Thursday, February 21, 2013

Weiss-Dodelson – A Response to Attack from Rosh Yeshivas on Rabbi Weiss

71 comments:

  1. Once again, you only have the competing batei din if you accept Gestetner but since nobody accepts him, this entire letter is worthless.

    You need competing RECOGNIZED batei din in order to make this argument.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rabbi Gestetner is accepted as any Beis Din.

      Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn shows as much in his letter.

      Delete
  2. I recognize him because he has semicha, knows his stuff, and can knock the stuffing out of the other Beth Dins when they goof off. Why is he not recognized? I checked with major Beth Dins and they do respect him. The ones he attacks don't. Too bad for them.
    Secondly, the decision of the Rosh Yeshivas to humiliate and fire the husband definitely produces a forced and invalid GET. So why is that not important to protest?
    And what is this about a cousin becoming part of a Beth Din that condemns somebody else? Doesn't that bother you?

    ReplyDelete
  3. James,
    The most important part of this letter is when I suggest my program for Beth Din continued education and supervision of marriage. There are so many divorces and broken families, court cases, Agunoth and coerced Gittin, and yes, mamzerim, even today, that this letter is very important, I think.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wow, this case is still going on? So why don't they get a third Beis din ? Who's holding back? With so many talmidey chachomim involved, they cant solve this?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is Hypocrosy !! BMG allows Yackov Gershon Burzstyn To Work as The Registerer in BMG office even Though His Son Moshe Yehuda Bursztyn is a Mesariv Ledin. Why Doesnt Rav Malkiel or Aaron Kotler Have Him Fired for encouraging and supporting his son in Being a Mesariv Ledin?? Because Yackov Gershons Brother-in-law is Rabbi Gavriel Finkel, and Gavriel Finkel Tells His Nephew Rav Malkiel Kotler To Look The other Way??

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sam,
    You said it. These cases go on for years and years. They consume hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is why to protest mamzerut is certainly important, but the major issue is to prevent divorces in the first place. In today's climate, this means couples signing up with a special Beth Din for Shalom Bayis that through education and intervention will keep things going. Today, people turn to friends and family, and they end up in the wrong place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not much to say, I hope your idea works out. Imagine all this money and aggravation could be solved with a bissele sechel. If I could I would do it for free.

      Delete
    2. L'kavod Harav, so nice to hear of your program and wish you much success! May I ask how this programs differs from the YU prenuptial that is supposedly endorsed by Rabbi Asher Weiss, Rabbi Zalaman Nechamia Goldberg, and Rabbi Ovadia Yosef? In the YU prenup part of the purpose is to get people to agree to a beis din if things go bad. I guess your program is different in that it takes a proactive approach to helping marriages succeed instead of just prevents situations of Agunahs.

      Delete
    3. And what are yours plans if the Shalom Bayis classes do NOT succeed? What then? WHich beis din will serve the couple?

      Delete
    4. "the major issue is to prevent divorces in the first place".

      Ah, now I understand your agenda: you support men who refuse to give a get, because this prevents divorces,at least for the statistics.

      from earlier interventions, I could see that you do not care much how a marriage works. You even support "divorce prevention" when domestic violence is at stake.

      Let me tell you: giving "preventing divorces" the first priority is not a good strategy, because it might uphold abusive situations.

      You supported many mesarvey get. meretz MK Merav Michali gives sound advise to jewish women: The divorce laws being what they are, it is preferable not to get married in the firest place.

      Delete
    5. I think a "special beis din" is the wrong place too... women who get divorced are, in general, quite intimidated by the beit din composed only of men, they have to fend for themselves as the only woman in the room.

      I do not think that a room filled with men is the adequate place to solve intimate marriage issues.

      Furthermore, when the beith din has a bias, aiming at "avoiding divorces" it makes things even worse.

      I think that a good marriage therapist has to watch that both parties have an equal say, should encourage the couple to come up with solutions that work for their particular case, and a therapist should have no bias as to what should happen to the couple in the future. If divorce is the best solution, he should encourage divorce.

      Delete
  7. here james goes again. Who exactly doesn't recognize dayan gestetner? herschel schachter who converted ivana? who else? who cares?

    James come up with a new line already since this one is not just old and stale but immature and blatantly wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stan, how have you been? Happy Purim!

