Monday, May 21, 2012

Rav Schachter: Problematic Seruv of Meir Kin

Guest post of Rabbi Tzadok     Here is the text of the Seruv for those interested, 

I'm posting the English translation below:
The three of us sat together on 11 Tammuz 5770 (June 23rd, 2010), and we deliberated on the dispute between Mr. Israel Meir Kin and his wife, Lonna, and his repeated refusal to arrange a Get (writ of Jewish divorce) for his wife in accordance with Jewish law. Despite extraordinary attempts to appease him and to mediate between the two sides, Mr. Kin adamantly refuses to divorce his wife in accordance with Jewish law. 
Therefore, we determine that he is considered a “Sarvan” recalcitrant) and does not comply with Jewish law, and the ramifications of this status are elaborated in Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah siman 334. It is incumbent upon anyone who is capable, to influence him to free his wife from an agunah’s chains and comply with Jewish law.
Problems with this Seruv:

1) Meir Kin deposited a Get with a B"D
 Update: Unfortunately both Rav Yitzhak Peretz, head of the Rabbinut Rabbinic courts, and Rav Shlomo Amar, chief Rabbi of Israel, say that this particular Beit Din, and the Rabbanim that run it, are not qualified to judge Gittin nor are they recognized by Rabbinute. A Get that is not universally recognized is pointless, which is what this discussion is all about.
IF the State of Israel will consider the children Mamzerim if she remarries using this Get, surely the majority of Chareidim, at least within Israel, will as well. Which puts us in no better a position that with a Get Meusah.
However, that of course does not mean that Nidui is at all justified. .
2) There is no B"D Kavua in the US so no B"D has the right to judge a person in the US without his consent(at least according to Rav Moshe Feinstein).

3) Basing a seruv on Y"D 344 in a divorce case is absurd, it's the hilkhot of Nidui

4) Since they are proclaiming Nidui(I have no other reason to think that they would be invoking those halakhot) any resulting Get would be possul Get Meusah according to all opinions.

5) The B"Y Eh"E 134 says that it is impossible to kasher the Get until it is no longer in the power of the those forcing him to force him... That is highly problematic.

Above the blog owner says,
"Rav Schachter and his supporters keep insisting that Rabbeinu Tam allows all actions which are not physical and are not nidoi."


However it would appear that is not the case, Rav Schachter also does Nidui when it suits him.

87 comments :

  1. Rabbi Tzadok, thanks for exposing some of the horrific fraud being committed by ORA.

    A few points could be added:

    6. ORA is m'sayeh mosrim - Lonna Kin is a moredes who has litigated in archaot against her husband for quite a while. The nidui should have been imposed on her instead of her husband.

    7. ORA's political propagandists will claim they don't recognize the Bais Din where Meir deposited the Get, or else they'll claim the Bais Din is "corrupt". I personally know several men who deposited Gittin in that Bais Din. Those Gittin were done to the strictest Ashkenazi Chareidi standards. That Bais Din is not corrupt, rather ORA despises it because it does not allow women to clean out their husbands in archaot and then come to Bais Din just to do the Get.

    8. ORA exploits bogus seruvim to create a fake halachic credibility to ORA's vicious harassment campaigns against Jewish husbands.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately both Rav Yitzhak Peretz, head of the Rabbinut Rabbinic courts, and Rav Shlomo Amar, chief Rabbi of Israel, say that this particular Beit Din, and the Rabbanim that run it, are not qualified to judge Gittin nor are they recognized by Rabbinute. A Get that is not universally recognized is pointless, which is what this discussion is all about.
      IF the State of Israel will consider the children Mamzerim if she remarries using this Get, surely the majority of Chareidim, at least within Israel, will as well. Which puts us in no better a position that with a Get Meusah.

      However, that of course does not mean that Nidui is at all justified.

      Delete
    2. Rabbi Tzadok,

      Why does it seem like the "Rabbinut" make no protest whatsoever against ORA's numerous forced Gittin, yet they reject a voluntary, Kosher Get done by Chareidi Gittin experts in Meir Kin's Bais Din?

      Have they ever refused to recognize any of ORA's forced Gittin? If not, exactly what credibility do they have when they attack Meir Kin's Bais Din?

      Delete
    3. The fax numbers and addresses are on the letters, why don't you write and fax and ask them.

      I'm being quite serious, btw, when you get their response post it. As it is you are assuming you know what they say, think and do. Without it in writing those are only assumptions and they may well be false.

      Delete
    4. Tzadok,

      You're once again playing your dishonest little shell game.

      On this blog numerous articles have cited the valid halachic sources which demonstrate the invalidity of ORA's numerous pasul Get Meusah.

      Yet you claim in regards to R. Abraham's Bais Din that "A Get that is not universally recognized is pointless".

      Tzadok, can you offer any valid halachic sources which show:

      1. Even one single reason why R. Abraham's Gittin would not be valid al pi halacha?

      2. Why a man who voluntarily leaves a Get in Bais Din when his wife is in archaos, is not allowed to choose the Bais Din where he leaves a Get?

      3. Why one would be allowed to challenge the validity of a Kosher Get written by a Chareidi Bais Din, while offering no reasons why the Get is pasul, while not violating Cherem Rabbeinu Tam?

      4. Why so-called "universal recognition" (ie recognition by the Israeli rabbinut & US Get Mafia) determines the validity of a Get?

      Tzadok, your own ORA sympathizer & comrade Bechhofer stated on his blog:

      "Am Yisroel l'dorei doros has a mesorah not to be m'ar'er on the kashrus of gittin issued by Battei Din of any Torah background." !!!

      Delete
    5. What dishonest shell game?

      You mistake me for being for a side, as in I'm either with your side in which case I am "Rabbi Tzadok" and receiving your grateful praise. Or I am not on your side, whatever that may be, in which case I am "Tzedoki" and being dishonest.

