Thursday, August 16, 2012

Jewish Exponent reports Friedman assault

Jewish Exponent   The man who is at the center of a controversy for refusing to grant his ex-wife a get, or a Jewish divorce, was allegedly assaulted two weeks ago in Bala Cynwyd after dropping his 4-year-old daughter at her grandmother's house. 

At least one blogger has hinted that the alleged assailants may have been supporters of the victim's ex-wife, but a group that lobbies on behalf of agunot, or "chained women" who are denied divorces, says that's unlikely.

The alleged incident took place on a residential street at 6 p.m. on July 29, according to Tom Walsh, a spokesman for the Lower Merion Township. The police department does not release the names of victims, but Friedman told the Jewish Exponent that he was the one attacked. [...]

Rabbi David Eidensohn of Monsey, N.Y., who has spoken on behalf of Friedman, said the man has been shunned in the Orthodox establishment. His brother, Daniel Eidensohn, has blogged extensively about the alleged incident at

"There were two or three people dressed in black who attacked me, at least one of whom was wearing a mask," Friedman said of the incident, which occurred on Tisha B'Av. "I had to go to the hospital afterwards. I was hit pretty hard. I was able to get away."

Walsh said there were "no weapons seen and the victim said there was no verbal communication." He added that no one has been arrested and an investigation remains ongoing.


  1. Just recycled accusations and speculations. Why do you keep posting this junk. Why not wait until there is some objective verification that an attack IN FACT occurred. All you have demonstrated (now for the third time) is that an attack is CLAIMED to have occurred. We know that already. What is new in this article you've just posted? It is as if you don't care about the real truth, you just want to keep the subject on the top of the blogfor political purposes regardless of its verifiable truth.

    1. Yacov Levado,
      So all of the newspaper accounts of a person being attacked by three people one of them masked are just "junk" and "recycled accusations" and "speculations." The fact is that husbands have been beaten, and are beaten, and a couple involved in this was caught by the FBI and now the FBI is looking into this. As long as people like Herschel Schachter publicly teaches that the Torah requires such husbands to be beaten and maybe killed, and as long as organizations such as ORA spread the incitement and hate, we are going to have problems with how people treat husbands. Of course, the husbands are now getting their act together, and the papers are printing their side. The haters may have less luck beating a husband until he gives a GET, a GET that in normative Judaism is invalid. This is exactly why we have to repeat and remind about this incident. We live in a time where the Schachters of the world are creating hundrds of mamzerim. There is now talk or organizing a data base for mamzerim. This is the ultiomate child abuse. True, some people like Schacther invent a new Torah where such forced divorces are Kosher, even a mitsvah. But the child has to marry into a world where normative Judaism may reject him as being a mamzer or a doubtful mamzer or one who is blemished by the argument of mamzeruth. This is hideous. WHy don't people write to protest this?

    2. but rabbis do not want to know abut mamzerim! Like the three monkeys, they close their eyes, ears and mouth about mamzerim, even for such mamzerim where it could be proved beyond reasonable doubt that they came from an adulterous relationship (like the case where the mother confessed, but the rabbonim decided not to believe her).

      so why are you intimidating women with something that should not be real.

      And if you go according to the judgemental hareidi world, children of divorcees are second class anyway...

      therefore, I think that your argument is not an argument. If the get was given, no-one will try to create mamzerim by casting doubts on the validitiy of the get.

      Forget the mamzer argument.

  2. this reporter confirmed directly with Aharon Friedman - something which was apparently lacking in previous reports. There was also complaints that the assault was not reported by the media - there are now two newspapers who are reporting the assault and have confirmed with the police that Aharon Friedman reported assault

    So please go back an reread the comments that claimed that this event was a lie because it was missing the above.

    Your irritation is misplaced and indicative that something else is motivating your attempt to trash the information reported.

  3. I think everyone has agreed that the alleged incident was reported. The police stated as much to both your brother and to R. Tsadok and his wife. And if it was reported it was obviously reported by Aharon Friedman. So what is new here. That he asserts he was not lying and did in fact report an assault? We know that. But there is still no objective evidence that the assault in fact occurred. I think you are compromising your "daas Torah" integrity out of loyalty to your brother and I think that's a pity.

