According to R Tam the S'A the Gra and present Poskim, R SK , R HS ect. Their bais din it is not a forced get / mekach Also NO Rishon ever said that busha causes a forced get / Acquisition. R DE please differentiate between real force and threat to steal ones assets , and non direct force which never cause a fake mekach.
no need to repeat all the previous discussion. I also cited Rav Weber that Rav Elishiv's view is that direcly embarrassing a person can produce a get me'usa.
avf - lets walk this through slowly. It is an invalid get because it is coerced. Rav Weber was not saying only if the gave the next day - but if he gave it as a direct result of being embarrassed. The point being that directly embarrassing a person to give a get - invalidates the get because the get was coerced.
Actually R' DE R' ELYASHIV is very concise with his words . He didn't say that its not a get at all , just that its invalid , which from Him shows its just a chishash for the SHACH. In addition he said its only a pasul the next day cause that's the limit to be choshesh that their might be a Gilui Daas that he is doing it against his will from the dire anguish of the rally. This is of course only a problem if you disagree with R Tam etc. and you don't recognize that a bais din told him that he must give a get.
Wow! You have ruach hakodesh and know that Rav Eliashiv didn't really mean what he said! That you know that he is disagreeing with Rabbeinu Tam - rather than with Rav Schachter. And that a beis did which didn't hear both sides skips the whole waste of time and even avoids issuing a psak - they just have to issue a seruv. Total nonsense
I don't have R"H but from knowing how he issues psaks you can see from his CHOICE of words what he MEANT.
Yes I can see that he is disagreeing with R Tam because according to him only direct pressure on him or his current assets causes a get meusa . Unless he only agrees with R Tam with a tzeiruf of a bais din causing it. What does R HS have to do with this case in neve yakov ? And the bais gave an Hazmona and aharon didn't show up so therefore they only heard one side. Obviously he didnt show up cause he knows he's a Rasha. I don't know how you can disagree with the Daas Torah of R S Kamenstky and R Belsky ect.
Treating Rabbi Kamentesky as somehow impartial in the matter between Epstein and Friedman is absurd. See, for example, the Yated article about the longstanding ties between Epstein's family and RSK. Also see the comments of Tamar's lawyer: http://articles.philly.com/2010-04-20/news/25213049_1_family-physician-geriatric-medicine-future-wife “Dr. Epstein [Tamar’s father] was an active supporter of Talmudical Yeshiva of Philadelphia, a religious school for Orthodox Jewish boys and young men in Overbrook. He volunteered his medical services to the school and was on call to care for the students 24/7, said a close friend, Rick Goldfein.” Rabbi Kamenetsky is founder and dean of the school
The Baltimore Beis Din, to which both sides mutually agreed to submit the case, and which held several hearings with the participation of both sides, did not order that a get be given. Perhaps, after having heard both sides, the Beis Din concluded that there are no grounds for ordering that a get be given.
Because R Kamentsky has a relationship with her family and her father Z"L and recieved contributions from them in the past dosnt mean anything unless he recieved money leading up to the bais din and afterwards. That the Baltimore bais din didn't order him to give a get also dosnt mean anything it could be for technical reasons ie lack of eidus , and not because they dont believe her .
I'm glad that as a simple unlearned Jew, I can see the simple truth. It is not ok to withhold a get. You can argue your minutai halachot until you turn blue, but you're missing the big picture. Withholding a get is in itself disgusting behavior. The Holy Torah allows this? I think not. Find the minutai halacha that gives women rights.
It was well known that "you pressure him until he Wants to give the get".
