Monday, February 10, 2014

Weiss Dodelson: Rav Shlomo Miller's letter to Rav Malkiel Kotler retracting his support for Dodelson

In the campaign against the Weiss and Feinstein family conducted by the Dodelson's and their allies - there were other victims. One of them was Rav Shlomo Miller who feels that Clall Yisroel was harmed by the Dodelson campaign. The following letter written by Rav Shlomo Miller was sent to me by a talmid of one of his major talmidim for publication to make the public aware of Rav Miller's strong feelings against the Dodelson's campaign which he describes as a “milchemes hadas.” I am not sure the Weiss's are aware of this letter.

The background to this letter is that during the last summer while Rabbi Greenwald was in the midst of his efforts to mediate a settlement, Rav Malkiel Kotler pressured Rav Shlomo Miller for a letter stating that there is a siruv, and a letter from major rabbonim demanding that R. Avrohom Meir Weiss give a Get. The letter that Rav Malkiel Kotler received from Rav Shlomo Miller, solely on the basis of Rav Kotler's presentation of facts, was used in turn to convince a number of Lakewood poskim to sign a letter against R. Avrohom Meir. On January 24, 2014, after an independent investigation of the facts, Rav Shlomo Miller faxed this letter of public retraction of support to a talmid to hand deliver to Rav Malkiel Kotler.

The letter was sent to me -  by a talmid of a major talmid of Rav Miller who approved its publication - with the following additional information. This letter should be read together with that of Rav Kaminetsky
==============================
The attached letter by Rav Shlomo Miller was written and delivered to R’ Malkiel Kotler over a week before the Weiss-Dodelson get was issued.
I discussed the background of the letter with my Rebbi, who is a talmid of Rav Shlomo, and he explained the following:
In the letter, Rav Miller makes it clear that he had initially supported the Dodelson’s based on the signatures on the “Kol Korei.” However, after doing his own investigation into the history of the case and reviewing the documentation, he withdrew his support. In fact, he told numerous people who spoke with him that they may not help or support the Dodelsons, and that – this is a direct quote – “She [Gital] is a rodef.”
This letter followed a week or so after Rav Miller spoke with R’ Malkiel and explained to him that the public efforts being undertaken to promote his cousin’s cause were no less than a “milchemes hadas.”
 My Rebbi thinks that people need to understand that this letter was not written by Rav Miller on the spur of the moment, but after careful consideration.

67 comments :

  1. So According to this letter, R Sholomo says that he has no position on the matter, & he writes clearly "I have absolutely nothing to say on this matter".

    Yet you feel it is ok to ascribe things to him like "Gital is a rodef" & that Klal Yisroel was harmed by them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is not in regards to the question of whether Weiss was required to give a Get - it is a comment on the public campaign that the Dodelson's waged to force the Get.

      Delete
    2. The letter doesn't say what you say it said. What you claim in the introduction is an anonymous claim.

      Delete
    3. No, but that's what he says he said..

      Delete
  2. And what exactly is your point in publicizing this now?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is the Halachic implication of publicly stating that X called Y a Rodef vis a vis hilchos loshon hora? Is there any toyeles to this now?

      Delete
    2. Seems rather obvious - those associated with Rav Miller feel that it is necessary to disassociate and protest against the Dodelson's campaign. He says nothing regarding the issue of whether Weiss was required to give a Get. In other words he is protesting the means while remaining silent about the goal. .

      Delete
    3. Yakov the answer is obvious. With Shira Dicker making her victory lap in all the newspapers and internet as to how she succeeded in using modern media to force a Get and bring the Weiss's, Feinstein's and Artscroll to their knees - it is necessary that people understand that this is not an acceptable way of obtaining a Get.

      Delete
    4. So it's oisgehalten in hilchos loshon horah, how?

      Delete
  3. I too discussed this letter with an unnamed Talmid of an unnamed Talmid of R Shlomo, & he told me something totally different.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He told me not to say over what he told me in his name.

      Delete
    2. Dovevos,
      As per your suggestion in the past, how about you call Rabbi Miller, and ask him for yourself!

      P.S. - Without sufficient proof, you won't be believed, as you have long since lost your ne'emanus.

      Delete
    3. I called a Talmid of a relative of R Shlomos wife & he told me that this is a Ziyuf.

      Delete
    4. Wow. An anonymous commenator says he spoke to an anonymous relative who proclaims this hand written letter to be a forgery and that my non-anonymous sources are lying to me?!

