Monday, November 18, 2013

Weiss-Dodelson: AZ asks why I don't agree with Kol Koreh to subject Avraham Meir to severe social and financial pressures?

AZ has requested that I publish his guest post asking why I don't follow the lead of the gedlim who signed the Kol Koreh advocating serious social and financial pressure to force Avraham Meir to give Gital a get.Guest Post from AZ:
Kol Koreh Hebrew

Kol Koreh English translation
=====================================
Daas Torah, 

It is possible that I am wrong and it is possible that you are wrong.

We are all human, and we must have the humility to recognize that no matter how much evidence we have and how smart we are the very nature of being human means that we are fallible. After all there are plenty of smart people – and even Talmidei Chachomim – on both sides of the aisle. By definition, in this case and in millions of other disagreements very bright people are wrong all the time.

Therefore, I call on you to be pragmatic. If you are wrong in your halachic positions on divorce, then you are guilty (by promoting these wrong views) of causing enormous suffering to hundreds of women whose husbands are not giving them a Get.

The path is open to you to follow R’ Shmuel Kamentzky and others whose opinions whether in this case or in many other cases are much more favorable to the woman and would make it easier to obtain a Get.

The spiritual danger of your opinion is clear. By going “all in” – by adopting opinions which make it more difficult for a woman to receive a Get - you risk destroying your humanity, decency, and compassion in the event that you are wrong about the Halacha, and you are acting with great cruelty by causing hundreds of women to be stuck without a Get. 

The Neturei Karta also think they are right – and we recognize that the Neturai Karta are wrong – and look how they destroyed themselves spiritually by hugging Arafat and the President of Iran. Look how religious Muslim fanatics have destroyed themselves spiritually (by murdering men women, and children) – and they are convinced they are doing a good deed – instead they could have adopted the path of a peaceful brand of Islam.

As you have repeatedly said when responding to me and others, that we are only saying these opinions because we don’t know the halacha and we are influenced by Western values. In other words, you agree that if not for your sources, the natural ethics and morals would lead us to believe that the husband should just give the Get (as the rest of the world believes).

My advice is, don’t adopt opinions which do terrible harm to people when there is another halachic path available (R’ Shmuel Kamentetzky and others) whose ways are peaceful. Remember, I want a win-win situation where both sides can be happy – and I believe the Weiss’s have received a very fair custody deal from the courts (2 nights a week plus every other weekend), and the couple has no money or house to fight over. If Weiss gives the Get today, I think that he received a good deal – a fair deal. Weiss's situation would be no different than the hundreds of other frum husbands who give a Get each year.
==============================
Daas Torah replies: Update November 18, 2013

AZ as you have said you are just a simple and sincere Jew - but you have inserted yourself in a major halachic dispute as if you knew what you were talking about. Please tell me what the above rabbis hold concerning get me'usa in a case of ma'os alei? It is nice you claim they disagree with me - please tell me what exactly do they say?

One of the reasons I didn't immediately answer your challenge in your post is your mistaken assertion that that are two distinct camps - those who have halachic reasoning for peace and make it easy for woman and those whose halachic reasoning leads them to cause problems. People like Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky have not written teshuvos on the subject - so it is difficult to know what exactly they believe. He has never justified his actions in these case by halachic reasoning. By and large these rabbonim who signed the kol koreh did not do it for halachic reasons but for political reasons. My brother called up a number of them. One declared that even though he signed it didn't mean that he was saying that kefiya is permissible?! If you can wrap your head around that one then you can understand that your premise is not correct. The declaration of the kol koreh are halachic nonsense. Speak to a neutral posek and ask him for a source for nidoi for the supporters of someone who doesn't want to go to a particular beis din or to destroy a supporter's yeshiva and his parnossa or to go to a trashy newspaper and speak lashon harah about your husband and Judaism - THERE IS NONE!

As regards to your question why not go to the posek who brings peace, we see that for you it is not whether the halacha is poskened accurately and correctly - but the consequences. This is known as posek shopping. Your pragmatic approach to halacha is to first find out what the different views are and then to pick the posek if he agrees with what makes you happy?!

This is amazing "scholarship" - you don't really care whether what I am asserting is the normative view of most poskim through ages and it is recognized as the most accurate fit with the texts - i.e., mostly like to be true according to G-d's Will. You totally skip that and you say since there is a rabbi who says something that I want to hear I will chose his views. Of course on another issue if he doesn't say what I want to hear I will shop around to find another posek! Thus you care nothing about Torah and rabbinic authority - i.e., doing what G-d wants from you - but rather making your life as easy as possible

Why don't you ask those poskim such as Rabbi Kaminetsky and Rabbi Schachter if that is what you should be doing? Or do you first need to ascertain whether they agree with you before you consider their views authoritative.


AZ - I don't deny your sincerity in wanting peace and tranquility. But there is another issues which this current firestorm has made obvious. Halacha and Torah values are not viewed as valid - unless they are according to the current secular values in our society. Secular society now values individual happiness over family and community responsibility - therefore there has to be Get on demand. Even in secular society such a value is only about 20 years old. Before that it was impossible to get a divorce unless you could demonstrate a serious problem with your spouse such as adultery. 

Please read the 19th letter of Rav S. R. Hirsch (especially the 18th) where he laments the fact that people require Torah to be consistent with secular values and not the reverse. People have been screaming - it is a chilul hashem not to give a get on demand. Chilul hashem is not determined by whether Torah is subordinated to secular Western values. The same cry is made in regards to homosexuality or same-sex marriages. Are you also advocating finding rabbis who support such views? Bris Mila and schecitah is also claimed to be a chilul hashem by the "enlightened" Western nations. Should we do away with that also? Are you also advocating geirus on demand to any non-Jew who want to have a Jewish identity? Are you advocating accepting mixed marriages to avoid "chilul hashem"? AZ the bottom line as Rav Moshe Feinstein writes in the Igros Moshe - we have to try as hard as we can to find what the Torah wants through studying the sacred texts and the Mesorah. One does not reject a Torah view simply because my non-Orthodox neighbor or co worker might not like it.

204 comments :

  1. Looking forward to your response.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Avrohom Meir's response should be to put together a beis din that will issue him a Heter Meah Rabbonim for which he will deposit a Get with them for, so that when Dodleson comes around to agreeing to give him what she is halachicly required to they'll allow her to pickup the deposited Get. But he can get remarried immediately.

      Delete
    2. ben torah, you're so sweet. so where is the halacha that Gital has to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to pick up a get? as there is none, wouldn't a better solution be for AMW to just give her the get directly w/o the obscene request for so much money? You seem to like halacha, where is the halacha that even though the marriage is over, a man can withhold the get for some cold hard cash in exchange for the get.

      Delete
    3. Ilana from your repeated comments - you obviously are not familiar with halacha nor do you care what it says. Look at Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 77 and 154). The halachic issues have been repeated discussed - search for terms get me'usa and ma'os alei.

      Halacha also allows her to refuse to accept the get and ask for whatever she wants to give it.

      Delete
    4. Please don't be so quick to judge me in a negative light. I hold in the shulchan aruch. Now i ask you, how is the amount of money (350k ?) derived based on what is written in the shulchan aruch? I'm not challenging you, I'm just asking so we all know.

      Delete
    5. @Ilana I have discussed this repeatedly. But to repeat myself again for your sake.

      The Shulchan Aruch does not say that a husband deserves X amount of dollars for a divorce. The simple facts are that in a case where the wife says, "You are not a bad person - but you are not for me" or " I fell in love with my driving instructor or next door neighbor and therefore I want a divorce: there is no obligation of the husband to give a divorce. That is the simple case of ma'us alei. The Rambam says he can be forced - but his view has been rejected by the majority of rishonim and achronim and is clearly not the halacha..

      He technically can ask for anything he wants. In this case compensation for the heavy burden of legal fees he was forced to pay in order to get the right to see his own son. He also wants a guarantee that this custody will not be diminished as they have asserted they want to do.

      If he is holding out just because he wants to hurt her - then beis din can put various types of pressure on him - known as harchakas of Rabbeinu Tam - which involves witholding things from him. It doesn't involved public demonstrations, or causing his relatives to lose their jobs or destroying the grandfather's yeshiva. They also tell him that he is obligated to give a get. He is not beaten or publicly shamed.

      Delete
    6. thank you for taking the time to explain things again, it is much appreciated.

      Delete
  2. Vehevei zahir begachloson shelo sikoveNovember 14, 2013 at 3:35 PM

    You are barking up the wrong tree. This massive chilul hashem is inexcusable. Ma noiro hamokom hazeh Ein ze ki rak ein yirat H' bemakom haze vaharoguni. Hibodlu mitoch haeido hazos, ve'im lo, brioh yivra H' ufotzeso haadama es piho uvoloh osom ve'es kol ASHER LAHEM veyerdu chayim sheolo vidaatem ki niatzi haanashim haele es H. This is a typical Machlokes Korach veedodso racing in self destruct mode consuming anything and everything along their way. They are now on their way to destruct a Yeshiva as in hovo nivne lanu ir umigdal verosho bashomayim venaaseh lonu shem. Reb Elyashiv a godol uposek hador, and a neutral person has spoken to these gedolim, but no one heeds nor cares about humanity, cruelty, Torah, Halacha, Chilul Hashem.These are the same people fanning the flames that protect the Kolkos lying through their teeth, promoting prod gittins, marbeh mamzerim beyisrael, and couldn't care less, Pen shem shomayim nischallel. Korach shepikoch hoyo, ma ro'oh lishtus ze? Could it be that R' Elyashiv was wrong, and these mechalel Kvod Shamayim Right? Huh? Was The whole Beis Din of the Eida Hachredis also wrong and fallible but these what you call gedolim know better? Vehaloy bedinei nefoshos askinon? These same people that lost their fortune ripped off from klall yisrael at the hands of Made Off like Korach veedoso, did not learn a Lekach, and still and all merim yad beToras Moshe veod yodov netuyo. Veyeossu kulom agudo chas to protect mishkav zochor befumbi bifnei kol haolam kulo, is it a wonder that Fake city is in the woods having 100 Gittin going on wholesale as of this very moment. Zu torah? Vezu schoro? Your whole factory is going bankrupt, harbeh drochim lamokom to pay back leinei kol Yisrael. You sell out your neshomo to the devil, at the expense of Kvod haTorah and Kvod shamayim just because you can. Hashem can, and much better than you. You say hava nischakmo lo pen yirbeh, and hashem says ken yirbe veken yifrotz. If you only know what's good for you, stop right there in your tracks, before all hell breaks loose under your feet and consumed by its flames. Al titen es picho lachti es bessorcho, ki al kol ele yeviacho E' bamishpot. Heref umiyad, ki shiches amcho! May Hashem have mercy on us all, uvo letziyoin goiel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AZ asked a legitimate question. In response, you rant & rave. Good times.

      Next time try addressing the substance of his points.

      Delete
    2. Asher pihem diber shavNovember 14, 2013 at 5:06 PM

      אשרי יושבי ביתך עוד יהללוך סלה, your psukim have no rhyme or reason ר שמואל קמנצקי is a Gadol hador too. הנה ימים באים והשלכתי רעב בארץ, חייב איניש לבסומי בפוריא
      Not everyone is always right. א-ל נקמות ה׳, א-ל דעות ה׳. The Rosh yeshiva likes coffee, so what ? Does it make him a bad person ? AMW is just trying to be אל תרבה שיחה עם האשה, באשתו אמרו. He needs to keep her אשתו to be מקיים מאמרי חז״ל. Are you a seri
      Seriously, give the get, negotiate later!! אלה תולדות נח. It may be time to start again. אדם שת אנוש קינן מהללאל ירד חנוך מתושלח למך נח שם ארפכשד... Who goes next ? Trick question ? What number comes next 1,2,4, ? Is it 7 of is it 8? והמבין יבין והמשכיל ישכיל. Seriously, stay on topic.

      Delete
    3. Have you ever tried incoherence therapy?November 14, 2013 at 5:35 PM

      Haydoes baal din kemeah edim damya. Since you are "Foncused", and furthermore, uvilshonenu eino makir, hence, lo motzo yodov 'vegarlov' lol, bebeis hamidrash. There's nothing legitimate about Prod Gittins, There is nothing legitimate about get meusse., There is nothing legitimate about matir eishes ish leshuk, There is nothing legitimate in marbeh mamzerim beYisrael, There is nothing legitimate in Megaleh panim baTorah shelo kehalacha, There is nothing legitimate in intimidating a Talmid Chochom ve'eishes chover umishpachto chasing him out of town with such bizui bresh gli veyored lechayov, as well as doing a 180 like Eishes Potifar vehirshiu es haTzadik, veHitzdiku es hoRosho, There is nothing legitimate in maachilin neveilos utreifos leyisrael bepeisach veshar kol yemos hashono, There is nothing legitimate in Chilul Hashem veToroso misof haolom ad sofo, There is nothing legitimate in Machzikin bemachlokes kaadas Korach ve'edoso Viyedei ovrei Aveiro. Kulay hay veulay, is this what you would call Machlokes leshem shamayim.
      This is only miktzas shvocho umegaleh tefach, Need we go on? You are anyway so confused, or foncused as you megamgem bilshoncha, will never understand even if it hits you in your ears. Mi nossan limshiso yaakov, veyisroel leveizezim. Haloy zu H' asher chotonu lo velo ovu loleches bidrochov... Are these what you call your Kol haeido kulom kedoshim ugdolim? My goodness, ele ponecho yisrael. Ana, Chizru bachem, umaher!
      And just one more thing before we go, please my friend, as a good piece of advice, no need to reply, you couldn't even if you try.

      Delete
    4. I couldn't read this ^. Could you write in English?

      Delete
    5. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 14, 2013 at 8:21 PM

      Daas Torah,
      Please remove AryehD's comment.

      Vulgarity like this has no place here.
      I am melamed zchus on you that you allowed it through because you are not familiar with the slang he is using and did not realize the vulgarity of the comment.

      Delete
    6. Asher Pihem: LOL and ROFL! Yours is a classic post! Best comment of all the threads on this topic, and I'm printing it out. Thank you!!

      Delete
    7. Purim Rav or erev ravNovember 15, 2013 at 3:12 AM

      @ asher pihem shav yedaberin

      Gam zi ruv? revovo ketzemach hasadeh, vayhi ruv baaretz? You are so consumed with Dooddleing around that you cannot seem to fathom what's the topic. At best you are veorav lo vekam olov and at worst orve porach. Kol mi sheino boki betiv gitin vekidushin lo yehe esek imahen. Haven't you seen the Psokim how they are all in cahoots, and the shotrei cheresh are after them? Am struggling to figure out whether you were born like such or acting as dovid beshanoiso es taamo, in any which case, taanosecho taani- es-beirchem. If you still couldn't figure it out, no big loss. Gei vaysz. Go figure.

      Delete
    8. waiting for the results of the Feds on the prods vesiyatoNovember 15, 2013 at 4:29 AM

      It is beyond comprehension if this is authentic. Who knows, if this is the last mishnah of Sotah. Let's see what the Feds will come up, then we talk.

      Delete
    9. Lokach es atzmo letzad echad mitoch ha'edo lachlok
      davar achar rofl ma ossoh, omad vekonas 250 roshei sanhedro'ois bidvorim lachlok becholuk shel talis shekulo tcheles lesachek olov aka Wolves in sheeps clothing. Not impressed with kol kore if allegedly true, Machlokes Korach tochiach. Furthermore, it is beferush in Shulcahn Aruch of conditions that they must adhere, it must be done leshem shamayim, done equally to ALL when a similar situation arises, else the cherem boomerangs. In one swooping breath, they condemn anyone in sight, the father, the Yeshiva, the Employer, the seforim, tomorrow the kitchen sink, and even a davar achar sandwhich sheloy befonov. These utilizing and supporting Gitin with Prods are cruel, it against Dina Demalchuse, making a chilul hashem of biblical proportions, it is against the Beis Din hagodol shebeYerushalayim, ve'ein lachlok olov. Hibodlu mitoch haedo hazos.

      Delete
    10. אשר פיהם דבר שואNovember 18, 2013 at 1:48 PM

      So the most important question for me, is, do I have to say ברכת התורה before reading and commenting on this blog ? The comments of the esteemed gentleman above are full of psukim, but I am doing this for entertainment purposes only! This also more like the תורה jungle than the תורה I am used to learning, with everyone throwing psukim from left field? So, I'll leave it for the פוסקים on this blog, poskim who are obviously עבריינים (use the Internet), to answer my שאלה.