      Delete
  8. A challenge to James and other like minded Jews - please provide some intellectually honest answers to these questions:

    Isn't it true that the real issue disturbing you is NOT Rav Gestetner's acceptability, rather what's disturbing you is the fact that based on normative Jewish law, a Jewish wife cannot just arbitrarily divorce her husband against the husband's will?

    Do you not believe that if a Jewish wife cannot obtain a Get whenever she demands it, that she is somehow a victim of injustice?

    Do you not believe that by assisting a Jewish wife to obtain a Get whenever she demands it, you are performing a great mitzvah?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ELYaakov,
      If your assumptions here are correct, then it supports my earlier analysis (which was not accepted by DT) that in fact the Roshei Yeshivas are enacting a Takkana to improve the lot of the woman in Jewish Law. The Takkana has been used throughout history of Halacha, legal devices, eg sale of Chametz, to deal with problems in halacha.

      Delete
    2. Eddie - 1) no one is claiming that a new takana is being made. 2) A takana is generally not made to do away with a Torah law.3) Don't know anyone who claims that a takana of this type could be made today 4) There is no recognized body to make such a takana that would be accepted by most Jews. Aside from these objections I have no problem with your analysis.

      Delete
    3. Firstly, i am not taking sides on this specific case, so I am not arguing on their behalf.
      However, the Prozbul was such a Takana that was "made to do away with a Torah law."
      Furthermore, certain Takkanot, such as the issues with cheese made by non Jews, were introduced "on the quiet" so as to prevent opposition.
      So the question is only whether it can be done today. That is not question I have the knowledge to answer.

      Delete
    4. @Daas Torah - "no one is claiming that a new takana is being made":

      Of course they're not so foolish to openly claim they're making a new takana.

      But in fact the MO ORA movement and its fellow travelers in the Yeshiva world are attempting to "reform" the practices of allegedly "Orthodox" Judaism so that it becomes acceptable, normative "halacha" to allow feminist divorce on demand, Get Meoso, and use of non-Jewish courts against Jewish husbands, including mesira, robbery and oppression against Jewish husbands.

      Delete
    5. your description of Prozbul is not accurate or rather it is vague as to be irrelevant to our case.

      We are not talking about gaming the system i.e., legal device which works within the law as it stands. Regarding the Get it would require nullifying a Torah law - which is significantly different then Prozbul

      Delete
    6. "We are not talking about gaming the system"
      It depends on the "rules of the game".

      Prozbul creates a legal mechanism to work around a Biblical Law. You claim for coercing the Husband to give a get it is violating a Biblical Law, whereas previously you conceded that there was an opinion that allows this. So as far s Torah Law, for Get you have changed your position from "possible violation" to actual. Prozbul was actual violation. The question s what framework are we talking about. Is a Rabbinical device to "break" a law actually a violation of Torah law, or is it perfectly subsumed within Oral Law? Seems there is more flexibility on some issues, but when it comes to get, then you are being totally rigid. And of course, this is fine, but they might argue you need to be more consistent.

      Delete
    7. Eddie I don't know what you are talking about. You seem to have misunderstood the whole discussion about get me'usa - I haven't changed my position.

      Who says that Prozbul is a violation of Torah law - that is nonsense.

      Again I really don't understand what you are trying to say.

      Delete
    8. Since Prozbul is only valid on Shemitta D'Rabbanan, then you are correct, since it has not validity on D'Oraita. I made an incorrect assumption about Prozbul, thanks for the correction.

      Delete
    9. My answers to your questions:

      1. No
      2. No
      3. No

      Delete
    10. One more thing:
      R' Dovid can not name a recognized Bet Din that accepts Rav Gestetner (either in the US or Israel) and you accuse me of being bothered by normative Jewish Law? Rav Gestetner is not normative.

      Delete
  9. To Chaim and Dovid Eidenson:

    It is my opinion that the reason this case and so many others dont resolve is because of the corrupted rabbis who advise the woman not to settle. There are 2 reasons for this: 1) They want to discredit Rabbi Gestetner and Rabbi Abraham so they wont allow the women to accept a GET or settlement from that Bais Din. 2) The corrupted bais Dins make millions off of divorce today, so they must keep alive the issue of "AGUNAS" to further their cause and to give credence and importance to their corrupted Bais Dins in America as if to show the women "You need our services to free you from your bondage". Just imagine if Rabbi Gestetners halachic arguments would be allowed to defeat them, their business would essentially be shut down. PLEASE NOTICE THAT NONE OF THESE CORRUPT RABBIS HAVE EVER BROUGHT CONCLUSIVE HALACHIC EVIDENCE TO DISPUTE RABBI GESTETNERS POSITION. All they say is we "we dont hold of him".Yet Gestetners every letter is essentially a Halachic responsa and not just spewing political mongering as they do.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Reb Dovid,

    Working for Shalom Bayis is admirable.