It is my opinion that ORA doesnt truly care if TAMAR receives a GET or not since many previous rallies on her behalf produced no results. Rather they are attention seeking in that they want to get media attention . This is all about the money and the fame. Tamar makes a great "poster child" since Aharon work for a congressman. If I was leading ORA, I wouldnt spend the time in organizing yet a new rally in a case that did not produce results and even more so after the DAAT TORAH blog covered all the Halachic ramifications of such actions. To pursue such action at this juncture shows immaturity,brazen anti-torah ethics.Since Halachacally rallies such as these produce illegitimate Gittin, therefore their action constitute embarrassing a Jew in public and Chazal stated that EIN LOHEM CHELEK BEOLOM HABA. I urge daat Torah to use this blog as a means to counter advertise to people not to participate in this rally to protect themselves from falling in the same category of Ein lohem Chelek Beolom Haba.
just remember noone ever paskended that he is chayv to give a get . in fact the rosh bais din in baltamore said that in a case like this we paskin that we don't force him to give a get
Wrong. The BD of Rabbis Belsky and Kamenezky said that Tamar is an Agunah and everyone (that means the public) is obligated to do whatever they can to convince Aharon to give her a Get.
the beis din issued a seruv. They did not specify what they were advocating. According to your liberal understanding there really is no reason why the public can't do everything - including physical and monetary threats. If they were limiting themselves to a call for harchakov of Rabbeinu Tam - they should have said so. If they weren't they should have also mentioned that. Consequently all that is clear is that they issued a statement to aid Tamar. Rabbi Ralbag said it was not a call for demonstrations against Aharon.
ORA does not want a Get Meusa. That is a highly misleading headline.
A man who refuses to give his wife a GET does not receive extra privacy rights. ORA is following the psak of a valid BD which encouraged everyone to convince Aharon to give his wife a GET. That is public knowledge. Having people call a husband to convince him to give a GET is nothing new. ORA is just adding to the list of people doing so.
To the extent that there is any humiliation, it stems from Aharon's refusal to give a GET, not ORA.
It is not like ORA is threatening to publish embarrassing photos. They are simply urging him to give a GET.
It did not exclude public demostrations. It said that all should do whatever they can to convince Aharon to give a GET. That is exactly what ORA is doing. There is no "humiliation". If they sought to "exclude" convincing Aharon in large numbers, they should have said so.
RSK seems to disagree with you on the validitt of a BD on which Rav Belsky sits. I defend your right to claim that they are all "on the take" and I do not believe that we all must bow to the Daas Torah of the so-called Gedolim but until those leaders have bees stripped of their positions (both as roshei yeshiva and in the case of RSK, member of the Moetzet Gedolei hatorah) we can not fault someone for relying on them. I am not saying they are right, only that if someone relies on them, we cant protest. Do you see the difference?
Treating RSK as somehow impartial in the matter between Epstein and Friedman is absurd. See, for example, the Yated article about the longstanding ties between Epstein's family and RSK.
James - Besides for ORA which of the Gedolim say it is ok to have rallies outside the homes of family members? Friedman lives in silver spring why are they having rallies in Brooklyn?
You dont need Gedolim to say that it is OK. There is no reason to believe it assur. In fact, the protests in Brooklyn (which, btw, I oppose) are far less problematic. Explain how protesting in front of someone else's home causes a GET Meusa. Where is that in the SA?
Considering how quick the Haredim in the US condemn everything MO from the IRF, Chovevei, Avi Weiss, etc, I wonder why they havent come out to condemn ORA in unequivocal terms. I think Mamzerus is a greater threat to Orthodox Judaism than Uri Letzedek.
"I do not believe that we all must bow to the Daas Torah of the so-called Gedolim but until those leaders have bees stripped of their positions (both as roshei yeshiva and in the case of RSK, member of the Moetzet Gedolei hatorah) we can not fault someone for relying on them. I am not saying they are right, only that if someone relies on them, we cant protest. Do you see the difference?"
James - great logic. I must not do anything about corrupt self appointed leaders until other corrupt self appointed leaders do something about them. Circular ridiculous logic.
Rav Elyashiv already told Belsky to jump in the lake and stay far away from gittin, so cut out the garbage. You are a frminist who could not care two hoots about halocho, that is the bottom line.