      Without further ado, ויהי בימי אמרפל מלך שנער. Is it Purim in שיננאו ? We have a עשו מלחמה, a profound מחלוקת שלא לשם שמים. This one is not הלל ושמאי. It is like the war of 1812. George Washington vs the Indians. Ok wrong war. Who cares ? It's war!!! And I am for it !!!
      הבדלו מתוך עמלק ? No get a grip!! She is not עמלק. He is not משרע״ה. You are not the אברבנאל but I am the king of Spain!!! So what is my point ? הוי אומרים לרע טוב ולטוב רע ! תנו שכר לאובד ויין למרי נפש. למי אוי למי אבוי למי מדנים למי פצעים חנם ? It's the drunks who have all the woes. Yet תנו שכר a לשון of מתנה. Give a little drink to a drunk ויין למרי נפש ישתה וישכח רישו ועמלו לא יזכר עוד. Even though he will recieve פצאים חנם give him a beer !!! Will work for alcohol !! Have some רחמנות on an אובד.
      Ok got carried away. The more I think about it, the less I think. I think כלל ישראל should charge a fee to all women who are giving us a hard time. Seriously, wasting our precious hard time with their nonsense. Is it a חנוך issue ? Is this the result of a bad חנוך? חנוך לנער על פי דרכו גם כי יזקין ? גם במעלליו יתנכר נערso what can you teach him already אם זך ואם ישר פעלו, speaking of זך of course leads me to חנוכה where שמן זית comes in already made breakable plastic containers. קידוש השם, no wait. So wrong people don't prepare it themselves like in the היים. I hope she has her גט by the חגה, and I hope that he gets at least 350,000, and his parents get at least another 500k for damages. Oh btw!! We all know, if a woman fulfills the needs of her husband, there wouldn't be a man who would get divorced. The same vice versa. It's all selfishness, divorce. Those who can't live with someone else. Deal with it ! Grow up!! לפום צערא אגרא, well that would not refer to my first marriage that was just plain לפום צערא צערא. Was I just preaching against divorce ? Yes. That is for everyone else besides me. I do whatever I want. Why would I be different that some of our leaders ?

      Delete
    11. Asher yutzar ahsrei yoshveiNovember 19, 2013 at 6:14 AM

      r u still in command and control of your faculties. u seem to have lost it. Toire shoru betzaar veato omer shire? riboinoi shel oilom lama umadua lama ein purim pamayim beshavua. yallah, ruch minhon, udrub. sakar el tumak

      Delete
    12. Asher pihem diber shavNovember 19, 2013 at 2:34 PM

      ההוא ערבי דהוי מצער האי צדיק בקראי , והיה זורק פסוקים מפיו כטרוריסט, ודבריו לא היו בהם ממש, כיון דראה האי צדיק דערבי הוא, שמטיה לקועיה מיניה ruch min hon. Walla.

      Delete
    13. hey אשר פיהם דבר שוא, you are so right, all Gital had to do was fulfill his needs. He had a need to be controlling, all she had to do was agree to be controlled, shame on her for not doing that! it's all her fault. and i agree with you of course that if a man has the need to beat his wife, the wife of course just has to fulfill his needs! at last, some common sense on this blog.

      Delete
    14. Ilana your comment is nonsense. You keep ranting about his need to control her - sorry but he has no need to control her. That was Gital's perception. The fact is that she was doing the controlling by simply leaving and taking their child with her. Her refusal to save the marriage despite her therapists saying it could be saved. That doesn't mean that she would learn how to accept being controlled.It means an objectively positive relationship could have been developed - but she said she wasn't interested.
      Your need to present a nightmare picture of what there marriage was like - is decidely dishonest and really isn't helping anyone. The bottom line is she wants out of the marriag because she wants out of the marriage

      Delete
    15. now hold on a second. I am just stating points/opinions based on what Gital wrote in the NY Post article. It is no rant. Your implication is condescending to Gital that it was merely her "perception" that he was controlling, But how do you know that Gital wasn't exactly accurate in what she wrote? Also, it was Gital who presented the nightmare picture of her marriage, not me, I am not making assumptions, I am basing my thoughts on what she herself wrote in the NY Post. This begs the question, why don't you believe what she wrote in the NY Post? Please explain.

      Delete
    16. Asher pihem diber shavNovember 20, 2013 at 4:09 AM

      Ilana,
      I knew you'd come around! If every controlling man was divorced, you would instantly solve the Shidduch crisis, and then some. Controlling to many women, is a good thing.

      Also, controlling is a two way street. if you yourself are controlling, it can be unbearable. There are women however, who want a guy to take control. There are women who can't stand weak men who can't lead. To make believe that AMW is any worse in his "controlling behavior" than the average yeshiva guy, is a stretch.

      BTW,If the one thing he wants to control is his wife's OBGYN, I don't see a problem. Can you guess the type of doctor most likely to have an affair with his patient ?

      As far as wife beating, we KNOW that AMW never did it. She would have not forgotten to mention it. Oh, we also know the worst he said, was calling her stupid once, and saying she would make any man unhappy. Doesn't sound like terrible verbal abuse. So, Ilana girl, take the dog for a walk, relax, you'll be fine.

      Professionals say, Men don't cheat, or leave women for looks, it's not having their emotional needs met. That's what does it girl, remember.

      Delete
    17. Daas Torah, you're saying I'm dishonest. Gital wrote "Around my seventh month, after getting the silent treatment over Shabbat again, I told Avrohom that we needed to see a marriage counselor. He flatly dismissed the idea, saying: “You can pack your bags and leave. We’re not going to therapy under any circumstances, and if anyone finds out we have a bad marriage, I’ll divorce you.”
      He was the one that refused therapy, not her.

      Delete
    18. @Ilana saying that Avraham Meir has refused to go the therapy is simply a lie. They did in fact go to therapy for 4 sessions with a therapist of her choice and she was told that the marriage could be saved. She said she wasn't interested and never went back.

      Now that you know that the article was written to paint Avraham Meir as a pyschopath - and not as he actually is - do you still believe every words she said is true?

      Delete
    19. "To make believe that AMW is any worse in his "controlling behavior" than the average yeshiva guy, is a stretch."

      Well, in this case, all the worse for the average yeshiva guy.

      I would say it is not only controlling, but also just plain chutzpa to live on the money the wife earns plus to tell her what she can or cannot do with her money.

      it is just plain theft to take from her money and to spend it without her consent.

      Remember: she was the breadwinner in the family, not him.

      So tell him: if you want to milk a cow, you have to bow. He did not know how to bow, therefore the cow refused to be milked. To bad for AMW!

      Having seen some marriages that started with symptoms like the ones gital describes in the NY Post article, I can tell you that Gital was right to leave, and she should have done it earlier, when he first threatened to divorce her.

      Because as far as I can see around me, husbands who feel entitled like AMW do not change their controlling behaviour, and it just gets worse with the years.

      So kudos to Gital that she left, and kudos that she does not cave in to get extortion.

      I suppose, she is stronger in the long run, because AMW will want sex more than he wants the money, so he will find someone else and give the get so that HE can remaary.

      Delete
    20. "They did in fact go to therapy for 4 sessions"

      That was after she moved out.

      Which shows that she was right to move out, since he was not at all cooperative before that. nor after that...

      I suppose, to him it was all about money

      Delete
    21. Asher pihem diber shavNovember 21, 2013 at 2:56 AM

      Blatant,
      Your aren't the sharpest chrein in the store!! The Torah says it's his, and it's a chutzpah for him to be spending it. You just don't take the Torah seriously!! I am a proponent of איני נזונת ואיני עושה, but you my friend, are just a closet heretic.
      Your ideas are strange, and you definitely care nothing about the Torah. You are another one of these frauds who thinks, what he decides IS Torah.

      Delete
    22. Your words are vain, as your nickname indicates.

      The Torah says that he has to provide for her, for himself and for the children. So the Torah would never accept a husband suing his ex for Alimony and Child support.

      The Torah says that she can renounce being provided for and keep her money. This seems to have been the arrangement here.

      If she is on that arrangement and she is millionare, she does not owe him one cent, and he can go hungry and sleep under the bridge, she owes him NOTHING.

      Because the Torah says that it is NOT upon the wife to provide for the husband, but the other way round.

      Delete
  3. Perhaps you want to share with us why you regards Reb Malkiel as a godol?

    Besides that in this case as a relative he cannot be trusted.

    So follow whom?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 14, 2013 at 4:09 PM

      The following was posted in one of the other threads:

      "They also wrote (translated) "We state that, according to the Torah, it is permissible and it is a mitzvah to protest against him, to gather publicly in front of his house and in other places, and to make the matter known publicly and in the newspapers in order to save an oppressed woman from her oppressor and an Agunah from being
      chained."

      In addition (again translated) "There is an obligation upon anyone who is able to do so, to influence Avrohom Meir that he should listen to Bais Din and that he should give a Get."

      This Kol Koreh was signed by:

      Rabbi Yaakov Perlow
      Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky
      Rabbi Aharon Moshe Schechter
      Rabbi Aharon Feldman
      Rabbi Simcha Bunim Ehrenfeld
      Rabbi Nota Tzvi Greenblatt
      Rabbi Tzvi Schechter
      Rabbi Moshe Heineman
      Rabbi Elya Dov Wachtfogel
      Rabbi Yaakov Hopfer"

      Delete
    2. Aren't these the same Gedolim who signed the wedding Takans that they themselves don't abide by?
      Did anybody write a tsuva as to why AMW is obligated to give a get?
      Or is this like the Lipa ban where they sign first and read the document later?

      Delete
  4. Joe Orlow (301) 754-1128November 14, 2013 at 4:19 PM

    AZ likes to think things through. I think if AZ were to follow his own arguments to their logical fonclusion he would give up identifying as a Jew.

    AZ writes: In other words, you agree that if not for your sources, the natural ethics and morals would lead us to believe that the husband should just give the Get (as the rest of the world believes).

    Consider this: I don't know what he means by "natural ethics and morals", but however he defines it, I don't think it would include a man binding his innocent son and sacrificing him.

    Yet, we exist as Jews today because of The Binding of Isaac.

    The Torah tells us to bind and sacrifice, and we do it. A marriage is a self-binding agreement, and the ramification of the marriage is that a woman may end up in a position that is "unnatural": married to a man she doesn't want to live with.

    Abraham would never have bound zisaac if he wasn't commanded by G-d to do it. Isaac would not hsve allowed himself yo be bound except that G-d commanded it. A woman in a marriage has to remain bound till her husband frees her because G-d commands it.

    To leave the marriage in peace, it's advisable to follow protocol, to leave in a systematic way. If she just unilaterally picks up and walks away with the children, she is apparently violating "natural ethics and morals" in that it is cruel to the father who is attached to his children and loves the children and devotes his life to bringing up the children and who now is left without his children -- if a wife is cruel like that, is it surprising that the cruelty comes back on her when the husband does not divorce as she demands?

    So it it is not the husband being cruel, or the Torah being cruel, it is the woman's cruel actions which bring the cruelty on her.

    What if instead of taking the children the woman rents an apartment nearby, and suggests to the husband that they share the children's time equally? IS THERE ANY DOUBT A GET WOULD SOON BE FORTHCOMING?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whether in the heat of the moment, the girl took the baby to her parent's house is not relevant now.

      The Dodelson's have repeatedly said that they want to give a Get following the custody arrangement decided by the Court (2 nights a week plus every other weekend). Their whole argument is that the Court decided the case and now give the Get.

      Delete
    2. the answer is simple, yes there is doubt. of course the get would not be forthcoming. the only reason the get is not being given is because the man wants to control his wife, so your apartment renting solution is simply wrong. glad i can clarify. and you seriously think g-d commands that a woman be in a terrible marriage, well clearly you are not Jewish, last i checked compassion is one of g-d's greatest traits.

      Delete
    3. Please stop with the "man wants to control his wife" nonsense. The marriage was not a terrible one - it was one that needed some basic therapy and they could all have been happy. Compassion applies to the husband and child as well.

      Halacha does not provide for forcing a get on demand - it is really that simple.

      Delete
    4. hi Daas Torah, our disagreement is NOT about halacha after all, it's about something else and I'm curious to your position. There's a lot of speculation in this blog about the marriage itself but I read Gital's entire article in the NY Post, those are her words, her version of events, her name and face are to the article. She makes it VERY clear that he was very controlling and and that the marriage was in fact terrible, that is the only way to understand what she wrote. She even said that he physically pushed her mom after the baby was delivered. towards the end she writes "On my last mission to ask for a get, a month ago, Avrohom said, “I can’t give you a get — how else would I control you?” I think that’s the key to it all. He insists the marriage isn’t over until he says it’s over."

      so I take her words at face value, I believe her. You obviously don't. My question is: why don't you believe Gital?

      (at least now you can understand i'm not just ranting and raving, i'm quoting the agunah)

      Delete
    5. I agree you take the words of an angry and hurt woman in a divorce struggle as being objectively true - even though they have orchestrated by a pr expert in order to pressure the husband to give a get.

      I have received information from both sides regarding the issue of her marriage and her refusal to try and resolve the issues throught marriage counseling- which the article definitely doesn't mention and she claims he refused to go to therapy which is simply not true.

      Or rather this is an example of selective reporting. he did say at one time he didn't want to go to therapy - but then he changed his mind and they in fact went. The fact that she chose not to report that they in fact went and were told that the marriage could be saved - is enough to invalidate the whole article as being false.

      As they said in the old days of computing - "garbage in - garbage out"

      So assuming that you are aware that in divorces there is the husband side and the wife's side and truth - I don't see why you think it is correct to strongly attack the husband based soley on what you read in the NY Post interview/

      Delete
  5. AZ - RDE has well documented his sources in Halacha to reach his conclusion. You and R' Shmuel have not provided any sources at all. If you want to create at new stream of Judaism and create your own laws then great. But if you claim to be a G-d fearing Jew and use Halacha to guide your life then please show the world your sources for your position as RDE has done for his position. If you can't then why don't you post on Shmaryas web site - he doesn't require Halacha.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not a Posek, however, as in all Halachik Shailos I ask the Poskim how to proceed. Their are many Poskim like R' Shmuel Kamenetsky, R' Belsky, R' Ovadia Yosef, R' Herschel Schachter, R' Morechai Willig and others who argue on R' DE and hold opinions that make it much more likely and easier for a woman to receive a Get.

      Delete
  6. People like to dismiss R' Gestner but he writes detailed tsuvas as to how he arrives at his opinion. Az asks that we follow the opinion of R' Kamenetsky but what is his opinion based on? Did he write a detailed tsuva as to what his sources are? Or did he sign a piece of paper not knowing all the details like the Lipa debacle? Has Daas Torah in 2013 been reduced to papal infallicy? Well if R' Shmuel said the sky is yellow it must be.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ask these gedolim why they were silent on child molestation. Ask these gedolim why the aguda doesn't protest when its archivist is machzik in arko'oys and are oyver mesirah and ask tbese gedolim why aharon schachter is not in cheirem for being lo tzias dina. Ask them why they invite r belsky to speak at their convention and ask them why r kotler threw out rabbi s from the yeshiva and doesn't reinstate him and ask r heinamann why he never put a siruv on tamar epstein for walking out of bais din. Ask r schechter why he out a false siruv on meir kin when his wife was in arko'oys and he deposited a get. And ask the boro oark rabbi if he is the self appointed vodol hador why a flatbush molestation problem is not his business.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oy Lanu that these are our gedolim!!!November 15, 2013 at 7:07 AM

      Stan - a great and devastatingly powerful summary of the rampant hypocrisy and corruption in alleged "gadolim" that is threatening the spiritual sanity of klal Yisroel.

