Monday, May 12, 2014

Tamar Epstein's marriage "annulment", Rabbinical Council of Washington and the degradation of Orthodox values and authority


Guest Post  by Joe Orlow

See - Tamar Epstein claims she is free even without a Get

[update added questions from Friedman supporters]

================
The Aharon Friedman-Tamar Epstein divorce process is an issue that has led to a split in the Jewish community. I am directly aware of a number of people, including people who are learned, who were initially supporters of Tamar Epstein and subsequently have become strong supporters of Aharon Friedman after they discovered more about the case and studied in more depth the Halacha which has a bearing on this case.

The Rabbinical Council of Greater Washington (RCW) relying on a letter from the Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the United States and Canada (Agudath HaRabonim), made a bizarre statement that "Mr. Aharon Friedman has been adjudged in violation of an order of a Beis Din and accordingly is now considered halachically to have made his wife an agunah."

Subsequent to the Agudath HaRabonim letter being issued, one of the Rabbis who signed the letter was arrested by the FBI in a sting operation for allegedly offering to free a woman from her husband -- even though the "husband" in question did not exist, since the woman had lied to him as part of the sting. One of the staff members of the Agudath Harabonim was also arrested as part of the sting.

Another Rabbi who signed the letter has allegedly been involved in a similar case, in which an actual husband was beaten and apparently almost killed.

Another Rabbi who signed the letter has a longstanding and close connection with Tamar Epstein's family.

Another Rabbi who did not actually sign the letter but added his signature to a copy of the letter has apparently called for beating husbands who don't give a Get to their wives after the husband and wife have been separated for an extended period, apparently without regard to the circumstances of the separation.

In this context, the statement by the RCW that "We urge those who have contact with or influence over Mr. Aharon Friedman to persuade Mr. Friedman, through proper [emphasis added] means only, to promptly comply with the order of the Beis Din and to promptly give his wife the required Get." would seem to indicate that violence is in order. Indeed, after the RCW's letter was issued, Aharon was attacked in the driveway of his wife's residence as he dropped off his daughter.

Lately, Tamar Epstein denies she's married to Aharon Friedman.

I have three initial questions:

(1) Are we allowed to take under consideration the published reports about Rabbi Mordechai Wolmark and Rabbi Yisroel Belsky and their alleged involvement in beating husbands, and if yes, how does this impact the letter they wrote about Aharon Friedman?

(2) How should we treat the RCW which apparently has allied itself with these men?

(3) How should we treat the RCW in light of their silence in regard to Tamar Epstein's disregard of her marriage to Aharon Friedman and her making herself available for marriage to another man?

[added questions from Friedman's supporters:
Following the assault on Aharon, the DC Vaad, and the rabbis who are its members, have refused to answer the following two questions (sent to them by email and postal mail):

Do you and the Washington Vaad consider beating Aharon to be "proper means" of "persuading" Aharon to give a get as called for in the Vaad's letter?

Would you or the Washington Vaad recognize as valid a get that was obtained through beating Aharon?

Furthermore, the RCW has an affiliated Congregation whose Rabbi is a graduate of a Yeshiva with a Bais Medrash
(a) where the students discuss the New Testament with Catholic clergy,
(b) whose current president welcomes intermarried couples,
(c) whose Rosh Yeshiva is embarrassed by the Torah as it has been received (and who seems to be advocating for a way to end a marriage in general without a legitimate Get), while
(d) the coordinator of conversions for the Rabbinic organization associated with the Yeshiva denies that any Jews are descended from Abraham.

Is a Jew allowed to step into that RCW affiliated Shul? If yes, can one eat from the kitchen in that Shul (the kitchen is certified Kosher by the RCW)?

One of the Rabbis of the RCW co-authored a Sefer with a number of Rabbis closely connected to this Yeshiva. Can a Jew Daven in this RCW Rabbi's Shul and eat from the kitchen there?

If food from the kitchens at these Shuls are off-limits, may one still eat at and/or buy food from other RCW certified Kosher establishments such as butcher shops?

There is an Orthodox school here whose Rav ha-Kehilla is a Musmach of this Yeshiva. May a student attend this school?