Botei Din in America are corrupt because when it comes to money many chareidim are corrupt.
Once again you are failing to see the distinction between "doing anything about corrupt self appointed leaders" and understanding how OTHER people may rely on them. I think the Eida Chareidi rabbanim have distorted true Torah but I recognize WHY others may rely on them.
I know your claims. Rav Belsky is evil, RSK on the take, etc. You may be right but at the end of the day we cant fault an organization for following them.
The "bottom line" is that you dont know me or anyone else on this blog so accusing me of not caring about halacha reveals more about you than it does about me.
On a somewhat unrelated note, are you the person behind the blog michael-tzadok.blogspot.com? If so, please note that it may be illegal to impersonate someone online. If you want to dedicate a blog to attacking him at least do so publicly or with an explanation that you are attacking him without his participation. That blog's About Me section implies that Michael-tzadok is the author. As does the web address. Just some friendly advice.
That is a pretty ironic claim given that Tamar abused Aharon's desire to save their marriage to have her abduction of the child treated as a fait accompli.
So you agree that he didn't budge. So where is the coercion. All this discussion about "force" just isn't there. At most, it's playing on his mind. In the end, if he gives a get, it simply CANNOT be seen as coercion. He will have decided by his Shikul HaDaas that it's not worth using Kiddushin as a weapon to solve his marital problems and his access issues.
this is absurd. By definition if force is used - torture, financial pressure, etc etc. - if he doesn't succumb to the pressure then it isn't a get me'usa. Most would agree you can't use physical beating in the case of ma'us alei. Would you argue that a beating is not considered coercion if he refused to give the get after being beaten? You need to look at what the poskim describe as improper pressure - that if it is the cause of the giving of the get it is a get me'usa.
being the the guy lives in silver springs why is the ralley in brooklyn- let ORA know that they got the wrong address!!!!!!! A rally in brookyn DOES NOT at all affect Ahron who is in silver springs over 250 miles away!!!!!!!!!
I'm really know very little and there are so many tolmidei chochomim here, but as I remember, RAMBAM writes that, if approved by beit din, it's quite OK to apply a force to such person in order the person gives get. I'm sure everyone knows it. That's why I don't understand the discussion.
This is a case of ma'us alei - that the wife simply says I don't like my husband. The Rambam says that the husband can be forced to give a get while the overwhelming majority of poskim disagree. Thus this is a case where the halacha is clear that force can not be used. The argument is that the shunning proposed by Rabbeinu Tam do not constitute force and thus are permitted. The discussion here is whether public demonstrations fall under the category of coercion or the shunning of Rabbeinu Tam.
Perhaps the reason that the rally is in NYC, and not Silver Spring where Aharon lives, is that Rabbi Stern doesn't want to spend his Sunday traveling to and from SIlver Spring - see more recent post on Daas Torah.
yemach shemom ve'zichrom
ReplyDeleteAccording to R Tam the S'A the Gra and present Poskim, R SK , R HS ect. Their bais din it is not a forced get / mekach Also NO Rishon ever said that busha causes a forced get / Acquisition.
ReplyDeleteR DE please differentiate between real force and threat to steal ones assets , and non direct force which never cause a fake mekach.
no need to repeat all the previous discussion. I also cited Rav Weber that Rav Elishiv's view is that direcly embarrassing a person can produce a get me'usa.
DeleteBut the get meusa is irrelevant, since we do not want to produce mamzerim, so we ignore the evidence that could qualify a person as a mamzer.
DeleteSo just shut up and everything is well.
Or did I get something wrong?
I thought that R Elyashiv said it causes only an "invalid" get . And its only a problem if he would give it the next immediate day.
DeleteBatmelech it is true that you got something wrong.
Deleteavf - lets walk this through slowly. It is an invalid get because it is coerced. Rav Weber was not saying only if the gave the next day - but if he gave it as a direct result of being embarrassed. The point being that directly embarrassing a person to give a get - invalidates the get because the get was coerced.