    Which batei din recognize Rav Gestetner (I just know realized that I left out the "Rav" in my post above)?

    Chaim,
    I dont know the facts of the case you reference but why should BMG fire a man for having a son who is mesarev l'din? We dont know what pain he is going through and the punishment for being mesarev ledin does not extend to parents.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. James I am glad to see the above- "the punishment for being mesarev ledin does not extend to parents." So you join in condemning ORAH for targeting (punishing through publicly shaming) relatives of any male they claim is mesrav ledin or as refusing to give his wife a Get?

      Delete
    2. Yes.

      I have no problem with the protests against the mesarev but do object to protests against relatives. That said, I fail to see how a protest against a relative results in a pasul get.

      Delete
    3. Sam,
      You wrote, "Not much to say, I hope your idea works out. Imagine all this money and aggravation could be solved with a bissele sechel. If I could I would do it for free."
      You if you wish can help. The big problem is that everyone is working for the wrong things, when the marriage is over. If we had an organization that worked to save marriages, we could achieve so much. Even if you join with me to work on saving marriages, and I do all of the work, you are helping, because I can say I am working not just for myself, but for you and other like minded people.

      Delete
    4. James,
      I am aware of the anger many rabbis have against Rabbi Gestetner. So before I publicly presented his decisions I asked several top heads of Beth Din who know him and asked what they thought of him. Everyone agreed that he was an expert on Gittin and a Talmid Chochom and a Yiras Shomayim. But they also said that because he attacks many Beth Dins people are afraid of him, especially the Beth Dins who cook the books. To me, that sounds like approval. The fact is, we do have problems with Beth Dins. Posek HaDor Rav Elyashev zt"l told me that he removes the Chezkas Bes Din from any Beth Din that does funny things with coerced Gittin. There are, unfortunately, many such Beth Dins. And they all hate Rabbi Gestetner. The head of a Beth Din told me a story about how he was standing in front of Posek HaDor Rav Elyashev zt"l and a major rabbi presented an idea to free a woman from her husband, and Rav Elyashev was furious. They can't get mad at him, but they do let it out on Rav Gestetner. All power to him. I don't say I agree with everything he writes or everything he does, and I am sure he doesn't agree with me all of the time, we have had some nice arguments. But we are good friends and I hope it will stay that way. I think he has the guts and knowledge to shine the light on what funny things are being done, and he has a big job ahead of him.

      Delete
    5. That was a very long non-answer to my question. Until I hear of batei din that accept Rav Gestetner, I will continue to side with the preponderance of the evidence indicating that his beth din is not acceptable.

      I have already pointed out some clear violations of Choshen Mishpat. Rav Gestetner does not comport to basic procedures as outlined in the Shulchan Aruch.

      Delete
    6. I would like to ask R ' David , or R' Daniel Eidensohn, is there an agreed recognized Poseq HaDor alive today, of course I mean in the Litvish world? In Olam Ha Sephardi, R Ovadiah has been Poseq HaDor for the last 2 - 3 generations.

      Delete
    7. Not sure what your question is 1) Is there a posek whose views are never disagreed with - the answer is no. Not sure there ever was such 2) are there poskim who tend to be asked to decide issues because they are widely accepted - yes there are.

      In other words are you asking whether there is any posek who can independently make a ruling and everyone automatically accepts it? Answer is no and I am not sure that Rav Ovadia is automatically accepted in everthing he says by the Sefardim.

      Or are you asking whether there are widely respected poskim who others will will voluntarily submit to their views - at least sometimes - the answer is clearly yes.

      in sum 1) is it top down authority or bottom up 2) is it universal absolute or is it widespread and often accepted by many?

      Delete
    8. Well, during the reign of R' Elyashiv zt'l, he was referred to by that title, whereas Rav Shach zt'l was referred to as the Gadol HaDor.
      R' Dovid uses this title when relying on R Elyashiv. So my question is whether there is anyone today who has the same title in the Yeshiva world?
      I have seen R Shteinman referred to as the leader and representative, and R Kanievsky is caleld Sar haTorah. But is there currently a Posek hador?

