Dispute Over Tznius Between A Chabad Family and The Chevra Kadisha Spills Over Into US Court
by CrownHeights.info
What began as an attempt to force the Ohel Chabad Lubavitch to install partitions in the women’s section – for matters of Tznius – has now spilled into the US Court system with a lawsuit filed against the Chevra Kadisha over a burial plot.
The dispute began when a Crown Heights resident, Rabbi Mordechai Gurary, filed a claim in Bais Din against the Chevra Kadisha and Agudas Chasidei Chabad, alleging that they should be required to install partitions in the women’s section at the Ohel where the Rebbe and Frierdiker Rebbe are buried. The argument on the need for a more robust solution for Tznius at the Ohel may be a good one, but according to the Chevra Kadisha, filing this claim in a Bais Din outside of Chabad, as was done, was a grave mistake.
In a letter sent by the Chevra Kadisha to Rabbi Gurary dated כח תשרי ה’תשפ”ד (Last year Tishrei), they wrote that; “There is a clear directive from the Rebbe that dayanim who adjudicate a Din Torah concerning matters related to Lubavitch should be specifically “from those who… have merited to be chassidim of my sainted father-in-law, the Rebbe.” In other words, the Rebbe stated clearly that Dinei Torah concerning Lubavitch matters are to be adjudicated only by a Lubavitch beis din! And there is nothing closer to “Lubavitch” than the holy Ohel and daled amos of the Rebbe, and the Rebbe’s holy institutions.”
The letter, filed in the court case, doubles down on the fact that the Rebbe didn’t just share this as a feeling but also took action. In the letter, they tell of a “prestigious Chabad family”, which had the “audacity” to do a similar thing to the Chevra Kadisha. At the time, the Rebbe instructed, through Harav Zalman Shimon Dworkin, that they pay a fine for their actions.
The Din Torah filed by Gurary over Tznius was not accepted by the Chevra Kadisha, and Rabbi Mordechai Gurary received a Siruv, the Bais Din’s version of a contempt of court, from the non-Chabad Bais Din against the Chevra Kadisha.
As punishment for going outside of Chabad in this case involving the Ohel, the Chevra Kadisha explained in their letter that unless the family writes a letter of apology and rescinds the Din Torah, they will cut all ties with the Gurary family, going so far as to say that they will be returning any money paid to the Chevra Kadisha for burial plots in The Old Montefiore Cemetery.
Attempts were allegedly made to find a solution between the parties, but according to court documents, those failed.
This is where this court case picks up.
Filing a motion in NYS Court, the Gurary family claimed that their mother, Mrs. Tema Gurary, had purchased a coveted spot in the Old Montefiore Cemetery in close proximity to the Rebbe’s Ohel half a century ago.
According to the filed claim, between fifty and sixty years ago, Mrs. Tema Gurary and her late husband purchased, the plot in Block 24 from Agudas Chabad for Mrs. Gurary’s eventual burial. Though at that time the Rebbe had not yet passed, the Ohel was already the burial spot for the Frierdiker Rebbe and a revered location in Chabad-Lubavitch.
Having previously paid for it, Rabbi Gurary claims that the Chevra Kadisha should not have the power to return the money and rescind the sale, instead going so far as to claim that the actions taken by the Chevra Kadisha are a form of collective punishment, stopping his mother from being buried in her purchased plot altogether.
“In response to Mordecai’s well-intended actions, in October 2023, he [Rabbi Mordechai Gurary] received a letter from the Chevra Kadisha, in which it purported to inform him of its broad, unnecessary, and excessive collective punishment upon him and his entire extended family,” court documents claim. As Agudas Chabad only permits Tahara for those to be buried in the Holy Cemetery to be performed by the Chevra Kadisha, the severing of all ties would therefore, according to Gurary, mean that they would not perform the Tahara, and by default, Mrs. Gurary would not be able to be buried in her purchased plot.
“Whether Mordecai did something wrong as a matter of Jewish tradition may be arguable,” the filed court claim state, “but it is unquestioned that his brother, sister, and their families, and most notably, the elderly Mrs. Gurary, have done nothing wrong.”
