Yachin uVoaz(1:124):[15th Century Algeria] You should know that there are two different types of moredes and they have different laws. There is a moredes who despises her husband and she asserts that he is disgusting to her. On the other hand there is a moredes who says she wants her husband but she wants to torment him In the case of ma'us alei the view of the Rambam is that the husband is forced to divorce her immediately and he learns this from a deduction from the gemora as the Rosh writes. The Rambam states in Hilchos Ishus (14:8) that if a wife refuses sexual relations that the husband is forced to give a a get since she is not like a prisoner who can be forced to have relations with someone she hates. However there has long been an outcry against the ruling of the Rambam by all the commentators and poskim such as Rabbein Tam, Ramban, Rosh, Rashba and many others.
They agree concerning forcing the husband to divorce. Whoever forces the husband to divorce in accordance to the ruling of the Rambam increases mamzerim in the world. And they reject the view of the Rambam with clear proofs from the Talmud as the Rosh does. And many proofs are brought to refute and reject the words of the Rambam. And even the Magid Mishna who normally devotes himself in all places to justify the words of the Rambam and to firmly establish their validity with clear proofs - in this case he refutes the Rambam and goes into detail with proofs to contradict the Rambam's reasoning and to reject it. It is unnecessary to repeat them here. The halachic view that has become univeral is that one does not force the husband to give a get when she claim ma'us alei and we do not rely on the ruling of the Rambam nor others who agree with him in this matter. And furthermore that even if the halacha was in accord with the Rambam it would be correct to make a protective fence in this matter to prevent immorality amongst the woman because of the degradation of the contemporary generation. Because woman have become haughty and arrogant in their immorality. We are therefore concerned that a wife might have become interested in another man and she wants to disgard her husband by declaring he is disgusting to me (ma'us alei). If it became known that that would be sufficient to have her husband forced to give her a get then it would surely cause problems. But in fact the Rambam is not the halacha because of the proofs that the opponents of the Rambam bring [And even in Algeria where they always follow the Rambam there are three exceptions and this is one of them and not those who agree with the Rambam...]. However I saw in the Rosh who writes that if in fact the psak of the Rambam was followed and the woman was divorced by force and she remarried - we don't force her leave the second marriage. However many others disagree with the Rosh and they say that if she remarries after a forced get - she must leave the second marriage.
Rabbein Tam, Ramban, Rosh, Rashba and many others. They agree concerning forcing the husband to divorce. Whoever forces the husband to divorce in accordance to the ruling of the Rambam increases mamzerim in the world... However I saw in the Rosh who writes that if in fact the psak of the Rambam was followed and the woman was divorced by force and she remarried - we don't force her leave the second marriage.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry. This is a self-contradictory statement. Either the Rosh agrees that it is ishet ish and thus we must force them to get divorced(lest they create mamzerim) or it is not.
The only other option you have is that the children aren't really mamzerim, and the Rabbanim were speaking figuratively. Given this ruling of the Rosh, I see no clear evidence one way or the other.
Re: Tzadok's comment - RABBANIM SPEAKING FIGURATIVELY?
DeleteHere we go again with ORA propagandist Tzadok spreading confusion and doubt, using convoluted logic while attempting to justify the ORA feminist agenda of GET MEOSO, ARCHAOS, M'SIRAH, MAMZERIM, and destruction of Jewish families.
While ORA's fake "agunot" rob their husbands blind in ARCHAOT, Tzadok and his feminist pals completely delete the remainder of the Rambam's PSAK in Hilchos Ishus (14:8) - "she (the wife) is not entitled to anything that belongs to her husband. She should return even the shoe on her foot and her head-covering that he gave her ..."
"Because woman have become haughty and arrogant in their immorality. We are therefore concerned that a wife might have become interested in another man and she wants to disgard her husband by declaring he is disgusting to me (ma'us alei)."
DeleteAnyone here (Michael Tzadok, BatMelech, Shaul, etc. ) falsely alleging that contemporary Chareidi rabbanim are adopting non-normative MACHMIR positions on MAUS ALAI - can you please comment on the very incisive statement about arrogant women made by a Sephardi Gadol hundreds of years ago?
AL ACHAS KAMA V'KAMA, what would that Sephardi Gadol say today with the current onslaught against halachic Judaism by the well organized and funded "Orthodox" feminist movement?