      Now your deconstruction of the term is healthy, but since it is used in this and other discussions as source for authority , I wish to know whether there is one single authority in the Yeshiva Welt today?

      R Ovadia is widely accepted as Poseq, although not exclusively. In fact I have seen many Sephardim who oppose R OY's views and hashkafa, but follow his psak nonetheless!

      Delete
  11. Yitz,
    You write, "L'kavod Harav, so nice to hear of your program and wish you much success! May I ask how this programs differs from the YU prenuptial that is supposedly endorsed by Rabbi Asher Weiss, Rabbi Zalaman Nechamia Goldberg, and Rabbi Ovadia Yosef?..."
    A basic difference between my plan and the pre-nuptial is that my program has nothing to do with a GET. Once you say the word GET you have problems with a coerced GET, and some poskim are therefore reluctant to use it. The rule is, Beth Din can coerce a husband to behave, but to coerce a GET is a rare thing. Because of this, many rabbis today, out of desperation, are doing things outside of normative Judaism. They know that to do otherwise will lose them the hope of many women. I don't accept that, but my plan will do away with most broken marriages, most Agunoth, and most coerced Gittin. This is because Beth Din will be assigned by the couple the job of monitoring their marriage, and phase one will be just to educate and talk to them, but phase two will enable Beth Din to fine people who violate SHalom Bayis halacha as interpreted by the Beth Din. If the husband or wife is fined heavily for violating the halacha of Shalom Bayis, and to escape the fine and end the process of being fined the husband or wife want a GET, this is not a forced GET. Again, coercion to behave in the house is not forbidden, even if because of it someone decides to escape the punishment and coercion by giving a GET. But nowhere is the coercion designed to produce a GET, only Shalom Bayis. Senior poskim have agreed with me that in no way is this a coerced GET.
    Another simple difference is this. If you have a prenuptial that only comes into effect when it the marriage is over, it is a disaster for marriage. I want to preserve a good marriage.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This case is a mega case since it involves TWO WELL-KNOWN CHASHUVA FAMILIES, where neither is ready, willing or able to bend, compromise or be crowned the LOSER. Bad feelings flow through the veins of each side due to prior Shidduchim & unsolved relationships.

    You are belittling the facts by assuming that this Get case is simply TWO FIGHTING SPOUSES. There are huge masses of supporters on both sides of the fence. The sorrow is this marriage should never have occurred, it was a festering wound from the beginning and now it will continue to infect the two communities of Lakewood & Staten Island.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I Cannot Blame The Weisses for Not Trusting The Dodelsons Considering That The Dodelsons are Rav Malkiel Kotlers First cousin whos Uncle Rabbi Gavriel Finkel Has a Beis Din Vaad Hadayonim Here In Lakewood Which he has Used on Plenty Of occasions for his personal use to benifit his Relitives

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yoni,
    You write about the Dodelson-Weiss battle, "The sorrow is this marriage should never have occurred, it was a festering wound from the beginning and now it will continue to infect the two communities of Lakewood & Staten Island." I don't think I ever saw any of the spouses. But this statement takes me by surprise. Can you really look at two people who are obviously happy with each other in a marriageable way and predict they are going to fail?

    ReplyDelete
  15. James,
    You write,"I have already pointed out some clear violations of Choshen Mishpat. Rav Gestetner does not comport to basic procedures as outlined in the Shulchan Aruch."
    How does Rabbi Gestetner clearly violate Choshen Mishpot? In this group of comments I did not see any claim like this on your part. So, please point out to me his "clear errors in Choshen Mishpot."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rabbi Eidensohn,

      Why do you continue to dodge his question regarding which Batei Din support Rav Gestetner.

      Let's take it out of the negative, let's say someone wants to find a Beit Din that Rav Gestetner supports, and who likewise support him. Let's say that there is a guy with a moredes for a wife, who wants to make Aliyah in a few years, and wants his get to be recognized by Rabbinut(Rav Gestetner's are not). But he also wants a Beit Din that works like Rav Gestetner and possibly in concert with him. Who would he go to?