Furthermore, there's an international Orthodox organization that has some member congregations that have Rabbis who are graduates of this Yeshiva. This organization has not categorically stated that these Rabbis cannot participate as members of the Kashrus branch of the organization. May a Jew eat food which has been certified as Kosher by this organization?

There's another international Kashrus organization whose Rabbinic leader has given a letter of support to the Organization for the Resolution of Agunot (ORA). ORA is the group that broke the news that Tamar Epstein, a married woman, is "free" and which took credit for facilitating this married woman's being granted the freedom to marry another man. May a Jew eat food certified Kosher by this Kashrus organization?

Lastly, it is my understanding that the entire Jewish Nation accepted upon itself to follow the Shulchan Aruch, and that when a Rav decides not to follow the Shulchan Aruch in a given case that it is not improper to request of him that he explain why we do not follow the Shulchan in that case.

Yet, reportedly, there's a Rav of the RCW that said that when a great scholar says to go against the Shulchan Aruch that the great scholar must be followed unquestioningly. Is one allowed to Daven in this Rav's shul, or to ask Halachic questions of him?

105 comments :

  1. Its quite enlightening that all you've done is smeared people but you have not added any proofs or arguments.

    Also if you want to say that Rav Shmuel Kamenentsky Shlita does not follow the Shulchan Aruch and does not respect the Torah be my guest, it just shows how off the deep end you are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beis Din Shar Hamishpat:
      "Rabbi Kamenetsky’s interference: With all due respect, it is unclear what authority he has to suddenly interfere in a dispute that is not his, and offer “Psakim” (decisions) that the husband is obligated to give a get, and especially to turn the husband to a “Sarvan” when he never heard the husband’s side, at the same time during which the Beis Din before which both sides signed a shtar beirurin and that has heard both sides has not required a get be given. ...
      It was certainly inappropriate of Rabbi Kamenetsky to act this way, when it is universally known that he has close ties to the Epstein family and has accepted benefits from them. The Zohar states that Moshe Rabbeinu stepped down from deciding on the case of Tzlofchad’s daughters since he felt there was suspicion that he disliked their father. And see there that whoever doesn’t act similarly is called an az panim [brazen] and a ga’e [exceedingly haughty]. See the Shla who wrote: “Judges…that… are… suspected of having favoritism to one of the sides in a case and do not resign from that case are called azai panim [brazen] and lacking even a modicum of modesty… When one of the judges in a Beis Din has a love for one of the sides, R’ Bachay wrote, that is the reason Moshe Rabbeinu dismissed himself from judging the Tzlafchad case, since he had somewhat favorable feelings towards them after they mentioned that their father “was not part of the Korach camp.”
      And if one thinks other “rabbis” [outside the Beis Din before which both sides signed a shtar beirurin] have the authority to share their opinion, why would Rabbi Kamenetsky think that specifically his opinion obligates the husband more than the opinion of the rabbis who said that he is not obligated to give a get until an appropriate custody arrangement is arranged in an acceptable manner. Does the husband not have the right to follow those rabbis? Why does he think that the husband is subjugated, and is required to listen, specifically to him?
      From a free translation of a document issued by Shar Hamishpot Beis Din. The full translation and the original are available on this blog

      Delete
    2. AVF - it is pretty sad, but let the "big name" fool you. I think all the proof is there. Rabbis who signed against Friedman, being arrested for plotting to beat and torture a "husband" who didn't even exist?? They must really look into matters before issuing seiruvim, putting someone in charim, and plotting to pretty much kill someone. AVF, I think YOU may be a little biased in this case

      Delete
    3. @Shoshana - "Rabbis who signed against Friedman" -

      Is it possible that some of the "agunah" activist rabbis may be motivated by feminist mentalities so that they persecute the Jewish husbands without regard to the facts of the divorce case?

      Delete
    4. EmesLeYaacov, it is a slam dunk 100% that the activist Rabbis are motivated by feminist mentalities.But not only feminist mentalities, it is an America 2014 mentality that the ideals of Human Rights and Democratic freedoms do not allow the Torah's laws regarding marriage (ie prenups) and divorce (ie get on demand) to function.