      You have got to make a more believable story

      Delete
    5. The person I spoke to isn't anonymous to me.

      Delete
    6. & I didn't speak to a relative. It's a relatives Talmid. Accuracy matters

      Delete
    7. Does anyone believe shlumoy? Don't think so. Probably just Dovevos in another name. A talmid of a relative of reb shlomo's wife. Very ingenuous. We have talmidim and his own relatives telling us its true but you have a Talmud of a relative of his wife. What a crock.

      Delete
    8. In fairness to Shlumoy and both sides, it is now quite common for every letter to be questioned for authenticity. The various bans attributed to R' Elyashiv for example (not to mention the Kovetz).

      Bring a letter to support one side of a controversy, and often you will find the other side denying its authenticity. So unles you are direct to the source, it remains a piece of detective work.

      Delete
  4. This letter should be read together with R Shmuels letter, you say. Why? Because maybe it will mean that R Sholomo just meant to quiet a Raash that was being made but not intended as an indictment of Dodelson as you imply.

    Bottom line is that this letter (if authentic) is a huge nothingburger. It's a letter that says that a man who's name WAS NOT ON THE KOL KOREI said he has no position. None of the letters circulated by D had Rabbi millers name on it.

    Most likely, Rabbi Miller had enough of having to listen to Freidman for hours every time he came to Lakewood & he gave him this letter to pattir him up. He doesn't need to fax it to a Talmid to hand deliver to R Malkiel, with the new Kolel he has in lakewood, he sees him himself every few weeks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I noted above - it is a protest against the PR campaign of the Dodelson's, the negative representation of Yiddishkeit by Gital and Dicker, the attacks on the Feinstein's and the Yeshiva of Staten Island etc etc. At the same time, Rav Miller is not discussing either the obligation of Weiss giving a Get or whether public pressure is prohibited in obtaining a Get.

      Delete
    2. Dovevos, while I would like nothing more than this to go away, you seem to bring up a brilliant point. RSM is NOT on the kol koreh. However, If you read what he writes about the kol koreh he says that the kol koreh was wrong and he was told wrong information. It is a stinging attack on the signers of the kol koreh. As the posek of Lakewood, IH"t, this is a strong rebuke. Btw, it is authentic (in case you really needed a person to tell you a hand written note is authentic). However, why are we still on this, its over. I am sure RSM is not pleased with its release now.

      Delete
    3. Dovevos,
      Granted, its an indictment of R' Malkiel!
      Denouncing the authenticity of the letter is a silly move, since R' Shmuel told someone just before Shabbos, that he doesn't remember ever writing the "Second" Letter that Dodelson publicized (that one was typed not hand-written).
      Having signed the Kol Korei or not, his letter clarifies that he was pushed to write a letter by R' Malkiel with the misinformation he was presented, and now has more information that proves that he was misled.
      As far as the faxing is concerned, time was of the essence, and he doesn't use email like R' Malkiel does.

      Delete
  5. It is beyond frightening that rabbonim and roshei yeshiva who are widely viewed as "gedolim" have been largely successful in having their positions on these cases (Dodelson, Epstein) treated as if coming from objective arbiters who are giving their unbiased conclusions based on the facts of these cases.

    A more accurate description of what these so-called gedolim are doing is acting as toanim (lawyers / advocates) and publicists (like Shira Dicker) for the party to whom they are related and/or have close personal and financial relationships.

    And at the request of one of these "gedolim," the others jump on board without even bothering to examine the facts or trying to obtain the other side to the story.

    And this seems to be not that dissimilar from the Schlesinger case in Austria where one parent seems to have been able to exploit very close ties to a high-ranking judge to severely restrict the other parent's time with their children to an obscene extent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Puzzled, this is the world we live in. If we want to change it we need to find real gedolim. You and me can start with each other.

      Delete
  6. I know that the Weisses had this and we're given permission to publicize this right after it was written.

    I know that they held off doing so because they did not want to do anything to upset the efforts towards finishing this up (that's what they told me at the time).

    I have no idea by they haven't released it since the get.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Weisses have not released this letter most likely because the Weisses and Feinsteins are not interested in engaging in a public debate on this matter.
      The Weisses and Feinsteins have been attacked and continue to be attacked in the most public manner. Because they are not willing to respond, it is left to Rabbi Eidensohn to do so.