      Delete
    2. Check out the case with Aron goldberger ,where he allowed him to remarry without a heter meah Rabonim , which was mentioned somewhere in this blog. Many Gedolim were shocked that he mixed in, when the original Beis din told him to wait, and when a prominent posek told him he must give a get to his first wife he went and issued one of his psakim against him. This was a person who married I think seven times. Anyways, in that post you will find why very few hold of him. By the way, goldberger is believed to divorce his latest wife according to his fb profile.
      So by going to such a Beis din, after a psak from another does seem strange.

      Delete
    3. You asked for clear violations of Choshen Mishpat and basic rules of procedure.

      Take a look at the bitul seruv in the Epstein/Friedman case. Rav Gestetner decided that this was not a case of maus alai without speaking to Tamar.

      That is a violation of Choshen Mishpat 17. Issues of fact can not be decided without hearing both sides.

      (I can not find the post but I remember Stan asking him about this after I called him out on it. His response was that he doesnt hold of that siman in the shulchan aruch.)

      Delete
    4. James,
      You mention one example of what you claim is a clear violation of Choshen Mishpot. But you claimed that Rabbi Gestetner made "clear violations" which is plural. What other clear violation did he make?
      So, either you exaggerated, or you didn't.
      More to the point, where in Choshen Mishpot does it say what you just claimed, that a Dayan may not claim that a woman is MOUS OLEI without talking to her? You say Choshem Mishpot 17. Were does it say that there? And even if it does say that, what does that have to do with Rabbi Gestetner?
      I have a copy of the Pesak from Rabbi Gestetner and it doesn't say anything about MOUS OLEI. He is fighting a Beth Din, not the wife. The wife has nothing to do with his fight which is simply a claim that the Beth Din ignored letters of acceptance to go to Beth Din. This has nothing to do with the wife, it is a fight about a fact, if the first Beth Din got notice that the Weiss's are ready for a Din Torah.
      Now, if you will find another letter from Rabbi Gestetner where he does claim that the wife is MOUS Olei, or anything else you may object to, please tell me where it is, and show me where it says in Choshen Mishpot that such a thing may not be said by a Dayan.

      Delete
  16. Michael tzadok what are you doing back here. You commited yourself to stop bloggin on this issue. You were repeatedly castigated for being rather economical with the the truth. Once agin a repeat.

    Who really cares what the rabbanut says? A bunch of corrupt gangsters that's all they are. there are plenty of men with wives that fall in the category of moredes. You go to Rav gestetner and nowhere else. Just like many chilonim won't get married through the rabbanut so too you can go elsewhere and do the marriage.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I am totally shocked that you posted a total fabrication of james. What rav gesttener said was that if the buden of proof is on the one claiming mo'us olai and since what she wrote clearly indicated it was not mo'us olai. Furthermore even if it was mo'us olai, since most rishonim and acharonim hold mo'us olai is not a reason to force a get, it frankly is irrelevant and hence there was no problem in being mevatel a fake siruv.

    Shame on you James. At least we knpow what you are now. I never said anything of the kind you alleged me to say. I want a public apology on behalf of Rav Gestetner.

    ReplyDelete
  18. And by the way what does Rabbi Tzadok say about someone who obtains a hetter from a single Rabbi to go to arko'oys. I remember you castigating Aharon Friedman for this. Well what do you say about a single Rov, Michael tzadok, who issues a siruv without a bais din?

    ReplyDelete
  19. I see things are heating up over here. I just want to reiterate what I said before, that the battle about the Siruv is not about the wife, it is about the first Beth Din and the Second Beth Din, who are clashing about facts, namely, they seem to disagree if there was a response on the part of Rabbi Weiss to the demand for a Din Torah from the First Beth Din. The Siruv of the First Beth Din seemed to be based on their claiming that Rabbi Weiss did not perform properly and is therefore worthy of a Siruv as one who ins contempt of a demand for a Beth Din session to resolve a fight. Rabbi Gestetner disagrees and says that Rabbi Weiss did behave properly. The Weiss family and Rabbi Shain of Lakewood claim that there are 22 documents to prove the position of Rabbi Weiss, that he did respond properly. This has nothing to do with the wife, it is an issue of whether or not Rabbi Weiss responded properly to the First Beth Din, and agreed to work out arrangements for a Din Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  20. By the way, I want from James either proof that Rabbi Gestetner "clearly violates Choshen Mishpot," or an apology for Rabbi Gestetner. You just can't get up and say lies about a person because you don't like him. or his beliefs. If James made a mistake, I will accept that as well. But making such a bold statement about someone that everyone believes it, and then not answering a challenge to it, is very wrong. There are those who get away with making bold statements because nobody would challenge something that is obviously easy to check out, so it must be true. But there are people who specialize in this kind of a lie, and they love coming to the Internet to do their dirty work. They assume that on the Internet nobody is so suspicious as to suspect them of a bald lie. Again, I call upon James to clarify if his attack on Rabbi Gestetner still stands, then he must furnish the source in Choshen Mishpot that Rabbi Gestetner violated. If James recognizes that he may have moved too fast in the heat of debate, let him apologize for that and I will accept it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. I discussed this issue a few months ago and am just repeating what I said back then. I do wish you would have commented back then when I was "in the sugya".

