighborhood regarding Machne Menachem. You stated that you have already spoken to the “other side” and you feel that the time is right to begin negotiation. I usually do not write nevertheless, because I know you and I feel that you are a truthful person, I decided to write you my personal encounters in this important letter. A humans mind tends to possess a selective memory, consequently, the rumors and fabrications that have been circulating have surely affected you, as well as many others in the community. Through our brief correspondence from time to time, I understand that you have forgotten some major facts and therefore I will reiterate them.
Bear in mind that the following is only a taste of the big pie, however I present them to you, for the reason that, you should be aware of all the true facts and will not say “my hands did not spill this blood”
As you recall you mentioned that the “other side” is ready to make “peace”. I told you to present their proposal in writing and you stated that Mr. …. would like us to sign a written confirmation that we no longer have any claims of ownership in Camp Machne Menachem Inc. Thereupon, I quote; “ko omar Hashem- ha’ratzachta v’gom ya’rashta!! – you murdered and you also want to inherit! ! (Melachim 21;19). After a few days, you once again approached [another of the camps directors] proposing the same idea, and by Divine Providence, I passed and confirmed that I have already spoken to you and since that time you haven’t presented anything in writing, therefore you are not serious about the matter.
Spritzer has countless times disobeyed the Bais Din, spit in their faces and stepped all over them. He then put them on a silver platter and gets to claim “Kovod Harabonim”.
Here is the fake Psak Din which Spritzer tried to represent to the court.
The court did not accept this as evidence (coopering it to the original), the Judge looked at it, and just let it roll out of his hand, on to the floor.
The court saw it for what it was, a fake. written by Spritzer himself. Yet, Spritzer sells to anyone that will listen stories of how it is he who is for “Kovod Harabonim”.
To note: you will not find this document in any court files (for it was totally disregarded).
Rabbi Meir & Mendel Hershkop , the founders and original directors of Machane Menachem approached Rabbi Marlow ob”m showing him the forged “Psak” and ask him, “היתכן that after the Bais Din comes out with a Psak (which was given to both parties) , they go ahead and sign a second Psak – to the liking of Spritzer – to pour salt on the wounds?” To this Rabbi Marlow replied “I don’t know to what you are referring, I never saw nor signed such a Psak”.
The “Psak” was written by Spritzers lawyer, Peretz Bronstein (without the second party even knowing about this “new” “Psak” until they came to court).
See for yourself…
יראה העם וישפוט
Go back, read the real Psak Dinnim, does this make sense? a Letter written by Peretz Bronstein himself. Since when do lawyers write letters for Bais Din? Why not present to the court the real (original) Psak?
Last week at Machne Menachem summer camp, Meir Hershkop’s assistant, Michal, prepares for the arrival of 350 children. Hershkop found numerous swastikas spray-painted at the camp when he returned on June 27.
LACKAWAXEN, PA – Meir Hershkop reached out his hand and
agreed to talk about the swastikas he found after returning to his
summer camp for children on June 27.
The 48-year-old walked by the cabin where he’s staying with his
assistant, Michal. The emblem of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party had been
sprayed in white on the cabin’s red siding. Beside the swastika the
vandal(s) had sprayed an anarchy sign.
Hershkop pointed out a swastika on a doormat, one on the window of
a storm door and one on a nearby picnic table. The word “Nazi” had
been sprayed on the table’s bench.
“Heil Hitler” had been sprayed in the grass, and the culprits had
broken into a building, stolen Hebrew Bibles, ripped out pages and
strewn them by the entrance gate to the not-for-profit camp, Machne
Menachem, which sits in a secluded 87-acre valley along the Upper
Meir and Michal were busily preparing for the 350 children who would
arrive on July 7 for eight weeks of summer camp. Hershkop took a
break, stepped out of the rain under the roof of a porch and began
talking about the history of the camp.
He and his partners purchased the property in 1997. This incident,
which Hershkop described as an “accident,” is the first of its kind to
occur here, though once before some thieves broke in and stole a
charity box that contained $13.00.
This is just a small collection of letters and Motions sent to the court and to the Bais Din by the original directors of Camp Machne Menachem. You will find plenty of information in these pages (They are not in order).
Spritzer takes control of the camp for the summer 0f 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002. That’s a total 0f 7 years, in those 7 years not one nail or gallon of paint was used to improve the camp. After not being on the camp grounds for six years I was shocked to not only find that not one thing was done to improve the camp grounds, bunk houses, playing fields etc…I found the place to be in total neglect.