      Delete
    2. That's a great credit to the Weiss Mishpacha. All along this terrible situation with the Dodelson's constantly and publicly bashing and attacking AMW, the entire Weiss mishpacha, the Feinstein Rabbonim and Roshei Yeshivos, and even attacking the Yeshivos! (Yeshiva of SI and MTJ), all along while enduring these terrible public attacks the Weiss not only did not respond in kind and issue press releases or news stories or any sort of attacks against the Dodelsons, not only didn't they do that, but even their response to the Dodelsons vicious and ugly attacks was a simple "we don't want to engage in a public discourse on a private matter" statement.

      What a wonderful family and true Yirei Shamayim and Bnei Torah!!

      Delete
    3. I would agree that the fact that the Weisses and Feinsteins have refused to to descend into the gutter is a great credit to them.
      But one can hope that the roshei yeshiva Rabbis Feinstein will speak out on these issues from a general perspective.

      Delete
  7. This letter is amazing: 1) If AMW was not from a prominent family, i'm not so sure that he would of received such a letter, as I have seen many rabbis are cowards to speak the truth. But in this case Rabbi Miller "did some more investigating". 2) You deduce from this letter that anybody who has a NEGIA BEDOVOR such as Malkiel Kotler, cannot be trusted because you are biased. I am hoping that the end is near for corruptive bais dins as we are experiencing seeing that their schemes are reaching a dead end. Mendel Epstein, martin Wolmark have been arrested and since then we learned that their torah methodology was flawed as they too have not investigated well the facts of the AGUNA who approachem them for a GET as she turned out to be an FBI agent and a fictitious wife. They still for the "HEAVY GREENBACKS" arranged for a kidnapping! I have yet to meet an honest non-biased Bais Din other than Rabbi Gestetner and Rabbi Abraham! They follow the lettter of the law with no feminist influences to sway their Halachic decisions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr. Epstein and Wolmark? Are you kidding? What "methodology"? Their only "methodology" was electric cattle prods. Their kangaroo "beis din" didn't even invite the husband to respond to the wife's demand! They issued their "ruling" without the husband ever having even known their was a case! (And it turned out in the last FBI case there wasn't even a husband and yey Mr. Wolmark and Mr. Epstein were willing to beat him without anything remotely resembling any kind of case.)

      Delete
    2. Ben Torah,
      I'm not willing to go into that case at this time, due to tooo many details being unknown. But one thing is clear from the publicized FBI documents on the case, that they sent the Husband a "Hazmanah" & 3 "Hasraos"... so please don't unleash your keyboard before checking the facts.

      Delete
    3. The FBI complaint says nothing of any hazmana or seruv against the fake husband before Epstein and wolmark planned to kidnap and beat the person.

      Delete
    4. There is no mention of a Hazmana in the epstein/wolmark docs

      Delete
    5. I don't have the time to search more now, but see # 4 of attachment B:

      http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/rabbis.pdf

      Note: There are more detailed documents, but don't have time to look for it now. There is also a statement toward the beginning stating something about not all the facts being written at the time...

      Delete
    6. The complaint does not say anything about there being a hazmana or seruv issued by wolmark or Epstein in this case.

      Delete
    7. In fact, the complaint says that wolmark out together a Beis din session, listened to one side, and then issued a peak din based on listening to one side. There is nothing about any hazmana or seruv.

      Delete
    8. A Beis Din CANNOT issue a PSAK of "Kofin" to beat someone into giving a Get unless the HUSBAND IS PHYSICALLY present in Beis Din.

      If they do it is invalid and the Get is me'usa and worthless.

      Delete
    9. And, btw, considering there was no real husband in the FBI case, there is no way any "husband" got the hazmana. And there is no way they could have verified the hazmana was served considering there was no husband.

      And again, even if there was a valid hazmana, if the husband was not physically in beis din together with the wife, it is halachicly impossible to rule Kofin. And a beaten Get thus is invalid.

      Delete
    10. The complaint says that their general practice was to start straight with a seruv. But in this case, it appears that they didn't even bother with that.