    Personally, I don't know these people. I have no idea what happened. But I do know, that at this point it is all conjecture. There has been know objective proof presented and you are simply contributing to the obfuscation and the rumor-mill.

    1. There is no objective evidence that the Yakov Levado post above is from a real person. It is very possible that the author of the above post is the result of a computer program that used comments in previous threads to write it. It's been done before:

  4. ..."there shouldn't be coercion," Eidensohn said. "He is not giving the get because he is terrified that he will go into court and they will wipe him out. The only protection he has is not to give the get."

    Strange logic. For "Eidensohn", it is OK to use the get as tool of coercion, but "there shouldn't be coercion" (to obtain a get)...

    I think you can't have it both ways. if you are against coercion, tell people not to use the get for coercion.

    No, no, I know, i misunderstood. "there should not be coercion in asking for get"... That's a halachic rule. That the wife remains more then four years without a get is irrelevent, that this keeps her from moving on with her life is irrelevent.

    I'm not against waiting periods. But four years is about as much as I can tolerate. And telling people to use the get as a bargaining chip is frankly immoral in my view.

  5. ORA, once again you've demonstrated your substandard and erroneous feminist logic principles.

    It appears evident that Epstein absconded the couples child to another state in violation of halacha and Torah values. If Epstein returned the child to the father's vicinity, and agreed to a halachic divorce settlement, then she would no doubt receive a valid GET from her husband.

    Therefore Epstein is not an AGUNAH in any way, shape, or form, and she is in fact M'AGEN (chaining) herself by refusing to accept a halachic divorce settlement.

    Instead of your bogus feminist sympathy for a fake agunah,
    Epstein deserves blanket condemnation for destroying a Jewish family, preventing a father from having a relationship with his child, and persecuting and defaming a decent and normal Jewish father.

    1. As far as I can see, withholding the get has contributed nothing to solve the problem, but created a lot of new problems.

      Therefore, I do not think that withholding the get is an adequate strategy.

      Let's say the wife does not care for a get, either because she has no intention of remarrying or because she has the intention of remarrying without a get. So she does nothing to obtain a get. Neither protest to obtain in, nor carve in to the extortion.

      What will the withholding of the get bring?

      Would you recommend withholding the get in such a situation, even though neither of the parties wants to stay married and the civil divorce is already pronounced?

      Therefore you recommend using the get as an extortion tool. I think this is deeply wrong, and I think giving a kosher seal to such tactics or pursuing such tactics is akin to being a "naval be darchei torah". i.e. using the letter of the law for very, very unholy purposes.

      Let's see how the blog author, who let through the "perverse, sexist gender hatred being promulgated by the lesbian feminists" will now be all outraged about the naval be darchei torah... ;-)

  6. @R'DOVIDE: "We live in a time where the Schachters of the world are creating hundrds of mamzerim."
    Oh really> I thought that was the domain of the Shermans of this world!

  7. "We live in a time where the Schachters of the world are creating hundrds of mamzerim. There is now talk or organizing a data base for mamzerim."

    Just because somebody wears a kipa sruga or went to YU, you might not want him to marry your daughter, but that doesn't make him a mamzer.

    Sounds like you're accusing the Rosh Yeshiva of sleeping around with married women.

    1. It does not sound like that's what he was implying. He was implying his statements are justifying others creating mamzerim.

  8. This article quotes the man who claims he was attacked. There is no mention of an attempted abduction. Mr Epstein just says 3 men beat him. So who made up the story about the attempted kidnapping?

  9. Dear Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn

    "On the issue of r' Shachter, I condemned nobody, since I don't know enough about the specific halachos to take a stand." These are the words of Eddie on a previous quote on this blog.

    You are wasting your time arguing with these pompous, arrogant YU biryonim who admit they are ignorant but are defending the honor of those who are knowingly violating halocho.

    Does that not seem like a waste of your time? As it says "Ein am ho'oretz chosid". Clearly where ignorance thrives, so does corruption.

    Have a good shabbos.


    1. Stan,

      I agree with you. I don't think people should be aloud to have an opinion unless they finished Shas and had a faher from Rabbi Eidensohn. Then they could make comments on this blog. Until then they should take off their yarmulkas and stop calling themselves jewish. If you didn't learn the whole Shas keep your mouth shut and kiss the rabbis beard. Torah is only for talmidei chachomim!

      some of you people are so narrow minded that you can't see past the end of your own nose.