      Delete
  8. Recipients and PublicityNovember 14, 2013 at 5:50 PM

    Stop the madness and stop fighting with each other ALL of you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Second Bais HaMikdosh was destroyed because of Sinas Chinam ("causeless hatred), and the third Bais HaMikdosh will only be rebuilt by Ahavas Chinom ("selfless love")! You are ALL making yourselves into a laughingstock in full view of the world !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! To the Weisses and Dodelsons STOP IT and tell your warring kids who are fighting each other to grow up and stop acting like BABIES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am a firm believer that a Get should be given first thing and I don't understand why there was a delay of this kind, but this PR campaign is vulgar.
    I hope that this Get is given as soon as possible; but using the press to aid in the resolution of our divisions, risking the making a Chillul Hashem, in this case making one that crosses the globe, has no compatibility with being a Torah Jew. That is not the way. Those who say such a thing is justifiable for the cause of Bnos Yisroel are missing the bigger picture and I question their Yiras Shamayim.
    Rabbossai, at this point whose right and whose wrong really has no value. I am sure with the caliber of Gedolim involved, who frankly ALL have negius with one of the Mishpachos at the center of this mess, both sides have halachic argument to support their actions.
    If we keep on hashing the question of whose right this will never be resolved. In the meantime the divisiveness and the terrible Sinaas Chinam WE are creating on the sidelines, will chalilah bring churban down on all of us. People need to start seeing that BOTH sides need to work together to bring this ugliness to an end.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I am a firm believer that a Get should be given first thing and I don't understand why there was a delay of this kind, but this PR campaign is vulgar.
      I hope that this Get is given as soon as possible; but using the press to aid in the resolution of our divisions....."

      well, it's been three years and she would argue that nothing happened until the PR campaign started.

      Delete
    2. Except it isn't true. There have been two strong responses to the PR campaign. The Secular and Modern Orthodox are outraged and are forming a lynch mob on her behalf. On the other hand the yeshivshe crowd has been very shocked by the campaign and there has been a strong backlash against her. The question is whether the outrage of the Modern Orthodox against Avraham Meir is more influential than backlash of the black hatters against Gital

      Delete
    3. really upset, i ask you, what should gital have done as of course forking over hundreds of thousands of dollars isn't an option (it's laughable extortion). what is your alternative solution? In terms of the chillul hashem, it's entirely on her husband and all men that keep their wives chained. you're embarrased that the whole world knows the truth that our religion can be so sexist against woman not by design but because of some men and their decisions? well you should be embarrased, but if there were no agunot, there would be nothing to tell the world about this matter. Let the world know what some disgusting men are doing to their wives, I don't care. We let it happen and now we reap what we sow as the world sees that what power a man can have over his wife in our religion.

      Delete
  10. Haker na lemi vomi hachosemes hapsulim haeleh.November 14, 2013 at 6:22 PM

    I would like to eyeball it and see the whole document, all those signatures you claim as well as the context. As they say osiyos machkimos. Anyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why don't you post the original?November 15, 2013 at 4:10 AM

      Where are the authentic chatimot attached? Until then, it has the value of Avshalom's letter from David hamelech. Is this another trick? So they can later retreat. Is this another doodleing around. Gey Weiss.

      Delete
  11. RDE/DT:

    You may be interested in this new article by R. Yair Hoffman as a seperate post on DT:

    http://5tjt.com/false-accusations-and-the-withholding-of-a-get/

    ReplyDelete
  12. Check out this interesting article that relates to this blog

    ReplyDelete
  13. This letter also shows that women deserve no help once they go to secular court. The "posek" in the above article seems to argue against these rabbonim?
    http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/04/prohibiting-archaos-civil-courts.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. For some reason everyone just 'knows' that if you have a dispute with the Kotlers then 'Daas Torah' will be against you.

    I categorically do not believe these kind of letters, frankly no matter who signs them and many people share my opinion.

    Ask yourself why this kind of interference is reserved for the Dodelsons if the motive is Daas Torah.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. kol kore bayaar ubetoch hadusNovember 14, 2013 at 9:16 PM

      Kvar hoyo dovor meoylom. Avshalom also went to all towns with a letter signed from David hamelech, to assign two people to serve him, only to gather a rebellion army. Yes, my friend, kosher fleish kosher lefel, Kosher chasimos although I yet have to see the alleged kol koreh, but lo and behold it is cooked in a TREIFAH POT! And that is the key. ved"al

      Delete
  15. TO AVROHOM MEIR: Do not give the GET under any circumstance until your losses are returned. I can guarantee all of you that if the rabbis of this generation fight for these causes to the death and dont bother fighting other causes such as rabbis who are pedophiles, you can be sure that itl ALL ABOUT MONEY AND NOT THE TRUTH!! We have no leaders today that can be trusted. I will not support Lakewood anymore for taking on such a disgusting approach in the public eye. We have here rabbis fighting other Rabbis which is a disgrace for the kovod hatorah all in the name of money. You might ask HOW DO I KNOW THIS? The answer is simple, because in many other cases such as the Lonna Kin vs Meir Kin, she1) ran to civil court as a first option, 2) had him gagged by court order so that he cannot tell a bais din certain facts 3) he went to Rabbi Gobioff's bais din which is a recognized bais din, 4) he ultimately deposited a get which she hadnt picked up and yet no one has stated any criticism of her behavior and continue to harrass and defame Meir as if he is halachacally not compliant!!! yet in the Weiss- Dodelson case, they all hang their hats on the fact that the husband went to court first!! Isnt this a double standard!!! Of course it is. There is no halachic standard in todays rabbinic world!!! Rather the man is always wrong IN ALL SITUATIONS even if he follows the Torah perfectly!! This spells for a MEGA- CORRUPTED RABBINIC SYSTEM WHICH IS NOT BASED ON TORAH VALUES OR PRINCIPLES BUT RATHER ON MONEY OR FEMINISM.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the problem with your arguments is that in this case, the man really is wrong. You are also advocating extortion to give a get, is that what hashem wants? chew on that.

      Delete
  16. kol kore bayaar ubetoch hadusNovember 14, 2013 at 9:21 PM

    For those asking to give a get, pay up or shut up. Pay now and get later, eshkol li ginzei hakesef, bein ubeincho ma hi.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yair Hoffman is a well known feminist. He recently gave prime time to mendel epstein. His article is a fabrication of halocho and misunderstanding of the poskim he quotes. A get can should be witheld if a woman is lo tzias dina and or in arko'oys see real kol koreh. There was never a time in klal yisroel that gittin needed to be witheld so the rabbis are confused. But now we have arko'oys, false molestation charges, women looking for lovers and step dads, restraining orders, equitable distribution, maintenance, discretionary child support etc of course the halocho should be followed.

    The rabbis are weak and it is the few like rav gestetner who know the emes.

    ReplyDelete
  18. A few points , although I step away from this particular dispute, and others like it.

    a) DT, I would like to see your response.

    b) Reb Dovid E has spoken some harsh words against American roshei yeshiva, who may/or may not be the ones involved here.

    c) I wish to offer a possible, but not conclusive solution to R Dovid Eidensohn's critique of the Roshei Yeshiva, whom he claims are violating halacha, shulchan aruch etc.

    Elsewhere on this blog, for the past few days I have had a long debate with Chaim.
    One of the issues we debated (and disputed) was Rambam in Hilchot mamrim.

    He writes
    http://mechon-mamre.org/i/e302n.htm

    הִלְכּוֹת מַמְרִים פֵּרֶק ב
    יב [ז] גָּזְרוּ וְדִמּוּ שֶׁפָּשְׁטָה בְּכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְעָמַד הַדָּבָר כֵּן שָׁנִים רַבּוֹת, וּלְאַחַר זְמָן מְרֻבֶּה עָמַד בֵּית דִּין אַחֵר, וּבָדַק בְּכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְרָאָה שְׁאֵין אוֹתָהּ הַגְּזֵרָה פּוֹשֶׁטֶת בְּכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל--יֵשׁ לוֹ רְשׁוּת לְבַטְּלָהּ; וְאַפִלּוּ הָיָה פָּחוּת מֵאוֹתוֹ בֵּית דִּין הָרִאשׁוֹן בְּחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן, יֵשׁ לוֹ לְבַטַּל. [ח] וְכָל בֵּית דִּין שֶׁהִתִּיר שְׁנֵי דְּבָרִים, אַל יְמַהַר לְהַתִּיר דָּבָר שְׁלִישִׁי.

    Is it possible that the Roshei Yeshiva are utilizing this Rambam, to cancel certain halacha(s) which are Rabbinical in nature, since certain matters have lost their hold on world Jewry, and in particular in America?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eddie,
      You say I have spoken harsh words about Rosh Yeshivas who may not be involved here. I don't understand you. People sign their names on letters demanding that we all go out and destroy people with humiliation and loss of income, both which create an invalid GET and according to the great poskim it creates mamzer by Torah standards, and you ask if they are involved in all of this? All of this happened only because of the Kotlers and other Rosh Yeshivas who value cousins first and Torah second. If I am wrong, I ask for their source to humiliate in MOUS OLEI. I am waiting for one.But there is none.
      Also, your point that since many people don't keep a rabbinical law it may be cancelled by a senior Beth Din, we are talking here about Torah laws, as the poskim teach, and there is no way to do away with that. And if any of your Rosh Yeshiva friends got up and cancelled any rabbinical law, they would simply reveal who they are, but no normal Jew would obey them. Your understanding of the Rambam does not agree with me, but it has nothing to do with the present topics, so I will not go into it.

      Delete
    2. Firstly, even if my understanding of the rambam is not accurate, it cannot and does not apply to Torah laws, but only to Rabbinicals. So it is only a suggestion that might apply if they have done away with Rabbinical halacha.

      I am not saying your harsh words are unwarranted. I am saying, perhaps they see that the forcing of the Get might be d'rabbanan. It is only a suggestion.

      Delete
    3. Eddie,
      I know what the major posek of that element thinks, and I wrote a lengthy teshuva to refute it that was accepted by the gedolim in Israel. I may write this teshuva on this blog with its full development to show there is no question that it is forbidden to do what they do. I have spoken at length with some of the people who signed their letters and I have no doubt that they do not know what they are doing. Again, I have developed some of this in various blog postings, here, but I am planning on writing a fuller account to fully dispose of their ideas.

      Delete
  19. Maybe this has been addressed already (although frankly with all the different threads, it is hard to follow what has been said), can anyone answer this:

    Let's assume, for argument sake (I am not saying it is so, just positing), that there is a basis to pressure the husband who won't give a get. What is the basis for pressuring his family -- getting his father and uncle fired from their jobs, and then pressuring the yeshiva headed by another uncle? Since when is there any basis to punish relatives for the misdeeds (if that is what it is) of their relatives?

    If there is no answer to this, then the people doing so are biryonim, plain and simple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is absolutely zero basis. It is completely and unambiguously against Jewish Law and an extremely serious violation of Halacha to do what was done to the Uncle and Father.

      Delete
    2. " Since when is there any basis to punish relatives for the misdeeds (if that is what it is) of their relatives?"

      It could be based on the Code of Hammurabi.

      Delete
    3. Tal Benschar,

      The Father and Uncle are the ones spearheading the campaign against the Dodelsons. Do you think the boy was capable of taking care of this matter by himself?

      Do you even think that he was able to take the lead? His father and Uncle took the lead.

      The boy probably never even heard of R' Gestetner. The boy didn't know how to hire lawyers and which lawyers to hire.

      The Uncle Rabbi Weiss had experience dealing with divorce because of his wife's brother(?) who was divorced - and was using that experience to help wage this campaign against the Dodelsons.

      Delete
    4. Who said anything about Halacha? Daniel S and Confused (who seem to be one in the same - the consensus is Aryeah D) have argued that there is no need to follow Halacha when he thinks otherwise. In the other thread he was practically gloating about the Weiss firings. This is the type of family AMW is up against.

      Delete
  20. I agree with the author of this post.

    RDE, I have put a number of questions to you which you have not answered, trying to understand if you are purely acting on halachic principle or whether you are motivated by something else. Your silence and your lack of compassion are confusing, because I would like to believe it's the former. (These questions include: what information do you have that makes you think Dodelson has been lying about her experience in the marriage? If she WAS telling the truth, would you consider the tactics she is using to be permitted? Or would you at least understand rather than her choice to use them?)

    At the end of the day, I hope your integrity shines through.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Raffi, a woman who hires a Reform PR consultant to wage a press war against yeshivos, frum publishing houses, demanding relatives jobs be fired and using shmutzy non-Jewish papers to spread her word with wild and implausible accusations is certainly not someone to be believed.

      A woman in midst of a brutal divorce who accuses her husband of anything or everything certainly cannot be believed at face value.

      Delete
  21. Daas Torah,

    Thank you for posting this as a guest post.

    Kol tuv,

    AZ

    ReplyDelete
  22. @ Eddie, it can also be all those things listed in the mishneh of Ikvosei dimeshichei, vehaemes neederes, Kinei sofrim tissrach...
    provided that it is not a salad of a puzzle put together by some bliyaal. It is beyond belief. We have to wait to the results of the feds, then we talk.

    ReplyDelete
  23. A question to rabbi EidensohnNovember 15, 2013 at 10:23 AM

    Can you possibly please enlighten us about the status of the Epstein prod gitin scandal that the Feds have busted. From there we can get a good idea of who is a Beis Din chotzif. Are there any backdoor deals going on? In the UK, they mummed those that wanted to tell the Judge how and who violated them and violated the Torah. ma osoh HKB'H, the baal hasimcha of these collaborators collapsed in midst of a simcha le'eini kol. Do not think for one moment you can outsmart Hashem, vehoelokim yevakesh et hanirdaf. And so it goes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have received no information about further developments or the current status of the case

      Delete
  24. Daas Torah,

    I would like to clarify that the main goal of this guest post is not to focus on this particular case.

    I am trying to convince you to adopt – in all divorce cases - the halachic positions of other poskim that make it much easier and much more likely for a woman to obtain a Get.

    As a general rule, you have adopted halachic positions in regard to divorce which do terrible harm to woman when there is another halachic path available (R’ Shmuel Kamentetzky and others) whose ways are peaceful.

    One cannot argue that these other “women friendly” halachic positions are doing harm to men, as these halachic positions essentially put men and woman on equal footing.

    And as the NJ Court has shown in the Weiss case, the Court system cannot be accused of being anti-men, as they gave Weiss almost 50% custody.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AZ: Those so-called "other poskim" are not poskim who issued any sort of psak allowing such Gets to be pressured or force. In order to make a "psak" one needs to provide halachic reasoning. None whatsoever has been provided by those you wish to promote us relying on.

      Delete
  25. "and I believe the Weiss’s have received a very fair"

    AZ, Well of course since you support the Dodelson side, you "believe" that Weiss got a very fair deal. But if the Weiss side doesn't believe he got a fair deal, then even picking and choosing your poskim on the issue still doesn't create a path of peace - it creates peace only for the Dodelsons and their supporters like you. Meanwhile, if the Weiss got their way, you would be the first to protest that that creates peace for Weiss but not for Dodelson. That's hypocritical aside from all the halachic problems Rabbi Eidensohn mentioned.

    ReplyDelete
  26. DT: You still failed to explain a few points, and I have repeated those questions more than 3 times, never received an answer:

    1) On which halachic basis is AMW allowed to sue his wife for child support?
    2) On which halachic basis is AMW allowed to sue his wife for alimony?
    3) On which halacha does AMW base his claim for 350'000$?
    4) Why do you think it is OK to give a get as soon as 350'000$ are paid?
    5) How come Batey din in Israel resort to coercive power?

    ReplyDelete

  27. As for the kol kore, here is your answer. It is HIS shot where to resolve the situation, they both agreed upon, only to abrogate later down the road.

    "Weiss Dodelson: Rav Dovid Feinstein pasken's agreement to arbitration means R Avraham Meir Weiss can not be considered a mesarev or me'agen
    Rav Feinstein states - that despite the disagreement of whether there was a valid seruv against R Avraham Meir Weiss - the fact that they both went to Rabbi Greenwald to arbitrate the dispute removes him from that status according to everyone."

    I believe and trust R' Dovid anytime over her, prod gittin rabbis, hired guns PR's, Bilam's ORAH, or any RA, for that matter.