      I personally don't know why Rabbinut does not accept that Beit Din, but they don't. They typically do not publish their reasons for rejecting various Batei Din. Though I have to admit I find the language of Rav Amar's letter quite perplexing when he says או יצרפו דיינים אחרים לא נכיר בהם, because it is unclear if he is saying they will not recognize that B"D even if (normally) recognized Dayyanim join it, or if it means that they will cease to recognize any Dayyan who joins it.

      I really don't care what Rav Bechhofer says, I don't agree with him on the majority of his points.

      As to why universal recognition of a Get is important... well that seems like it ought to be a no brainer, but let me spell it out for you. Right now 42.5% of the world's Jews live in Israel a great many more are concerned as to what the Rabbanut thinks about a potential marriage, but let's just stay with that 42.5% for right now. If the Get is not recognized by just Israel(again never mind the many other Batei Din that don't recognize it) that means that any resulting children will be considered mamzerim to nearly half the world's Jewish population. More than half if you factor in the many other Batei Din in the US and around the world that rely upon Rabbanut.

      IF you are not worried about the results of mamzerut ect. that come with problematic Gittin, this whole conversation is simply pointless. If you are, then just as we should protect women from organizations like ORA that will get them unwittingly into unaccepted Gittin, we need to also protect them from husbands who will run to Batei Din(for whatever reason) whose Gittin are not recognized, and thus wind them up in unaccepted Gittin.

      If you so badly want to know Rav Amar's reasoning, ask him. I will think of sending him a letter/fax, but honestly I'm not that concerned.

      Delete
  2. Lastly the arrogance of Ora and all its followers is beyond belief. They will not even respond - they are so great that no explanation is to be given. Questioning their godol is unthinkable.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank You Rabbi Tzadok. Finally this case will expose ORA and Schachter as liars and deceivers. This case classically is all the womans fault if you read the facts of the case. The best part is the fact that lonna kin had him Gagged and the gag order specifically prohibited him from discussing certain "immoral acts " that occurred to any Bais Din. This clearly crosses the line where a woman overtly prevents her husband from achieving a fair Din Torah in any Bais Din so that she can "control the outcome of her case and yet screan "AGUNA" when she doesnt receive a GET at her choosing. In fact there is a letter from Rabbi Gobioff to the Judge pleading not to jail him as Lonna Kin attempted to have him jailed for violating the Gag order when he went to Bais Din. see letter at the bottom of this link dated 3/31/2005 where rabbi gobioff writes to the judge.
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/33564437/Evidence-Package-to-Rabbonim

    ReplyDelete
  4. Rabbi Tzadok, please the Gittin business is money driven and any bashing of another bais din without open proof as to what is being done wrong is just Motzi shem ra. I want to remind all the readers that Rabeinu Tam issued a Cheirem to Motzi Laaz al haget. The wicked rabbis who try to destroy the reputation of Rabbi Abraham and Gestetner have no basis but do so to eliminate the competition and to further their agenda of Get Meusa as well as to abolish the issur of Secular courts. Since if they had to abide by the issur of Secular courts or to the dinim of Moredet, they will essentially lose all potential business as many men would argue their case that their wifes went to Arkoot etc.. So please lets stop the bashing of others without proof. As Opposed to Schachter and ORA and Rabbis Sauer and Union, we can clearly show that no Halachic protocol was followed when they imposed a seiruv on Meir Kin as no Hazmonos were sent and we all know that these 3 rabbis dont really sit in Bais Din together as 2 are from LA, 1 from NY. This Seiruv is pure motzi she ra and have an agenda against Meir Kin. see this link where rabbi gestetner vehemently defends him and ridicules these rabbis as motzi shem ra .
    http://mishpattsedek.com/Docs/SharMishpat-Niduy%20against%20Sauer%20Union%20Schachter-Hebrew.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  5. why was my 1st comment not posted ? Your censorship is becoming more and more ridiculous.

    Again Amar gives no reason because he is part of the rabbanut that forces gittin all the time.

    Who cares what the rabbanut says? after all they recognize themselves and they recognize the BDA.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rabbi Tzadok,

    You are once again writing a post about a subject whose facts you know nothing about. You did this with Postelnik before learning that he was arrested for beating her in public. Have you made any attempt to learn how many times the BD met with Meir? Perhaps he did agree to the BD. You just dont know.

    Further, as noted in your comments, the BD to which Meir deposited a GET is not recognized. Why then do you consider his deposit of that GET to be the first "Problem with this Seruv"?

    It is too easy to surf the Internet and write blog posts critiquing rabbinic actions without any knowledge of the facts of the case. You did this with Postelnik and now you are doing it with Meir Kin.

    Why not call Rabbi Schachter (or, if he is too busy, any other dayan) and ask him about the case and the seruv.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't publish anonymous comments

    ReplyDelete
  8. James

    We welcome any documents you can get hold of to prove the corruption in this case. Lonna Kin has been in arko'oys from day one and has never left.

    So Meir does not even have to offer any Bais Din nor deposit any get. While she is in arko'oys no Bais Din can do anything. Yet Schachter got involved.

    Present you documents or keep quiet. You don't know what you are talking about.

    Furthermore because the Rabbanut on whom no real chareidi relies on for Kashrus (they need mehadrin, they need yerusholyaim etc) is suddenly the world authority when the Brisker Rov assured even stepping in there. Show how the Rabbonim you are motzi laaz on have violated Halochoh. This is the US, who cares what the Rabbanut falsely and baselessly denigrates?

    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  9. Grist for the mill! Keep it comin', fellas. This post will serve as the basis of my less-than-horrified attitude vis a vis women who go to ercha'os.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. R. Bechhofer, midah k'neged midah, some day we may witness your wife filing an action in archaos against you, while expelling you from your house, seizing most of your assets, and enslaving you to insanely high child support and alimony payments.

      We will then all have a wonderful opportunity to observe your heroic "less-than-horrified" attitudes. What a great role model you will no doubt be for us!

      Delete
  10. yes i am sure it will. the shulchan oruch according to gavriel bechofer who can learn better than all those who preceded him individually and collectively.