Here we go again with ORA propagandist Tzadok spreading confusion and doubt, using convoluted logic while attempting to justify the ORA
DeleteYou ready... here's some propaganda for you. I believe that the actions of ORA violate many many different halakhot. Full Stop.
That being said, I do follow Rabbis like the Ben Ish Hai and Rav Ovadia Yosef, who rule that a B"D should be allowed to use their judgement and find halakhically permissible ways to force a Get when a valid B"D believes it is necessary.
Any reading of Piskei Din will show that Rav Eliashiv felt the same way, as he signed on many unanimous opinions doing just that.
So now that you are done with the ad hom in order to attack an organization that you falsely assumed that I support, would you mind trying to rectify the contradiction found in the words of the Rosh?
According to all of the Rishonim pressure and shaming are NOT a forced get.
ReplyDeleteThat is therefore the Absolute Halacha.
Anyone who has all the Rishonim in front of him and says otherwise, is a Apikoris.
Could you explain how you arrived at this conclusion?
Delete>They agree concerning forcing the husband to divorce. Whoever forces the husband to divorce in accordance to the ruling of the Rambam increases mamzerim in the world.
ReplyDeleteThis is very unclear. Is there meant to be a colon between the sentences? Do they agree TO force him or ABOUT forcing him,i.e. that it paves the way for creating huge spiritual problems?
And what exactly is the authoritative status of this posek?
My understanding is that they agree about the issue of forcing.
DeleteHow would you translate this?
שו"ת יכין ובועז חלק א סימן קכד
וכבר צוחו על פסק זה כל המפרשים והפוסקים כגון ר"ת והרמב"ן והרא"ש והרשב"א והרבה זולתם ז"ל והסכימו לכוף הבעל לגרש וכל הכופה הבעל לגרש כפסק הרמב"ם ז"ל מרבה ממזרים בישראל ודחו דברי הרמב"ם ז"ל בראיות ברורות מהתלמוד
From Bar Ilan Responsa program
YACHIN U-VOAZ
Yachin U-Voaz is a responsa collection by two brothers from the famous Duran family, Rabbi Tzemach (part 1) and Rabbi Simeon (part 2), who served in the rabbinate and rabbinic court of Algiers during the fifteenth century. These responsa deal with various halachic and philosophical problems. Their treatment of issues concerning the Marranos, who had fled to Moslem Algeria, is of particular interest.
ORA- NOW THEY SEND COLLEGE AGE GIRLS TO DEMONSTRATE AND LET THEM SING - GUESS KOL ISHA IS OK ALSO
ReplyDeleteIT IS INTERESTING THAT R SCWAB ZTL IN HIS SEFER ON TEFILA CALLS THESE WOMAN MASCULINISTS. HE SAYS THEY ARE NOT FEMINISTS - THEY WANT TO BE MEN NOT LADIES.
So, the shulchan orech usually uses the rosh, Rambam and the Rif to come to a psak. Accordingly, the Rosh holds that a child from this woman remarrying would not be a mamzer "However I saw in the Rosh who writes that if in fact the psak of the Rambam was followed and the woman was divorced by force and she remarried - we don't force her leave the second marriage." If the new marriage led to mamzerim then everyone would agree that we force her to leave the second marriage as anyone who knows anything about halacha would tell you.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, I can conclude that it, in fact, does not make actual mamzerim according to halacha since we have two of the three major poskim the shulchan orech uses stating in this source that the children are not mamzerim.
Assuming you are correct - but I assume you agree that normative halacha does not permit pressure - even the harchakav of Rabbeinu Tam. In addition there are many poskim who are choshehsh for possibility of mamzerim.
DeleteThe Rosh was describing that in a case that the woman remarried that she doesn't have to get divorced again. Does he allow her to get remarried l'chatchila?
Do you ignore these concerns?! Please read my translation of Rav Sternbuch's teshuva as well as the other teshuvos.
That would appear to be the ruling of the Beit Yosef in the Tur. He sees it as an issur d'rabbanan. The resulting get, would be(if there was bitul moda'ah) Sofek D'Rabbanan.
DeleteSo to answer the questions of the blog owner. No you couldn't do it l'chatchila.
Much like Kohanim marrying those women who are forbidden to them d'rabbanan, a Rav shouldn't do it. However, if it was done by mistake, then we do not force them to divorce or say anything negative about the children.
