Features
Taking a look inside the mausoleums at the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery
By BERNIE BELLAN I’m sure that I’m not alone in saying that I’ve long had an abiding curiosity about the two mausoleums that are located in the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery, both of which are situated not too far from Main Street.
Recently I was invited to attend the cemetery and to see what was actually inside those two mausoleums. The occasion was supposed to be a visit to the cemetery that was to be led by Rabbi Yitchok Charytan of the Chabad Lubavitch movement. Rabbi Charytan has been conducting online classes with seven participants, the subject of which has been the study of “Tanya,” a book of the Kabbalah.The classes came about as a result of a suggestion from financial planner Royle Derbitsky, who had been visited in his office by Rabbi Charytan. When Rabbi Charytan began discussing Jewish mysticism with Royle, Royle asked him whether he would consider offering regular online classes about the subject.
Subsequently, earlier this year Rabbi Charytan did begin offering classes through Microsoft Teams. During one of the classes, according to Royle, Rabbi Charytan brought up the name of Rabbi Shmuel Twersky (also known as Avraham). Rabbi Twersky, also known as the “Makarover Rabbi,” was a leading rabbi in Winnipeg who arrived here in 1927. He was considered a great “tzaddik” (righteous man).
Rabbi Charytan’s online classes have had seven regular participants, Royle told me, of whom four showed up at the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery on the afternoon of Tuesday, August 8, to see for themselves what lay inside the mausoleum. In addition to Royle, present were: Marianne Dordick, Roz Olin, and Debbie Stern. (The other members of the class are: Elliot Saunders, Earl Ashkin, and Judy Rodkin.)
Rabbi Charytan though, was unable to attend, Royle explained to the others, as he was ill that day, but Royle did read from notes that Rabbi Charytan had prepared.
While I was able to see inside – and enter into, the Twersky mausoleum, which also contained the coffin of Rabbi Twersky’s wife, Richel, I was also able to see inside and enter into the other smaller mausoleum, which contains the coffin of another rabbi, whose name was Eliyahu Grubert.
I had many questions circulating in my mind, however, including: Why these two mausoleums and no others?
Upon returning from the cemetery I began to do some research into that particular question. Within our own Jewish Post & News archives (which are accessible on our website: jewishpostandnews.ca, and which are available to anyone free of charge), I discovered quite a few references to Rabbi Twersky.
Among the most pertinent was an article written in 2012 by Myron Love, in which Myron described a tour to the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery in October of that year that was conducted by Penny Roseman. Penny had been responsible for compiling a digital archive of all headstones in all Jewish cemeteries either in Winnipeg or nearby.
Myron’s article noted that Roseman began the tour with stops at the mausoleums (miniature houses) of Rabbis Eliyahu Grubert and Shmuel Abba Twersky (and his wife, Richel), which were erected in 1917 and 1947 respectively. Roseman noted that these are the only Jewish mausoleums in western Canada. The coffins inside are enclosed in concrete, which is acceptable, Roseman pointed out, because concrete is “of the earth”.
Yet, Myron’s use of the word “acceptable” led me to wonder: Why are there only two mausoleums at the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery if mausoleums are “acceptable?” Surely, I thought, if a Jewish coffin can be housed aboveground in a mausoleum, wouldn’t others have wanted to build mausoleums for their loved ones at the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery? After all, a mausoleum certainly commands attention and, since so many headstones are also designed to command attention, wouldn’t one think there would be many more mausoleums that would have been built there? (Of course, at a certain point, space limitations would have entered into the conversation, but that didn’t emerge as a problem for the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery until quite recently.)
Upon further reading, however, it seems quite clear that mausoleums are not considered acceptable by either Conservative or Reform Jews and, according to an entry on Wikipedia, Orthodox Jews allow the construction of mausoleums only under certain conditions.
Here is what the Wikipedia entry about Jewish mausoleums says: “Most mausoleums place remains above ground inside a mausoleum crypt. Because Scripture and Jewish tradition dictate burial of the deceased in the ground, mausoleums are not commonly used by the Jewish faithful. Instead, Jewish cemetery monuments are placed over the earthen deceased.
“While earth burial is traditional, the three movements of Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform Judaism disagree over this sensitive issue. The Orthodox movement of Judaism allows no cremations or interments but mandates below-ground burial only (emphasis mine). They refer to various phrases of the Bible to determine their position. In Genesis 3:19, God says dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return. Also, Ecclesiastes 12:7 states The dust returns to the dust as it was, but the spirit returns to God who gave it. To orthodox Jews, this means that they must be buried in the ground so they may return to dust.
“For this reason, the only Jewish mausoleum that Orthodox Jews allow is a mausoleum that extends underground,” (Emphasis mine) the Wikipedia article continues. “This is easier when Jewish monuments are built on a hillside, making Jewish cemetery monuments an entrance to the underground.”