DeleteWell, you see, your fear of producing mamzerim is just step one.
DeleteIn a second step, mamzerut will be ignored, so bedieved, there is nothing to worry...
Bottom line: this looks very, very much like an intimidation tactic to preserve male privilege, at the expense of the women.
Actually R' DE R' ELYASHIV is very concise with his words . He didn't say that its not a get at all , just that its invalid , which from Him shows its just a chishash for the SHACH.
DeleteIn addition he said its only a pasul the next day cause that's the limit to be choshesh that their might be a Gilui Daas that he is doing it against his will from the dire anguish of the rally. This is of course only a problem if you disagree with R Tam etc. and you don't recognize that a bais din told him that he must give a get.
Wow! You have ruach hakodesh and know that Rav Eliashiv didn't really mean what he said! That you know that he is disagreeing with Rabbeinu Tam - rather than with Rav Schachter. And that a beis did which didn't hear both sides skips the whole waste of time and even avoids issuing a psak - they just have to issue a seruv. Total nonsense
DeleteI don't have R"H but from knowing how he issues psaks you can see from his CHOICE of words what he MEANT.
DeleteYes I can see that he is disagreeing with R Tam because according to him only direct pressure on him or his current assets causes a get meusa . Unless he only agrees with R Tam with a tzeiruf of a bais din causing it.
What does R HS have to do with this case in neve yakov ?
And the bais gave an Hazmona and aharon didn't show up so therefore they only heard one side. Obviously he didnt show up cause he knows he's a Rasha.
I don't know how you can disagree with the Daas Torah of R S Kamenstky and R Belsky ect.
Treating Rabbi Kamentesky as somehow impartial in the matter between Epstein and Friedman is absurd. See, for example, the Yated article about the longstanding ties between Epstein's family and RSK. Also see the comments of Tamar's lawyer: http://articles.philly.com/2010-04-20/news/25213049_1_family-physician-geriatric-medicine-future-wife “Dr. Epstein [Tamar’s father] was an active supporter of Talmudical Yeshiva of Philadelphia, a religious school for Orthodox Jewish boys and young men in Overbrook. He volunteered his medical services to the school and was on call to care for the students 24/7, said a close friend, Rick Goldfein.” Rabbi Kamenetsky is founder and dean of the school
DeleteThe Baltimore Beis Din, to which both sides mutually agreed to submit the case, and which held several hearings with the participation of both sides, did not order that a get be given. Perhaps, after having heard both sides, the Beis Din concluded that there are no grounds for ordering that a get be given.
DeleteBecause R Kamentsky has a relationship with her family and her father Z"L and recieved contributions from them in the past dosnt mean anything unless he recieved money leading up to the bais din and afterwards.
DeleteThat the Baltimore bais din didn't order him to give a get also dosnt mean anything it could be for technical reasons ie lack of eidus , and not because they dont believe her .
I'm glad that as a simple unlearned Jew, I can see the simple truth. It is not ok to withhold a get. You can argue your minutai halachot until you turn blue, but you're missing the big picture. Withholding a get is in itself disgusting behavior. The Holy Torah allows this? I think not. Find the minutai halacha that gives women rights.
ReplyDeleteIt was well known that "you pressure him until he Wants to give the get".
www.http://michael-tzadok.blogspot.com/
ReplyDeleteIt is my opinion that ORA doesnt truly care if TAMAR receives a GET or not since many previous rallies on her behalf produced no results. Rather they are attention seeking in that they want to get media attention . This is all about the money and the fame. Tamar makes a great "poster child" since Aharon work for a congressman. If I was leading ORA, I wouldnt spend the time in organizing yet a new rally in a case that did not produce results and even more so after the DAAT TORAH blog covered all the Halachic ramifications of such actions. To pursue such action at this juncture shows immaturity,brazen anti-torah ethics.Since Halachacally rallies such as these produce illegitimate Gittin, therefore their action constitute embarrassing a Jew in public and Chazal stated that EIN LOHEM CHELEK BEOLOM HABA. I urge daat Torah to use this blog as a means to counter advertise to people not to participate in this rally to protect themselves from falling in the same category of Ein lohem Chelek Beolom Haba.
