Sunday, July 8, 2012

Rav Gestetner to Rav Miller - Remarry without heter 100 Rabbonim?

34 comments:

  1. Please thank Sam from Toronto for this document. Since rabbeinu gershom was not gozer in the case of a moredes and this guy is not as well connected as malkiel the emporer kotler to get the 100 signatures, what is the problem.

    please see the divrei chaim, rabi akivah eiger, the achiezer and the recently departed ha'goan hagodol tabonb shel kol bnei ha'gola rav menashe ha'godol.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stan your problem is that you don't know the details. Reb Shlomo explained himself in a letter. That Beis din got the wrong details and if it's a question who to believe, I'll choose Reb Shlomo any day

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You Cant Handle The TruthJuly 9, 2012 at 2:24 AM

      Like the Dodelson/Weiss case, where R Shlomo is firmly in the Dodelson camp? Or he must have been fooled by those devious Dodelson/Kotler/Schustal/Mechon L'Horaah meanies!!!

      Delete
  3. I don't understand what is so difficult about getting a heter meah rabbonim. Nowhere in the HMR does it say you can't get 100 Kollel Guys with smicha to sign it. I don't see why it should be so hard to obtain a HMR. There are thousands upon thousands of guys with smicha. Finding any random 100 should be relatively simple.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Replies
    1. He calls her a moredes but according to Reb Shlomo, that's not true. I wish I had the paper that was up in the Kollel, but I don't. He owes her money . This is his seventh marriage according to the rumors. Reb Shlomo checked on the story and had the backing of Reb Shmuel Aerbach on the story. That's enough for me.

      Delete
  5. You Cant Handle The TruthJuly 9, 2012 at 2:22 AM

    The point of this document is to show how far out on the fringe R Gestetner is. That he is the one Weiss needs to run to for a bittul Seruv from the most well respected Beis Din in America speaks volumes.

    Your Welcome R' Doniel for pointing you in direction of the document.

    ReplyDelete
  6. d.t. your heading on this case is very misleading, thay did not marry "without" a heter,of corse thay got a "heter bais din", thay just did not have a "heter meah rabunim",(a heter BD is sufficent "al pi rov poskim" by a "moredes", rav gestetner quoats a lot of poskim that even without heter at all we dont force them to seperate, but that's not thy casr here), please corect this very misleading header,thanks

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sam, in the interests of transparency, why don't you state your relationship to the woman whom you allege is not receiving a get al pi halocho. I have asked you this before but you have chosen not to answer. Clearly you have an interest because you have only commented on this case and i will not for one second buy an argument that you are not involved somehow. so come clean now already.

    Secondly unlike the ORA feminists and their chief spokesman on this blog Tzadok, Rav Gestetner does not automatically assume anyone is right until seeing the facts. So
    1) Post the document explaining rav shlomo miller's alleged facts.
    2) I asked you previously to contact me if necessary through daas torah so that i could get your documents to rav gestetner. you never took me up on the offer.
    3) rav gestetner left several messages for rav miller who never responded to rav gestetner before the latter released his own document.
    4) rav gestetner never issued the hetter to remarry - it was done by a different bais din but he agreed with its psak after reviewing the documentation.

    lastly i will always have some hakoros hatov to rav miller for finally exposing izzie belsky to rav ekyashiv and for him having belsky declared persona non grata in the oylom hatorah in eretz yiroel.

    having said that, although a big talmid chochom, rav miller is not a malach. rav gestetner is allowed to disagree with him just like many other rabonim do all the time. so
    1) provide documentation
    2) come clean on your relationship in this case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not related at all to any of these cases I comment on. I have been thru a get with my daughter and came to realize how some people will twist and turn facts to win. This guy is hanging around Toronto now and is totally shunned from the frum community. Let him give a proper get and pay his wife the money owed. And yes, I am a chosid of Reb Shlomo, and I know him well enough that if he puts out such a letter against somebody he checked the details quite thorough. The other Beis din has a name for itself. There is no reason for Reb Shlomo to answer to them.