In neither of the two mausoleums at the Shaarey Zedek Cemetery, however, are the graves buried underground. While I suppose one can accept the rationalization that coffins enclosed in concrete are “of the earth,” then why just two mausoleums and not many more, I wonder?
Features
Hair straightening at Sets on Corydon
Features
Ontario Online Casinos Let Players Set Daily, Weekly and Monthly Deposit Limits
A deposit limit sets a ceiling on how much money someone can add to an online gambling account. In Ontario’s regulated market, players can choose limits covering 24 hours, seven days and one month, with the website’s system enforcing the amounts they select.
The settings are straightforward, but the timing deserves attention. A daily allowance may sit within weekly and monthly caps, while an increase can involve a waiting period. For adults using Chrome on a Chromebook, understanding these account rules starts with knowing where to find them.
Finding the Settings and Choosing a Period
Deposit controls sit within the gambling website’s account menus. The Tooniebet Ontario responsible gaming page is an operator-specific resource readers can consult alongside their account settings. ToonieBet is operated by Canadix Limited and regulated by the AGCO under an agreement with iGaming Ontario.
Ontario’s standards require an easy and obvious way to set financial and time limits during registration and afterward. Players must be offered deposit and loss limits when signing up, and the controls must remain easy to reach and change once an account is open.
Menu names differ between sites. Published examples place deposit limits under account settings or responsible-gaming tools, where players can select an amount and a period.
Each type of limit measures something different. Deposit limits cap money added to the account. Loss limits restrict net losses after winnings are taken into account, while time limits govern playing time. iGaming Ontario’s player guidance explains all three.
For Chromebook users, these settings are managed through the website’s account interface. Chrome’s own permissions handle separate browser functions, such as access to location information.
How Several Limits Apply to One Deposit
Players can have daily, weekly and monthly limits running together. A deposit must fit within every active cap.
Take a hypothetical account with limits of CAD $40 daily, CAD $100 weekly and CAD $250 monthly. These figures illustrate the process.
If someone has already deposited CAD $90 during the weekly period, the remaining weekly allowance is CAD $10. That becomes the most they can add, even when the daily limit has more room. Reaching the monthly cap would likewise block another deposit until some monthly allowance becomes available.
This is why checking all active limits matters. A new day may bring fresh daily capacity while the weekly or monthly total remains close to its ceiling. The longer periods continue to apply as the shorter one refreshes.
When Money Drops Out of a Rolling Window
The next question is when previous deposits stop counting toward a cap. Some sites use rolling periods, which track elapsed time from individual deposits.
Published Ontario policies include daily windows of 24 hours, weekly windows of 168 hours and monthly windows of 720 hours, equivalent to 30 days. Under that approach, each deposit frees up its corresponding allowance once it falls outside the window.
Suppose someone has a CAD $100 rolling weekly limit and deposits CAD $25 on Friday, followed by CAD $75 on Saturday. Seven days after Friday’s deposit, CAD $25 becomes available again. The other CAD $75 returns seven days after Saturday’s deposit.
Leaving the restored Friday allowance unused means it combines with Saturday’s restored amount. At that point, the full CAD $100 is available. Reviewing deposit dates and times helps explain how much room remains within a rolling period.
Changing a Cap Takes a Separate Step
A limit refreshing follows the schedule already attached to the account. Raising that limit requires a request and a wait.
Ontario’s standards require at least 24 hours before a player’s request to relax or remove an established limit can take effect. The existing limit remains enforceable during the cooling-off period.
Operators publish their own timings. Documented examples include a seven-day wait for deposit-limit increases or removals. Another published schedule allows increases after one day for a daily cap, seven days for a weekly cap and 30 days for a monthly cap.
Lower limits take effect immediately under these published policies. Some policies also restart the waiting period when a player requests another increase while an earlier change is pending. The effective date shows which amount currently applies.
Other Controls and Support
Deposit limits work alongside loss limits, time limits, short breaks and self-exclusion. Together, these give players ways to restrict account funding, gambling activity or access.
Ontario-regulated online casino play is restricted to adults aged 19 and older who are physically in Ontario. Gambling involves financial risk.
For concerns about your gambling or someone else’s, ConnexOntario offers free, confidential information and referral support around the clock. Call 1-866-531-2600 or text CONNEX to 247247. Standard message and data rates may apply.
Features
What “Best Odds” Really Means When Comparing Gambling Review Websites
The phrase best odds appears frequently in gambling discussions, but it is surprisingly easy to use imprecisely. MonsterBetList is primarily a casino review and rankings website, not a dedicated live sportsbook odds comparison terminal. That difference is central to evaluating what its reviews can and cannot establish. A casino rating may explain payout conditions, licence information and bonus restrictions, while a claim about the best available price on a sporting outcome requires a different kind of evidence altogether.