      What is ironic is that they changed the Torahs laws to fit into the American ideal and the American government is coming after them with their full weight and power to put them in jail.

      Delete
  2. And here is your proofMay 12, 2014 at 3:17 PM

    Talmud states, "harotze leshaker, yarchik eduso". Yelamdenu no rabenu, you say Tamar is Free, MEHEICHAN DANTANI??? Is THIS not a legitimate question al pi haShulchan Aruch, Huh? This Tamar veamnon saga and the whole Geshmir, is mibayis umibachutz, BAKOIFER. Did anyone a Musmach baki betiv Gittin veKidushin sign his name on this, yeitze lachofshi chinam FREE as a Butterfly can be? Oy no lonu, ki me hoyo lonu.

    ReplyDelete
  3. what this shows is that there are a lot of people including many 'chashava' rabbis and rosh yeshivas who owe aharon friedman, his family, and friends a public apology.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @emes - Yes, the YU based ORA group and its feminist henchmen owe Aharon Friedman and his family a huge apology. And they owe many other Jewish men huge apologies for the harassment, smear campaigns, and injustices committed against those men in the name of rescuing alleged "agunot".

      But the Friedman case also demonstrates how Torah law has been bulldozed and demolished by the militant feminist "agunah" "rabbis" to the extent that married Jewish women are now being made freely available for relationships with other men. Nothing less than rabbinically sanctioned wife swapping.

      Delete
  4. I cannot comment directly on the organization but most people don't have a problem not eating from even the best hechsherim. We posul organizations and people by standards that we identify with. I don't see ' being a ba'al machlokes and speaking lashon ha'ra being a problem with people.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Superintendant ChalmersMay 12, 2014 at 4:56 PM

    Does anyone know yet who was actually behind Tamar's supposed "heter"? What was the basis for it? Is she actually conducting herself as a single woman (ie dating)? Is anyone taking the heter serriously?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Beis Din Shar Hamishpat:

    "The Washington Beis Din – Why did it take them an entire year to admit a simple matter: that they have no authority to persecute Aharon when both sides agreed to the jurisdiction of the Baltimore Beis Din before which they signed a shtar beirurin? Their public notice of the husband as a “Sarvan and me’agan” completely contradicts their earlier public notice stating that the Beis Din before which both sides signed a shtar beirurin had not obligated Aharon to give a get nor issued a seruv against him, and hence Aharon should not be criticized. This glaring flip-flopping screams out to the heavens, and is a disgrace and embarrassment to the honor of Betai Din [Rabbinical Courts], turning the honor of Beis Din to dust. And afterwards they claim to be astonished and complain as to how the masses have no regard for Betai Din. Is this Daas Torah [Torah opinion], or it going astray after every fleeting wind of the opinion of the street?"
    The full document and translation can be found at
    http://www.friedmanepstein.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bob, the link you bring does not talk about the alleged "annulment" or its supposed authors. This seems to be a great mystery. If there is any evidence of a) annulment, and b) who orchestrated it please provide reliable documentation.

      Delete
    2. A woman who claims she does not need a GET is not believed. Everyone knows she was married, nobody heard about a GET, the husband denies giving her a GET, nobody heard about her receiving a GET, she never claimed she got a GET, she only claims that she is "free." And Kaminetsky supports her. But he also won't say who permits her to be free and remarry. If no rabbi openly declares that she is permitted and she declares that she is permitted and Shalom Kaminetsky says she is permitted but doesn't provide what rabbi permits her, she cannot remarry and if she does remarry her children are mamzerim. The Philly Yeshiva is a mamzer factory. Nobody should send their children there.