This case, filed on October 10th, looks to force the Chevra Kadisha to bury Ms. Gurary in her purchased plot should she need it, and does not work to resolve the original dispute over Tznius at the Ohel or the Din Torah filed in the non-Chabad Bais Din.
The Chevra Kadisha has yet to respond to the claim in court.
Read the entire complaint below:
Read the letter sent by the Chevra Kadisha below:
Chaim
Great!! Another lawsuit which doesn’t do anything to the growth of our families and community.
30 years fighting over a basement.
Now we’re going to fight over graves.
Amazing!!!
Am Yisrael Chai!!
Old timer
Thank you for publcizing this incedible chilul hashem and chilul lubavitch during the holy month of Tishrei. Any other suggestions for erasing any zechuyos we’ve accumulated this year?
AH
The truth shall set you free!
Not so old timer
Well said we need to stop this nonsense it’s terrible and disgraces the rebbes name
Anonymous
The truth should set you free!
To AH and Anonymous
You probably don’t know this, but the line you are quoting is from the “new testament.” If there is any mentality that is hepech Torah, it’s this one.
Anonymous
This is the real Lubavitch.
Solution
I would suggest that the Chevra Kadisha let the Gurary’s do as they please, and at the same time erect a 5-6 ft wall around the plot so it’s excluded from the rest.
Chaim
This is a real tragedy. Since the rebbe died the messianic cult has created untold issues for Chabad. Start by ripping down the Ychi sign in 770.Chabd has lost its sence of direction and is controlled by the Beis Lunatics.
Really
Didnt know the anti meshichist are saints? The anti meshichist have their own cold hearted, heartless, disrespect and disregard for anyone who has different views or opinions then them.
Forget about meshichist. Antis dont have the basic ahavas yisrael towards people outside chabad. So they don’t get along with meshichist or outside chabad oh wait they cant even get along with themselves…grow up
Anonymous
If you live with the truth you don’t do these deeds
Mushkie
Misguided people think that din-Torah or l’havdil court is somehow dirty laundry. No! The reality is that there are machlokes and nasty disputes all around us. Courts and bais din are mechanisms to RESOLVE fights. Imagine if courts or bais din didn’t exist – litigants would physically fight each other to death. Even bnei Noach are required to set up a system of dispute resolution. That is NOBLE!
Mushkie
How wonderful it is to read that when there is a dispute, the parties are brought to bais din or court to resolve. That is was civilized people do! The alternative is to have a continued vendetta, physical fighting, barbaric alternatives. The Torah way is to seek peace BY RESOLVING machlokes. No shame in reporting the Ways of Peace. The misguided sweep disputes under the carpet as it smoldering.
Misguided
I think it is you who are misguided, in thinking that taking a dispute to an OUTSIDE authority, and furthermore, a dispute where one side is saying that there is no reason to even call them to a din torah, is in some way not washing dirty laundry outside.
Not everything needs to go to a din torah, and it is questionable whether the person even has standing (or the Beis Din have jurisdiction).
Mushkie
“Misguided” clearly has a bias opinion. He or she already decided, that there is no viable claim and that the bais din has no jurisdiction. Isn’t that for the bais din to decide? But you already decided (based on your unqualified qualifications!). You formed such a strong opinion without hearing both parties. And you are against the Torah view that disputes SHOULD be brought to bais din. Shame!
Mushkie
As far as going to an “outside” authority (a “foreign” bais din), why not presume that there was a justified and valid reason for it?! Suppose the local “unzer” bais din is negios? Suppose the “insider” bais din disqualified itself? It’s not a far stretch to imagine that members of “our” bais din received benefits from “our” chevra kadisha! That would force the plaintiff to seek an outside venue!
Mushkie
It is ironic that in our community when many Chabad issues are brought to a GENTILE Court, (like, ownership of 770), we get bent out shape when a din Torah is brought to an “outside” bais din. Really?!
Mushkie
Finally, what exactly is considered an “outside” bais din? If the rabbonim dayanim learn Tanya, are they Lubavitch, like, Lubavitch shchita by shochtim that learn occasionally Tanya? If the dayanim have an association with Chabad? What are the halochos of an inside vs outside bais din??? And, b’di’eved, when already summoned to an outside bais din, may a frum yid simply ignore the summons? Feh!