    According to Torah, eizeh isha ksheiro, haosehh et retzon baalo bechol es, she clearly did not, from the get go. The Torah says 'vehi yimshol bah', and she is in violation. There is good reason for 'Vehi', imagine a car that would have two driver seats, in opposite directions like some vehicles do, and both wheels to be driven at the same time. Does any country have two Presidents at the same time, or a Military two independent heads of command, that will be utter chaos. That is not to say that they do not confer, but if one clearly always wants to have it her way, all the way, highway or no-way, all the time, it will never work. The Torah knows the life has it's ups and downs, and any party can jump the gun in heat and wants a get on demand only to regret later, therefore they have built in safety valves, such a Ketuba to give Him cooling time, it has to be given by the willing husband to give Her some cooling time, first you go on the peace road, as well as many regulations to "Boker veyoda Hashem". She violates them all. She finds Torah law antiquated, outdated, uncomfortable, burdensome and even mocking it. She does not like her Yiddish name Gittel, calls herself GITAL. Her dress code is not in the ways of al titosh torat imecha, along with that smirk on her face, see picture. The potty over the LONG sheitel to make her look as if a single girl, defeating the whole purpose of a head covering to demonstrate that she is married ("UPORA ROSH HAISHA"), the two piece two tone short sleeve over the long sleeve to give the untznies effect. So much for lo shinu et shmam and levushom. "Venishalo et piho", whether if she is into him, she should have never married him to begin with. It is clearly against veahvta lereiacho kamocho, getting married just to please your parents, only divorce afterwards. That causes irreparable damage for life to your partner, not to mention the pain and anguish that causes for his parents and all partiers involved. You cause damage, you are responsible for it. You just can't get up one morning, and declare I wan't out, because you wan't a different way of life, other than you have already committed for. Then, to prove that your marriage is dead in order to qualify for a Get you go and burn the whole house down raze it to the ground, showing a chazer fissel, you see! There's nothing alive in there anymore, nothing to salvage. It sounds like the guy who murdered his parents, then go beg mercy from the Judge, because he is an orphan. You go to all the rag outlet's and destroy any chance of reconciliation with a big Chilul Hashem, for an insurance goal of, character assassination.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Asher pihem diber shavNovember 19, 2013 at 6:24 PM

      You got her picture analyzed, if I may say so myself. You say she has a potty over her long sheitel. What exactly do you mean ? Potty ? Like a toilet ? Is it a sheitel ? Or is it her hair ? Or a fall ? Is the smirk an issue ? Or perhaps she should have had a picture with her saying tehillim, crying on tisha B'av? You go on to talk about her short sleeve over the long sleeve for the effect. I am not sure what effect you are talking about. I don't see anything wrong about her picture. My only point about the picture is that she looks an awful lot like ר׳ מלכיאל קוטלר. Seriously, am I the only one to see it ?

      Delete
    2. Ok, in your spirit, here is your answer. First of all, right off the bat, if she resembles R' MK, she is oiver on lo silbash. Potty is a 'graf shel reyi' in targum loshen. Shulchan Aruch says, you are not suppose to keep such kli in a Sukah, same applies on top of the schach. I did assume and hope it's a sheitel rather than her own hair, but a long one defeats the purpose of the Halacha, furthermore, since she resembles who she resembles, it is not a kovod for a king when his twin hangs in town square, as the ( posuk says, right -you do not like psukim ) ki klelas E' tolui. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a Duck, then tvias kolo detarnegolte kegon CockA Doodle do, it must doodle do, and therefore it is a Duck, if you get my drift. Have no clue about fall, I thought you are in midst of winter, somuch venireh leyome deKapitkoi (see targum loshen ) veyesh omrim Ludkaye, veacherim omrim haydu ki mishom hatarnegolim, vekivan sheBla"az korim yomo detovo 'Hodu laShem ki tov', al ken koru bearo deyehudin tarnegolte dehodu, ved"al. I agree that she will need to say lots of tehilim crying over this mess, hen BeTisha Ba'av, vehen besha'ar yemos hashanah for the rest of her life. Since this milchemes gite deGITAL is a Misaber al riv asher loy loi, loy aleinu veloy alechem kegon ORAH shehevi harbeh choshech va'afelo leolam, the NY comPost, veshaar shemos HARODFIM, for PR, like Balak and Bilam, oy lerosho, veavoy lishcheno, vehem be'eitzo achas, al ken chozu ikunin veanpin umarin bishin im kritza besifsevoso bechutzposo ravrevoso kehanei kalbin dachtzufin, smirk be"laaz. Vekol kach lamah? Kedei lehatil eimo veyiroh vofachad al kol biryoh asher yoiz kenegdoso kovel GITAH, klomar, didan notzach and do me something if you only can. How would I know? If you put your ears close enough, tishma kolah menahemes keyonah veomeres meumka deAroh oy li mielbonah shel torah. Haven't you ever heard a picture talks a thousand words. And that chutzpah, is the issue de'anan askinan. The sleeve effect is thus, do you think a M. K. look alike should wear a holy knitted sweater with a skin look alike shirt underneath for the effect, same issue as skin looking stockings? And I don't mean Holy as in The Holy of the Holies. It is just the opposite kovel sitra deachro, veilu hadvorim shehatznius yofe lahen vein tzorich leha'arich. On the picture at hand, I can only agree as far that it IS awful, but nothing about a lot or less, they say that it is in the eyes of the beholder, and most beholders agree that this whole saga is awful. I have never seen the look alike, I therefore, have no opinion. Please forgive my Targum along with psukim of mikra, I am used to meoidi, psok li psukoch, and psokim of true gedolim only. I also pray that you can see the smuchot hamikro to the kesher benidon didan. Wishing you and all, a Yoma Chedvoso DeKepitkoi or Happy Thanksgiving day bel"aaz.

      Delete
  28. Tshuvo nitsachas to ZNovember 18, 2013 at 4:51 PM

    Newsweek “Only three days into the marriage, I knew I made a terrible mistake.”
    You then set your rules how to expedite total destruction, only a goyish counselor, only four attemps before it's final, over and out. A marriage is not an experiment inflicted at his expense, your mistake happened before marriage, you clearly dislike Torah or a ben Torah, it is not your way of life. The first thing is, to be true and honest, especially to your self, more so when it involves another ones life, and YOU want to be a Lawyer (liar)? Your solution is to live with the prospect 5 years in sin, before you decide if you are in. Not at all, all it takes is a little honesty. You knew everything you needed to know about your prospect, his wishes for a Torah life, but you reneged. You now are on a tsunami path of revenge and total destruction, No Torah, No Chochma, No Yirat Shamayim, not for kidush, not for havdala, and definitely not for marriage, neither here, nor there, nor anywhere. This whole Korach saga is your punishment that the whole world should know who you are, your character, and your non-values. The fact that you recruited PR, support from ra banim that support prod gitins hits you right back in the face. R' Avram Meir does not wish to grant a get meusse as R' Dovid along with the greatest Poskim say, that such as in your case is, he is entitled to compensation first, for all the atrocities, pain and anguish you have inflicted on him. No, you are not a hostage, nor an Agunah, in order to perform a Kosher Get and not a get Meusse, you own up to snuff, pay your bills, pay your dues for YOUR mistakes and you are free as a butterfly. Many thanks to the Rabbi's Eidonsohn in providing a platform to all the well wishers of Rabbi D. Feinsten and family, to R' Avram Meir, to refute all Motziei shem ra, mechalelei shem shamayim berabim in cahoots with the Satan. I firmly believe, this is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth! So help us all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Avram Meir does not wish to grant a get meusse as R' Dovid along with the greatest Poskim say, that such as in your case is, he is entitled to compensation first"

      So let me get this straight; the money, or $350K to be exact, turns the get meusse into a kosher get? Is it something like pidyon haben? There you only need five coins to redeem your child.

      Delete
    2. You conveniently missed the target. " The fact that you recruited PR, support from ra banim that support prod gitins hits you right back in the face." Rabbi Eidensohn enumerated all Rishonim and gedolei Haposkim so saying.
      Shaming him into it, invalid kol kore's, Newsweek, Post, ORA's, vechol minei marin bishin,Yored lechayov to dispense a get without complying to the arbitrator of already agreed upon choice, is the same modus operandi as the prod gitin. Call it what you want, pidyon of self inflicted agunos, kofer nefesh for spilling Jewish blood, or Gonev nefesh, Gonev daas, Lo soni ish es amiso, hakol lefi. If you look over it again, it is right on the money. Kofer hakol, veKofer Batorah, will not cut it. As the good book says, tovo imah, utkaneach tzoias bitah. Yikov hadin et hahar, and comply with the arbitrator.

      Delete
    3. "without complying to the arbitrator of already agreed upon choice"

      He was Weiss's choice. The other side never agreed that he should be the arbitrator. See RG's e-mail.

      Delete
    4. hi Tshuvo, you seem to know Gital really well the way you describe her and her decisions. But do you actually know her? have you met her? She said she knew it was a mistake right away, but what you're ignoring is that she was in fact right! this simply make her a very perceptive person. I ask you, have you been in her shoes, living in such a marriage with someone that has such terrible midos? Unless you were a voyeur in the privacy of their home, I don't see how you can judge either of them negatively, yet you have chosen that she is not a good Jew. Well, unlike Catholicism, divorce is permitted in our religion, what would you reserve it for. Just how bad does the husband have to treat the wife? I'm really curious what you think.

      Delete
    5. The tshuva is right in front of your eyes.

      " It is HIS shot where to resolve the situation, they both agreed upon, only to abrogate later down the road. "

      "Weiss Dodelson: Rav Dovid Feinstein pasken's agreement to arbitration means R Avraham Meir Weiss can not be considered a mesarev or me'agen
      Rav Feinstein states - that despite the disagreement of whether there was a valid seruv against R Avraham Meir Weiss - the fact that they both went to Rabbi Greenwald to arbitrate the dispute removes him from that status according to everyone."
      ***
      How can anyone deny R'Dovid's words?

      "they both went to Rabbi Greenwald to ARBITRATE the dispute."
      If she later changed her mind not to follow up, not to go and not to be makebel Kinyan, that is HER loss. You can play around with words till the chickens come home to roost. She missed her boat deliberately, therefore, he is not a meagen and she is NOT an aguna. Time to grow up and own up to reality.

      @ yitz, here is what I think and DAAS TORAH, veDAAS HAKAHAL of shomrei Torah umitzvosov

      I know neither of them. Don't claim to know their privacy of their life, but I do know what she claimed in PUBLIC and bimvo'os hamtunofim e.g ORAH etc.! See gemoro in Kidushin 71. ,
      " Im roiso shnei bnei odom shemisgarin ze boze, shemetz psil yesh beachas mehen, ve'ein menichin aso lidabek bechavero. Furthermore, see shulchan aruch of ne'elovim veinom olvim. So there you have it, this was not my choice. Adam nikar bekiso, bekoso, ubekaaso, dragging this dispute with PR to magnify the CHILUL HASHEM, does not add much to her integrity. Divorce is advised when motzo bah ervas dovor, the same applies to her with riders shekovu chachomim. She conveniently makes things up dynamically to suit her whims. She also admitted that he is a gentleman, not the exact words. You just can't get up one morning and decide you want out of hopeful a life long comittment. You inflict a life long pain, stigma, and all the other unnatural state as a result, not to mention the future life of the child. She deliberately ran this marriage south and downhill to ram the last nail in the coffin, to prove that it is not salvageable, so as to qualify for a get, and not from it's own natural momentum. It is crystal clear that the goal of deliberately inflicting pain is in hot pursuit in order to obtain a get, and NOT as a result thereof. She has already been given an opportunity to do so. Paining unjustifiably for get purposes is extortion, causes a GET MEUSSE, same as THE ELECTRIC RAMMING PROD. You must compensate providing relief, in order to qualify and obtain a kosher get of his own free will. Less than that will not cut it. Hafoch ba vahafoch bah dekulei bah, and no use to go around in circles.

      Delete
  29. "1) On which halachic basis is AMW allowed to sue his wife for child support?"

    On the basis of the fact that Gital unilaterally walked out of their marital home and grabbed his son without his consent from the marital home they were living together in. It was an emergency situation, her grabbing the child, that needed immediate rectification. And he first got a heter arkoyos.



    "2) On which halachic basis is AMW allowed to sue his wife for alimony?"

    This was in response to her suing him for child support.

    "3) On which halacha does AMW base his claim for 350'000$?"

    On the humongous legal expenses she forced him to incur by suing him for divorce.

    "4) Why do you think it is OK to give a get as soon as 350'000$ are paid?"

    Because she owes it to him and until she gives him whayt she halachicly owes him, he is entitled to hold the Get to insure she complies with her duties. He needn't do his duty to her before she does hers to him.

    "5) How come Batey din in Israel resort to coercive power?"

    Perhaps they do so incorrectly. Or perhaps they do correctly only in the situations where it is halachicly warranted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ben Torah, I think we were all expecting an direct answer on the HALACHOS involved and you only talked about what made sense to you (except for maybe for the first answer, but is it really an "emergency" when a child goes with a responsible mother?). Please discuss and explain the halachos (be specific) when answering all these questions. I'm a bit surprised by you. We all look forward to the halachos from you.

      Delete
    2. hi Ben Torah, i'm still waiting for the halachos in conjunction with your answers. for example, please show me the halacha that she has to pay him 350k before he has to give her a get. (halachos for all your answers would be appreciated)

      Delete
  30. HUD, Wic, Food Stamps, Jersey Care, and Tomchei ShabbosNovember 18, 2013 at 8:41 PM

    Most Lakewood People are On Paxil Or Prozac as They Have Nothing To Do all Day living in the Suburban American Country Club of Lakewood NJ Paid For IN Full By Uncle Sam, That is why Lakewood People are all Day Suing People and pressing Charges and Busy With Dinei Torah

    ReplyDelete
  31. We are still missing some facts from this case, but I think we can state with reasonable confidence that:

    1. Dodelson abandoned her husband and abducted their child without halachic justification, so she has the status of a MOREDES in HALACHA.

    2. Regardless of any temporary custody actions R. Weiss's filed earlier, Dodelson is NOW clearly the Plaintiff in the NJ court, so only Dodelson can withdraw the dispute from the non-Jewish court.

    3. Under the present circumstances, there's no basis in HALACHA to claim that R. Weiss has an obligation to give a Dodelson a GET. I challenge the OH-RAH propagandists to find any normative, authoritative non-YU POSEK (not a Yeshiva politician) that states that the husband of a MOREDES can be forced to give a GET on claims of MOUS ALI. Claims that the NJ court ruling somehow obligates R. Weiss to give a GET are simply OH-RAH feminist nonsense with no HALACHIC basis. By any standard of logic, the NJ court did NOT order a GET, so no GET needs to be given.

    4. There may be some doubt as to the amount of damages Dodelson owes R. Weiss as a result of her NJ court actions. This would have to be decided by a kosher Bais Din or mediator.

    5. A kosher GET can probably be obtained for Dodelson, but NOT as long as the OH-RAH BIRYONIM and Reform feminists like Shira Dicker are advising her. The OH-RAH / Dodelson / Shira Dicker harassment and persecution campaign against R. Weiss and the Feinstein family is a grotesque injustice, a massive CHILUL HASHEM, and utterly contrary to Torah values and law.

    6. Dodelson will gain nothing from her insane persecution campaign against R. Weiss because if R. Weiss does give a GET, the GET will be declared invalid by Chareidi POSKIM. As long as Dodelson and her feminist henchmen refuse to accept a halachic divorce settlement, Dodelson is M'AGEN herself.

    7. Anyone who is honestly seeking to help Dodelson obtain a kosher GET should urge Dodelson to conduct a halachic divorce settlement which might have to include:
    - Dodelson (& Weiss) withdrawing from all NJ court actions
    - ceasing the feminist jihad against R. Weiss and his family
    - allowing a revised custody agreement that will protect R. Weiss from losing his parenting time with his child after a GET is given. This might be acheived by allowing R. Weiss to be custodial parent, but Dodelson will be allowed somewhat less than 50% parenting time. Obviously a NJ attorney has to advise them on this.
    - submiting R. Weiss's court damages to a non-Jewish mediator or else a Bais Din.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that 6. is a very interesting point and it appears consistent with some other strange things like the NY Post article that is not likely to lead to a GET. So what do the Dodelsons really want?

      Delete
    2. I read Gital's article in the Post, but you seem to say she wasn't telling the truth, but how do you know? Based on how she described the marriage (beyond awful), she was perfectly justified in leaving her husband once she knew the marriage was over. Why live with him if a divorce was necessary and he treated her like garbage? Also, she said that she wanted to see a marriage counselor with him and he was the one that turned it down. He was the nasty one that treated her just horribly, at least according to what she wrote. So she says she was the victim in a terrible marriage and that her husband recently stated explicitly that the only reason he wasn't giving the get was to continue being able to control her (why do you never address this). So why should I believe you over her? Her going to the NY Post does not mean what she said are lies. I just don't understand why you would call your fellow Jewish sister a liar just because you disagree with her tactics in going public. I ask you, have you been in her shoes as an Aguna not being able to remarry? I'm guessing not, so why do you judge her harshly? Perhaps you should judge her favorably.