      Delete
    3. " The Philly Yeshiva is a mamzer factory. Nobody should send their children there."
      This is a very big statement to make. Does anyone in the USA agree with you? (other than ShaarMishpat)

      Delete
    4. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 14, 2014 at 3:18 PM

      "" The Philly Yeshiva is a mamzer factory. Nobody should send their children there."
      This is a very big statement to make. Does anyone in the USA agree with you? (other than ShaarMishpat)"

      A musmach of the Chafetz Chaim, Rav Leizerowsky felt that Rav Kamenetsky knew what he was doing in the halachot of Gittin and such to seat him on his Beis Din. Rav Dov Brisman a musmach of Rav Shach and Rav Aharon Felder a musmach of Rav Moishe Feinstein still feel that way. They have not raised their voices against Rav Kamenetsky in all of this... That should answer your question.
      Someone who cannot tell the difference between a hamlatza and a semicha says such a thing about a Yeshiva that Rav Aharon Kotler himself set up, and about the Rav that Rav Aharon Kotler himself installed as the Rosh Yeshiva... What more needs to be said? This mevazeh talmid chacham pure and simple.

      Delete
    5. Everyone a rosha gomur, besides for Nuchum!May 15, 2014 at 6:02 AM

      How dare you start up wth Moreinu v'rabeinu, hagaon, hatzadik, hadabron, hasock puppeteer rav dovid eidensohn shelita?

      If he says a person is a "rasha gamur", then that's a final psak! No one dare question him. That means that this great Rabbi Eidensohn has looked through him clearly, with his nevuah, and concluded that he is pure rishus. Not one good deed.

      Or, of course, you can question his self self-aggrandizing silly hyperbole.

      Delete
  7. Kan sofrim tisrach, PhooeyMay 12, 2014 at 7:20 PM

    It is of no surprise why these are acting the way they do, it is a Mishneh mefureshes, and the mishneh does not lie. Kidnapping, inhumane cattle prodding, beating the life of a neshomo to a pulp, Lying to one another about the status of an individual and motzi shem ra, get meusse, fake ksav seruvs, fake meagnim, fake Agunot, fake hatores eishes ish leshuk, fake pilpulim that they are afraid to disclose the patent how they concocted the witches brew, lest they be challenged. Fake sofrim, fake witnesses, nonexistent recalcitrant husbands, fake makeshift field marshal kangaroo courts, fake kol kore's, fake rabbis, fake everything. I could go on and on if not for the ink and space I am running out of. The whole system is rotten to the core, it is all about, power, money, kovod, protektziya, mekurev lemalchus, kol dealim gvar. Now that they have gotten caught with their hands in the cookie jar, let's see if they have the guts to apologize to harav hachoshev R' Friedman for all the agmat nefesh they caused him, physical pain, mevaze berabim. What about the chilul hashem berabim they cause very day all over the world? Did they gather in Mega Stadiums to stop all this gehinom from underneath of our feet? No, it is only the Internet that is the problem, because it mirrors them back into their face in an instant all over the globe all the charpes and bushos they cause. That is why they gather in the Stadiums. We now have alleged manhigim arrested and charged for racketeering and high crimes against humanity. Vote with your pockets, do not fund them or support them. Take down the information of those strongmen kaddafi kapos, snap pictures of the enablers, and of the reshoim arurim, place it on the blogs where it hurts them most. ORA them back into their face, let them eat themselves what they cooked up for the "little people". Asher Yozidu, Aleihem! Pitam pas Aki'm, Yeynom yayin nesech, veshamnon shemen chazir. Umi sheomar leoylomoi day, yoymar letzoroysenu day.