      http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/09/bitul-seruv-of-aharon-friedman.html

      Rav Gestetner issued a Bitul Seruv. I have multiple problems with the psak. B-F are all wrong and misguided but I did not address those points because he is deciding questions of law. He is saying there that the BD issuing a seruv got the law wrong. I think he is wrong as a matter of law but that is a debate others can (and have) taken up. I addressed the violation of Shulchan Aruch with respect to point A.

      The Shulchan Aruch 17 discusses judicial procedure. Let us look at one seif: 17:5. "Assur ledayan lishmoa divrie baal din haechad shelo lifnei baal din chaveiro". In English, we call this ex parte communication. The claims he makes about Tamar are outrageous.

      Here is what he writes:

      "And this is certainly true in our case where she acknowledges that there is no meisus as she herself, in her own handwriting, hasexpressed her true heartfelt emotions before leaving him: that she loves him, admires him as a goodand loyal husband, and lists in detail a long variety of his virtues."

      How can he make that determination based on an unsubstantiated diary entry? Did he ask her why she wrote that? Perhaps her therapist thought it would be a good exercise. How can anyone claim to know her true heartfelt emotions without asking her or talking to her? There is not one reputable court of law that would decide a fact (she is not disgusted by him) on the basis of a diary entry without speaking to the woman herself.

      "But nonetheless she decided to leave him because of frivolous and immaterial reasons even though her actions are harmful to their daughter.Such behavior is found only amongst the lowliest of the world’s peoples."

      Frivolous and immaterial reasons? What an outrage! Maybe she has some very good reasons for leaving him that she doesnt wish to share in public! It sounds like he only heard Aharon's side of the story.

      "The lowliest of the world's people"? If anyone should apologize, it is Rav Gestetner to Tamar! Shame on him.

      Rav Gestetner thinks he knows what is in her heart. He decides a question of fact without hearing her side. That IS A GROSS violation of halacha. I will not apologize.

      Once again, you claimed that there are multiple respectable batei din that accept Rav Gestetner. Please name them.

      On a personal note, I take offense to the intimation that I "specialize in this kind of lie...[and] love coming to the Internet to do [my] dirty work." Are we going to start accusing each other of "lying"? Are these attacks helpful? I can only conclude from vitriol you spill that you have spent too much time with Rav Gestetner.

      Delete
    2. James,
      I appreciate your lengthy reply to my remarks. I certainly did not refer to you when I spoke about people on the Internet doing certain things. But I meant it is a problem, one that I and others have run into. But I did not accuse you cholila, I merely presented my thoughts that to attack someone is a serious matter and I call upon you to verify your remarks. My remarks are thus a challenge to you to present an answer to my points, that is, to show that what you claim, that Rabbi Gestetner have "clearly violated" the laws of Choshen Mishpot. I mentioned that your wording clearly stated that he had done this more than once. So, I am waiting for the second proof of his violating Choshen Mishpot. I also said that it is possible that in the heat of the debate, as in all intellectual arguments or even discussions, someone may be moved to somewhat exaggerate. And I said that if you said a plural when you really had a singular, I don't accuse you of being a liar for that, if you admit it. But if you won't admit that you made an error, I restate my point, that you made an accusation about a Talmid Chochom who issues Gittin, and you cannot substantiate it. This does not make you a liar. It makes you a claimant without a proof. Again, I don't claim that you deliberately lied. I did say that there are people I know who do deliberately lie. But I did not have you in mind as one of them. But if you do not produce the second proof that you accuse Rabbi Gestetner of doing, and you don't apologize, I feel you are doing the wrong thing. But I don't call you any names for it.
      This is very long, so I will have to continue in a new windows. But anyway, I feel this takes care of part of your remarks. I will now have to explain about the support of Rabbi Gestetner from others.