That is how it would appear to me, unless one were to rely on the Tzitz Eliezer, Rav Shternbuch or Rav Ovadia each of whom allows some indirect pressure. But then we are no longer talking a Get Meusah.
two new simple questions for michale tzadok to answer.
ReplyDelete1) why do so many morrocan girls want to marry ashkenazim and not their own?
2) how do you explain the blood on the hands of shas for going with oslo
two new simple questions for michale tzadok to answer.
Delete1) why do so many morrocan girls want to marry ashkenazim and not their own?
Well I could ask you why so many Ashkenazi girls want to marry Sephardim and not their own. Since there are no statistics it is a matter of perception. Though it may be because there is a shidduch crisis on, and there are more Sephardim than Ashkenazim, but that is pure speculation.
2) how do you explain the blood on the hands of shas for going with oslo
How do you explain the blood on the hands of all Jews for using X-tian babies to make their matzah? A blood libel is a blood libel.
Shas abstained from the vote on the first Oslo accords, so you can hardly blame them. Then they voted against any further peace negotiations. So I really can't explain what isn't there.
Sepahrdim are about 20% of the Jewish population, with Ashkenazim the bulk of the rest.
Deletemore facts:
Delete1) What relevance has marriage between one community and another have to do with the issue under discussion?
2) Being an extreme Eretz Yisrael militant, I agree that there is severe criticism for Shas in its activities during Oslo. However, the Ashkenazi Haredi world (with the graceful exception of Gur and Lubavitch) spent many years attacking the Gush Emunim, and making the false claim that giving land (and arms ) to the PLo would somehow bring peace, whilst mocking the MIzrachi world for its heter Mechira (which does grant some agricultural land to token goyim for shemittah year). For the sake of historical accuracy, it is important to remember the hatred and loshon hara that was spread in the Lithuanian camp against the lovers of Eretz Yisrael, for political reasons, and the humiliating about face by Rav Shach ztl, who finally adopted the position of his good "friends" Rav Goren and Lubavitcher Rebbe, concerning holding on to every inch of Holy Land.
Sepahrdim are about 20% of the Jewish population, with Ashkenazim the bulk of the rest.
DeleteTry again. That was before WWII. There happened to be a major Ashkenazi population drop due to the Nazis and the Soviets, may their memories blotted out.
Today Ashkenazim represent over 70% of the Jewish populace. Pre-WWII it was much more than that.
DeleteToday Ashkenazim represent over 70% of the Jewish populace. Pre-WWII it was much more than that.
DeleteYou're dreaming.
Also, the Ashlenazi birth rate (especially by the frum) is far higher than the Sephardic where 10+ children is fairly uncommon.
DeleteOk. The Ashkenazi to Sephardi ratio before WWII, most historians have it as 60-40 to 70-30. Hitler(mah shmo) killed 6million Jews entirely Ashkenzim. Stalin(mah shmo) and his successors, granted over quite a few more year, are believed to have killed, at minimum 7million Jews.
DeleteMoving on. Birth rate. You obviously haven't been around many Religious Sephardim if you think they have small families. 10 children is common, 16+ isn't unheard of.
Several years ago, when I made Aliyah, I went to Rav Neventzal to ask him about where I could buy Sephardi Soft matzah, his response "I don't know, but with 5million Sephardim in Israel they shouldn't be that hard to find." Perhaps the Rav was wrong on the Sephardi population of Israel... but I doubt it.
According to studies and research conducted by Daniel J. Elazar, Political Scientist and demographer at Bar Ilan University and founder of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, in 1931 Ashkenazim accounted for 92% of the Jewish population and today account for 80%.
DeleteDon't forget 50% of the Sephardim converted to Catholicism in the Spanish Inquisition. That means many many millions of descendants that woild have been Sephardic Jews today are now Catholic. Even if Dr. Elazar is off a bit, you surely get the idea of what kind of numbers we are dealing with.
Michael: BTW, the number you quoted of 5mil Sephardim in Israel is laughably wrong. There are only 5.8 million Jews in all of Israel according to the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics (and that's without even getting into their overcounting with non-halachic Jews.) Of those 3 million are Ashkenazim and 1.8 million are Sephardim/Mizrachim according to government statistics. And a majority of Sephardim live in Israel. The overwhelmingly vast vast majority of Jews outside Israel are Ashkenazim. The only other countries with notable Sephardic populations are France with 300,000 Sephardim and the U.S. with 200,000. After that it is 50k in Argentina and 20k in Turkey. There is between 9-11.2 million worldwide Ashkenazim, with 5-6 million in the US alone.