    And Oh' yes! One more thing before we close. Since they were mafkia the Kidushin lemafrea, what happens now with the unnecessary whipping of the Husband which retroactively was not deserved. Could they be mafkia those makos retzach koshos veachzoriyos by piggybacking hafkoeh as well, or they must compensate reparations since pain is not tangible, therefore, such a maasei nevolo cannot be undone? I leave it for all you there, yovoy hakohol veyishpot.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is known that the rabbis of Washington DC have called for the public humiliation and coercion of Aharon Friedman to force him to divorce his wife Tamara Epstein of Philadelphia. He was even attacked by thugs to force a GET but he escaped. Instead of supporting him, the Washington rabbinate supported coercing him with public humiliation. Such a GET given with coercion is invalid and the children born from it are mamzerim. But the Washington rabbis and others who don’t know the laws of Gittin insist that we coerce the husband and force a GET. Washington rabbinate is thus a mamzer factory, because children born from an invalid GET are mamzerim. Now Aharon’s wife has publicly declared that she is eligible for marriage without a GET and is supported by one of the Kaminetskys. Why do the Washington rabbis not speak out against this? Why do they only speak out against men and make mamzerim? But when the woman makes mamzerim they are silent?
    I challenge any of the Washington rabbis to answer why my sources that coercing a GET is forbidden are wrong; and I want to know their sources.
    (I once challenged a New York Rabbi who encourages humiliating husbands when the wife demands a GET with the above Rashbo, Radvaz, Beis Yosef and Chazon Ish and asked him for his sources. He replied, “The Washington rabbis.” And what was the source of the Washington rabbis? That rabbi from New York.)
    The modern Orthodox world and Washington DC among it is split. Some are Orthodox but some follow the open Orthodox movement that permits one rabbi to declare publicly that he knows that the Torah is false and is filled with stories that are not true. He does not believe that the Jews left Egypt or that Abraham lived, etc. And this person is a major personality in this movement and he calls himself “Orthodox” which is just another bit of falsehood that is part of his teachings. Can such people promote kosher food and give Gittin? Their kosher food and their Gittin are completely treifeh.
    To make it short and sweet: Any rabbi in Washington that promoted torturing Aharon Friedman to force a GET (that would have been invalid if forced) is guilty of producing mamzerim. Even if some rabbis here and there would deny this, the child who is considered by me and by the leading rabbis of Israel and the leading heads of Beth Dins to be a mamzer surely will not find any normal person who wants to marry. This is the ultimate child abuse, and the rabbis in Washington are fully enthusiastic at doing it.
    Surely the rabbis who are silent about the apikorsim who deny the text of the Torah are not rabbis and their opinions have no standing in Torah. Any rabbi, any shull, any Kollel, that stages programs together with Reform, Conservative or open Orthodox types and honor them as “rabbis”, has lost any authority to be considered an Orthodox authority on the Torah.
    It is time for the honest Torah Jews in Washington to shake off the yoke of the apikorsim and their associates in Washington, to stand up and be counted: “He who is for HaShem, come to me!” as Moshe called out when the Jews worshipped the Golden Calf. Washington DC is a Golden Calf and it must be exposed and at least allow the true Orthodox Jews to have their religion without lies and inventions.
    Reb Yosef Chazak ViEmatz! HaShem is with you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. " Any rabbi, any shull, any Kollel, that stages programs together with Reform, Conservative or open Orthodox types and honor them as “rabbis”, has lost any authority to be considered an Orthodox authority on the Torah."
      Depends on what the programs are and in what sense they are honored. If the program is about a new soya milk, and A Reform rabbis is allowed speak about the product , then that does not invalidate the Orthodox shul.
      In the UK, the previous Chief Rabbi forbade giving an Aliyah to a "Masorti/Conservative Rabbi" in an orthodox shul, because he had denied that the whole Torah is from Hashem via Moses. However, if there was a new hospital being opened, they woudl allow the same conservative fellow to participate in the ceremony.

      Delete
  9. Sod haibur, umeabrim es hanoshin veyoivlosMay 13, 2014 at 3:01 AM


    Houston! We have another big problem. These same alleged rabonim that manufacture mamzerimlech are mechape the mega molesters and the semi mega molestors being mafkir our children to this pega. Why would such alleged rabonim be mechapeh when it is everything against what they have taught. Doubly so, why do they switch tables and harass nebach the victims al lo ovel bekapom, stom piyos and rodef them ad chormoh? Now that is the Sod Haibur. It is these same alleged rabonim that force get meusses, the same rabonim are mechape the Choleras raping our children. Some of these having done the same themselves, some have family members that have done the same, therefore, it is in their best self serving interest to rodef the nirdaf while covering their backs al kol tzoro shelo tovoi. The same reason explains the issur of the Internet. Some alleged rabonim that pasken shailos for women, have touched, raped and even bore mamzerim r'l'. Some have learned these techniques from other rabonim, some needed a tikun from previous gilgulim they had been as a pair. They are constantly on the run, anywhere from Aussie to IL, from IL to Belgelei, from Belgelei to the US, From the US to the UK, vechozer vecholile till they secure an orei miklat with protection of high up. Even when settled, they are still on the move, vayisu michoir hagidgoid vayachnu bekivros hataavo, vayisu mikivros hataavo vayachnu bacharodo , vayisu mihorei hoavorim vayachnu al yarden yerecho, vayisu mimakhelos vayachnu besochas, vayisu mitochas vayachnu besorach, and so it goes. Why is it called Sod haibur? Because they are not only meaber the shonim, but also the noshim and besulois vechol asher bo leyodom, and that is the sod my friend. We are so deep in this mess, that you can find shale oil and snake oil. It is you that put them in power, finance them, only to destroy our children. Wake up, uru yeshenim mitardimaschem we must put them out of commission before it's too late. Stop giving your votes, and stop paying them for the destruction of our children. Enough is enough.
    ,