      Delete
    3. James,
      Here is part two, about other Beth Dins who support Rabbi Gestetner. As I said previously, when I heard of Rabbi Gestetner and his work, I made it my business to check him out. First, I met with him and read his material, and he has a lot of material. He takes on everybody and writes very long pieces with hundreds of sources. But still, I realized that there was something in the air, that a lot of people are not his best friends, and I selected a group of very prominent Dayanim in Gittin, and asked them for the truth. I was told basically by everyone I spoke to that he is a big Talmid Chochom, he knows his material, he is a Yiras Shomayim, but because he is so famous as a fighter, people would not necessarily want to sit with him and battle about the halacha. By the way, I did have an argument with him, and I felt I was right, and did not change my mind, but he felt very strongly about his position. I don't know if I would want to sit on a Beth Din with someone who takes his halacha opinions so much to heart, that he must battle for the truth over every point. I don't even know if an effective Beth Din can contain strong people who go to war over this and that. So, there are three sides to Rabbi Gestetner as I see it. He is surely qualified to write Gittin and his halacha decisions are most likely backed by solid sources, and he is a yiras shomayim. He could make a lot of money in his field, but he refuses it. That is very special. So, the first phase is his positive qualities that everyone I spoke to agrees are very special and unusual. Phase two of Rabbi Gestener would apply to people who insist on their right to interpret halacha in a way that normative Judaism would not. Those people probably hate Rabbi Gestetner. Then you have people who respect his Beth Din, but would not necessarily want to sit together with him and spend a few hours at war. I might be in that category. But if necessary, bli neder, I would surely do it, and get a good night's sleep before the Yeshivas Beth Din.

      Delete
    4. Unfortunately, your two long responses do not address my points above nor do they answer my question.

      I, too, can say that I have spoken to Gedolei Torah who do not approve of Rav Gestetner and do not accept his Gittin. Until we start naming Batei Din and Rabbanim the entire conversation is pointless.

      I have had this conversation too many times. I repeated, here, a few objections to just one small section of one bitul seruv. Until something changes or any new information is produced, I consider this conversation over.

      Delete
  21. Michael tzadok how do you explain Dovid Cohen of g'vul ya'vetz issuing heterrim to go to arko'oys without a bais din, just himself. Do you justify this since he is an open feminist?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Michael tzadok what are you doing back here. You commited yourself to stop bloggin on this issue.
      I have. I was simply seeking information above for my own reasons.
      I don't know why my initial reply to you was not put through so let me repeat it.
      Thank you for your honest reply.

      Michael tzadok how do you explain Dovid Cohen of g'vul ya'vetz issuing heterrim to go to arko'oys without a bais din, just himself.
      I thought I made my position on this abundantly clear before, and it hasn't changed no matter who is doing it. A heter for Arko'oys must come from a validly constituted Beit Din(meaning three Rabbanim, preferrably who all have Yadin Yadin Semikha).

      This in my opinion is the understanding of the Shulhan Arukh, and further it is backed by the Takana which you were kind enough to post in the past.


      Delete
  22. Since you pravda'ed my previous posting:

    Once again I explained to you, MO'us olai is not grounds for forcing a Get. So since the issue was academic anyway, Rav Gestetyner did not feel the need to interview her since she was mesarev l'din anyway to the baltimore bais din and they never came down on her presumably because of her late father's wealth. so get off it.

    James you are so worried about procedure which is inapplicable here. please explain to me how rabbi herschel schachter signed a siruv against meir kin without even being mazmin him even once to a bais din. how do you explain that please. Call him up to confirm that he signed on the siruv without a single hazmonah

    ReplyDelete
  23. Stan and james,
    I don't have the previous posts from Rabbi Gestetner here, so I will just comment in general. Stan is right about MOUS OLEI, that it is not grounds for a coerced GET, and the coerced GET in MOUS OLEI is invalid. There are people who know the opinion of the wife having heard it from her. I heard from one of them. Rabbi Gestetner could have heard from others. A Dayan may consider witnesses as sources if he feels that such is justified by halacha. At any rate, if Rabbi Gestetner made a comment about the wife that he did not hear directly from the wife, but he heard it from reliable witnesses, it is certainly wrong to accuse him of "clearly violating Choshen Mishpot." I say this to James: I made a bad blunder once on this blog and attacked somebody, and when I realized my error, I apologized. It is human to err, but if you want to do it right, you should apologize when you make a mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  24. When was the last time rabbonim made any issue about a mesarev in a landlord-tenant matter? or in a business partner