Odds and ratings answer different questions
Sports betting odds represent a price offered on a specified outcome. A review rating is an editorial judgement built from multiple criteria. These two numerical systems cannot be substituted for one another. A bookmaker rated highly for service may offer a less competitive price on a particular match, while a service with a more attractive price may impose different limits or verification rules.
Similarly, a casino review can discuss return-to-player statistics, but RTP is not the same as sportsbook odds. RTP describes a theoretical long-run percentage built into a game model. It does not tell a reader what will happen in one session and it is not an individually negotiable market quotation.
What makes sports odds comparable?
A fair odds comparison starts with identical selections: the same event, outcome, market rules and settlement conditions. Comparing a three-way football result with a draw-no-bet price is invalid because the products pay under different circumstances. The observation time also matters; displayed prices can change quickly as market information or trading decisions evolve.
The numerical format should be standardised. Decimal odds provide one convenient representation, but American and fractional formats express the same underlying idea differently. Converting these formats is straightforward. What matters is the net price, the operator’s rules and whether the quoted offer remains available when reviewed.
Overround explains the hidden cost of many markets
In a simplified two-outcome market, dividing one by each decimal price produces an implied probability. If the implied probabilities add to more than 100%, the excess is commonly described as the bookmaker’s overround. It is one way of understanding the margin embedded in prices, although individual market structure and adjustments can complicate the interpretation.
This concept explains why the word best should not be attached to a price without context. A strong headline may look appealing yet represent an ordinary margin after calculation. More importantly, any single quote is time-dependent. Genuine comparison requires a dated observation and equivalent market rules; broad editorial praise is not enough.
What casino rankings can establish instead
MonsterBetList publishes casino reviews and guides addressing licences, bonuses, payout experiences and responsible gambling. Those topics are relevant to evaluating consumer risk and service quality. A report about the length of a withdrawal process, for example, can be useful if its methodology is transparent. A bonus review can help identify restrictive wagering requirements that marketing headlines omit.
However, a casino ranking should not be presented as evidence that its highest-rated operator consistently offers the best sports prices. Unless a site publishes repeated market-by-market comparisons, that conclusion is not supported. Readers benefit when publishers clearly distinguish what was measured from what readers might assume was measured.
Bonuses can complicate comparisons
A sportsbook may offer free-bet tokens, cashback or other promotions. Their effective value depends on conditions rather than the largest number printed in a banner. Some credits are not withdrawable as cash; others require qualifying selections, minimum odds or a deadline. Casino welcome bonuses often introduce wagering requirements, game-contribution rules and limits on withdrawals. Combining these products under one generic promotional score can hide important differences.
For instance, a large matched deposit might require extensive play before bonus-related funds become eligible for withdrawal. The required betting volume is not a promise of profit. The presence of a promotion may therefore make comparisons more complex instead of simpler. Clear disclosures should precede any judgement about value.
Editorial independence and methods
Review sites sometimes state that rankings are editorially independent. Such a statement is relevant but does not replace evidence of consistent testing. Readers should look for the criteria used, the date of each review, whether real transactions were examined and how negative findings are treated. If one platform receives detailed testing while another is scored on marketing copy, the ranking loses comparability.
Commercial incentives should also be visible. Referral relationships or sponsorships do not automatically make every observation inaccurate, but they create reasons to ask how rankings are insulated from revenue. A publication that explains its methodology and corrections process gives readers a stronger basis for trust than one that simply declares its winners.
Licensing and dispute rights before price claims
A marginally attractive price is of limited value when the operator is not legally available to the reader or does not provide meaningful avenues for redress. Regulations vary by jurisdiction, and a licence in one country may not authorise service in another. It is prudent to verify the legal entity behind a brand and the current status of any licence through official records.
Consumers should also review identity verification, account restrictions and dispute resolution procedures. These operational conditions influence the actual experience of using a gambling service. A sensible evaluation includes them before discussing promotions or theoretical market advantages.
Why guaranteed-profit language is a warning sign
No ordinary review or odds list can guarantee that an individual will win money from gambling. Claims of certain returns often omit the fact that results are uncertain, prices move and transactions are subject to restrictions. Casino games generally incorporate a house advantage, and sports outcomes remain uncertain regardless of a persuasive analysis. The safest response to absolute promises is scepticism.
Readers should also avoid treating gambling as a means of addressing financial problems. Chasing previous losses and increasing stakes to recover money can deepen harm. Consumer-oriented coverage is more valuable when it explains risk and offers realistic options for stepping away.
Conclusion: define the claim before ranking the service
“Best odds” is a specific comparative proposition, not a synonym for a high casino rating. MonsterBetList can be examined for its published casino research, review structure and risk disclosures, but those materials should not be stretched into claims they have not tested. Clear definitions, dated evidence and honest limitations are the foundations of trustworthy comparison journalism.