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't know the facts and am not competent to discuss hilchos gittin - (although I can discuss lomdos on mesechta gittin :-)). However, I can not accept that the godol and marbitz torah R. Shmuel Kaminetzky is going against halacha.

    ReplyDelete
  11. makeh beseser beilum shem, al ma velamah?May 13, 2014 at 9:24 PM

    In reference to Epstein/Wolmark. Why is it that when Rabbonim act badly the rest of the Rabbinic establishment stays silent?
    Why is it a secret how Tamar was freed provided that it is legit? Maybe others can be helped with the same "freeing" process? Why doesn't he openly disclose who is behind the psak? Megale tefach umchase tfachayim? Not even close.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Humble Jew,
    That is the problem. A Rosh Yeshiva is not trained in halacha but rather to teach certain pages of the Talmud over and over again. If Shalom Kaminetsky supports this lady who claims to be "free" and I understand he offered her as a match to a dear friend of mine, what is his source? Now, if she follows his lead and does marry, and nobody knows who permits her because whoever told her obviously is not talking about it, her children will be mamzerim. This is a Gadol? This is a child molester because making a mamzer is the ultimate child molestation. But I do appreciate your pain and your respect. There was a generation, not this one, when we did respect Rosh Yeshivas. But not now. Not after they make Gittin that produce mamzerim.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By Shalom K. you mean Shmuel?

      Delete
    2. So you claim to know Rav Sholom Kamenetsky Shlita, know what he has learned and what he has not learned and that he is not a Posek.?
      YOU are a liar a fraud and an embarrassment.
      You also claim to be a prophet and know that all cases of Gittin are the wife's fault.
      While you claim to represent real Daas Torah, you are totally lacking in Daas- and therefore also Torah .

      Delete
    3. Eddie is back,
      I mean what I said. It is obvious that Shalom K surely would have asked his father before doing such a wild thing. But Shalom is the doer and the driver as I understand. They are both disgraces and they are both busy making mamzerim.

      Delete
    4. Rabbi Eidensohn has never claimed that all cases of Gittin are the wife's fault.

      Delete
    5. @avf - It is you who is the ORA troll, liar, fraud, and obfuscator here.

      Rav Dovid Eidensohn never claimed to be a prophet, nor did he ever claim that all cases of Gittin are the wife's fault. Rav Eidensohn cites one valid Torah source after another to prove his positions. ORA's "Torah" sources are Jeremy Stern, Tamar Epstein, and the "Orthodox" feminists.

      You and your ORA henchmen despise rabbis like Rav Dovid Eidensohn simply because they expose the severe Torah violations, anti-male bias and injustices, hypocrisy, and lies committed on a regular basis by the feminist "agunah" activists.

      Delete
    6. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 14, 2014 at 3:13 PM

      Honestly Dovid Eidensohn if you are going to be mevazeh talmid chacham at least get the Rav's name correct.

      Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky has an actual Teudah Yadin Yadin from Rav Aharon Kotler. Do you? You claim to be musmach from Rav Kotler, if Rav Kamenetsky's Teuda and learning under Rav Kotler is useless so is your own.

      A musmach of the Chafetz Chaim himself felt that Rav Kamenetsky was fit to sit on a Beis Din with him, but you claim he is ignorant of halacha... What world do you live in? How is it, that you, not even sure if Rav Kamenetsky is behind whatever or not, and unwilling to talk to him about it, but instead simply relying on lashon hara, and possibly motzei shem ra, feel that you can deprecate a talmid chacham that a musmach of the Chafetz Chaim felt fit to sit on his Beis Din?