    ReplyDelete
  11. By the way r' YGB please arrange for the lecture to be taped.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You didn't catch that he said the Shiur is going to be given on Yom Tov and thus recording would be ossur did you?

      Delete
  12. James,

    I'm just posting things as I find them. The blog owner asked me if he could elevate it to a main post and I gave my permission. I informed the blog owner of the issue with point #1 and he left it stand.

    If you know of a source that says that one may place a person in nidui until they give a Get, please bring it forth, but from all we have seen that is a Get Meusa.

    Second to that I don't know that placing a person in Nidui is the best way to resolve the woman's problem of an invalid Get.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem is that you are posting things as you find them. That is not the way issues of Gittin (and potentially mamzerus) are handled. They are handled with discretion and with research. If you want to know why he cites YD, the responsible thing to do is find someone on that beth din for an explanation. You are more than capable of finding contact information for some of those rabbanim and finding someone close to Rav Schachter shouldnt be so difficult. If that is too difficult for you, write your question (respectfully), send it to me, and I will forward it along to the right people.

      Delete
    2. Sent requests to all three Dayyanim who signed the seruv asking for clarification. We'll see if anything comes of it.

      Delete
  13. shmuelMay 21, 2012 4:21 PM
    Rabbi Tzadok, please the Gittin business is money driven and any bashing of another bais din without open proof as to what is being done wrong is just Motzi shem ra.


    That's a fairly loose definition of Motzi Shem Ra. First I posted two letters from Rabbinut and supplied links above where they say that these Batei Din are not recognized anywhere in Israel. That is not motzei shem ra, as motzei shem ra is by definition a lie.
    Secondly as everyone ultimately in Israel relies upon Rabbinut for yichus(they may go beyond Rabbinut, but as all marriages have to be registered by them, and their stance on halakhic Jewry ect) saying that 1/3 of the world's Jewry will consider the Get invalid and the resulting children mamazerim is pretty serious.

    stanMay 21, 2012 5:24 PM
    Again Amar gives no reason because he is part of the rabbanut that forces gittin all the time.
    Who cares what the rabbanut says?

    Aside from Belz, Gur, Lubavitch, the majority of the Litvak world, event he Eida when it comes to the validity of Gittin(anything Rabbinut possuls, so will everyone else). Their recognition of BDA was only after, in Rabbi Marc Agnels words, "RCA/BDA had many chumrot forced upon them by the Chareidi run Rabbinut." They brought BDA up to a halakhically acceptable standard for conversion and Gittin ect.

    The problem stands, that over one third of the world's Jews will not recognize a Get by these Batei Din.

    As to whether Rav Amar or Rabbanut needs give a detailed teshuva to every inquiry as to whether a B"D is recognized for something, is a silly question.
    Rav Amar's language is a little more... harif. Why again, he probably doesn't say because we have no need to know, but he goes so far as to say that even if other valid dayyanim sit those Batei Din they will not be recognized.

    Forcing a woman to accept a Get that will leave over 1/3 of the world's Jewry to see her as still married and living in sin if she remarries is obscene. Give her a valid and accepted Get.

    ReplyDelete
  14. So to take Tzadok's absolutely absurd reasoning to its conclusion, Rav Elyashiv, Rav Shlomo Zaman and reb Moshe should have kept quiet when Shlomo Goren was mattir mamzeirim because the Rabbanut rules absolutely and who are the real gedolim to challenge them.

    This is utter absurdity. For the very reason that this letter is political and not halachik, that is why R' Amar's authority is very suspect in many people's eyes.

    We will not bow to the politics of the rabbanut who need to please their paymasters the leadership of the State of Israel who have removed from themselves almost completely the yoke of shomayim and frankly it is obscene to take seriously what Tzadok has written.

    Either a halachik justification is given for the alleged unacceptibility of the Bais Din or it is ignored.

    We are not Catholics where we believe the rabbanut is infalible. On the contrary, especially today they do not represent the views of any of the Gedolim especially on the Ashkenaz side.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wasn't it you who said that we only reject the rulings of Rabbinut when they are l'kula, not l'chumra?

      Delete
  15. In fact anyone who stand up against the mafiosa tactics of the Rabbanut for jailing men wh o won't give their wives a get and then when they do announce that such gittin are posul since they are forced gets blacklisted by the rabbanut.

    we will not give in to terrorism tzadok.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you have any idea the threshold the needs to be met before Rabbinut will imprison a husband?

      In short, it isn't for a cause of Ma'us Ali, it is reserved only for a case of abandonment, wherein the husband ran out on his wife, at times has even married(or at least shacked up with) another woman(and in some cases a man) and yet refuses to give a Get.

      Or in cases where the Shulhan Arukh specifically dictates that we force a Get.

      If you can find a single case in all of Piskei Din(what some 28 or 29 volumes now?) that says contrary to that, I will gladly apologize. However, since you won't, let me just say that your baseless hatred for fellow Jews, your motzi shem ra, and your idea of a different Torah for men and women, is quite shocking and off putting.

      Delete
    2. In what cases do we force a get and what constitutes force? From the minimum to the maximum? Cherem, beatings, jail or otherwise.

      Delete
  16. This is utter absurdity. For the very reason that this letter is political and not halachik, that is why R' Amar's authority is very suspect in many people's eyes.


    Now see this is a motzei shem ra. Claiming that automatically their rulings are politically motivated. You obviously don't know how Rabbinut works, or how they decide whether an outside B"D is acceptable, however, considering that if they make the decision to possul a Get, that decision is final in all of Israel, and for a good bit of the world outside of it, asking a woman to accept a Get which is not universally accepted is terrorism.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Tzadok please stop assuming people are stupid, they are not. The Rabbanut is very far from the final arbitrator on matters concerning klal yisroel. I am sure the Brisker Rov, rav Shach, and the Chazon Ish really cared what this state body has to say...

    what is motzi sheym ra is the rabbanut's mafiosa style tactics in condemning those who stand up against its egregious abuse of halocho and claiming that they are not valid.

    that the rabbanut doesn't condemn many other botei din where the dayonim have been seriously suspected of taking bribes or being mafkia kiddushin le'mafai as in the Bertie Fuchs case but condemns those who who are against its corruption shows that it is not concerned about halochoh but politics.