    ReplyDelete
  25. you are astute. they won't. they only use halochoh to further their own purposes.

    malkiel kotler, novominsker et al all know that the Agudah's archivist's family are in arko'oys. have seen a siruv but couldn't care less.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I am waiting for James to apologize for completely misrepresenting what I posted.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I asked a question earlier about Posek HaDor

    This is an interesting article by R Cardozo.

    It also is pertinent to the latest post on 12 things on this blog.

    http://cardozoacademy.org/current-thought-to-ponder-by-rabbi-lopes-cardozo/in-search-of-a-new-posek-hador-ttp-306/

    ReplyDelete
  28. I believe most of you are missing the main point. What should be discussed is how to end this tragedy. Here you have two families who have their dirty laundry aired out in public and two people who I can only assume would like to go forward in life but can't. Is there not one Beis din in the world that two families can trust? Am I the only one that thinks that this is a tremendous chillul Hashem ? Can it be when it comes to asifas everybody is willing to try to get people there but these same people can't solve a divorce problem? And you have a Bas Yisrael crying in agony or the boy crying and there is nobody to turn to?
    I ask one question , if you were to ask Hagoan Reb Moshe Zatzal , what would he do? Would he say to continue fighting or tell one of the sides to give in and live on?

    ReplyDelete
  29. The emotional garbage continues. A Bas Yisroel crying in agony. She is not an agunah. She is someone who went to arko'oys shelo k'din. She has despicably used her child against his father.
    There are 2 such Botei Din, both located in Monsey NY. Rav Gestetner and Rav Abraham.

    ReplyDelete
  30. You don't know if she went שלא כדין. She has a heter. If you disagree with the Beis din that's one thing, but she doesn't have to follow the only Beis din in the world you hold of and most Rabonim don't.
    And Stan, don't you think the boy is suffering as I mentioned. It seems you are more then happy to have someone who is an agunah not remarry and the same goes for the husband. It's people like you who don't understand compromise that are ruining this world and causing great צער in כלל ישראל.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Actually Sam you obviously do not know what you are talking about. In all these cases it is the woman who refuses to compromise - who uses the child against his/ her father by trying to prevent the child from access to his father, by making the father jump through a million hoops etc.

    When the only bais din in the world that i hold of actually follows the halochoh and follows the psakim of rav elyashiv and is not in it for money and profit, yes they do. furthermore the halochoh is toveah holeches achar ha'nitvoh. If she wants a get she must go there. What are the grounds for hetter? that her husband who had a hetter simply for visitation by a single rov (not ideal i agree) goes to arko'oys to see his son and then his wife suddenly gets a hetter for everrything and anything. you obviously also don't understand how a hetter works. A hetter to go to arko'oys only allows you to claim what you are entitled to al pi halochoh. Are you so sure that weiss is following this guideline because my understanding is that she is demanding money that the husband does not have.

    neither epstein or dodelkson are agunahs in any sense of the word. they are both have the status of moredes.

    what is ruining the world is the fact that these women instead of being ostrasized are seen as the victim when they are just playing silly games to inflict pain on their husbands.

    you are incredibly naive and sucked in by the naive feminism of this dor of corruption which is equivalent to the dor hamabul despite the frum and yeshivish and haimish looks of everyone. i deal with these cases every day. clearly you are an armchair ignorant blogger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ stan "i deal with these cases every day. clearly you are an armchair ignorant blogger."

      In what capacity do you deal with these cases Stanley? Are you Stan or Dayan?

      Delete
  32. Rav Lazer Ginsburg Advises people not To Listen To Rabbi Dovid Cohen from Gvul Yavetz "Heter Arkous" for woman to Have Their Husbands arrested

    ReplyDelete
  33. Eddie, I can be both a Stan and a Dayan at the same time. there is no contradiction in being both even simultaneously. Stanley.

    ReplyDelete
  34. The siruv says that he took her to court, if is not true does it mean that the siruv is botul?

    ReplyDelete

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