      Delete
    2. sam:
      look up the blog "lakwood wiew" and you will see the letter from the bais din who isued the heter (kedushas levi), thay show all the arguments of rav miller to be eithre false facts or mistake in halacha, yes i am a chosid of rav gestetner just because he fights for the truth with no fear from the "sistem"

      Delete
  8. Dovid, if there is no chiyuv to obtain a hetter meah, then there is no chiyuv.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When does halacha (under the cherem) ever allow a married man to remarry without a HMR? Please cite specifically.

      Delete
  9. Is there any Respected Hareidi Ashkenazi Gadol that says a heter meah is not necessary? Rav Eliashiv, Rav Shternbuch, Rav Kanievsky? Does anyone else learn this way?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Michael: Does a Sephardi EVER need a HMR to remarry without a Get? I don't think so. So does a Sephardi remarry if his wife illegitimately refuses a Get? Or can a Sephardi force his wife to accept a Get against her will?

      Delete
    2. Dovid, the point here is not Sephardi Halakha, the question is whether or not this is accepted Ashkenazi Halakha.

      To answer your question this is written into every Sephardi Ketubah to which the husband also takes a Shavua, as is written in the Ketubah to uphold:
      ולא ישא ולא ישדך ולא יקדש שום אשה אחרת עליה, כי אם ברשות בית דין הצדק, ולא ימכור ולא ימשכן שום חפץ מחפציה כי אם ברשותה ורצונה הטוב והגמור, ולא יפתנה ולא יסיתנה שתמחול לו כתובתה, לא כולה ולא מקצתה ולא שום תנאי מתנאי הכתובה. ואם תמחול- הרי המחילה ההיא בטלה מעכשיו כחרס הנשבר וכדבר שאין בו ממש,
      How that is interpreted and under what circumstances the B"D may give permission would take a lot of going through Sephardi responsa which has nothing to do with our discussion. However the short answer is that while not Heter Meah, he still needs a Heter B"D.

      Now back to my question, is there any respected Hareidi Ashkenazi Gadol that says a heter meah is not necessary? Rav Eliashiv, Rav Shternbuch, Rav Kanievsky? Does anyone else learn this way?

      Delete
    3. http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/cherem-rabbeinu-gershom-rav-sternbuch.html

      Delete
    4. שו"ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק ב סימן ב

      במורדת שהשיגה דיווארס וכמה אלפים דאלאר ע"י הערכאות ואינה רוצה לקבל גט כדי לצערו אם יש להתירו לישא אחרת בלא מאה רבנים כ"א למב"י תשכ"ב. מע"כ ידידי הרה"ג מוהר"ר צבי יונה געלער שליטא רב בפארטלאנד ארעגאן.

      הנה בדבר האשה המורדת שכבר איזה שנים שהשיגה דיווארס בערכאות וגם לקחה ע"י הערכאות שלשים אלף דאלאר במזומן ובית וכלים שמכרה בעד עשרים אלף והשופט דערכאות סגר בבאנק אלף דאלאר מהשלשים שחייבו את הבעל ליתן לה עד שתקבל גט כדמו"י וכבר הסכימה לקבל גט ונסדר בסיאטל וכתר"ה נעשה השליח לגרשה וכשחזר לפארטלאנד והודיע להאשה בדבר הגט שבידו חזרה בה ואמרה שאין רצונה לשחרר את בעלה בשום אופן ולעולם לא תקבל את הגט כדי לצערו. הנה זה ודאי שאף אם לא נאמין שהיא גרמה הקטטא שביניהם אלא שהוא התחיל בקטטא עד שיצא מזה שהיא השתדלה ע"י לאיער בערכאות להשיג דיווארס נמי כיון שהסכימה ליקח גט וחזרה בה כדי לצערו נחשבה למורדת כיון שאינה רוצה לא לדור עמו כאשתו ולא להתגרש כמפורש בסימן ע"ז סעיף ב' ואם מרדה מתחת בעלה כדי לצערו ואמרה הריני מצער אותו בכך מפני שעשה לי כך וכך או מפני שקללני או מפני שעשה עמי מריבה שולחין לה מב"ד ככל דין מורדת עיין שם ומסיק הרמ"א דלאחר י"ב חדש אם הוא רוצה לגרש צריכה לקבל ממנו בעל כרחה או מתירין לו לישא אחרת עיין שם, וכ"ש בכאן שכפי שידוע לכתר"ה היתה היא המתחלת בקטטא והיא השתדלה בענין הדיווארס.