      Delete
  8. what this proves is that the letters and haskomos from gedolim are worthless. letters are signed without full investigation of the facts. the same is probably true of tzdakah letters signed by gedolim. and the average person is a fool if he gives any weight to these letters. (rav Schechter signed many letters against friedman with the statement 'if rav kamentsky says it must be true. he knew nothing about the real facts of the case)

    ReplyDelete
  9. what we learn from this letter is that a kol koreh may have nothing to do with the facts. This is one of many many examples.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Actually, what this shows is a formal admission that he did not investigate the facts before he signed the death sentence of Bi'yush Bi'rabim. Unfortunately, this is all too common nowadays.

    The Kotler-Lakewood typical out-of-the-book style is to gather up as many signatures as possible to bury their opponents. The signatories usually have no real knowledge of the facts - or Halacha for that matter. There are so many examples of this I can't even start...

    R' S.M. himself has signed hatchet proclamations before similar to this... Perhaps each one of those should be reviewed as well.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I have rejected a number of posts because they contain the name of the family that was driven out of Lakewood. I have been requested not to publicize their name even though they are known by many.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This letter - if authentic, is an indictment of Rabbi Shlomo Miller. Sadly for me - a Ben Torah, this only reinforces why I no longer trust our so-called Gedolim. To me this is the greatest tragedy. The age and era of gadlus - the honesty of the Chafetz Chaim etc, is unfortunately over.

    Yankel fun Mikkeys Kaveh Shteeb

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Asher nasi yecheta. Rashi quotes Chazal that a nation whose leader errs and admits his error is fortunate. Attitudes like yours only succeed in ensuring that those who erred never back down, and prevent innocent victims from being vindicated.

      Delete
    2. "the honesty of the Chafetz Chaim etc"

      What?! HaRav Miller is behaving in full honesty. He admits that he made a mistake. To err is part-and-parcel of being human (Mahral). He admits that he made a mistake. That is the Chofetz Chaim's honesty.

      BTW, the Gemara is full of cases that great people erred - which Hashem allowd in order to leave the door open for ba'llei teshuva. (Avodah Zara 3: etc.)

      Delete
  13. Not good PR for RSMFebruary 11, 2014 at 6:11 PM

    This letter does not do any justice to RSM Shlit'a. As a Rov In a major citer and as a Rosh Bais Din (according to some) in a major Torah City it is mind boggling that he supported a cause JUST by relying on a Kol Koray and then reverse his position based on further investigation. Is this how one issues a psak? Is this how a Rosh Bais Din handles Din Torahs?
    We know that he knows a LOT more then many but there is a 5th Shlchan Aruch which is usually consulted on each and every psak in Halacha.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right that its not the greatest PR, but the fact that out of all the Dodelson's supporting Rabbonim, he was the only one to send out a letter retracting his support & and admitting his mistake.

      Delete
    2. Sir,

      There are halachos of "ne'eman alav k'bei trei", when has good reason to trust them as two kosher witnesses. The signatories (certainly some) of the kol korei DID have that trustworthiness.

      Delete
  14. How about we here at daas torah band together and send a WRITTEN PETITION to several Roshei Yeshivos / Rabbonim, respectfully requesting that they adhere to the laws of Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpot, in regards to how decisions in Dinei Torah should be made?

    So many of us have lost trust in Gedolim whose actions point to unmistakeable self-serving hypocrisy.

    If they don't have the backbone to withstand Rabbanic "peer pressure" that pushes them to do unethical "favors" to other Roshei Yeshivos / Rabbonim, then how can they expect their adherents to withstand THEIR own tests?

    Let's write a petition!


    ReplyDelete
  15. Want A Post by Pursuit of HonestyFebruary 11, 2014 at 9:30 PM

    Over the last few threads, Pursuit of Honesty has made a few statements that run contrary to what the street is saying. Obviously he has knowledge of things that the rest of us do not. It would be helpful if he wrote a guest post.

    He wrote that;
    A) Weiss did not receive any money- there was an agreement in place years ago that D would pay his legal fees.
    B) this get was invalid as it was not given willingly- he said he's going to have to regive this get.
    C) he said that R Shmuel Kamenetzky's letter is a forgery by D.

    I don't remember anyone else on this site making these claims. Maybe he can post exactly what he means, & why he thinks those are the facts.

    Thank you,
    A faithful reader.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pursuit of Honesty has made a few statements that run contrary to what the street is saying. Obviously he has knowledge of things that the rest of us do not. It would be helpful if he wrote a guest post.

      Alternately. He is yet another anonymous internet troll that is simply making stuff up.