“After the first session, the Beth Din ruled (Erev Rosh Chodesh Tammuz, 5756-1996) that all members of the camp administration are equally “within” and that all decisions must be made by the whole committee (following the majority).” However, Spritzer and Schreiber disobeyed this Halachic Ruling, never calling Hershkop or Hartman to any meeting, and deciding everything on their own.” (from PMM booklet) Read the rest of this entry »
This site is not addressed to the malevolent troublemakers who thrive on dissension and miss no opportunity to stir up controversy. They have no interest in knowing the truth, so no letter, information or facts, can deter them from their goal of provoking strife and sitting back to enjoy the action…
This site and the information on it, is addressed only to those genuinely interested in the truth, justice and who are honestly concerned about respect for the Torah, and are upset by what they feel to be the Chillul Hashem by Spritzer and friends.
If you have nothing genuine to say/state or as(comment), just don’t!
If you know something I might not know, feel free to inform (all of) us. E-mail: email@example.com
Spread the Word
59,753 Know about Machne Menachem
The Talmud in Gittin states:
R. Tarfon used to say: In any place where you find gentile courts, even though their law is the same as the Israelite law, you must not resort to them since it says, 'These are the judgments which thou shalt set before them.' (Ex. 21:1) this is to say, 'before them' and not before gentiles.
"A person will not say lies, which can easily be discovered".
But the Lubavitcher Rebbe of blessed memory asked once, that we still see people that lie in any case, and the Rebbe answers;
When we look into the wording of the Talmud it says INSHEI which means a mensch, however someone who is not a mensch can boldly lie to you in the face even on something, which you know now, that it is a lie.
הלכות גזילה ואבידה פרק חמישי
א. אסור לקנות דבר הגזול מן הגזלן ואסור לסעדו על שינויו כדי שיקנהו שכל העושה דברים אלו וכיוצא בהן מחזק ידי עוברי עבירה ועובר על ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול
ב. אסור ליהנות בדבר הגזול ואפילו לאחר ייאוש והוא שידע בודאי שדבר זה הוא הגזלה עצמה. כיצד ידע בודאי שבהמה זו גזולה
אסור לרכוב עליה או לחרוש בה
ג. גזל בית או שדה אסור לעבור בתוכה או ליכנס בה בחמה מפני החמה ובגשמים מפני הגשמים. ואם דר בתוכה חייב להעלות שכר לבעלים כדין הדר בחצר חבירו שלא מדעתו. גזל דקלים ועשה מהן גשר אסור לעבור עליו וכן כל כיוצא בזה
אמת Hayom Yom, 10, Menachem Av
ווען דער רבי וואלט ניט געשטעלט די דריי ווערטער "במדת אמת ליעקב" – באה"ק קטנטי – וואלט ער געאט נאך פופציג טויזענט חסידים, אבער דער רבי מאנט מדת אמת
Had the Rebbe not inserted the three words "b'midat emet leYaakov" ("according to the attribute of Truth unto Yaakov"), he would have attracted fifty thousand more Chassidim. But the Rebbe demands the trait of truth.
אילו היה הרבי משמיט את שלש התיבות "במדת אמת ליעקב" - באגה"ק "קטנתי" - היו לו עוד חמישים אלף חסידים הרבי תובע מידת אמת
There are seven things that characterize a boor, and seven that characterize a wise man. A wise man does not speak before one who is greater than him in wisdom or age. He does not interrupt his fellow's words. He does not hasten to answer. His questions are on the subject and his answers to the point. He responds to first things first and to latter things later. Concerning what he did not hear, he says "I did not hear." He concedes to the truth. With the boor, the reverse of all these is the case.
The human brain is a super computer. It has a vast memory bank that can store vast amounts of information. However, even this memory bank has its limitations. As with any computer, it is possible for its capacity exhausted.
Facts require little retention. A tree was a tree ten years ago, is a tree today, and will be a tree ten years hence. Falsehoods, however, have no existence in reality, and must be retained in memory. A faulty memory will, of course, soon expose the false nature of a statement.
Even if memory is intact, the storage of falsehoods occupies precious space where truth could be stored. Retention of these falsehoods will, therefore, diminish the brain's capacity to store useful information. While we may deceive another person with a lie, we cannot make constructive use of false information.
Truthfulness cannot be maintained during active Lying. Excuses, cover-ups, and frank distortion of fact characterize a lie. To live a lie is not only unethical, but also stupid.