ReplyDeletejust remember noone ever paskended that he is chayv to give a get . in fact the rosh bais din in baltamore said that in a case like this we paskin that we don't force him to give a get
ReplyDeleteWrong. The BD of Rabbis Belsky and Kamenezky said that Tamar is an Agunah and everyone (that means the public) is obligated to do whatever they can to convince Aharon to give her a Get.
Deletethe beis din issued a seruv. They did not specify what they were advocating. According to your liberal understanding there really is no reason why the public can't do everything - including physical and monetary threats. If they were limiting themselves to a call for harchakov of Rabbeinu Tam - they should have said so. If they weren't they should have also mentioned that. Consequently all that is clear is that they issued a statement to aid Tamar. Rabbi Ralbag said it was not a call for demonstrations against Aharon.
DeleteORA does not want a Get Meusa. That is a highly misleading headline.
ReplyDeleteA man who refuses to give his wife a GET does not receive extra privacy rights. ORA is following the psak of a valid BD which encouraged everyone to convince Aharon to give his wife a GET. That is public knowledge. Having people call a husband to convince him to give a GET is nothing new. ORA is just adding to the list of people doing so.
To the extent that there is any humiliation, it stems from Aharon's refusal to give a GET, not ORA.
It is not like ORA is threatening to publish embarrassing photos. They are simply urging him to give a GET.
The psak of the beis did did not include public demonstrations according to Rabbi Ralbag who was a member of that beis din.
ReplyDeletethe rest has been fully discussed already
It did not exclude public demostrations. It said that all should do whatever they can to convince Aharon to give a GET. That is exactly what ORA is doing. There is no "humiliation". If they sought to "exclude" convincing Aharon in large numbers, they should have said so.
DeleteFrom James
ReplyDelete"ORA is following the psak of a valid BD"
where have you been dude? belsky is as valid as the pope
Stan,
DeleteRSK seems to disagree with you on the validitt of a BD on which Rav Belsky sits. I defend your right to claim that they are all "on the take" and I do not believe that we all must bow to the Daas Torah of the so-called Gedolim but until those leaders have bees stripped of their positions (both as roshei yeshiva and in the case of RSK, member of the Moetzet Gedolei hatorah) we can not fault someone for relying on them. I am not saying they are right, only that if someone relies on them, we cant protest. Do you see the difference?
Treating RSK as somehow impartial in the matter between Epstein and Friedman is absurd. See, for example, the Yated article about the longstanding ties between Epstein's family and RSK.
DeleteJames - Besides for ORA which of the Gedolim say it is ok to have rallies outside the homes of family members? Friedman lives in silver spring why are they having rallies in Brooklyn?
ReplyDeleteYou dont need Gedolim to say that it is OK. There is no reason to believe it assur. In fact, the protests in Brooklyn (which, btw, I oppose) are far less problematic. Explain how protesting in front of someone else's home causes a GET Meusa. Where is that in the SA?
DeleteConsidering how quick the Haredim in the US condemn everything MO from the IRF, Chovevei, Avi Weiss, etc, I wonder why they havent come out to condemn ORA in unequivocal terms. I think Mamzerus is a greater threat to Orthodox Judaism than Uri Letzedek.
I feel that this problem of agunos is much worse then the Internet problem.
ReplyDelete"I do not believe that we all must bow to the Daas Torah of the so-called Gedolim but until those leaders have bees stripped of their positions (both as roshei yeshiva and in the case of RSK, member of the Moetzet Gedolei hatorah) we can not fault someone for relying on them. I am not saying they are right, only that if someone relies on them, we cant protest. Do you see the difference?"