      Delete
    2. Want A Post by Pursuit of HonestyFebruary 12, 2014 at 2:49 AM

      I don't know- Rabbi Eidenson seems to assign his opinion some validity. I may just be misjudging that. But what can it hurt if he makes a guest post?

      Rabbi Eidenson,
      Can you put my previous comment up as a post? Maybe that way Pursuit of Honesty will see it & he can submit a guest post of his own? I feel like these are big questions that need to be addressed.

      Thank you,
      A Faithful Reader

      Delete
    3. Interesting how " A Faithful Reader" - "Want A Post by Pursuit of Honesty" spells Weiss' name correctly, but uses "D" for dodleson. This is something "Dovevos" has done in all his posts when he referenced the families.
      Interesting.
      Any chance they are one and the same?

      DT: Is there any way you can verify that through IP addresses?

      Delete
    4. Rabbi Micheal Tzadok,

      "Pursuit of Honesty has made a few statements that run contrary to what the street is saying."

      "Alternately. He is yet another anonymous internet troll that is simply making stuff up."

      So, to you, if one contradicts "what the street is saying" (whatever that means - does it mean the NY Post; Facebook...?) then that's sufficient reason to believe that he is just "another anonymous internet troll that is simply making stuff up"??

      I fail to see your reasoning.

      Delete
    5. Want A Post by Pursuit of HonestyFebruary 12, 2014 at 8:23 AM

      Human,

      I don't know why others do it, but I used D because I type from my phone & it's easier than struggling with autocorrect.

      Rabbi Eidenson,
      Is there a reason why my previous comment did not post?

      Thank you,
      A faithful reader.

      Delete
    6. Didn't see any other post that needed moderating. Send it again

      Delete
    7. Sir Want a Post by Pursuit of Honesty,
      I am puzzled and confused. (but to be clear , I am not 'Puzzled' or 'Confused')
      I have been trying to find the source of your statements.
      POH has a whole explanation of how the 2 letters of R' Shmuel do not contradict . Where did he say that one is a forgery ?
      Where did he say that another get has to be given ?
      Where did he say that Weiss did not receive any money ?

      Delete
    8. I am only a human being who has a family and life, I can't always respond to attacks immediately.
      I devoted many hours to clarify publicly how Avrohom Meir Wiess, his family, his friends, and his supporters aren't what the "D"s make them out to be - to the public eye. Neither the Weisses nor anyone else has asked me to post here. I wasn't given details to publicize, I just happen to be close to some of the people who are deeply involved and knowledgeable of all the details. The Weisses chose - al pi daas torah - to keep this private case private, as is appropriate for bnei torah. That being the case, I don't have every last detail you want to hear, I have/had no intentions to write guest post with all the details I do know, besides, some of what I do know I was specifically asked not to publicize - "Please don't fan the flames" (Saki D. thinks I and RDE are hired by/working directly for the Weisses. It is not true at all. I don't even now if the Wiesses know that I am "Pursuit of Honesty". Lol!)

      Now for my long awaited response:

      A) Before the Weisses went to court the first time, they notified the Kotlers/Dodelsons that if they have to go to court due to their withholding of his child, they will be obligated to pay those costs. (Note: Gital took Aryeh away from his father without any halachic or legal ramifications.) In fact, the Dodelsons didn't denounce those charges, but rather used them then to catch the public's attention, claiming AM to be "Extorting" money for the Get. The exact amount they had to pay was negotiated, and the Weisses swallowed the bigger portion - by a far cry. The actual six figure amount discussed was nowhere near the claims Dodelson claimed in her interview on NPR. The money went directly to the lawyers, with Wiess adding to it.

      B) First of all, R' Reuven Feinstein (Weiss' grandfather) made it clear before the Get was given that if he gives the Get under these circumstances the Get will be Meusa. On another note, someone with power (My unwillingness to start up with a mafia guy restrains me from publicizing his name, but he proudly told people what he did.) hung a very very serious threat over the Feinsteins/Wiesses - "If the Get isn't given within 2 days, the consequences will be severe!" That's called forced, even though the Dodelson and supporters claim the Get is Kosher b/c they asked AM prior to giving the Get it is being forced, and he said it isn't. The other pressures, be it unemployment, public embarrassment, boycotts, or harassment without ever having gone to Bais Din for a Get or having a Bais Din's psak allowing any of those, may have also played a role in R' Reuven's psak.