    Again if we were going by rov, the rov in the middle east from fez to casablanca to beirut to damascus and baghdad and riyadh is sharia law. we do not go after a rov when there is no sofek something is ossur, ask the 8 year Baal Shem Tov of Michelstadt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sure the Brisker Rov, rav Shach, and the Chazon Ish really cared what this state body has to say... that the rabbanut doesn't condemn many other botei din where the dayonim have been seriously suspected of taking bribes

      1)Since one has to register their marriage with Rabbinut, you bet they did. While other may have been stricter than Rabbinut in concerns about Yichus, none are more Maikel. If you want to register with say Belz to be married in Israel, first you have to pass through Rabbinut's criteria. No one is going to matir a Marriage that Rabbinut possuls.

      2)How do you know what Batei Din in the US Rabbinut does or does not recognize? When I asked Rav Amar about this personally he said that there were only 30 some odd Batei Din in the US that are recognized for either Gittin or Gerut and that Rabbinut does not publish a list. Somehow it appears that ITIM managed to obtain a list of 29 accepted Gerut Batei Din, and I am sure there is some cross-over. Personally I just think you are upset because what you have declared repeatedly to be the only two kosher Batei Din the US are actually not considered Kosher by anyone.

      3)As it is Rav Shlomo Amar Rishon L'Tzion who has actually fought to make Gittin and Gerut much stricter in Israel, Rav Peretz who is a Chashuva Rav in his own right, Rav Moshe Green Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva D'Monsey and Rav Yechiel Tauber, have all written that this B"D is not recognized.  The argument to this point against those who rely on various kulot is that those Gittin will not be universally recognized, that it will split the Frum community, and that there will be many who view the resulting children as Mamzerim.  That same argument applies to the Batei Din of Rav Gestetner and Rav Abraham.  They will flat out not be accepted in many Chareidi and Orthodox communities, not just in the Israel, but in the US and around the world.

      Delete
  18. Please explain how a siruv is issued against a man whose wife has been in arko'oys from day 1 and has never left, Tzadok?

    The rabbanut recognizes Schahcter though that's for sure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I already did. See the blog post above.

      The rabbanut recognizes Schahcter though that's for sure.
      It recognizes BDA, aside from that I do not know that it recognizes Rav Schachter himself.

      Delete
    2. Rav Schacther has nothing to do with the BDA.

      Delete
    3. James your wrong:
      look at this list of Dayanim:6th from the bottem
      http://www.bethdin.org/Dayanim.asp

      Delete
    4. Read it again. That is a list of Rabanim WHO HAVE SERVED as dayyanim. Anyone the parties agree to can be a dayyan. Rabbi Bechhofer is also on that list. Perhaps he can resolve this by answering whether or not he would consider himself a dayyan at the BDA.

      Delete
  19. Chevra,

    We have proof right below (a comment from Bechhofer's blog) of the phony hypocritical double standard of the feminist ORA camp.

    On the one hand, ORA and its "rabbis" continually bash R. Abraham's non-feminist but 100% kosher Bais Din, while claiming that his Gittin are unacceptable to the frum olam.

    On the other hand, when attempting to validate forced, PASUL Gittin, ORA sympathizer Bechhofer refuses to accept any challenges to "the kashrus of gittin issued by Battei Din of any Torah background." !!!

    Is there any better proof of the phony double standards of ORA and its so-called "rabbis"?

    =======================

    http://rygb.blogspot.com/2012/04/mechooh.html

    Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer said...

    Am Yisroel l'dorei doros has a mesorah not to be m'ar'er on the kashrus of gittin issued by Battei Din of any Torah background. Once a get is written, signed, sealed and delivered, ein potzeh peh u'metzaftzef. The alternative is too devastating to contemplate. This is, of course, totally irrelevant to a case in which there was no get!
    Monday, April 30, 2012 1:02:00 AM

    ReplyDelete
  20. Is it even legal, in the US, to prevent people in any way, shape or form from going to the courts and force them to accept a parallel court system?

    I do not think this would withstand a trial (if a spouse goes to trial against the other spouse for trying to force them in front of a beith din instead of state courts).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the US, nobody can be legally forced to appear before Beis Din on matters other than a get - just like nobody in the US can be legally forced to appear before Beis Din on the matter of a get.
      If you expect someone to appear before a Beis Din for the latter (despite have no legal obligation to do so), than why not the former?

      Delete
    2. Perhaps they should just prohibit jewish marriage in the US, so the problem would be solved... It would be clear that divorce goes according to civil, not religious procedure...

      Delete
    3. Ever hear of the first amendment? They are not going to prohibit Jewish marriage in the US.

      Delete
    4. Who should prohibit civil marriage? How can the U.S. government prohibit people who choose to get married under Jewish Law from doing so?

      Delete
    5. And note that the idea that one must prove serious grounds to terminate a marriage without the consent of the other spouse is not foreign to secular law. In the U.S., a showing of cause was generally required in order to obtain a divorce without the consent of the other spouse before the 1970s.