      והנה אם צריך בכאן להיתר דמאה רבנים, מפשטות לשון הרמ"א משמע שמתירין אותו במורדת לישא אחרת גם בלא מאה רבנים שלא הוזכר שם לא ברמ"א ולא בנו"כ. ועיין בתשובות מהרשד"מ אה"ע סימן ק"כ דבמורדת לא גזר הרגמ"ה, וכיון שלא גזר אין צורך להיתר דק' רבנים אבל מפני שלא יבואו לומר על כל דבר קטן שהיא מורדת לכן סובר שאין להתיר אלא כשעברו איזה שנים שידוע שהיא מורדת, וראיתי באוצר הפוסקים סימן א' ס"ק ע"ג אות כ"ד מביא כן גם מרעק"א ועוד הרבה אחרונים שמתירין בכה"ג גם בלא ק' רבנים עיין שם. אבל מ"מ לכתחלה יש להשיג היתר ממאה רבנים וכן נוהגין אבל אם אי אפשר כדכתב כתר"ה יש להתירו גם בלא ק' רבנים כיון שזה חמש שנים שהלכה מבעלה והוציאה ממנו בערכאות חמשים אלף דאלאר והסכימה לקבל גט ונכתב ברצונה וחזרה מלקבלו כדי לצערו שזה יותר לא שכיח מהאופנים שבמהרשד"מ ועובדות האחרונים. והגט יהא מונח ושמור בהכשו שלא יתקלקל עד שתבוא ותקבלהו מהשליח. ידידו, משה פיינשטיין

      Delete
    5. Can we get a translation or summary?

      Delete
    6. Michael: Are you sure EVERY Sephardi kesuba has that language? I understand it is NOT universal. And when did Sephardid start inserting that language into the kesuba? Surely it was not *universally* done so prior to the establishment of the State of Israel. And if a Sephardic kesuba does NOT have that provision, presumably the husband can take a second wife under Sephardic halacha (putting aside civil regulations.)

      Delete
    7. Rav Eidensohn thank you that was interesting.

      Dovid, yes I am sure it is universal and I am sure that has been universal for at least 300yrs. There are minor variants in language. For instance the Morrocan version requires also the wife's permission. However, Gedolim such as the Chida wrote about it, so I know it has been around that long.

      Delete
    8. "For instance the Morrocan version requires also the wife's permission."

      So according to Sephardic halacha, a husband may have two wives so long as his first wife okays it.

      Delete
  10. Where is the fight for the stability of families in this case?

    Is it not just a way of strengthening the bias in favor of men, who can run away and marry someone else, if they so wish, even without giving a get, while the ex-wife remains blocked, and no-one should be allowed to pressure the poor ex-husband into giving a get?

    this is an example how the intricacies of jewish law are used for an unholy purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  11. to the "am haaretz" Micael Tzudok, as an answer to yout ignerent quastion, i got these sourses from rav gestetner
    עי' רעק"א תניינא סי' פ"ב, משיב דבר סוף סימן ה', תועפת ראם אה"ע סי' ג' אבני צדק אה"ע סי' מ', עין יצחק ח"א אה"ע סי' ג' ענף י"ג, באר משה סי' ט"ו, מהרש"ם ח"ב סי' נ"ה, וח"ו סי' קל"ח, וח"ז סי' קנ"ט, בית דוד סי' כ' כ"א וע"ו, נטע שורק אה"ע סי' כ', צור יעקב סי' י"ב, אחיעזר ח"א אה"ע סי' י' אות ד', אגר"מ אה"ע ח"ב סי' ב', בית אב"י ח"ב סי' ק"ז וקט"ז וקל"ג, שאילת יצחק תניינא סי' קע"ח וקע"ט, תשובות והנהגות ח"ג סי' תט"ז, עי"ש
    yoyr the joke stock of this blog

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is that barely literate response supposed to be a joke or is English not your strong suit?

      I didn't ask if Rav Gestetner sourced his opinion, I asked if any respectable Hareidi posek, such as Rav Eliashiv, Rav Shterbuch, Rav Shteinman, Rav Kanievski et al agree to this.