DeleteHonest question:
ReplyDeleteWhy does any discussion of the halakha of what does or does not constitute a Get Meusa, and under which circumstances that is m'doraitta vs M'rabbanan ect ect always have to come down to who is or isn't supporting ORA?
Isn't that being rather reactionary? Reactionary measures tend to become over-reactions.
The Rosh in Teshuvose in chapter 43 has many cases where a woman wants to force her husband with MOUS OLEI according to the Rambam, and the Rosh says clearly that to do so would increase mamzerim in Israel. There is, however, another teshuva, in 35, whereby a widow from a prominent family was seduced to marry by an unworthy person. In this case the Rosh permits forcing a GET. We see that in a case where the marriage itself was a trick by an unworthy person we do the Rambam, but in a normal marriage such a thing increases mamzerim. Another thing, the Rosh holds that forcing as the Rambam suggests produces mamzerim, but that is only in a country where the rabbonim don't agree with the Rambam. But in a country where people accept the Rambam as their rebbe and do force a husband, the Rosh did not make this into a mamzer, and permitted people to continue living together after a forced GET, because he only spoke after he became the Rov and in his sphere of influence the GET is invalid, but he did not come to Spain to declare that all of Spain who did like the Rambam were possible mamzerim. Because they did what they did by following the Rambam. I discussed this severo with Posek HaDor Reb Elyashev shlit"o.
ReplyDeleteThat is probably the worst attempt at a terutz that I have seen in quite some time. Are you really going to ascribe that Rav Eliashiv?
DeleteTo Michael Tzadok: You mentioned "However, if it was done by mistake, then we do not force them to divorce or say anything negative about the children." There is no mistake about GET Meusa, the RA Bonnim that arrange for a kidnapping/beating or public humiliation know what they are doing. GET Meusa is not arranged by a laymen but only thry corrupted individuals. Therefore there is no "Bedieved" but a purposeful act to violate the Torah (in most cases).
ReplyDeleteWasn't talking about the Get, was talking about the remarriage. That can be done by mistake, so it would seem to me.
DeleteLkavod Rav Tzadok, Rav Sternbuch writes in his teshuva 5:344 that a forced GET in these cases causes Mamzerus in Klal Yisrael..so according to him and his followers they hold the issue is mamzerus....I agree about making everything personal. Why can't people separate politics and halacha? Can both sides stop the personal attacks and stick to a halichik discussion?
ReplyDeleteThat's great. Yet no one has yet to explain to me how something that the B"Y says is sofek m'd'rabbanan can make a mamzer.
DeleteNor have we actually defined a Get Meusa. If you are talking in terms of the Rambam, you are talkiing about actually physically beating a husband. There is a far distance between that and R"T, and then there are the methods that the B"Y himself brings, and then there are the later poskim... ect ect.
So even if we have at one extreme that the physical beating of the Rambam is agreed to by all to be assur, arguable d'oraitta arguable d'rabbanan fine that is our upper limit. You cannot beat a husband.
Can you beat his father until his father tells him to give a Get and then beat him until he does what his father says as the B"Y clearly states? Would that create mamzerim? The B"Y didn't seem to think so...
Honestly, at this point I am not concerned about what ORA or Rav Shachter are doing(and I'm not quite sure Rav Shachter knows what his name is being put to). First there needs to be defined as clearly as possible, understanding that all the poskim will never completely agree on all the details, what the halakhic boundaries are. Then it becomes easier to determine if they fit into those halakhic bounds.
Trying to justify or condemn which seems to be the way this has gone, seems to be putting the cart before the horse, because you have people coming the predetermined conclusions who are then picking and choosing sources to fit their predetermined ideals.
RABBI DANIEL EIDENSOHN:
ReplyDeleteHave you seen and translated, and explained how they fit into your ongoing discussions about divorces, the following two teshuvos by Rav Elyashev shlita?:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24681716/rav-elyashiv-teshuva
and
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24681744/Ravelyashev-Coerced-Get
Just posted the other teshuva
DeleteI see your campaign against halacha and decency continues. Have a look at Rav Amar's teshuvos, where he summarizes the position of the Tzitz Eliezer, Rav Ovadia and Rav Herzog as "yesh mokoim be'mois olai' lechayev beget oi LICHFOIS GET B'AKIFIN be'tziruf sibois noisofois".