  10. Stan,
    A talmid chochom of YU called me and let me have it. I said to him, "Okay, fine, but what is your rebbe's source against my sources?" He asked R Schachter and was told that the source to defy my sources was that the YU rabbis ruled that way. A few months later, this person called a close friend of mine and said that he had been complaining about me to his friends and they insisted that he go to my website and and check out my sources. He did so and changed his mind. He agreed that I was right and R Schachter was wrong. So, I surely am anot against YU people. It is a pity that such fine people have such a horror for a Rosh Yeshiva, a man who repeatedly called for violence and even death, including his remark that a Prime Minister in Israel should be assassinated. He feels that way, but why does YU have to let him be the Rosh Yeshiva and influence the students and all others?

  11. "these pompous, arrogant YU biryonim who admit they are ignorant but are defending the honor of those who are knowingly violating halocho."

    It is important to admit where someone has not a specialised knowledge.

    As for YU - sorry, but I wasn't there.

    Re: arrogance - it is stanley who claims to know more than some of the greatest Roshei Yeshiva in America. And Put down R Kamenetsky , suggesting he is not a gadol.

  12. Rabbi Edelson. In the interest of disclosure can you say if you or your brother receive any form of compensation from Mr Friedman or his supporters?

    1. no - I don't think my brother receives any form of compensation either - but he can answer for himself.

  13. Rabbi Eidensohn

    We don't believe you that this guy changed his mind. Did he file a police report to this effect? Did he video this phone call and post it on you tube?

    This is nonsence posted on this blog all the time. And following the shulchan oruch is deemed narrow mind. And I must be brisker if i want toi follow halocho and all the other stupidity instread of adressing the basics:

    What is the source in accepted halocho for
    1) secular law in a bais din when the rshbo calls this not only rishus but being oyker the torah
    2) bifurcation which is really just the same concept as the trinity - pure kefirah
    3) supporting women in arko'oys
    4)fake siruvim on women in arko'oys.
    5) being malbin pnei chavero be'rabim she'ain lo chelek le'oylom habo.

    Let those intellectual giants James and Eddie associated with those enlightened humane Jews of YU just answer these questions. NI am sure you agree nothing else really matters.



    PS: Please ask your broither to censor me the same way he censors you (ie he doesn't)

  14. PS: How much $$$$ does r schahchter receive from ORA that is also the big question?

  15. mrmoose,
    I don't take any compensation from Mr. Friedman or his supporters.

    1. Thank you for answering BTW if I was speaking to someone from ORA I would ask the same question in reverse.....

  16. To Lazer

    "LazerAugust 16, 2012 10:46 PM
    Sounds like you're accusing the Rosh Yeshiva of sleeping around with married women."

    Actually the steipler accuses a dayan of going to prostitutes who always favors the woman in a marital case because she is a woman and never the man because he is a man.

    Most zonos are probably not married. But if you wish to go further than the Steipler zt"l in your accusations Lazer then be my guest. Who am I to stop you.

  17. To DT

    "LazerAugust 17, 2012 7:03 PM

    I agree with you. I don't think people should be aloud to have an opinion unless they finished Shas and had a faher from Rabbi Eidensohn. Then they could make comments on this blog. Until then they should take off their yarmulkas and stop calling themselves jewish. If you didn't learn the whole Shas keep your mouth shut and kiss the rabbis beard. Torah is only for talmidei chachomim!

    some of you people are so narrow minded that you can't see past the end of your own nose"

    Lazers remarks are so childish and illogical that the only conclusion I can come to for you allowing them to be published is to give him enough rope to hang himself that you are allowing him to advertise to the whole world " See everone how stupid I am and I am willing to admit this to everyone".

  18. Stan repeats the same falsehoods, even when they have been refuted.
    R Shachter does not always favour the woman, and he says so explicitly. Stan is looking for the most extreme statements to justify his position, where he is unaware of the facts.
    He also keeps throwing around the word bifurcation, and now trinity,.
    What exactly does he refer to when he uses that word? Do YU pray to 2 deities? That was actually a claim of the Alter rebbe of Lubavitch against R Hayyim Volozhiner, and the Gra, ie they had the Ein Sof, and the Torah, which were 2 "gods".