      Delete
  21. to Michael Tzadok, excuse me but Rabbi Amar didnt sign the letter that states that Rabbi Abrahams bais din is not valid but rather his secretary, Rabbi Eliyahu Ben- Dahan who was kicked out of the Rabbanut and had a television in his office to watch sports! This is the letter you rely on????? The other letter is from a Rabbi Peretz? See http://meirkin.com/default.htm. Who made them world authorities on which bais din is reliable??? Your rhetoric is just rhetoric. Once again the masses burned the seforim of the Mesilas Yeshorim and the Rambam because they were considered Apikorsus.Does this mean that we should stop learning the Rambam and Mesilas Yeshorim? So too the fact that the masses speak against Rabbi Abraham and rabbi gestetner without explaining their halachic infractions is nothing but Motzi Shem Ra. Additionally the Gittin that are coerced by the Rabbanut or any other Bais Din carries less weight than the ones that are written by Rabbi Abrahams Bais Din with "full consent of the men" where no question of GET Meusa is present. I therefore find it deplorable and laughable at those wicked people who spew falseities about Gittin written at a Chareidi Bais Din where such Gittin are written with full consent of the men which on the contraty should be considered "MEHADRIN of Mehadrin compared to most other Gittin written today that carry a status of "SOFEK KOSHER" because of coercions and other factors that raise questions of its validity. So you can spew all the hate you want and lies about Gestetner and Abraham, but the fact remains that Herschel Schachter, BDA and all others that shame the men and apply presures cannot at the end of the day state that their GET is "Mehadrin" but rather Bedieved at the best and possibly possul. Rabbi Greens letter is also worthless as one of his benefactors of his yeshiva had a daughter who was also in a bitter divorce and son in law left a GET there, so naturally he took the side of his benefactor. see
    http://rabbiniccorruptionatrcc.blogspot.com/2009/09/rabbi-moshe-green-violates-rabeinu-tam.html At that site you will see a letter from the BADATZ to Rabbi Abraham. I dont believe they would adress him with such respect if his Gittin were invalid?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow... Talk about Motzi Shem Ra, the web site you linked to is nothing but Motzi Shem Ra.

      As far as the Eida addressing Rav Avraham with Kavod, first there needs to be ascertained as to whether the Eida actually wrote the letter... but that is really a side point.

      If you want I can provide letters and invitations where several major Gedolim here in Eretz Yisrael addressed me the same way. I even have one where I am spoken about with such Kavod to the the State. Yet I am sure than none of them would accept my Gittin as valid.

      YOu can find correspondance online where Rav Eliashiv addresses his talmid Rav Yonah Metzger with the same honorifics. However, the world knows(at least at this point) that no one accepts either Rav Metzger's gerim or gittin, not even the Rabbanut where he holds the position of Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi.

      The point being that courtesy, and adding meaningless honorifics does not make one's Gittin valid. Unless you can provide written proof to the contrary, there is no reason to believe that the Eida, as well as everyone else, will not continue to rely on the Rabbanut to at least tell them what is possul.

      Delete
  22. James

    Once again you are misrepresenting. Schachter has and does sit on the BDA if the parties request which is what Weissman who works there said.

    secondly they are all colleagues in YU/ REUTS. I wonder if Schachter would acquiese if all of a sudden tomorrow one of Rav Abraham's dayonim suddenly got a job in the YU neth medrash?

    PS: Moshe Green's brother is Pinky Green. Need I say more?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the parties request, the BDA will let anyone arbitrate a case. That is not the point. Rav Schachter is not one of the regular BDA dayyanim. He has no say in how they run their organization.

      Stan, I am not defending the BDA. I am just clarifying a point because you seem to lump all your opponents into one group. Rav Schwartz/BDA/YU/Schachter, etc.

      Delete
  23. "YOu can find correspondance online where Rav Eliashiv addresses his talmid Rav Yonah Metzger with the same honorifics. However, the world knows(at least at this point) that no one accepts either Rav Metzger's gerim or gittin, not even the Rabbanut where he holds the position of Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi."

    Your ability to contradict yourself with such illogical postings tzedoki is breathtaking. You yourself condemn the co-head of the Rabbanut and yet in the previous breath you claim they are the final arbitrator as if they are the Sanhedrin.

    In the same way the world knows who Metzger is it defintely knows who Amar is and what he is worth - bopkes. The rabbanut is a joke - alleged leaders are chosen there for political reasons not for knowledge or erlichkeit reasons and thanks for pointing that out to us so eloquently.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well Rav Metzger was picked by Rav Eliashiv... don't know why. You'd have to ask Rav Eliashiv.

      Rav Amar was the choice of ROY and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu ZTz"L. They believed him to be the most qualifed person.

      Rav Metzger may have been qualified before the changes that Rav Amar instituted in his first five years as the head of Rabbinic courts for Gerut and Gittin, however, he did not after those changes, so they never switched places as is normally the custom. Instead Rav Metzger has spent 10yrs making Rabbanut Kashrut more stringent and Rav Amar has spent ten years making Gerut and Gittin more stringent.

      If UTJ has their way, those two Rabbis will stay in their spots for another ten years, as they want to undo the laws put in place to get Rav Goren out of the office.

      Delete
  24. Boy need help tzedoki. You are even more irrational than many of those meshugeneh women in arko'oys.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Rabbi Tzadok,
    Rabbi Schachter says that in Israel the government/rabbanut will throw in jail any husband who won't give a get. Do you retract your statement below or are you accusing Rabbi Schachter of being a liar?

    http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739308/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Options_for_Helping_Agunot# at 41:30

    "Do you have any idea the threshold the needs to be met before Rabbinut will imprison a husband?

    In short, it isn't for a cause of Ma'us Ali, it is reserved only for a case of abandonment, wherein the husband ran out on his wife, at times has even married(or at least shacked up with) another woman(and in some cases a man) and yet refuses to give a Get."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In short, Rav Schachter is out to lunch on how the Rabbanut works in Israel. Like I said, if you can find me a single case of Maus Ali in all of Piskei Din, where the husband was sent to jail, I'll retract.

      Rav Schachter unfortunately seems to say whatever is convenient to the moment.

      He says that R"T is anything short of Nidui, then he puts a person in Nidui.

      Would I call him a liar? I don't know.

      Delete
  26. DT From your best fiend (sorry i meant friend) the t'zedoki. See how he attacks personally your own flesh and blood...

    http://rygb.blogspot.com/2012/04/mechooh.html

    "Rabbi Michael Tzadok said...