Anonymous
This is the way the majority of Jews acted, since Moses took them out of Egypt
C R
Why did this “outside” bais din consent to any involvement in matters pertaining to another community? I was involved in a case brought to a B”D some years back. One party tried to go to another court in another city. Their immediate response was “why are you coming to us? You have rabbonim where you live. Take your case to them.”
Mushkie
If one party believes that the bais din is disqualified to adjudication the matter (for various reasons: jurisdiction, bias, qualifications, relatives, involvement), the correct approach is to ATTEND at that bais din and make your case that they are disqualified. In a gentile court, one attends and argues to the judge that s/he is disqualified to hear the case! To ignore a summons is contempt!!
Mushkie
Dies anyone really think that the tznius at Ohel is ok? Men and bochurim standing opposite me gazing at me while we daven! Or when I stand at the headstone next to a man who is also standing there. Brushing against men on the narrow path to ohel as they return! It’s NOT nice and totally unacceptable.
AH
If you can’t stand the heat, don’t go yo the kitchen.
Mushkie
Having said that, that the tznius at the ohel is deplorable (and we can learn from the ohel of other chassidus kehilos), I don’t believe one can force, through bais din, that the Chevra Kadisha must correct the situation. Can one force through bais din that a shul should have separate areas in the lobby for men and women? That money should be spent for seperate men’s and women’s entrances? No!
Mushkie
I cannot get bais din to impose on others things like: 1. call to bais din someone not dressed in proper tznius (too much hair showing…). 2. Store selling products without a hechsher that I approve of (cholov stam, pas palter…). 3. A school that doesn’t teach chassidus (or allow saying yechi…). I cannot ask bais din to impose my standards on everyone else! [Some countries have tznius police]
Mushkie
On the other hand, you cannot get a court to force a merchant to do business with someone he cut ties with. The Chevra Kadisha has no contractual obligation to preform taharas on any individual. If the corporations constitution states that only burials with their tahara will be allowed, then the court cannot force the Chevra Kadisha to make an exception.
Mushkie
Aguch went to a Gentile court to settle it’s dispute with gabboim. A Gentile court is a Lubavitch bais din?! A Gentile court is not an “outside” venue. A Gentile court is not airing our dirty laundry?! A Gentile court is ok, But a frum Ehrlich bais din of
dayonim is a problem?! Explain!!! My head is ready to explode from the hypocrisy and the logic borrowed from the conducts of Sodom!
Mushkie
Customs of Sodom: 1. The mother must suffer for the sins of the son. Mother’s burial service denied. 2. You call me to court, I punish you. 3. You point out my shortcomings (in preventing tznius breaches), I counterclaim, how dare you air chabad dirt laundry to outsiders. 4. I do not need to heed a summons of bais din because I decide what is right or wrong. 5. It is my way or the highway. Sodom!
Mushkie
To understand just how atrocious the reaction of Aguch, imagine if Gurary retaliated in kind: All children related to Aguch members or Chevra Kadishha, including granddaughters, neices, cousins etc, are immediately expelled from Bnos Menachem and prepaid tuition will be returned. Such a retaliation would be proportionate and mirror the horrendous reaction of Aguch-Chèvra Kadisha. Not mentchlich.
AH
Relax, This all politics don’t put yourself out of shape for it. They did because it satisfies their egos not for justice
Crown Heightser
When I read through the article, I was totally on the side of the Chevra Kadisha. But when I read through the many comments of “Mushkie”, I think Gurary has a strong point. Now I realize that you can’t be quick to judge and there are two sides to each dispute. If you only see one side, you don’t really get it, at all.
No Name
Why is there no name signed on the chevra kadisha letter? Who is Hamazkir?
Grateful we left
Nothing else to say.
anonymous
Like our comments, the letter from Chevra Kadisha is unsigned. It is likely unauthorized by all members of the CK, some are volunteers who dedicate
themselves selflessly and don’t care for any politics.
Chosid
I think Mushkie should mediate the dispute!
Yanky
I was intrigued to read the many comments of Mushkie. She obviously has a good grasp of all the issues and nuances. Clearly she sees the strengths and weaknesses of each side in this dispute. I wonder whom she thinks is right?