    1. Reply to Eddie -"R Shachter does not always favour the woman":

      Eddie, your comments serve notice on us that you are a brainwashed ORA / Schachter-bot / feminist troll lacking the most basis reasoning abilities.

      One would be very hard pressed to find ONE instance where Schachter's ORA feminist mobster outfit has yet to ever publicly protest AGAINST a woman in a divorce dispute, or find one instance where ORA has ever publicly pressured a woman to respect her husband's halachic rights, or find one instance where ORA has ever publicly denounced a woman in a divorce situation.

      Instead ORA's feminist fury is always directed solely at Jewish husbands to coerce them to give into any and all demands of their MOSERES-MOREDES wives.

      Yet ORA Schachter-bot trolls like Eddie will pronounce with a straight face that "R Shachter does not always favour the woman".

  19. 16 ) משנה – מס' ערכין (כא.)
    וכן אתה אומר בגיטי נשים, כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני.

    R Shachter is giving a shiur on Gemara and halacha. In some cases force is allowed, as per the mishna quoted above.
    What his detractors are attacking him for is for giving a shiur which cites these sources. So, is it that you do not accept the Mishna?


    2. He gives a shiur, and quotes various sources, including some that say that violence is permitted, and other cases where its not.
      What DT does to sensationalize and demonise him, is to just quote where he says violence is permitted.
      perhaps its jealousy, since there isnt anyone so great in learning on their own side.

    3. Rabbi Schachter doesn't just quote Jewish Law in the abstract.
      Rabbi Schachter wrote a letter concerning the Epstein- Friedman case stating that Friedman was the same as a former slave who insists on continuing to live with a maidservant about whom the gemara says the master may beat the former slave. Rabbi Schachter adds that anyone can take into their own hands to beat Friedman.
      It is ironic that Rabbi Schachter picked a case which was actually submitted to a Beis Din by both sides, and that Beis Din held several hearings with the participation of both sides and did not rule that a get should be given.

    4. This letter does not name Friedman.

      It does nto say beat him, it says pressure (the subject).

      The guest poster also claimed in a separate post that an attempted abduction took place . This claim is a plain lie. No such claim was made by Freidman, or by the Police. This blog is publishing blood libel, and falsely attributing it to R Shachter.

      Kidnapping is Assur'D'oraita, and subject to death penalty.

      A false claim of kidnapping has been published , with no evidence whatsoever. this is blood libel, and RDE should remove such claims.

  20. Can I ask a serious question here... I'm not trying to be flip. Just practical...

    What is the big deal about getting the get. Seems like locking the gate after the horse ran away. Say she gets her get. Would ANYONE in the right mind, (seeing the way she/her family behaves) marry her? She's chain herself by her actions.

    Say she doesn't get a get but remarries in a civil court. What Rabbi would challenge her marriage? Or the Status of her future kids. (Don't ask dont tell) How many countless cases are there of folks that were remarried before they became Baal Tshuvah (or had kids out of wedlock before they became BT) are out there. Who contests these marriages/Children? NO ONE!

    Thousands of dollars are being pumped to lawyers for what? Making us look like were are some sort of Jewish Taliban. How do you think this reads to the goyish world or our non-frum brothers? Look at the way this is being played out in the Goyish press, how does that make us look. You think Holy? Tell me... who is coming out of this looking Holy?

    This is an utter disgrace!! And really... for what? HOW in the world can this be resolved that brings any form of Kiddusha? It can't... Everyone involved with this case needs to have a serious conversation with Hashem during these next couple months.

    Read the arguing here... The venom on both sides... The strife, the hatred!! Awful! And we wonder why Hashem hasn't brought Moshiach? Really? Oh, you all are so holy. Bunch of chassid shoteh

    1. I don't understand your casual attitude to get. If she remarries without a get she is committing adultery and her future children are mamzerim - see the documents associated with the Rubin case where the woman did in fact remarry without a get and the Bedatz wrote a protest and declared her future children mamzerim.

      As I have posted before - there is a clear basis in halacha for not requiring a get from a civil marriage or non-Orthodox marriage. but if there was a clearly valid marriage she needs to have a get.


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.