      Delete
  32. 1) The Chillul Hashem is not that women can’t receive a Get on demand. The Chillul Hashem is the extortion of a man losing in court and then insisting on new terms in order to give a get. If a man truly loved his wife and wanted to stay with her, there wouldn’t be the same outrage. That would sad and tragic, but it wouldn’t be unjust. ORA may be upset with that situation, but many others could live with it. L’Havdil Catholicism doesn’t allow any divorce, and while people disapprove and disagree, they understand. Now imagine if in Catholicism a man could hold his wife hostage for whatever demands he wanted, and nothing could possibly free her without his consent. Even the Church itself couldn’t free her without his consent. Many people would find that to be a terrible injustice, and clear proof a Catholicism is incompatible with a notion of a Just G-d.

    I don’t know how many non-Jewish friends you have, but I have several non-Jewish colleagues at work who very well read, and significantly smarter than anyone I’ve ever seen on the Jewish Blogosphere. I don’t know how to answer the Chillul Hashem created by you and those who hold like you. I tried to explain that you can’t Torah liable for sins done by individuals claiming to be frum, now that the secular authorities tie the hands of Beis Din. Then you and others like you come along and try to show that someone who refused to go to a widely accepted Beis Din and instead went to secular court and lost is perfectly justified to state whatever demands he wants in return for a Get. Give me an answer to the Chillul Hashem you so enthusiastically endorse that would satisfy a fair-minded genius.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The Chillul Hashem is the extortion of a man losing in court and then insisting on new terms"

      You OH-RAH trolls continue to mindlessly chant the same bogus arguments, as if these arguments might be become true if enough naive people believe them.

      The NJ court did NOT order R. Weiss to provide any GET. In fact it is the Dodelson / ORA camp who are rejecting the terms of the court order, while hypocritically accusing R. Weiss of doing so.

      "non-Jewish colleagues at work" - Normal non-Jews see no objection to a father filing an action in family court when he is being denied access to his children, as occurred in the Weiss-Dodelson case.

      Until about 30 years ago, the US family courts and most pro-family non-Jews, did not accept the anti-Torah, feminist divorce on demand ideology being aggressively promoted by Hershel Schachter's YU ORA henchmen:

      "An agunah is a woman whose husband refuses to grant her a Jewish divorce upon request."
      http://web.archive.org/web/20050130200043/http://getora.org/

      Delete
    2. EmesLeYaacov, no one claims the NJ court ordered a Get. What court order is Dodelson ignoring? Which part of http://www.setgitalfree.com/timeline.html do you disagree with? AMW was issued a Seruv by the most respected Beis Din in Monsey, but he didn't want to use them. He chose to keep his dispute in family court, as he knew it would give him more favorable terms, which it did. It still wasn't favorable enough for him, so now he's using the Get to extract terms that no court of law has ever endorsed.

      Just because ORA is sometimes wrong, it doesn't mean that anyone who ever argues with them is always right. When has US family courts ever endorsed the extortion and blackmail that you support? AMW is happy to be divorced. He just wants to take advantage of Halachah to extract a huge payoff from Gital's family. Blind defenses like yours only increase the Chillul Hashem. Please speak to your smart non-Jewish and secular friends before posting here, so they can explain to you how much worse you're making things.

      Delete
    3. Asher pihem diber shavNovember 19, 2013 at 11:13 PM

      For all those who worry about explaining to Catholics, let your heart not be troubled,

      Withholding a גט is just hurting himself after CDRG, because it means he can't get married either. So it actually is a protective measure on marriage that either one can stop divorce from happening. Him by not giving, her by not taking, with him having the nuclear approach HMR, in which case she must be free as well. So extortion shouldn't work. If it does, it's only because she didn't call his bluff, or because her biological clock is ticking a bit faster.
      Remember, Halacha doesn't come to answer everything. If a man deliberately tries to blackmail, and take advantage of a woman who is rich and focused on her biological clock, I am sure he will be punished. However in business if someone can't make his payments, and someone buys him out for pennies on the dollar, I don't see people putting the buyer in חרם. Oh, because that is business. Same thing no ?

      Delete
  33. http://menachemmendel.net/blog/rabbi-chaim-pinchas-scheinberg-zl-on-shopping-for-a-pesak/

    2) According to Rav Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg Zatzal, you are allowed to go to multiple Poskim in search of a Heter. That applies even when there is no particular reason to go shopping for one. Here we have a Chillul Hashem that is turning people away from Torah. This is literal Sakanos Nefashos, where souls are leaving Torah in disgust and embarrassment over a Torah and that enables and endorses extortion. Anyone who is Makpid on Sakanos Nefashos has no choice but to find a way to end the Chillul Hashem of the extra-judicial Torah sanctioned extortion that is called Get-Refusal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is baloney. What you are saying is that the husband can go "posek shopping" until he finds a posek who says he should not give a Get.

      Okay, he did that. Now he doesn't have to give a Get. He found a posek who says he doesn't have to give a Get.

      Thank you

      Delete
    2. Consider the pikuach nefesh that wiil arise from all those who will choose to follow Gital when she succeed

      Delete
    3. SA, what is it that you find ridiculous? The Psak of Rav Scheinberg Zatzal or how I’m using it? Every Get-Refuser can find some Rav or Posek somewhere to support him. In a case of Chillul Hashem the Tzibbur can tell him we will punish you until you stop the Chillul Hashem, no matter who your Posek is. IMHO, any Posek who hasn’t met and spoken to those who’ve left Yiddishkeit should be wise enough to not pasken in this area. It’s a shame that we have poskim who are so cut off from the consequences of their decisions. We the Tzibbur who know how damaging the Chillul Hashem of Get-Refusal is must defend the Honor of Hashem and the continuity of the Jewish People by ostracizing these self-centered extortionists.

      “Eize Hu Chochom”, are you claiming that Jewish men make horrible husbands? Jewish men can give a get and walk away whenever they want, but they don’t, presumably because Jewish women make great wives. However if Jewish women were allowed to insist on divorce and walk away, so many of them would leave their marriages that it would constitute “Sakanos Nefashos”. That’s because Jewish men are such awful husbands that we need Halachah to chain women to these men.

      If AMW wanted to stay married, there wouldn’t be such moral outrage and Chillul Hashem. He’s fine getting divorced, as long as he gets to extort a huge sum of money from his wife’s family. Your defense of him is to claim its Sakanos Nefashos for Gital’s family to not pay him. Please ask Rav Eidensohn to let you write a post on that topic, so that everyone can see how foolish and defenseless the Weiss position is.

      Delete
    4. I'm simply saying based on what you said Avrohom Meir is on solid ground in not giving a Get if he found a posek who said he doesn't have to give a Get. Based on the very idea you cited b'sheim Rav Sheinberg ztl.

      Delete
    5. No one says the Halachic right to withhold a Get is the only issue here. You have Chillul Hashem, Sakanos Nefashos, and the destruction of Torah life in Chutz L'Aretz. Klal Yisroel has a long history of Rabbonim and Poskim who would let the Beis HaMikdash be destroyed in order to prevent bringing a Korban with a slight blemish on it. We who don’t want to witness another Churban must fight against those who are destroying Torah, even if they can find some Posek somewhere to support their destruction.

      Delete
  34. Recipients and PublicityNovember 19, 2013 at 2:25 AM

    At this point it is MORE THAN OBVIOUS that the war between the Dodelsons and Weisses is NOT about Torah, Halacha and Yiddishkeit because if they all cared about the Torah, Halacha and Yiddishkeit they would become aware that they must all settle, that they CANNOT wipe each other out or wipe the floor with each other forever with each other, but rather they must AL:L bite the bullet and come to the negotiating table in good faith and bring this matter to closure once and for all!!!

    At this point in time, given all that has transpired and is still going on, it does not matter where and how the settlement will come about. It could be via any Bais Din or Rov or layman. It could come via Ronnie Greenwald or a frum attorney, and there are so many Orthodox attorneys. All that is missing is the goodwill and the desire to settle.

    The Dodelsons must stop treating the Weisses as if the Weisses must be "defeated unconditionally" in a total onslaught, and the Weisses must forgive and forget and realize that they also will not get their way, and CUT THEIR LOSSES once and for all since look who they are dealing with Gital "the lawyer" and her Mom Saki the CEO who functions as if she "owns" the world and forgets that the Fensteins/Weisses also have this view of themselves since they are after all the Gadol Hador Rav Moshe Feinstein's ZT"L's family.

    So this is about EGO, POWER, STUBBORNES, with no evidence of RACHMONES, EIDELKEIT, YIRAS SHOMAYIM and being MA'AVIR AL HAMIDOS.

    Imagine HKB"H during the Yemei HaDin during Aseres Yemei Teshuva and EVERYONE comes before him like this, there is a saneigor and a kateigor everywhere, and yet we beseech Hashem to act with Rachmonus and enter us into the Sefer HaChaim. We don't ask the Hashem to "wipe out a yeshiva" (the Feinstein's Yeshiva of Staten Island) as the Dodelsons threaten to do. One Pesach we celebrate that Hashem FREED us from the chains and the prison of Mitzrayim and we do not pray to hold on to other Jews (especially ex spouses) with CHAINS and make them into AGUNOS as the Weisses are doing because KULANU BNAI CHORIN, we are ALL JEWS MUST BE FREE!!!!!!

    So if the Dodelsons and the Weisses really cared and wanted to, they could settle tomorrow. Many worse conflicts in history have ended with settlements when smart leaders are around. But in this case, it looks like both sides wand to fight it out to the end EVEN IF IT MEANS BRINGING THE WORLD DOWN WITH THEM, and as in nuclear war NEITHER side will win such a war because they will ultimately destroy each other and who knows how many innocent victims will be dragged down with them.

    Nebech, the Hippies had it right the first time when they said (lehavdil): MAKE LOVE, NOT WAR!!!!!! Where is the AHAVAS YISROEL here???????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where are the MIDDOS TOVOS here??????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where is the MA'AVIR AL MIDOSAV and HEVEI DAN ES KOL HA'ADAM LEKAF ZECHUS here ???????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Yidden have rachmonus on each other and on all of Klal Yisroel, settle once and for all. Please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Moshiach is coming. I agree 100% with R&P.

      Delete
  35. First, there are poskim such as R’ Herschel Schachter and R’ Shmuel Kamenetzky who rule that Weiss is obligated according to halacha to give a Get. On the other hand, R' Gestetner's opinion is not considered mainstream - most people going to R' Gestetner are opportunists.

    In regard to Torah values - what is the conflict here between Torah values and Western values?

    Even according to you that Weiss is not obligated to give a Get, he is also not obligated to refuse to give a Get! Halacha is not holding him back from giving a Get!

    Is Weiss’s alleged demand that Gital pay him a monthly alimony a Torah value!?

    Is Weiss’ alleged demand that Gital pay the tuition for Aryeh’s Yeshiva education a Torah value!?
    And at the same time, Weiss is still allegedly insisting that he be the one with exclusive authority to decide which Yeshiva Aryeh goes to!

    Is Weiss’s alleged demand for $350,000 a Torah value? Do you know of a single husband who refused to give a Get because of legal bills?

    Is this attitude in sync with the Torah values displayed by Rabbi Muroff’s actions who returned the $98,000 found in a desk?

    Is Weiss’s alleged demand to not accept the almost 50% custody decreed by the Court a Torah value? Is the Torah preventing him from accepting this arrangement which most divorced husbands would pray for?

    Did you read the biography of R’ Aryeh Levin? Do you think he would have refused to give a Get? And you don’t need to be a tzadik like R’ Aryeh Levin to give a Get, this case is not more complicated than any other case where the husband give a Get.

    To zero in again on the $350,000 – This doesn’t have to be decided in conjunction with the rest of the divorce as this is for legal bills.

    If Weiss cannot obtain a ruling from a Beis Din or the Court declaring that Gital owes him $350,000 then I don’t understand how you can possibly say that it is not extortion/blackmail.

    What kind of a way is it to live life demanding your “rights”. Is that what we are taught?! Everyone would be in the midst of a fight right now with friends, family, and neighbors if they demanded their “rights”.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AZ

      Only a fool would believe that when having a dispute with the Kotlers in a Lakewood Beis-din they will get a fair chance to make their case.

      Due to the above only a few people trust the Kol Kore and therefore even in case that the Psak would be correct it will not accepted so at this point a GET will be assumed by many as POSSUL and future children will be considered MAZEIRIM by many and that is of course not a real solution.

      The desperation that we have seen lately on the Dodelson side may well be a reflection of recognition of the above.

      I am interested to see if you can address this very point.

      Delete
  36. Rav S.R. Hirsch, in his chapter on oppression in Horeb, also clearly denounces those who use their power over others to needlessly restrict their lives. When a woman wants a divorce, and the man refuses to give a get, thus preventing her from ever marrying again or having legitimate Jewish children, he is oppressing her! That is midos sodom, as an article on Torah Musings recently pointed out. The fact that some rabbis are telling the men that they shouldn't give a get -- that just because they (according to one view) don't technically have an obligation to give a get, means that there's no moral problem with them not doing so -- is enabling this oppression. If all rabbis recognized this was wrong then we wouldn't have to worry about ORA's protest tactics and the possibility of a get meusa -- because the get refuser couldn't get any rabbis to support him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A husband needn't divorce his wife against his will.

      Delete
    2. It is immoral and midos sdom to try to force a man to divorce his wife if he doesn't want to divorce his wife.

      Delete
    3. You are right in some cases where husbands have the moral obligation to give a GET but you are wrong to suggest that the husband is not allowed to use his power to force Sholom Bais. In fact, in some cases it is his very duty to do so.

      In the case of Dodelson it appears that she made a decision to break the marriage. This comes with a price of things like custody of the child. She refuses to accept this and Weiss is entitled to use his power to make justice to himself.

      Delete
    4. he wants to divorce his wife. He threatened her with divorce before she even filed for divorce, before the child was born.

      He just wants to extort money with the possibility to refuse a get.

      Delete
    5. He only filed because she walked out. He didn't want to divorce initially.

      Delete
    6. Blatant,

      By the tone of your comments you are implying that you have inside knowledge as to what went on behind closed doors. Why don't you share with everyone what your relation to Gital is.

      Did he divorce her? who was the one that left? extort or protect him from damages that she caused or will cause?

      Delete
    7. "It is immoral and midos sdom to try to force a man to divorce his wife if he doesn't want to divorce his wife."

      This makes no sense -- in such a situation, he's the one being selfish and treating other people cruelly.

      Eize, I have no problem with withholding a get for a few months to try to achieve shalom bayis. What we're talking about in these cases is men permanently withholding it even there's no chance of them getting back together. That's completely different.

      Delete
    8. Keeping your wife and marriage is a mitzvah and Kiddush Hashem. Breaking a marriage is a Chillul Hashem. And trying to force a man to give up his marriage and family is Chillul Hashem and crime of the utmost proportions.

      Delete
    9. Dave, preventing your wife from being able to remarry, even though she has left you and wants nothing to do with you, and condemning any future children she has to a pariah status, that is a kiddush Hashem? And encouraging him to not oppress her and to let her live her own life, that is a chillul Hashem? It's hard to believe anyone could actually believe this.

      Delete
    10. hi Dave, Gital made it very clear in her NY Post article that she was subject to overly controlling behavior and bad treatment, and that her husband refused to let her parents see the baby even hours after the baby was born. she writes "When they asked to come in to see me afterward, Avrohom steadfastly refused to let them into the room. I later found out that he actually manhandled my mom, shoving her back as she tried to walk out of the room."
      so I ask you Dave, when is it OK to force a man to give up his marriage and family, when is that not a chillul hashem? Perhaps you feel a divorce is not OK in the case of Gital, but please tell us all when it is OK to force a man to give a get, just how bad of a husband does he have to be?

      Delete
    11. No one has the right to unilaterally breakup a marriage if there is no just halachic cause to do so. Not even the husband or wife. For one of the spouses to breakup the marriage without just cause is a Chillul Hashem.

      Gital's claims in the shmutz NY Post have no credibility given her animosity against the person she is criticizing.

      Delete
    12. @shlomo you obviously believe every word in that propoganda piece in the NY Post - why would an intelligent person accept one side as the truth?

      Regarding your second issue it is widely discussed in the teshuva literature - some of which is translated on this blog - search for ma'us alei

      Delete
    13. We have two sides here:

      - We have the fact the civil divorce is through and that AMW refuses to give the get unless he receives 350'000 $. This fact is undisputed, and it says a lot about his personality.

      - We have the subjective description of Gital about why she left the marriage.

      Personally, I see no contradication between AMW's publicly known and undisputed attitude ("I want money for my get") and the description of him as a husband in the NY Post article.