    You don't actually expect Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn to respond to a well reasoned argument that is fully knowledgable of the sources and the various halakhic fallacies that he wants to throw around do you?

    Let's see his outrageous statements have included:
    1) The B"Y holds like the Rashba(when reading beyond the Teshuva of the Rashba that the B"Y brings will show that he doesn't).

    2)That all of the Rishonim said that pressure of any kind was ossur(That was until he was shown that the Rashba was actually the minority opinion).

    3) That Rov Poskim said that pressure of any kind was ossur(until a bunch of Teshuvot were brought saying otherwise).

    4) That those poskim who said that pressure could be applied(the Tzitz Eliezer, Rav Shternbuch, Rav MOshe Feinstein, Rav Ovadia Yosef, the Ben Ish Hai, the Yaskil Avdei et. al) were mistaken(L'havdil) in their understanding as he would show all of us, and possibly even give a point by point rebuttal(haven't seen either yet).

    5) That a Ketuba could be written in a way that would invalidate it, and that a Rav who was going to do marriages had to be an expert in Gittin(until shown the Shulhan Arukh, Beit Shmuel and Taz on Eh"E 54 that say otherwise).

    He's not interested in the truth. He's not interested in debating the actual halakhic sources. Rather he prefers the propaganda method developed by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, "A lie, told often enough, becomes the truth." If you actually take the fight to him and challenge him with what his own sources say, he will simply ignore you, while he continues to deride and defame any Rav he doesn't agree with, modern Orthodoxy, other Hareidim, whoever doesn't follow his vary narrow views.
    Thursday, April 26, 2012 4:06:00 PM :

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IF you can find me anywhere that Rav Dovid Eidensohn as actually responded to any one of those points I will retract.

      You seem to not understand what is a truly personal attack. Rav Dovid Eidensohn is activist for a view that I do not believe to be mainstream. I am not attacking him, hence I call him Rav/Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn. I.E. I don't make insulting twists of his name nor deny him the honor he is due for his incredible learning that obviously resulted in the Toar of Rav.

      However, that does mean that I have to like his views nor his tatics for trying to spread them. I would love to hear what he actually has to say. Unfortunately he seems unwilling, still to engage others in the actual sources.

      Delete
    2. BTW stan,

      I make the same compaints against Rav Bechhofer. He makes these grand pronouncements and then retreats back under his rock once the sources come out, saying that the internet is an inappropriate place to discuss such things.

      I'm no fan of people who do not want to deal with the sources, which is probably why you and I don't get along.

      Delete
    3. RMT,

      That is totally unfair. If I may speak for Rav Bechhofer (though I do so without asking him), what we oppose is not the discussion of sources but their application to actual cases. You want to use actual cases (about which you know nothing) as a springboard for a discussion of sources but we think it very dangerous to speak in terms of mamzerus and passeling gittin in the context of actual cases. If you want to talk about tactics in the abstract, thats fine but you write posts about the problematic gittin of Postelnik without knowing all of the facts and you write critiques of batei din without trying to understand what they are doing.

      Delete
    4. My knowledge of Internet Yeshivish abbreviations is quite poor but I think YGB agrees.

      Delete
  27. and I got lectures from tzedoki about personal attacks...

    ReplyDelete
  28. "Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer said...

    Am Yisroel l'dorei doros has a mesorah not to be m'ar'er on the kashrus of gittin issued by Battei Din of any Torah background. Once a get is written, signed, sealed and delivered, ein potzeh peh u'metzaftzef. The alternative is too devastating to contemplate. This is, of course, totally irrelevant to a case in which there was no get!
    Monday, April 30, 2012 1:02:00 AM"

    Tzedoki as previously stated, your soul mate bechoffer can't have it both ways. If we can't paasul any gittin then we can assume the gittin of rav gestetner and rav abraham are kosher.

    if we can passul gittin then we can apssul gittin written by gedaliah schwartz, schlachter, broyde, willlig, belsky ralbag, mendel epstein, peretz steinberg, shmuel fuerstz, wohlmark etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You seem to mistakenly think that I agree with Rav Bechhoffer. You are wrong.

      Delete
    2. I agree. I would assume all gittin to be kosher.

      Delete
  29. Stan, here's more evidence of Tzadok's falsification of Torah.

    At the very BEGINNING of Rambam, Hilchos Gerushin Perek 1, Halacha 2:
    "(From the Torah verse) "Em lo timtza chen b'einav", we learn a man only divorces by his free will. If a divorce is done without the husband's free will, then the wife is not divorced."

    Yet Tzadok posted this false comment on Bechhofer's (Reformadox) blog !!!

    "M'doraitta, we can force a husband to give a Get. The recalcitrance on the part of the Rabbanim was for the worry that the husband may not have the proper Kavvanna. Thus a forced Get(never mind R"T), an actual forced Get, is only possul m'd'rabbanan. "

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are referring to the same Rambam who says we beat a recalcitrant husband with rods until he not only agrees but wants to give a Get right? You seem to be clueless to what the sources say so this might help. I suggest you start listening at around minute 17, he lays out pretty clearly the sources from the Gemarra on, stating that even what is written in the Rambam was already a level of chumra.

      Delete
  30. "n short, Rav Schachter is out to lunch on how the Rabbanut works in Israel. Like I said, if you can find me a single case of Maus Ali in all of Piskei Din, where the husband was sent to jail, I'll retract."

    Are you serious tzedoki? How about Yosef Dov Meyerson great grandson of the Brisker Rov was recently put in jail by the ra(ie bad) rabanut. Everyone knows this case where are you living? which planet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh good so you know all about the case. Got to Otzar HaChokmah, find the relevant Piskei Din, and post it, then we will discuss. Otherwise you are just throwing around hear say.