ReplyDeleteSee here:
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21867&st=&pgnum=323
How can you claim Rav Schachter is doing more than this?
Are you claiming he is agreeing with ORA's program of humiliation?
DeleteThat is not what the Tzitz Eliezar or Rav Yosef say which he is basing himself on - they permit harchakas Rabbeinu Tam - not more.
Bob,
DeleteRav Ovadia Yosef, I believe in Vol 6(though I may be mistaken I read it over Shabbat so I couldn't write down the source), says that the Kophia that the Rambam was talking about was not (chas v'shalom) actually hitting another Jew. He claims that it was figurative language for publicly deriding and demeaning the person until he gave a Get.
That is what ORA is doing supposedly with Rav Shachter's approval. The problem is, at least according to this(ROY's) view, that such a Get would be invalid, as no one considers the approach of the Rambam to be valid.
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/04/rav-eliashivmaos-alei-get-not-required.html
ReplyDeletethanks tzedokki for misleading again with a very devious answer about shas and oslo. the torah has an issur for abstaining called lo sa'amod al dam reicho. if shas had followed the godol hador and not taken shochad there would have been no oslo. you can obfuscate all you want until the cows come home but you can't fool everyone all the time.
ReplyDeletei repeat there are many morrokaiyot who would die for an ashkenazi husband.
there is a famous story of a sefardi bochur who pleaded to be admitted to an ashkenazi yeshiva. the rosh yeshiva told him i want to be the rosh yeshiva of an ashkenazi yeshiva...
Stan I see your racism continues unabated very nice. At least you are consistent.
Deletethanks tzedokki for misleading again with a very devious answer about shas and oslo. the torah has an issur for abstaining called lo sa'amod al dam reicho. if shas had followed the godol hador and not taken shochad there would have been no oslo.
DeleteBy Gadol HaDor I assume you are talking about Rav Elazar Shach who, according to his wikipedia page, had his party vote in favor of Oslo 1 and 2. Whose party would, under the leadership of Rav Eliashiv, go on to support the Gaza Disengagement.
Now leaving this in context. If Rav Ovadia Yosef had, as you apparently think he should have, acted as Rav Shach's lap dog, the Oslo accords would have been strengthened by the additional votes.
Furthermore even had Rav Ovadia Yosef completely opposed them(and thus Rav Shach) and voted against them, it would not have changed a thing.
Stan, people in glass houses should not throw stones.
as for your reference to blood libel, you show yourself to be a real anti semite. i do not need to say more, tzedokki.
ReplyDeleteDo you mind explaining how this works? I say that the blood libel is false and that makes me an anti-semite? That makes no logical sense.
DeleteM tzdok... Bring aall the irelevant statistics you want... Rav o yosef addmitted it was a mistake and blamed it on derie
ReplyDeleteCohen katan beyond belief he should take some responsibility himself. He decided to break with rav Shach he knew better...
ReplyDeleteStanley, you seem to be bringing Oslo into the equation, as if it has a connection with Gittin.
ReplyDeleteAs a matter of fact I may be in agreement with you about Oslo, and Shas' corruption/cowardice on the matter.
But the Gedolim you appear to follow were instrumental in bringing the Oslo disaster about, by attacking religious Zionism, and mocking Gush emunim, and supporting the Peres types in the the years leading up to Oslo.
I will give you another example - when Israeli commandoes rescued Jews in the Entebbe raid, R' Moshe Feinstein called it an open miracle, whilst R' Shach called the operation illegal and against halacha. the reason being that he considered the 3 oaths to be valid.
Fortunately, r' Shach was honest enough to see the dangers of sticking to that position, and also unbribable, which are excellent middos, one has to agree. So he ended up saying it is assur to give any land won by miracle to rotzchim. The complete opposite of his position and that of haredi world in the years leading up to Oslo!
"You should know that there are two different types of moredes..."
ReplyDelete"There is a moredes who despises her husband and she asserts that he is disgusting to her."
I think it is quite spooky that a woman is called a moredes in this case.
And I think that it is quite interesting that the major sefardi possek says that she is not a slave and cannot be forced, while ashkenasy poskim seem to call this into question.
You raise two important issues.
DeleteIt is not an issue of spooky - it is simply a legal status which results from not fulfilling her obligations. Similarly the man is also described as rebelling. The question is what is the reason for not fulling obligation - and that determines how the beis din reacts - not the mere fact of being a moredes. If the text said, "Those who refuse to fulfil their marital obligations are of two types" would it be more acceptable?