      That he did not provide for his family is undisputed. That he sued his wife for child support and alimony is undisputed. That he is ready to destroy his father and uncle's parnassa rather than give a get is undisputed.

      Delete
    14. Blatant, undisputed only in your imagination.

      Delete
    15. RDE believes that Gital should pay 350'000$ to obtain a get. So I suppose he believes that AMW claims 350'000$.

      It is true that we were not in this marriage, so we don't know what happened. But what shocks me is that many comentators on this blog believe that what Gital says in the nypost article is true (that he did not earn money, that he refused a housekeeper she wanted to pay with her money, that he gave her money to a relative who was out of work) and they think it is OK and the word of G-d to act like this!

      Those comments make the torah look really, really bad.

      Delete
  37. Hopeful writes, concerning his non-Jewish friends:

    "I don’t know how to answer the Chillul Hashem created by you and those who hold like you".

    I believe that Rabbi Yair Hoffman articulates a straightforward answer that any reasonable person can understand, whether Jewish or not:

    Writing in the 5 towns Jewish times (@http://5tjt.com/false-accusations-and-the-withholding-of-a-get/) he explains in the name of an unnamed "major" Posek, that:

    "it is permitted to do so [withhold a get] in response to false legal accusations that are still causing a continuing negation of the father’s rights"

    Or...

    "when the wife had vindictively kidnapped the children without his assent and began living far away from the husband".

    Yes, he does note that "neither party is in charge of figuring out which Rabbis or which Bais Din will determine whether the charges are real or false and whether the facts of the vindictive relocation are true"

    However, as he also notes - we don't have such a widely accepted Bais Din today.

    So I would suggest telling your non-Jewish friends that the husband believes he is justified based on false legal accusations & the wife's vindictively kidnapped the children without valid cause.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Hopeful also wrote:

    "According to Rav Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg Zatzal, you are allowed to go to multiple Poskim in search of a Heter.".

    Chas Vasholom!

    The entire concept of searching for a Heter doesn't apply to בין אדם לחבירו, where any "heter" for one side is detrimental to the other side. They're talking about איסור והיתר which is בין אדם למקום.

    ReplyDelete
  39. It is a tremendous Chillul Hashem that men are being pressured or even forced to divorce their wife against their will. This is an abomination and outrage and the greatest kind of Chillul Hashem. Who ever heard of such things in the past? A husband who never hit his wife should be forced to divorce her? There was never such a thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you were familiar with halacha, you would know that there are grounds for divorced besides physical violence.

      Squandering household money is also "Amtala" or grounds for divorce. So is not providing for the family.

      Delete
    2. Joe, you seriously think that the only thing that should merit a husband to divorce his wife is physical violence? You say there was never such a thing but that's the point, thanks g-d now women can be divorced from terrible husbands, the notion that a husband can be verbally abusive with no intention of every changing and that the marriage should still not end is just disgusting. You are way off base here. what twisted reality do you live in where the aguna is the perpetrator and cause of a chillum hashem and (for example) the world's worst husband is the victim as long as he isn't actually violent.

      Delete
    3. hi Joe, what you said is so preposterous that I almost think you're playing devils advocate intentionally and so you want to play the part of someone that you find vile to get a rise out people who actually agree with you. so yes, i do agree with you, the notion that the bar for divorce is set at "physical abuse" is a slap in the face to women that are deeply unhappy living with terrible husbands and want out to find their real zivug.

      Delete
    4. Yet there were no halachic grounds for divorce that Gital had. She just unilaterally walked out and grabbed the child with her.

      Delete
    5. ok Sally, Gital claimed she left because her husband was to controlling and she could not be in such a marriage. In terms of halacha, please tell us where we draw the line. how bad does a husband have to be for the halacha to say he has to give his wife a get? Does the shulchan aruch really discuss something that is actually quite subjective? I'd love to hear from you Sally.

      Delete
    6. Dave is 100% correct. To force someone to breakup his family and divorce his wife against his will is a terrible crime. Marriage CANNOT be broken over trivial matters. Even if one of the spouses wishes to divorce over a trivial matter, he/she has no such right. This is open-and-shut halacha,

      Delete
    7. A wife cannot demand a divorce without "cause" that is recognizable by halacha as giving her the right to demand a divorce even if that is against her husband's wishes.

      In the absence of "cause" that halacha recognizes as giving the right to demand a divorce against his will, she has no basis in halacha to demand a divorce if he doesn't wish to give it and he may choose to remain married to her.

      Delete
    8. wow, i'm feeling like i'm never getting a straight answer. to colombus and true perspective, what defines trivial matters? what "cause" is recognizable by halacha? to get straight to the point, just how bad does a husband have to be to cross that line where he should give a get against his wishes. Please answer that directly. Clearly Gital didn't feel the issues were trivial at all, but apparently you can judge a subjective situation because you have super powers. Do you agree with a previous poster that only physical abuse merits a divorce, and nothing else?

      Delete
    9. Ilana

      The concern expressed in this blog regarding feminists is due fact that they have a general social agenda that finds Halachic view (especially in regards to divorce) difficult to accept. It is alleged that some so called feminist undermine the halacha by stretching the rules permitted under Jewish law (namely pressuring the husband to give the GET) and that is indeed problematic to those who believe that Halacha is superior to Western values.

      Halachically, Women have equal rights in a all/most marriages but breaking the marriage because one does not like the attitude of the husband where the is no abuse may come with a price that Gital is now paying.

      Just by the way, there are a number of rules imposed by Rabeinu Gershom that give women more rights within marriage, These rules are of course accepted.

      Delete
    10. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 20, 2013 at 3:59 AM

      No one has given Ilana a straight answer yet, just lots of obfuscating and beating around the bush...

      Delete
    11. what constitutes non-physical abuse and who makes the judgment if not the victim herself? How does this apply to gital? what rabbi makes the call on it?

      Delete
    12. Some cases where a Get can be halachicly demanded are physical abuse, not supporting the wife, not giving onah, etc. In most cases the husband is entitled to wanting and to be given the chance to correct himself before he is forced to Get. In most other cases a Get is not warranted under halacha even if the wife wants one against her husband's will.

      Delete
    13. @Ilana your question is widely discussed in the teshuva literature. There are many teshuvos that I have translated on this blog. Simply search for ma'us alei.

      Beis din is the place to evaluate this after hearing from both sides.. Furthermore as I have repeated stated - they went to a therapist of her chosing and he said that the marriage could be saved.

      So let me ask you. If the marriage could be saved i.e. provide her with happiness and satisfaction would you agree with her that she should just throw it out and mess up her husband and child? I would agree with you that if the beis din said that he is controlling and abusive and there is no way of fixing it because he refuses to go to therapy or the therapist says he is beyond repair - that they should get divorced. But that is not the case.

      She ran off with the child, she controlled his access to the child, she controlled whether or not they went to therapy and who the therapist was, she controlled whether they would work together to repair the marriage and she decided to bankrupt his family in an effort to prevent them from getting a proper custody arrangment and she has decided to destroy him and his family for not giving in to her demands.

      Delete
    14. "Beis din is the place to evaluate this after hearing from both sides".

      AMW refused to appear before the beit din... Already forgotten?

      Delete
    15. "in an effort to prevent them from getting a proper custody arrangment"

      He HAS a proper custody arrangement, more generous than most!

      Delete
    16. "she has decided to destroy him and his family for not giving in to her demands".

      Why demands? She asked for one thing, a get. Which should be given now that they are divorced anyway.

      Delete
  40. Rav Moshe (YD 4:16 letter beis) also writes that, if the couple are not living together as husband and wife and don't want to continue to do so, neither is allowed strand ("l'agen") the other over financial claims.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You only quoted part of the teshuva - please add the rest of what he said!

      Delete
    2. Below (in multiple posts to respect Bloggers limits) are the full text of the cited tshuvah and my translation. Also EH 4:3 in full with my translation, and the beginning and end of EH 1:135 discussing a get done by a Conservative rabbi, again with my translation. I contend that these tshuvot make R. Moshe's attitude toward withholding a get for financial leverage quite clear.


      שו"ת אגרות משה יורה דעה חלק ד סימן טו

      ב. איש ואשה שאין שלום בית ביניהם, והאשה מסרבת לבא לב"ד לקבל גט מחמת תביעות ממון

      ובדבר איש ואשה שזה הרבה שנים שליכא שלום בית, וכבר שנה וחצי דרים במקומות מופרדים, וכבר ישבו ב"ד חשוב ולא עלה בידם לעשות שלום ביניהם. וראינו גילוי דעת חתום מהב"ד שלא הועיל כל השתדלותם לעשות שלום. וכנראה מזה שהב"ד סובר שא"א לעשות שלום ביניהם. אז מדין התורה באופן כזה מוכרחין להתגרש ואין רשות לשום צד לעגן, לא הבעל את אשתו ולא האשה את הבעל, בשום עיכוב מצד תביעת ממון. אלא צריכים לילך לפני ב"ד לסדר התביעות בענייני ממון ולסדר נתינת וקבלת הגט. ואם האשה תסרב לבוא לב"ד, יהיה הרשות להב"ד ליתן להבעל היתר של מאה רבנים בהשלשת גט והשלשת סך ממון הגון שיראו
      A husband and wife where there is no peace between them and the woman refuses to come to beit din to receive a get because of a monetary claim.
      In the matter of the husband and wife who, for many years have not had domestic peace, and for a year and a half they have lived separately and a noted beit din has sat but been unable to establish peace between them. And we have seen their written report that there efforts have failed to produce peace between them. From this it seems the beit din despairs of restoring peace. Then by Torah law they are required to divorce and neither side has permission to strand (l'agen) the other, neither the husband to the wife nor vice versa, with any obstacle because of a monetary claim. Rather they must come to beit din to resolve the monetary issues and to arrange for the get to be given and received. And if the wife refuses to come to beit din then the beit din may arrange aheter me'ah rabbonim with the husband depositing a valid get and whatever sum of money the beit din rules proper.

      Delete
    3. שו"ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק ד סימן ג

      יסור להתיר חרם דרגמ"ה =דרבינו גרשום מאור הגולה= בלא השלשת גט כשר אפילו אם יש לבעל תביעת ממון על האשה.

      ח' תשרי תשל"ט. למרנן ורבנן ה' עליהם יחיו.

      הנה כבר מפורסם דעתי שהיתר דמאה רבנים אף במורדת הוא דוקא בהשלשת גט כשר אשר בכל זמן שתרצה האשה לקבל גט תוכל לבא ולקבל הגט ולהיות מותרת לעלמא, אפילו אם יש להבעל עליה תביעות ממון, כי ח"ו שהגאון רגמ"ה יתקן דבר תקלה לעגן בת ישראל איזו שהיא, ואף באופן שודאי חטפה משל בעלה איזה סך ממון לא תיקן ושום ב"ד דגאונים לא תיקנו ולא יתקנו באופן שיוכל הבעל לעגנה לגמרי או עד שתתן לו כמה שירצה, ובשביל עניני גיבוי ממון לא תיקנו ולא יתקנו שום תקנות שיהא ביד הבעל כח בעצמו לעשות כרצונו ולעגנה, וכשלא נעשה כן אין ההיתר של הב"ד שהתירו כלום אף אם יחתמו ע"ז אלף רבנים ויותר, ויש על הבעל איסור וחרם דרגמ"ה מלישא אשה אחרת אם לא יגרשנה קודם בגט כשר, ואני חתמתי רק שיתירו להבעל כדין דהוא אחר שישליש גט כשר שתוכל לקבלו בכל עת שתרצה, וכן אמרתי גם בעובדא זו ביחוד לקרובי הבעל שלא שייך שום היתר בלא השלשת גט כשר שתוכל לקבלו בלא שום עיכובים, וע"ז באתי על החתום למען האמת שלא יעותו דיני התורה.

      משה פיינשטיין
      The Prohibition to Issue a heter Meah Rabbonim without Depositing a Kosher Get even when the Husban Has a Moneraty Claim
      8 Tishrei 5739
      My opinion is already well known that a heter me'ah rabbonim , even in the case of a rebellious wife, is only when the husband deposits a valid get that is available any time the woman is willing to accept it and she will be permitted to remarry, even if the husband has a financial claim; God forbid that Rabbeinu gershom, Light of the Exile, would establish a problem where a Jewish woman can be made an agunah, even if she definitely grabbed a sum of money from him. He didn't establish that, nor did any beit din of Gaonim, nor would they establish that the husband could strand her completely or until she gives him what he wants. To collect money no on established or would establish that the husband shall have the power to do as he wishes and strand his wife. And if it not be done [i.e. depositing a kosher get] a heter me'ah rabbonim would be invalid even if 1000 rabbonim would sign it. And the husband is subject to the Cherem if he remarries without depositing a get. And I sign that they can only permit him to remarry after he deposits a kosher get that she can accept at anytime she is willing. So I have said in this case to my relative (or the relatives of, the Hebrew is ambiguous) the husband that no heter is applicable without depositing a kosher get that she can accept with no obstacles. And on this I sign for the sake of truth and to see that the laws of the Torah are not twisted. Moshe Feinstein.
      שו"ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק א סימן קלה

      Delete

    4. בענין גט שחתום עליו אחד מהעדים שהי' איזה זמן מתלמידי הסעמינאר הקאנסערוואטיוון /סמינר הקונסרבטיבים/ וגם רב בביהכ"נ שלהם מע"כ ידידי הנכבד הרה"ג ר' דוד האלענדער שליט"א.

      בדבר הגט אשר סדרו רבאי שלמד איזה זמן אצל סעמינאר הקאנסערוואטיוון וגם הוא רבאי בביהכ"נ קאנסערוואטיווי והוא גם חתום בעד על הגט וגט אחר א"א להשיג מהבעל כי הוא רוצה לעגנה רק כשיתנו לו סך גדול מאד שאין ביד האשה ליתן וטיבו ומעשיו של הרבאי זה לא ידוע אך כת"ר דבר עמו בעצמו להודע ממעשיו ואמר לו כי הוא מתפלל ומניח תפילין בכל יום ושומר שבת ונזהר ממאכלות אסורות אבל מזלזל באיסור הוצאה בשבת ומאחרים לא נשמע כלום אודותו מה טיבו.
      (Here I omit the technical discussion of the status f the rabbi and the get)

      וכיון שהוא רק חשש פסול מדרבנן סמכתי במקום עגון ע"מ שבארתי שיותר נוטה שלא נפסל הרבאי עדין לעדות. ולכן מותרת האשה להנשא. והסכים לזה גם הגרי"א הענקין שליט"א. ידידו מוקירו, משה פיינש

      IמIn the matter of the Get One of Whose Witnesses was for a period of Time a Student in the Conservative Seminary and is the Rabbi of a Conservative Temple. From the honorable Rabbi David Hollander
      In the matter of the get which was arranged by a rabbi who had been a student at the Conservative Seminary and is a Conservative rabbi, and he also signed as a witness. And it is impossible to arrange another get from the husband as he wishes to keep her an agunah unless she pays him an impossibly large sum. And your honor has spoken to him regarding his practice and he says he prays and wears tefillin daily and keeps Shabbat even if he is careless about carrying....
      [I omit the technical analysis of whether the rabbi is a disqualified witness etc.]

      And since it is only a suspision of a rabbinic disqualification I rely n a case of an Aguna on that which I explained above that it one should not yet disqualify the rabbi as a witness. And therefore the woman is permitted to remarry. And R. Y.E. Henkin agrees. Yours, etc. Moshe Feinstein

      Delete
    5. 4:3 regarding heter meah rabbonim is not relevant as I have discussed before because this case is not using a heter meah rabbonim.

      Regarding 4:15

      "Then by Torah law they are required to divorce and neither side has permission to strand (l'agen) the other, neither the husband to the wife nor vice versa, with any obstacle because of a monetary claim. Rather they must come to beit din to resolve the monetary issues and to arrange for the get to be given and received. And if the wife refuses to come to beit din then the beit din may arrange aheter me'ah rabbonim with the husband depositing a valid get and whatever sum of money the beit din rules proper".

      Rav Moshe is saying that in such a case they most go to beis din to resolve the issue. The husband can't say he refuses to go to beis din unless she pays the money first.

      Thus it is not relevant in our case where they can't agree which beis din to go to.

      your third case is not relevant to the question

      Delete
    6. As I have said before, I am commenting in general rather than about this specific case (or any other case I know about only from the competing one-sided stories on the web).