      Delete
  13. Are those criticizing Rabbi Eidenshon with regard to his position on Rabbis Kamenetsky in this matter claiming that Rabbis Kamenetsky have not stated that Tamar may remarry, or that Rabbis Kamenetsky have stated that Tamar may remarry?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 14, 2014 at 3:06 PM

      Doesn't matter. Rav SHMUEL Kamenetsky is an actual musmach of Rav Aharon Kotler Z"L. He was made a chaver of a Beis Din by Rav Leizerowsky a musmach Yadin Yadin of the Chafetz Chaim, Rav Dov Brisman musmach Yadin Yadin from Rav Shach and Rav Leizerowsky, and Rav Aharon Felder musmach Yadin Yadin of Rav Moishe Feinstein.

      He is being maliciously attacked here by a man who has repeatedly claimed hamlatzot as Semicha L'Dayyanut, who hasn't taken the time to call the Rav and discuss the issue with him, and who can't even get his name right...

      When Dovid Eidensohn can produce any form of proof of backing of Gedolei Yisrael that Rav Kamenetsky has, then perhaps he will have something to say on the issue. However, as it is he is simply mevazeh talmid chacham...

      "Rabbis Kamenetsky have not stated that Tamar may remarry, or that Rabbis Kamenetsky have stated that Tamar may remarr?"

      No one has given evidence either way, and instead we see people being mevazeh talmid chacham without even attempting to find out.

      Delete
    2. So it doesn't matter what position Rabbi Kamenetsky is taking. Because it is Rabbi Kamenesky, he is automatically correct and no one has the right to dare question anything he says.

      Delete
    3. This is basically the position in this matter of Rabbi Hershel Schachter who wrote that the absence of any finding against Friedman in this case by any beis din is irrelevant - so long as Rabbi Kamenetsky takes one person's side in a dispute, that person must be right and the other wrong because
      “there already is a sage who’s instructed.”

      Delete
    4. To quote Beis Din Shar Hamishpat:
      To take a position, as Rabbi Hershel Schachter has done in this matter, based on "'there already is a sage who’s instructed' makes a mockery and disgrace of the entire Torah. With such a meaningless statement one can erase all the Torah’s prohibitions, and nullify all integrity and justice, and issue decisions according to whatever one likes in contradiction to the Torah."

      Delete
    5. Some data is not for a blog.
      If you must have the details here is my contact info
      torah104 [at] gmail.com
      (301) 754-1128

      Delete
    6. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 14, 2014 at 4:39 PM

      You are asking about why there is criticism of Dovid Eidenson. I'm saying it doesn't matter what position people THINK Rav Kamenetsky has taken, no one KNOWS what position he has taken or why because no one has bothered to ask him or discuss it with him.

      Dovid Eidensohn is calling a renowned talmid chacham a child molester based on lashon hara... That is absurd.

      Did Gestetner talk with the Rav? NO!!! Did he even here the wife's side before he issued a pesak beis din? NO!!! He is completely discredited on this. Aside from the various Rabbanim and Gedolim who have said that Gestetner is unfit to be a dayyan, you have several infractions of halacha simply in the way he handled the Friedman case. He did not hear from both side, or the Rabbanim involved... He listened to Friedman, was paid by Friedman and issued his pesak according to the wishes of the man writing the check.

      Now we have Dovid Eidensohn who has gone so far as to call a renowned talmid chacham a child molester. Molestation as defined by websters dictionary:
      ": to harm (someone) through sexual contact : to touch (someone) in a sexual and improper way"
      Such filthy language that a talmid chacham should be called a sexual pervert, A RAPIST OF CHILDREN!!! You defend this langauge? You wonder why Dovid Eidensohn is being criticized?!?!?! It is because he uses such filthy and libelous language against a talmid chacham that he has not even bothered to contact to seek his reasoning.
      Such motzei shem ra in which a Talmid Chacham would be called a child molester, a child rapist, a sexual pervert by definition because you don't agree with his position. You need no other reason for well deserved criticism. That is pure opikorus.