      So I take it by your answer that no, he is a Daat Yachid and thus can be ignored.

      Delete
  12. RDE,

    May I suggest you do a fuller exposition and an article on the halachas of the Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom and the Heter Meah Rabbonim? What the Cherem entails and when the HMR is and is not needed. And when a HMR can or cannot be issued. And who can issue a HMR. And who qualifies to be one of the 100 signatories to a HMR.

    And how do non-Ashkenazi men remarry if their wife illegitimately refuses a Get. Or can a non-Ashkenazi force a wife to accept a Get, since the only thing preventing that is the Cherem, which is only applicable to Ashkenazim?

    And is there any halachic issue with a Sephardi marrying two wives, simultaneously, today? After all, they do not have the Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom preventing it. And Sephardim did, indeed, have multiple wives until even modern times, before they moved to countries that had goyishe civil laws preventing it. Some Sephardim moved to Israel with multiple wives. And Rav Ovadia Yosef said a few years ago that Sephardim should not follow Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom and that it would be good if they would marry multiple wives today.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The Divrei Chaim and the Maharashdam (Rav Sholom Shwadron's great grandfather as well).

    As you can see Sam has still NOT produced his document but expects us to believe him because he hero worships Shlomo Miller.

    What a joke. Produce the document already or frankly pipe down. As for owing money irrelevant - let R Miller issue the hetter bais din to go to arko'oys IF TRUE.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Stan ,you reply makes no sense at all. You must have an agenda worse then Ora,that is to make as many agunos as possible even if the husband is going against Halacha . You have no respect for Gedolim if they do not conform to your view. Good bye.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sam respectively produce the document or shut up. You are the one who has no respect for gedolim like rav gestetner, I have asked you to produce the facts which you refuse to do. So i think what you are accusing me of you are guilty of, not making any sense at all.

    since rav miller feels he does not need to have a discussion with anyone and is above everyone else, clearly it is his way or the highway. so the highway it shall be.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think I have the right to demand an apology from Sam. Where did I say things disrespectful of rav miller?

    ReplyDelete
  17. What is Rav Gestetner shlita's relation to Yossi Gestetner, the political whiz kid? Both are from Monsey.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I am not sure what the facts of this case are; so I do not comment on it.

    However one should note that both in the selection from Igros Moshe cited above (at the end) and even more clearly in E.H. 4:3 Rav Moshe says that even if the wife is a "moredes", and even if the husband has valid monetary claims against her, he has to deposit a valid get with a beit din before remarrying; he does not have permission to leave her an aguna (as R. Moshe says explicitly in 4:3). I ask Stan on other commentators whom seem to think that withholding a get can be legitimate leverage in disputes over money how they reconcile that view with R. Moshe's clear p'sak.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. so we have a contradiction in igros moshe and you decided to go by "pick and choose", i spoke to rav gestetner and asked him about this.
      he informed me that there are guidelines in the poskim "כללי הוראה והכרעה" exactly how to handle such a problem and how to decide which one overrules the other, (but to go your way by "pick and choose" is outruled), in this particular case it's very clear that the one in E.H. 2:2 overrules the other one.
      rav gestetner referred me to his shiur #56 on "KOL BAIS DIN" where he discuses this issue.
      instructions how to get to the hsiur in USA: call 1951 262 3634 when recording starts press #3 when recording starts again press #56 (P.S. the shiur is in yiddish)

      Delete
    2. I don't see any contradiction regarding a get. (I wasn't talking at all about whether he needed hetter 100 rabbonim or not) In both tshuvot Rav Moshe says the man must leave a get with the beit din before remarrying. In 4:3 he says explicitly he should not withhold a get over financial claims; in 2:2 the subject is not explicitly addressed, presumably because the husband didn't threaten to do so.

      My question is specifically to those commentators who claim a man may withhold a get for leverage. I make no comments about particular cases (including the one R. Gestener is writing to R. Miller about) because I do not know the facts. Certainly the case Rav Moshe writes about in 4:3 is fairly extreme (she is a moredes and R. Moshe accepts that she stole from the husband) and he says that the husband must leave a get and does not have permission to make his wife an aguna.

      Delete

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