      But I think you err in focusing narrowly on the specific ruling of each case rather than looking at the language of the tshuvot to see how Rav Moshe views withholding a get to exact money. It is for that reason I think the third tshuva is relevant--it shows how far Rav Moshe was willing to go to avoid subjecting the wife to such demands.

      Delete
    7. How far was that? If he considered that the get was good and it was only hiddur mitzva to get another get it is considerably different that he held that really the get was posul but since there is one view that permitts it and this is an emergency situation. Which is it?

      What we are looking for is an explicit condemnation of asking for money to give the get - which is what Gital's supporters are screaming is against halacha and G-d's will. 4:15 is the closest to that but then he adds that therefore they should go to a beis din and settle the money issue and give a get.

      In other words he is condemning refusing to go to beis din until she pays. But going to beis din with a demand for money is not being condemned.

      Delete
    8. Why would he condemn trying to hash out the financials in BD?
      I'm also not clear how you're reading anything other than:
      1) one shouldn't be m'agen over money.
      2) even when the wife is wrong, the HMR specifically requires that a GET be available to her.
      He said both of those בפירוש.
      How are you arriving that a husband should NOT give a get unless and until the wife comes to BD?

      Delete
    9. 1) Actually I think the strongest language is in the EH tshuva, about it being inconceivable that a proper beit din would in any way permit the husband to remarry while he was withholding a get over even a clear financial obligation ("she certainly stole some of his money".) Of course he doesn't condemn going to beis din with a financial claim--what else does one do with a financial claim? That doesn't mean it is acceptable to withhold a get until the wife adjudicates a financial claim in the husband's preferred beit din.

      2) Of course if R. Moshe felt the get in the last tshuvah were absolutely possul, he wouldn't have permitted her to remarry. On the other hand I am sure you know better than I that, had the husband in that case only wanted reimbursement for the sofer's fee, R. Moshe would have absolutely required a second get. Thus the word "adayin" in the penultimate sentence. And while I didn't want to post and translate the whole tshuva because that one is long and technical, it seems clear to me from reading it that Rav Moshe is treating this as a b'dieved situation because she will otherwise be an aguna.

      Delete
    10. 1) The EH teshuva is specifically referring to heter meah rabbonim.

      2) Don't see derive anything from that teshuva. If the get is in fact kosher but there are issues that people my be bothered by - so she should have a 2nd get. But she doesn't have to pay a large sum for that perfect get.

      Delete
    11. The teshuva is referring to heter meah rabonon,

      However it is clear to any objective person that the reason R Moshe holds why heter meah rabonon can not be used to leverage a get - is because that is considered morally wrong to use igun - her inability to remarry - as leverage. - bob

      Delete
    12. Yes, the EH tshuvah is dealing with a case of heter me'ah rabbonim. So what? I think you are taking an excessively narrow, legalistic view. If R. Moshe thinks it is OK to use a get for financial leverage in general, why does he think it inconceivable that Rabbeinu Gershom or any other beit din would arrange for the husband to preserve that leverage while getting a heter me'ah rabbonim.? And in the YD tshuvah he seems pretty strong that neither party can avoid a get to press a financial claim.

      As to point 2) one of the objections he raises and says can be overcome is his own ruling that it does not require haggadas eidus to render an apikorus possul l'eidus. So I think it is pretty clear (to me, at least) that because it is a case of Igun he is going beyond where he would normally go.

      Furthermore, it would seem axiomatic that both divorcing spouses remain required to treat each other within the Torah's requirement of "Loving thy neighbor as thyself" which would seem to preclude using either access to the children or a get (or acceptance of a get) as leverage for financial claims.

      It would similarly seem axiomatic that if the husband no longer wishes to fulfill his obligation of Onah, he must give a get.

      Delete
  41. Most of the people who go to rabbi gestetner are opportunists. AZ you don't know what you are talking about. All the major poskim hold like Rabbi gestetner. Or far lore accurately rabbi gestetner holds like all the major poskim. see the kol \koreh of the 70 rabbis.

    It is only the corrupt American rabbis who are feminists, family friends, in the bais din business who have completely perverted halocho who hold otherwise completely baselessly.

    I know of at least one other person who refuses to give a get voluntarily because of legal fees but was forced to give a get by the corrupt NY State laws. he told the dayan he was only giving the get to stop litigation in arko'oys and the dayan shouted at him. This is your corrupt American ways.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately there are many more cases similar to the case you mentioned and similar to R. Weiss's case where women destroy their children's relationship with their fathers, while destroying the fathers financially in non-Jewish courts, and then force a PASUL GET.

      Hershel Schachter's feminist YU ORA (OH-RAH) henchmen and various corrupt rabbis are aiding and abetting these evil women while conducting huge PR campaigns to transform these women into victims of their husbands.

      These women skillfully playing the fake "agunah" card with the help of their YU ORA handlers. A really sickening perversion of HALACHA and Torah ethics.

      Delete
    2. wow, you know what "facts" and "emesleyaacov", i have an idea, why don't we call the husband get refusers the agunim, those poor husband, they deserve our sympathy, all they want is to not afford their wives who already left them the opportunity to marry again, enough of these terrible women trying to obtain a get, we know who the real victims are right? and those Rabbis, oy vey, only fools think that Rabbis in power are supposed to be a voice for voiceless, when they should really be advocating for the Agunim. we can't let these crazy women think they can ever be released from their marriages w/o giving up their "halachic" obligations (whatever that means).

      Delete
    3. what is wrong if a Rabbi is a feminist? Who should advocate for women's rights in a public forum, women? For modesty reasons this is not feasible. Rabbis are the only ones who can step up to the plate and advocate for women in a meaningful manner. Or would you rather women's voices not be heard in society by anyone?

      Delete
    4. Facts,

      Where is the corruption please? The fact that the Dayan shouted at him? Or the fact that the husband was basically saying, "I am a vindictive menuval who would be m'agen her forever if the law wasn't in place"?

      The longer you continue, the more twisted you sound. The marriage in the case you mention was long over. In order to secure the civil divorce (which he obviously wanted), he needed to give a get. So he decided to be a Peh Tzaddik and do an end run around Bais din. Yeah, tell them what they don't want to hear. That'll fix her.

      Please.

      Delete
    5. The Get is he gave while announcing he is only doing so due to NY State law is a Get Me'usa.

      Delete
  42. Moshe Shevach, Monsey NYNovember 19, 2013 at 7:27 PM

    The Weiss will Never Get a Fair Din Torah Under The Kotler Regime in Lakewood, as Reb Malkiel Uncle R' Gavriel Finkel Heads The Bais Din Vaad Hadayonim which Operates Under The auspecies of BMG, The Kotlers and Bursztyns Have Used Their Uncle Gavriel Finkels Bais Din Countless Times To Obtain "Heter Arkous" and Psak Dinim for their own Personal Use From Their Uncle

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Moshe, please let us all know loud and clear who is the victim here, the aguna or the guy that won't give her a get. to what extent do you care that if he gave her the get years ago when their marriage was done, she could have already remarried. to what extent do you care about your fellow Jewish sisters?

      Delete
    2. The point that you raise in in fact the source of the problem, It is one thing to agree to a divorce with a regular family but if you deal with these people the understandably it far more complicated.

      Delete
    3. Huh? The Dodelson's didnt go to a Lakewood Beis Din. They went to Machon Lehora'a in Monsey - no friend of the Kotlers.

      Delete
  43. Prod gitins are not Kosher according to Halacha. Rambam explains the logic behind a koifin oso ad sheyomar rotze ani. A yid truly wants to be tzayes ledina, ela seor shebeiso meakev. A mesarev still is in control whether to give or not to give depending how much pain he is willing and able to tolerate. Prods have been proven to kill, and nowhere is there a heter to leayem lehorgo in kfiyas haget, even if there has been a psak of a Kosher beis din lechiyuve. The nature of Prods, is same as an exorcism, threatening to beat out the Satan, except that you DO threaten to kill, it IS liable to kill, electric prods that is used to move two ton Bulls Kills their mighty resistance, even the Satan himself cannot withstand 5,000 electric Volt shocks , let alone the yetzer Tov, so how would you know that there is any rotzon left altogether in a human being. If you don't believe me, try it on m. epstein and we will see how much rotzon he has left to resist. Same applies to waterboarding, meayem lehorgo ysv. Shaming, defaming, in ambush and spilling one's blood in front of the world rachmono lesheizvei, is a runner up of Kfiyas prod, and the prominent poskim declare the children of such PRODucts as mamzerim. For those attempting to explain away, that for all practical purposes the marriage is over, but the question still remains of who is the cause of all this. The Shulchan oruch says, Poschin beSholom, that means an unbiased one for that matter. Dictating terms as to whom, and limiting the visits as to four, is not entering with an open mind, is not mesiach lefi tumoi, and denying a fair chance, is dictating and predicting the outcome, is equivalent to writing off a DNR of which becomes DOA. Don't you see that vahavoas sholom ,,, uvein ish leishto is elu dvarim shein lohem shiur. And this is all because nosno einaho bidvarim acherim, kegon a career, before the best interest of her child or a united family, and nothing personal. That is not one of the reasons listed to qualify for a get. All these trickeries to prove her case that it is like beating a dead horse, she herself is responsible to snuff out the life of what's been left. It reminds me of the town's Firefighter that wanted to become a Hero, he started the fire and was always the first to be on the scene to distinguish. true story Here is another true story, of this Hospital nurse that was injecting fatal substance to many patients, and when the STAT alarm was sounded, he always came running, mosnov chagurim, umaklo beyodo equipped with the antidote. He was always the HERO, until he got caught, with the only difference that she burned it all, and left the patient to expire R'L'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. let's keep this simple Emes. Let me ask you something in general, how bad does a husband have to be in order that halachically he has to give his wife a get? In this specific instance, Gital left him because she felt he was treating her so badly, she had to get out of the house and the marriage but you seem to feel that she did something wrong. Please share your thoughts on when a get is really necessary. Why do you feel that Gital is not the victim? To what extent can an aguna advocate for herself to get a get?

      Delete
    2. Avrohom Meir did not do anything during their marriage that gave Gital the halachic right to demand a Get.

      Delete
    3. Ben Torah, I guess it's all settled then. But seriously, how do you know? Did you have a hidden camera in their residence? Are you one of those people that draws the line only with physical abuse? Just curious on your thoughts.

      Delete
  44. The only reason the dayan shouted at him is because he saw the $775 slipping away. He has subsequently admitted he shouldn't have written the get. He was even in possession of a seruv against this woman but did not care. Like you the facts are an inconvenient truth to be ignored. This woman had gone to arko"oys was oyver not just mesirah but repeated false molestation allegations and no she is not the victim nor is she an agunah. If rav pam paskened this who was a lot more eidel than you biyonim we will defer to him and not to you. This woman is not entitled to a get because she was in arko"oys whether you like it or not until she gets the h-ll out of arko"oys.

    ReplyDelete
  45. To all the feminists on this site what the agunim want is halachik justice, boys to the father, no arko"oys, no fake orders of protection, no bankruptcy by being made to pay huge sums over to their exes which prevent them from moving on and fairness. As long as they dont get this these fake agunahs can scream and shout till high heavens but the ball is in their court to fix up

    Stop misquoting a Rambam which is not l'halocho anyway. It only applies when there is a mitzvah l'garesh not when a woman is a moredes buay torturing her husband and or in arko"oys. You MO feminists have invented your own religion anyway so dispense with the get.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What exactly does "boys to father" mean?

      Delete
  46. facts, get your facts straight. Are you seriously saying that women have the power to bankrupt the guys into giving them gets? It's usually just the opposite. What you're saying doesn't make sense.

    ReplyDelete
  47. if anyone out there could tell me where it says anywhere in halacha if a person is misariv to din you can punish his father or uncle

    ReplyDelete
  48. Shandel are you serious? you clearly know nothing about the couet system. It is not my job to enlighten you. Years of fake litigatiob calling someone to court virtually once a month can easily bankrupt someone. Now please take your ignorant views elsewhere

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yeah I'm serious. A large component of the Agunah crises is men extorting their wives for money in exchange for a get.

      Delete
  49. @ dave the raveNovember 20, 2013 at 5:24 AMNovember 20, 2013 at 3:33 PM

    You can find it in Masechet Mendel Epstein, Perek keitzad PRODin. It states that haKessef ya'aneh as hakol. Ya'ane tartei mashma as "Vayaneho", ad sheyomer rotze ani or ad shetetze nishmoso. Veim timtzo lomar, veholy ato marbeh mamzerim b'Yosroel, lo koshe, hakessef metaher mamzerim. You just make up mob rules as necessary, kmo shekosuv, kol dealim gvar, Kappish.

    ReplyDelete
  50. MO "agunah" activists - Please Read:

    Facts' comment above stated "what the agunim want is halachik justice" - This critical point is completely ignored by the MO feminists who constantly scream "give a GET, give a GET".

    Screaming "give a GET" to "agunim", ie Jewish men who are financially crippled by feminist family courts, while these "agunim" are unable to get remarried and are denied access to their children, is gross feminist hypocrisy and injustice.

    To honestly resolve Jewish divorce disputes, instead of masquerading these disputes as a fake "agunah" problem, the primary goal must be to promote TZEDEK (justice) principles as defined by the Torah, not by feminism.

    If MO "agunah" activists refuse to accept Torah justice principles, then these activists have absolutely no right to invoke Torah morality when they're demanding that a GET be given or accepted.

    Basic Torah divorce justice principles:

    1. Torah justice rejects feminist divorce on demand. A husband/wife cannot force a divorce on demand from their spouse for any superficial, emotional based reasons such as "I don't like my spouse" (MOUS ALI).

    2. A Jewish parent has a right to regular access and parenting time with their child.

    3. A Jewish father who is denied access to his child has every right to withhold a GET until he obtains secure access to his child that cannot be easily removed in family court.

    4. In the event both spouses do seek an eventual divorce, the divorce terms must be based on Torah law not on feminist police state law. Torah justice rejects the gross injustices of family courts including alimony payments, imputed income, debtor's prison, high child support payments, restraining orders and jail for non-violent spouses, etc.

    5. An "agun", ie a Jewish father who has been financially crippled in family court has every right to withhold a GET until he is financially able to remarry and move on with his life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. EmesLeYakov:

      I just wanted to say concerning this last post of yours: I agree!

      I couldn't post much recently, but wanted to state unequivocally that I'm in your corner on this - as many other readers of this blog obviously also are.

      This specific story is quite complex, and I think that although there have been 100's of comments on this sad story, some important issues still haven't been mentioned or discussed here, to the best of my knowledge:

      Example: I didn't see anyone pick up on what seems to be a core Halachic dispute here: Mechon Lehoyroa (as per the docs on the setgitalfree website) seems to believe that Weiss needed to first send a Hazmana from Bais Din in order heter to go to secular court, and that he misrepresented the Debretziner Rav's opinion on the matter.

      It's fair to say that others would say that the women's taking away the child + the Bais Din's inability to enforce it's decision would be enough heter, as per עביד איניש דינא לנפשי' which R' Hoffman quotes from the unnamed major posek.

      Another important omission: The subtle interplay of deep feelings of invalidation and unfairness that BOTH Gittel and Avrohom Meyer probably felt
      early on, and the ensuing fiasco. Fair to say that he felt "like a Shmatta", because she didn't seem to be מחשיב his learning or his opinions, and she felt stifled because of her perception of unfairness in the "system". The resolution for such things is COMMUNICATION, as per הוכיח תוכיח את עמיתך. Nobody from the outside can ever know exactly why that didn't happen & if it did, why it broke down...

      In any case, I strongly believe that the concept of EMES (part of your sn and so dear to the foundation of our religion) requires that Halachic fact be seperated from Halachic fiction....

      So, Thanks again for doing so...

      Delete
    2. Zeroing in on the process the court probably used in awarding custody to Gittel vs. AM, here's a link to an excellent presentation that Dr. Tana Dineen gave at the 36th Annual Conference of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

      She basically demolishes the process HOW courts decide who gets custody.


      link: http://www.tanadineen.com/writer/writings/FamilyLaw.html

      After reading what she says, it's no wonder Weiss lost custody. Personally, I think he made a big mistake in taking it to the courts - with a little research he could of suspected that he probably wouldn't get a fair hearing. Perhaps he recognized that he had no other choice.


      That answers what many posters basically say that he went to court and lost... what does he want?