      Delete
  31. So Rabbi Bechoffer if that is the case, if a man deposits a Get at the botei din of rav gestetner and rabbi abraham which will be released when the woman leaves arko'oys are you okay with that since you are okay with the botei din?

    also are you happy that these men get remarried in the interim?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. My position, based on what I have read here, is that the procedures of that BD in its treatment of women are wrong. The get should be given forthwith, regardless of whether the woman leaves ercha'os or not. The men should certainly not be allowed to remarry until their first wives are fully divorced k'das Moshe v'Yisroel. What I am saying is that once a woman has received such a get, regardless of all the avlos perpetrated against her by the BD, she is megureshes k'dos u'k'din.

      Delete
    2. What I am saying is that once a woman has received such a get, regardless of all the avlos perpetrated against her by the BD, she is megureshes k'dos u'k'din

      How do you know the bais din perpetrated avles against her?

      Delete
    3. Stan,
      The problem with that BD has nothing to do with the actual GET but with the BD and their (lack of) procedures.

      What you dont know about the BDA is that despite their "procedures" leading up to a GET (which, BTW, I dont much care for myself) they actually outsource most of their Gittin to a mesader Get from Borough Park who writes the GET, brings his own witnesses, questions the parties, and conducts the "ceremony" independent of the BDA. Having gotten to know him, he is about as "Modern Orthodox" as you are.

      Delete
    4. Instead of "all the avlos" read "any avlos." That is what I meant.

      Delete
  32. Tzadok, That is a mous olai case, loud and clear. I saw what rav gestetner wrote and one of the dayononim protested the get forced.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rav Gestetner isn't recognized so I really don't care what he has to say.
      However, just want to check that you are talking about the Meyerson that the BaDaTz Bnei Brak wrote against here.  The one who says that the Rabbinut only said that he Chiyuv to give a Get, without Kefia, which means according to the law he cannot be imprisoned.  This is the same one yes?  And this is the B"D that you said wrote that he had no Chiyuv to give a Get...  Stan you need to get your facts straight.

      Delete
  33. Rabbis Tzadok and Bechhofer,
    Do you believe that in the U.S., all marital dissolutions issues (custody, marital property) should be brought to a beis din, or is it perfectly acceptable from a halachic perspective to bring those issues to the secular courts?

    Do you believe that in all cases in which one spouse says that they want out of a marriage, that Beis Din should order that a get be given immediately (before the resolution of other issues), regardless of the grounds upon which the spouse says they want out, and regardless of the status of other issues in the case?

    Should beis din order the other spouse to agree to an immediate divorce in civil court, even though civil law (at least in some States) does not allow for a judge to issue a divorce until the parties have been separated for two years, absent there being either grounds for divorce or the consent of both spouses?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This cuts to the heart of the matter.

      As Rabbi Tzadok wrote in this post:
      2) There is no B"D Kavua in the US so no B"D has the right to judge a person in the US without his consent (at least according to Rav Moshe Feinstein).

      The ramifications of that statement - which is true - are the basis for my perspective. In the United States, there is no BD system. Hence, a spouse who is tovei'a a get in a legitimate, universally recognized as fair, BD can be countered by the other spouse demanding a different BD - which may be of any quality or inclination - or Zavla.

      (The RCA's pre-nup was meant to avoid this problem, by having parties consent ahead of time to submit exclusively to the arbitration of the BDA - which is generally recognized by the members of the community which it serves to be a fair BD.)

      Since there is no system, much less quality control, marital issues should - must - be brought first to a BD, but the dispensation to go to ercha'os should be immediate upon the other side demanding another BD or Zavla (unless the other BD can be wholeheartedly accepted by both parties).

      And therefore, ideally, a get should precede all other issues. This ideal is complicated and not necessarily feasible, but it should be the course advocated by every BD.

      Your last question is moot, since BD cannot compel either side to give a get.

      Delete
    2. Rabbi Bechhofer can you please give us the sources of your shiur and how you plan on explaining how woman who run to secular court deserve unconditional Gitten? Do you have a sources that conflict with Rav Sternbuch 4:301, Rav Pam and the rest of the Rabbonim on this document? http://www.mishpattsedek.com/Docs/KOLKOREH-ERKAOT-70GADOLIM-SEALS.pdf Do you have a source that says a Beis Din is immoral if it allows a man to deposit a GET on condition the woman drops secular court? If not, then why do you condone their actions? Why not at least warn them that if they act in this manner than their is a likleyhood that Rabbonim will back the man and end up in Beis Dins that hold different than you do? If Modern Orthodox Rabbis want to prevent agunahs in cases like the above, why dont they ever warn or protest woman who run to secular court. Your logic basically tells woman to go to secular court.

      Delete
    3. Rabbi Bechhofer,
      In answer to the second question, are you saying that in all cases, if one spouse comes to BD and says that they want an immediate divorce, the BD should, no questions asked, and regardless of how long the couple is separated or whether they have children, order that a get be immediately given?

      Delete
    4. Rabbi Bechhofer
      What do you mean by the the last question being moot, and what do you mean by reference to a get? The last question related to civil divorce.

      Delete
  34. Bechhofer's slick obfuscation sounds more like some kind of new-age feminist religion than Torah Judaism:

    1. Exactly which "procedures" of the BD are wrong? Never specified by Bechhofer or his cronies like Tzadok.

    2. "get should be given forthwith" - Where does any posek say a Get must be given forthwith to a moredes/moseres? On the contrary, R. Moshe Feinstein stated that all issues were to be settled before the Get is done, or there's chashash gadol on the Get.

    3. Does the woman have any requirement to leave archaos? Never specified by Bechhofer. I guess he's "less-than-horrified" by mesira and destruction of men's lives in archaos.

    4. "Men should not be allowed to remarry ..." - Heter meah rabbanim, although allowed up to now in the case of moredes by major poskim like R. Moshe Feinstein & Rav Sternbuch has now been prohibited by Bechhofer.

    5. Exactly which "avlos perpetrated against her" by that BD? Never specified by Bechhofer.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Stan,
    "The problem with that BD has nothing to do with the actual GET but with the BD and their (lack of) procedures. ".