      C) I don't recall claiming it to be forgery, but rather recall writing "Denouncing the authenticity of the letter is a silly move, since R' Shmuel told someone just before Shabbos, that HE doesn't remember ever writing the "Second" Letter that Dodelson publicized (that one was typed not hand-written)."
      (Note: That was written in response to Dovevos' questioning the legitimacy of R' Shloime Miller's letter. {see above comments})

      Delete
    9. Has Rabbi Reuven Feinstein said that the get is invalid?

      Delete
    10. Given that the coercive tactics that the Dodelsons, the Roshei Yeshiva, and ORA have used in this case are similar to what they have done in other cases, are currently doing in other cases, and intend to continue to do in the future, do Rabbis Feinstein feel that it is important that the propriety of this sort of conduct be addressed on a broader level?

      Delete
    11. Funny to claim that a Get AMW took $125,000 for, made a Shvuah tht it was MiDaatoi, & was given in MTJ, under the supervision of MTJ employee & Feinstein ally R Chaim Ganzweig, should have any pikpuk at all. In all likelihood all this is bluff & R Reuven never said anything of the sort.
      A get that's is posul would also invalidate the consent order- so why is Yosroel Weiss asking DT to pull the posts if they think the Get is posul?
      It's more likely that POH is just making things up on a whim.

      Delete
    12. Want A Post by Pursuit of HonestyFebruary 13, 2014 at 12:42 AM

      So I guess I wasn't misreading what you were saying. It is worthwhile to note that I have not heard about this R Reuven psak. If He really holds that way, why was it not publicized?

      It's also disturbing that nobody seems to be able to have a civilized exchange. I posted my comment & Rabbi Tzadok immediately accused Pursuit of Honesty to be a "troll". Then I was accused of being someone else, & it ended with Dovevos accusing Pursuit of Honesty of making things up.

      No wonder people can't work things out.

      Thank you
      A Faithful Reader

      Delete
    13. does any care anymore?February 13, 2014 at 4:38 PM

      Let the rest of us realize that Dovevos and POH are both intricately involved in this. Obviously one from each side. Dovevos seems to be stuck on money, as though that was the number one issue. I think it is fair to ask him what else AMW got in terms of visitation. Because if the entire fight was only about money and the Dodelsons didn't pay then they are simply stupid. Wasting years of their daughter's life to save some greenbacks is something no sane person would do. However, POH seems to say the his side wants nothing more than to make mamzeirim in klal yisroel. This isnt just stupid it's completely sick. To say that Reb Reuven, shlita, has gone along with this is complete motzei Shem rah. It is possible that along the lines of discussions when the kol koreh was released or when artscroll was under attack that RRF may have said something like that. It is generally understood in the yeshish world that those things had not of an iota of halacha tied into them. But to say that an agreement was made and a get given and they are still halachickly married is crazy and to be proud of it is just sick. So, we now have the people from the Dodelsons saying their side was crazy and the Weiss defender saying their side is sick. Why don't we just agree to let the two of you go on living with your fight and let the rest of us move on. DT, you previously asked if you should take down all the stuff from this fight. I think you need to take out all of the nonsense that we have seen here and in other places and keep the halachik points intact.

      Delete
    14. Puzzled & Dovevos,

      To clarify: Although I have written that what I heard from impeccable sources in the name of R' Reuven PRIOR to the giving of the Get, I have not heard from nor have I asked R' Reuven POST the giving of the Get if his final psak is that the Get is Meusa. I also wrote what I think influenced his prior warning and the outcome is if he actually decides that way. 

      In regards to the "coercive tactics" (when applicable): It is a popular, very large and controversial topic these days. I definitely never asked Rabbis Feinstein about this unrelated subject. In this case, there was no halachic basis for what was done against the Weisses, Feinsteins, YSI, Artscroll and the rest.

      Claiming "Shvuah that it was MiDaatoi"; I highly doubt they make anyone make any shevu'os, and being Birtzono has many different nuances. However I have not heard anyone in the Weiss family say, after the get, that it was passul.
      Also note that MTJ is not YSI, and R' Reuven isn't obligated to hold like R' David.

      Delete
  16. No go on this - SorryFebruary 12, 2014 at 6:02 PM

    "ne'eman alav k'bei trei" can NOT be used against OTHERS. It can be used for your own psak etc which applies to you ONLY.
    You can't use "ne'eman alav k'bei trei" where it is "Chav L'achrina"

    ReplyDelete

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