      He probably wants common sense fairness - and even based on secular guidelines I dont think that's happened

      Delete
    3. Emes,

      It's clear you believe wholeheartedly in what you're saying. A couple questions:

      This one goes to points 1,2, and 3 above: No one is in disagreement, that both parents need to be a key part of a child's life. However, is there any point in your mind where one has to consider that יצא שכרו בהפסדו? How many years of a protracted battle -- with children in the middle -- will render your attempts at evening the playing field counterproductive? Wouldn't it be better to move forward, even if it isn't even, and try to swap quantity time wih the kids with quality time?
      As to point 4, I just don't see how you can try to impose Torah law on a woman who has (for example) been in a marriage for 20 years, where cars and homes were bought....and you are prepared to throw her out on the street with a $7000 Kesuba? How does that appeal to anyone's elemental sense of ישרות?
      Let's up the Kesuba value to 1.5 million dollars, and then maybe there's something to discuss.
      Last question: as to point 5, if he has already been financially crippled, is it worth becoming emotionally crippled too, via a protracted, years-long battle that destroys your מנוחת הנפש and probably devastates the kids?
      It seems that your strategy, while understandable, will cause much more damage to the people important to the husband: himself and the kids.
      Daniel

      Delete
    4. Weiss has been financially crippled? By what, the court that denied his request for alimony payments so that he can continue learning w/o having to concern himself with earning a living?

      Delete
    5. Yitz,
      Before you go there, let's deal with the abstract first. Some men might be financially crippled. Is it worth it for them to cripple themselves emotionally too, by dragging themselves through a years long battle over a get?

      Delete
    6. @Daniel - "Wouldn't it be better to move forward" - These types of questions about "moving forward" (which of course means giving the wife a GET before every is settled AL PI HALACHA) naively ignore some fundamental issues such as:

      - Many people don't realize that due to the vicious anti-father campaigns orchestrated by the YU ORA organization, the husbands view their wives as an implacable foe and seek to maximize their protection from harm that may occur after any GET is given.
      - It appears that due to the vicious harassment campaign orchestrated against the husband, any GET given now will be declared a GET MEUSA by Chareidi POSKIM.
      - So in fact Hershel Schachter's YU ORA organization should be held responsible for Gital's continued difficulty in obtaining a valid GET.
      - No one has the right to tell another man to concede his parenting rights to his child. Its the father's right to decide if he wants to pursue his valid halachic rights to his child, even if a long conflict is required.
      - Even if there was a court order in the Weiss case, if Weiss has valid reason to believe that his wife may try to eliminate his parenting rights after a GET is given, I cannot blame him for insisting on the maximum legal protections possible.

      Delete
    7. Emes,

      A person who is a crime victim could also effectively seclude themselves in their home, and bolt the doors with 15 deadbolts. You haven't answered my question: Even if you are victimized, at what point are your efforts at preventing further victimization causing more harm than good?

      You obviously have a major bone to pick with the "ORA goons" you bring up in every single comment. It's hard to have a regular conversation on the issues, when you seem so singleminded in venting your fury against these people, whoever they are.

      I would imagine that Gital can go to non-chareidi Poskim to get married if, as you say, there will be a sector that will refuse to acknowledge the validity of her GET. I don't think anyone really cares if some people want to refuse to marry others.....that is happening all over the orthodox world today anyway.

      I wasn't conceding anyone else's parenting rights. But my experience is such that moving forward and developing quality time with the kids most definitely helps the children....who, I would assume, would be at the top of the father's priority list (especially if their mother is a Class A מכשפה). By choosing the road of a protracted and ugly conflict, where everyone is slinging mud and/or going to media and blogs, the father is essentially choosing revenge over the welfare of the children.

      IOW, most of us have learned along the way: "Life ain't fair; now deal with it."

      Daniel

      Delete
    8. If custody was established through reprehensible behavior such as kidnapping, it is reasonable to believe that the reprehensible behavior would further escalate if Weiss were to give in. Making concessions and trying to appease aggressors generally results not in peace but if further aggression.

      Delete
    9. But it is yashrus for Weiss to out his son to bed or say modeh ani with him in the morning four times per month?

      Delete
  51. Emes thanks. When you have feminist ignoramuses like shayndel claiming courts cant bankrupt you when this is precisely one of weiss main taaynes then we are living in lala land. Even the NY appellate division recognizes this IN THEORY. In practice unless the male is in court against the Rockefellers the feminist courts fail to apply this and only award legal costs to women. Another example of the injustices perpetrated against men in arko"oys.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Menachem response to Emes LeYaacovNovember 20, 2013 at 6:07 PM

    To Emes LeYaacov, You Have No Idea How Many Men In Lakewood Have Been Arrested and Locked Up On These Rediculous Restraining Orders That The Ocean County Family Courts Hand Out Like Free Lolly pops. In The State of NJ there need not be any Violence or a Threat of Violence to Be catogerized Domestic Violence, "Verbal Harrassment" falls under The Domestic Violence clause and is also considered 'Domestic Violence"
    Verbal Harrassment itself is also Misused as Many Frum Women in Lakewood have Obtained Restraining orders On Their Husband on Simple Arguments and Exchange of Heated Words and Petty Insults, Claiming "Harrassment". and Than Proceded To Use The Restraining Order as a Tool of Revenge To Have Their Husbands Humiliated By having Them To Arrested Branded as Criminals and Taking away Custody and Visitation Rights

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm aware that states like NJ have extremely liberal DV laws that allow evil women to toss their husbands out of the house without any proof that the wife is in any danger.

      MESIRAH of course is one of the worst transgressions possible - the Chafetz Chaim states in Chpt. 3, Avavas Chesed that a MOSER is excluded from KLAL YISRAEL.

      Where are the Lakewood "Gadolim" while this vicious MESIRAH is going on?

      Delete
  53. Waxman his family have been dealt a huge financial blow. Are you now arguing with mitziyus? If you have a spare 350 grand rhen you can solve the case. You may or may not be entitled to your views that she deserves a get. But to claim that extreme financial difficulties have not been the consequences of this litigation is totally laughable. It would take AM 50 years to repay his family. Please cut totally absurd claims out. Some of us are trying to have an intelligent conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  54. BMG is where all the Money and Power is ConcentratedNovember 20, 2013 at 6:51 PM

    Mechon Lehorah is Not Just a Beis Din It is a Fully Staffed Kollel and Yeshiva Dependent on The Money of Many Rich Donors and The Good Will of The Big Players in The Frum World Today Like BMG and Company.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Menachem from Lakewood on the Restraining Order Hefker VeltNovember 20, 2013 at 7:00 PM

    I Personally Know of a Number of Frum Men In Lakewood who were arrested over the past few years on these Restraining orders because the Wife called The Police To Say That She Saw The Husband Drive Down The Block, Or Said Hello To one of The Children. The Police Dont ask Questions or Verify if The Allegations are True or Not They Immediatly Come To The Husbands home or Place of Work Hand Cuff him and Haul Him Off To The County Jail For Processing. A Second Violation of a Restraining Order Results in a Mandatory Minimum 30 Day Jail Sentence

    ReplyDelete
  56. Major Tom to Ms. ilana Yellow Submarine ANovember 20, 2013 at 11:05 PM

    -I hold in the shulchan aruch. Now i ask you, how is the amount of money (350k ?) derived based on what is written in the shulchan aruch?

    * See Breishis 25:6 velivnei hapilagshim asher leaAvraham (see Rashi zu hagar) nosan matonos vayshalechem meal Yitzchok beno beodenu chay kedmo el eretz kedem. In spite there was good reason to send her on her way for smoking to avodo zoro, he still pacified her with compensation, when the wife at hand, never had justifiable cause to part ways and did cause irreparable damage, al achat kama vekama. Is Torah good enough for you?

    * Requesting to light candles his mothers way, is a far cry from control, if she cannot please on such a minor issue, imagine when it comes to something truly serious, such as if the house is engulfed in flames, rather than trying to put out the fire, you add more fuel to the fire.

    * See Breishis 24:67, " Vayvieho Yitzchak ho'ohelo Sarah imo vayikach et Rivkah vathi lo leisha VAYE'EHOVEHO, vayinochem Yitzchak acharei imo", See Rashi, shekol zman shSarah kayemet haya ner doluk merev shabbat lerev shabbat ubrocho metzuyo...umishemeso paskah, ukeshba'at Rivkah chozru! If such a minor thing as seeing his mothers candlel ighting, brought Yitzchok to Love and to be consoled, is that such a big price to pay? Which woman in her right mind would exchange such a blessed opportunity for Doodaim to buy her husbands love, bite the nose in spite your face, just to prove who is BOSS? Now that my dear, was retzon Ba'ala, only to forfeit, nebach- on her very FIRST Shabbos. Is that so much to ask? You are creating a mountain from a mole hill. Is this her Attorney wannabe logic of command and control? Is this the nightmare picture of her marriage in the NY ComPoste. Indeed, shame on her! And from this, you leapfrog to beating a wife? You, are for sure the mother of all Attorneys wannabe, blessed with Solompn's wisdom. Yerachem hamrachem!

    * Yes, she did want to visit a marriage counselor, provided on her turf, on her terms, permitting four strikes n out, does she also get to dictate what he should advise or what he can say? Who is in control? Or better yet, who is Out of control and out of order? A marriage counselor, you and her, will never be either. Maybe just a devils advocate, if you can succeed.

    -In terms of halacha, please tell us where we draw the line. how bad does a husband have to be for the halacha to say he has to give his wife a get? Does the shulchan aruch really discuss something that is actually quite subjective? I'd love to hear from you Sally.

    * Ha! And you claim, " I hold in the shulchan aruch." Ilana dear, you first must be honest with yourself before you ask on others. "Kshot atzmech", is in order.
    In addition, this is only speculative, and I firmly believe that "Maus olay", she had no clue what it means or how you eat it. These are the feminist ra bais, ORA, that coach a MOREDES to allege and disseminate. You cross the bridge when you get there, and say the truth, and nothing but the truth, YOU don't need to hoard weapons of mass destruction in your back pocket handy at moments notice.

    * Furthermore, see Breishis 1:27, Vayivro E' es ho'odom, later in B. 2:18 ... Eese lo Ezer, to complement and to suplement, B. 3:16, vehu yimshol bach. You can see the order of hierarchy, and all genders are not created equal, some are born more equal. Don't try to outsmart the Ribono shel Olam. Please excuse my french, but you seem to have the butch femme problem with authority, power, super power, equality, hate men with a passion,

    ReplyDelete
  57. Major Tom to Ms. ilana Yellow Submarine BNovember 20, 2013 at 11:08 PM

    here are some of your own excerpts, .Now it's time for you to chew on that.
    ********************
    -all men that keep their wives chained. *(what about, whip, shackles n the works)
    -the truth that our religion can be so sexist against woman not by design but because of some men and their decisions?

    * Adam's Rib, Adam's Apple, Designed by who? That is the extent your Love of Torah /Religion / Shulchan Aruch? Afra lepumech!

    -Let the world know what some disgusting men are doing to their wives, I don't care. We let it happen and now we reap what we sow as the world sees that what power a man can have over his wife in our religion.
    -the only reason the get is not being given is because the man wants to control his wife,
    -and you seriously think g-d commands that a woman be in a terrible marriage.

    * Do you really believe in g-d, do you think he is fair? Huh?

    -hi Daas Torah, our disagreement is NOT about halacha after all, it's about something else ...
    She makes it VERY clear that he was very controlling
    -Avrohom said, “I can’t give you a get — how else would I control you?”

    * On information and belief, My understanding is, she took this completely out of context. Since she was so consumed with her perceived concept as if being controlled, AM handed her, her own logic, with tounge in cheek, and that's where therapy can help both. This was deliberately twisted around, as if meant as said.

    -at least now you can understand i'm not just ranting and raving, i'm quoting the agunah.
    * Yes, but with the wrong interpretation, same as hers. Brilliant, Ms. Brainstein.

    -what is wrong if a Rabbi is a feminist?
    * He is liable to be Megaleh panim baTorah shelo kehalacha, and they do!
    ********************************
    You sound very angry and upset with your g-d, religion, halacha, torah, sages, authority, command & control, life in general and men in particular, with yourself, and last but not least, Husbands, with a great passion. Getting even by and with Chilul Hashem, is not an option. Please, get some Therapy ASAP, n you''ll be fine. Do yourself a big favor, after blogging dilligently for the past two days, left and right, you deserve a break. Toodooloo

    ReplyDelete
  58. Rabbis Eidensohn,

    There is a machlokes Rishonim regarding whether or not we are "kofin" in a case of "Moes Ali." The Rambam holds we are kofin (but she doesn't collect her kesuba), the Tosafos HaRid holds we are kofin if there is an amasla, and Rashi is mashma we are kofin (at least after 12 months). Furthermore, the Rif brings down a Takana of the Geonim that we are kofin right away (without waiting 12 months). The Rambam and the Tosafos HaRid hold that the Geonim's takana was dealing with a case where her Kavanah was to cause him pain (or moredes without an amasla according to the Rid).

    On the other hand, Rabbeinu Tam, the Rashba and others hold that we are not kofin by Moes Ali, even after 12 months, and the Takana of the Geonim is not binding. The Shulchan Aruch and the Rama pasken like R"T and the Rashba. The Rashba rejects the Takanas HaGeonim (which had been made out of fear that women were going to the secular authorities for divorces) because maybe the women is lying about the man being disgusting to her and rather "she has placed her eyes on someone else." If she is in fact lying and a kefiya was under false pretenses the "get" would be posul and future children would be mamzeirim.

    I have never seen an authoritative source, however, that holds that if a Beis Din is kofin in accordance with shitas HaRambam (and k'neged the Shulchan Aruch) that the children are actually mamzeirim.

    More importantly, the Rama in Even HaEzer 154 clearly states that the rabbonim have the right and the power to put societal pressure on a man to give a get even if it is not a case of kofin. Finally, even if we are not kofin doesn't mean that the man doesn't have bein adam l'chaveiro responsibility to give his wife a get (e.g. v'ahavta l'reiacha kamocha; v'halachta b'drachav; lo sikom; hachnosas kallah, etc.).

    In summation, I think it is irresponsible for you to write that Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky or Rav Herschel Schachter are creating mamzeirim and it is assur to listen to them.

    Sincerely,

    Benignuman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In in Israeli beith din document posted somewhere here, the fear that the wife might want a get because she fell in love with someone else seems to play an important role.

      i.e. they pasken that if it can be established that she did NOT leave marriage in order to go with someone else, plus she has more or less valid reasons to leave the marriage plus enough time has elapsed, they are ready to take coercive measures. And those are coercive measures in Israel, i.e. prison etc.

      Delete
  59. @ yitzNovember 19, 2013 at 6:37 AMNovember 21, 2013 at 3:05 AM

    She said she knew it was a mistake right away, but what you're ignoring is that she was in fact right! this simply make her a very perceptive person.
    I believe she knew even before right away.

    Her parents talked her into it, because of his qualities and midos, albeit she looked for something completely different in life. Hoping to change some ones outlook on life, is unjust and unfair to the other party. Suppose he has the same notion, and does not tell her, there would be a world crisis in divorce. Waking up after the fact, it is highly convenient to dig up a smear campaign blaming the other party. Eishes potifar did the same, just because Joseph refused her, and it is very common for women to accuse of sexual inuendos, child abuse, denying visitation rights, rape, violence and stabbing in the seventh rib ever so viciously through the course of divorce proceedings for Nitzachon's sake. Where was her perception of all these grave allegations beforehand. It is simply organisations like ORA, korach ve'edato, that coach her to say so. If you read her deliberate misinterpretations @ ilana, that is a giveaway of her true character. He begged her not to spill it out in public, and yet she took it up to devesate him at the expense of the whole family and Hakodosh Boruch hu as well. She will have her way no matter what, will stop at nothing. That is not what you call a Jew or a good Jew for that matter.

    Just how bad does the husband have to treat the wife? I'm really curious what you think.

    When it becomes unbearable, and after "both parties gave their honest to goodness best efforts to get along", make it go and have exhausted it all, much more so when children's health and well being are at stake, it reached the stage to part each other. A true talmid chacham without bias, can see through it all, and if you can fool some of the people some of the time, you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. I wouldn't put it beyond this couple that it was well within repair, indeed, her choice of a Therapist attested to that. It is because she had no interest from the get go, and deliberately destroyed any potential of a possibility, how sad. I feel his pain, and the family's pain, and what a shame that for selfish reasons she snuffed out the best interest of her own child. It is time to go, but you must clean up the mess, before you do so. I wish both hatzlacha in the future.

    ReplyDelete

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