The language of slave is that of the Rambam. He says that a wife is not like a slave who can be forced to have relations with someone she hates. This is his reading of the gemora Kesubos 63b - "One who says my husband is disgusting can not be forced to be with him." The Rambam says the gemora is understood to be saying that she can not be forced but the husband can. Rabbeinu Tam and others say that the gemora is not implying anything about whether the husband can or can not be forced. Without the authority of Chazal then we run into the problem of an invalid coereced get.
Thus it is not a question of differences in concern for a unfortunate woman - it is what does the Torah Law prescribe. You can see this in Rav Sternbuch's anguishing over how to help agunos within the parameters of the accepted halacha.
"it is simply a legal status which results from not fulfilling her obligations"
DeleteThat's what I find spooky - that it seems to imply that marital relations are an obligation for the wife, when they really are just an obligation for the husband.
The ashkenasy tradition seems to undermine this very basic principle in Ketubot 63b that you cite here. This is very, very spooky.
By the way, if you take the list of 7 obligatory household chores for the wife, every jewish wife of today is a moredes, since none of them spins or weaves.
Another question.
DeleteWhat about other kinds of contracts, when they are coerced?
Is a marriage invalid if it was coerced?
How is it determined?
Is a contract invalid if it was coerced?
What if a father is coerced to sign a bail so that his daughter will receive a get? Is this bail also considered a coerced contract and invalid?
Important questions - some of which is discussed by Rav Schachter in his tape Plight of the Agunah starting at about 11 minutes. these are all discussed and I am not able to give you a quick summary.
DeleteIn sum, relationship between forced monetary transactions, forced kiddushin and forced gittin
Yes the bail is invalid. Whoever was bailed out is mechuyav to go back to jail.
DeleteYou have no idea what the word "invalid" means. In fact you have no idea what the word "marriage" means.
Batmelech,
DeleteIt is a halachic obligation of both husband and wife to have relations with each other. Neither can refuse without becoming a mored or moredes. In Shulchan Aruch, Evan HaEzer Chpt. 77, it clearly states that a man who refuses to have relations with his wife is a mored. Did you consider that "spooky"?
Why must you women continually assume, without any careful analysis, that the rabbis are discriminating against you?
If you women would bother to carefully investigate the halacha, instead of adopting a hostile feminist attitude towards halacha, you would realize that the rabbis made great efforts to protect the rights of women, subject to the limitations of gender differences and human weaknesses.
The hostile, feminist influenced attitudes by certain women towards Judaism and the rabbis are a major cause of our divorce crisis. Why don't you encourage women to respect Judaism and reject feminist attitudes?
avf says, "According to all of the Rishonim pressure and shaming are NOT a forced get. That is therefore the Absolute Halacha. Anyone who has all the Rishonim in front of him and says otherwise, is a Apikoris."
ReplyDeleteI am confused here. Kollelnik says I am sick and you say I am an apikores. But if I am sick I cannot think straight and it is not my fault so why can I become an apikoress?
Also, according to you what are the Rashbo, Bais Yosef, Radvaz, Shach and Chazon Ish when they forbid coercing a GET with humiliation, surely public humiliation that is considered by Chazl to be murder? And the Chazon Ish clearly says that active humiliation of the husband makes the GET invalid. Now, you have all of the Rishonim, and you presumably have the Rashbo. Does he agree with you that humiliation of the husband is not a problem? Or is he just an apikoress and therefore removed from the Rishonim in your library? Actually, it makes sense that you removed all of the Rishonim who disagree with you about coercion, because all of them disagree with you, and therefore, you hold all of the Rishonim in your hand! Oh, you are so clever!
Reply
searching for help on the internet to get my ex lover whom will got divorced back, i came across this wonderful man called DR.ODOGBO of ODOGBO TEMPLE who did a nice job by helping me to get my divorced husband back within 48hours.. I never believe that such things like this can be possible but now i am a living testimony to it because ODOGBO TEMPLE actually brought my lover back, If you are having any relationship problems why not contact DR.ODOGBO TEMPLE via email on: (DRODOGBO34@GMAIL.COM ) OR WhatsApp him on +1443 281 3404 Then i promise you that after 48hours you will have reasons to celebrate like me.
ReplyDelete