    And James what exactly are those problems, I am awaiting to hear. You must be kidding! They apply halochoh which to you and the other MOs is a serious problem which is why your mates at getora want to scrap halochoh.

    Let me tell you that the BDA apply anything but Torah law in their death bin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My objection was to the claim that RYGB was trying to have it both ways by rejecting assuming the kosher status of Gittin and rejecting that particular BD. There is no contradiction.

      I dont know what they find objectionable about the BD. Not knowing the parties, rabbanim, or facts, I would rather not speculate.

      I wish others would refrain from speculating about matters with which they are unfamiliar.

      Delete
  36. Shmuel, re: your comment "if they (Batei Din) had to abide by the issur of Secular courts or to the dinim of Moredet, they will essentially lose all potential business as many men would argue their case that their wifes went to Arkoot etc.."

    Your point is crucial to understanding the current day "Bais Din" system. Many of these Batei Din are raking in huge profits while turning a blind eye to Jewish women who moser their husbands in archaos and then come to Bais Din just to obtain a Get.

    Should these Batei Din apply the actual halacha by placing seruvim on the women in archaos and demanding that the women remove the Court orders before any Get is done, many women would exit the Batei Din causing a huge profit loss to the Batei Din.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Can anyone explain to me which opinion of the two below is the real Tzadok? Is Tzadok real or is he just a sock puppet?

    1. In the posting above, Tzadok wrote:
    "any resulting Get would be possul Get Meusah according to all opinions."

    2. In the Bechhofer blog,
    http://rygb.blogspot.com/2012/04/mechooh.html
    Tzadok posted a comment as follows:
    "Rabbi Michael Tzadok said...

    Mamzerut claim is really and truly a false claim that is meant to be more incendiary than it is helpful. It is pure propaganda ... That is what this is, it is a lie that keeps getting repeated.

    M'doraitta, we can force a husband to give a Get ... Thus a forced Get(never mind R"T), an actual forced Get, is only possul m'd'rabbanan.

    You throw on top of that Bitul Modaah, then what you are left with is a Get that is sofek possul m'd'rabbanan(at best, and then only by the stringent opinions which the B"Y rejects). But let us say that you have a sofek d'rbannan. Since when do we not rule sofek d'rabbanan l'kula? ...

    Saturday, April 28, 2012 2:34:00 PM "

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you really not see how these things go together?

      1) Get Meusa, since it is being forced by Jews, in a way that is not currently halakhically acceptable it would be possul M'd'rabbanan, according to all opinions(a lot like cooking chicken in milk is ossur m'd'rabbanan by all opinions, as opposed to say fish in milk which is only a problem by Sephardim).

      2)Mamzerut is a false issue see the Rosh he says it isn't an issue, or see the B"Y Eh"E 134 who says it isn't an issue.
      As I have said, and as is laid out source by source here(starting at minute 17), according to the Gemarra there is no problem with forcing a recalcitrant husband.  The Geonim became squeamish about it, the Rambam while he permitted it, also had his own added strictures, R"T was downright afraid of it, and we keep adding Rabbinical Humrot upon Humrot.  Which is fine...  However those Humrot do not negate the fact that
      1) A B"D initially(m'dorraitta according to most) had the ability to force the husband to give a Get.
      2) That a Mamzer is not made on account of a Rabbinic Humra.

      What you yet fail to grasp is that I do not side with Bechhoffer or the ORA or Rav Schachter. Likewise I don't side with peoople like you or Stan. I side with the Halakha. The extent to which you do or don't will be the extent to which we agree.

      Delete
    2. Tzadok, I really couldn't care less whether you side with me or not. Your obfuscating statements and positions are in fact sharp deviations from normative Ashkenazi halacha.

      Contrary to your numerous misleading statements, the majority of contemporary Ashkenazi Gadolim have in fact ruled that:

      1. Women who moser their husbands (99% of the so-called agunos today) in archaos receive invalid Gittin

      2. Mamzerim definitely do result from these pasul Gittin

      http://www.mishpattsedek.com/Docs/KOLKOREH-ERKAOT-70GADOLIM-SEALS.pdf

      Furthermore, a Get can only be forced under very limited circumstances by a B"D recognized by the husband as a valid halachic B"D. Therefore any Get forced on non-feminist husbands by the feminist organizations and rabbis (such as ORA, Bechhofer, etc.) is pasul, and future children from a new husband are mamzerim.

      Delete
    3. I really couldn't care less whether you side with me or not. Your obfuscating statements and positions are in fact sharp deviations from normative Ashkenazi halacha.

      Provide sources and we will talk.

      Contrary to your numerous misleading statements, the majority of contemporary Ashkenazi Gadolim have in fact ruled that:...
      2. Mamzerim definitely do result from these pasul Gittin

      Lo mekubal. This is motzi shem ra pure and simple. When the Rishonim and the B"Y and Sh"A say that it does not, no true Gadol is going to say that it does. To say that they do is to denigrate them.

      Therefore any Get forced on non-feminist husbands by the feminist organizations and rabbis (such as ORA, Bechhofer, etc.) is pasul, and future children from a new husband are mamzerim.
      Now we come to the crux of the problem. You recognize only two Batei Din, which no one else in the world recognizes, while simultaneously rejecting everyone else. There is no way around that impass, unless the blog owner would turn to talking about why those Batei Din are rejected. Until he does, since you and your cronies see fit to make that assertion, he is most likely going to need to kill the discussion on Agunot as well.

      Delete
  38. This is a question for Rabbi Eidenson, putting aside whether or not she is technically an aguna and what constitutes a beit din that is authorized to give siruv regarding gittin. What is the halacha regarding meah rabbanim and depositing the get in escrow with a tannai?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Be very careful about using the Beth Din of America for your GET or other religious issue. Rabbi Shlomo Weissmann and Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz both have seruv’s against them. Prior judges on this court have had a multitude of problems. Read more about it at www.thebethdin.com. Too many Beth Dins are corrupt and dishonest. As for ORA, it is only a Mamzer factory.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.