ReplyDeleteJames - great logic. I must not do anything about corrupt self appointed leaders until other corrupt self appointed leaders do something about them. Circular ridiculous logic.
Rav Elyashiv already told Belsky to jump in the lake and stay far away from gittin, so cut out the garbage. You are a frminist who could not care two hoots about halocho, that is the bottom line.
Botei Din in America are corrupt because when it comes to money many chareidim are corrupt.
Once again you are failing to see the distinction between "doing anything about corrupt self appointed leaders" and understanding how OTHER people may rely on them. I think the Eida Chareidi rabbanim have distorted true Torah but I recognize WHY others may rely on them.
DeleteI know your claims. Rav Belsky is evil, RSK on the take, etc. You may be right but at the end of the day we cant fault an organization for following them.
The "bottom line" is that you dont know me or anyone else on this blog so accusing me of not caring about halacha reveals more about you than it does about me.
On a somewhat unrelated note, are you the person behind the blog michael-tzadok.blogspot.com? If so, please note that it may be illegal to impersonate someone online. If you want to dedicate a blog to attacking him at least do so publicly or with an explanation that you are attacking him without his participation. That blog's About Me section implies that Michael-tzadok is the author. As does the web address. Just some friendly advice.
It's hardly coercion. The guy hasn't budged. These are just one of many pebbles designed to have him come to his eventual senses
ReplyDeleteCome to his senses? You mean he should agree not to have a meaningful relationship with his child?
DeleteNo he should agree not to use his marriage in pursuit of such.
DeleteKiddushin is NOT A WEAPON
That is a pretty ironic claim given that Tamar abused Aharon's desire to save their marriage to have her abduction of the child treated as a fait accompli.
Delete"It's hardly coercion. The guy hasn't budged."
ReplyDeleteYes and Tamar did budge by up and running. No get for that sickening rashanta and marsh'as until child is given back to father. good work Aharon.
So you agree that he didn't budge. So where is the coercion. All this discussion about "force" just isn't there. At most, it's playing on his mind. In the end, if he gives a get, it simply CANNOT be seen as coercion. He will have decided by his Shikul HaDaas that it's not worth using Kiddushin as a weapon to solve his marital problems and his access issues.
Deletethis is absurd. By definition if force is used - torture, financial pressure, etc etc. - if he doesn't succumb to the pressure then it isn't a get me'usa. Most would agree you can't use physical beating in the case of ma'us alei. Would you argue that a beating is not considered coercion if he refused to give the get after being beaten? You need to look at what the poskim describe as improper pressure - that if it is the cause of the giving of the get it is a get me'usa.
Deletebeing the the guy lives in silver springs why is the ralley in brooklyn- let ORA know that they got the wrong address!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteA rally in brookyn DOES NOT at all affect Ahron who is in silver springs over 250 miles away!!!!!!!!!
Aharon's mother & uncle live in Brooklyn.
ReplyDeleteI'm really know very little and there are so many tolmidei chochomim here, but as I remember, RAMBAM writes that, if approved by beit din, it's quite OK to apply a force to such person in order the person gives get. I'm sure everyone knows it. That's why I don't understand the discussion.
ReplyDeleteThis is a case of ma'us alei - that the wife simply says I don't like my husband. The Rambam says that the husband can be forced to give a get while the overwhelming majority of poskim disagree. Thus this is a case where the halacha is clear that force can not be used. The argument is that the shunning proposed by Rabbeinu Tam do not constitute force and thus are permitted. The discussion here is whether public demonstrations fall under the category of coercion or the shunning of Rabbeinu Tam.
DeletePerhaps the reason that the rally is in NYC, and not Silver Spring where Aharon lives, is that Rabbi Stern doesn't want to spend his Sunday traveling to and from SIlver Spring - see more recent post on Daas Torah.
ReplyDelete