      Delete
    7. ORA regularly calls its bullying victims "spousal abusers".

      And you have problems calling someone who ruins the future sex lives of children a molester
      . (Some of these people seem to get their "kicks" by bullying their victims.

      Delete
    8. What is your position on The Kotler fiasco chasing out of town a Talmid Chochom bebizoyon godol oyom venoiro, calling him a molester, just because he wanted to protect our children from being molested as defined by the Webster's dictionary by this great SCHWEIN Kolko S'R'Y' ? Not only that, but robbed him of his parnosse. Thanks to him, now rotting away in jail. WHO MOLESTED WHOM? And YES, having bring an innocent child into this world as a mamzer is as bad as molestation can only be. You have done him in and never had a chance. Does he also have smicha from his father?
      EAT THIS
      "Such filthy language that a talmid chacham should be called a sexual pervert, A RAPIST OF CHILDREN!!! You defend this langauge? You wonder why Dovid Eidensohn is being criticized?!?!?! It is because he uses such filthy and libelous language against a talmid chacham that he has not even bothered to contact to seek his reasoning.
      Such motzei shem ra in which a Talmid Chacham would be called a child molester, a child rapist, a sexual pervert by definition because you don't agree with his position. You need no other reason for well deserved criticism. That is pure opikorus.
      NOW BEAT IT!

      Delete
    9. My offer to communicate directly is still open.

      "I'm saying it doesn't matter what position people THINK Rav Kamenetsky has taken, no one KNOWS what position he has taken or why because no one has bothered to ask him or discuss it with him."

      I have spoken -- twice -- with Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky. I know of others who spoke with him. Contact me and I will give you their contact information. I will also give you Rabbi Kamenetsky's contact information.

      I would respectfully ask if you have carefully reviewed Rabbi Gestetner's letter. He lays out the evidence and brings down the Halacha. If the evidence of the case or the Halacha is other than what is in the letter, perhaps you could point out to us the error you claim to have found. Or perhaps you could explain the reason you are misconstruing the letter to be something other than what it is.

      Where in the letter does it say that Rabbi Gestetner received any compensation for writing the letter?

      The dictionary definition fits Rabbi Eidensohn's use of the term "molestation" very well. In particular, "to touch (someone) in a sexual and improper way." The decision by some to coerce a Get from a husband can affect the wife's future progeny. The coercion can lead to the wife having relations with a man not her husband and to offspring that may have a tremendous challenge finding a spouse in accordance with Halacha. Does the coercion not improperly touch upon the lives of the offspring? Does it not affect the sexual relations of the offspring?

      Please call or email.

      Delete
    10. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 14, 2014 at 7:56 PM

      "What is your position on The Kotler fiasco chasing out of town a Talmid Chochom bebizoyon godol oyom venoiro, calling him a molester, just because he wanted to protect our children from being molested as defined by the Webster's dictionary by this great SCHWEIN Kolko S'R'Y' ? "

      What does the actions of the grandson have to do with the grandfather? You say us and our like you are from Lakewood and know the Yeshiva, yet you say
      "Does he also have smicha from his father? "
      Which demonstrates your ignorance. Rav Malkiel Kotler is the son of Rav Shneur Kotler. He was barely a 10yr old boy when Rav Aharon Kotler was niftar.

      I think it pretty sick that you would try to slander the grandfather for the sins of the grandson.

      Delete
    11. Everyone a rosha gomur, besides for Nuchum!May 15, 2014 at 6:16 AM

      Hamlatza Becomes Semicha,

      You have spoken well. You can see why Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn doesn't have any credibility anymore. What was 20-30 years ago, was 20-30 years ago. He may have been logical back then.
      May be that he wasn't consumed by jealousy back then. He does seem to be envious of the "Talmud teachers" by continuously bringing this up, irrelevantly, while calling them "reshoim gemurim".

      Delete
    12. Hamlatza is only a lotze,May 15, 2014 at 12:47 PM

      1) "What does the actions of the grandson have to do with the grandfather?
      2) You say us and our like you are from Lakewood and know the Yeshiva, yet you say
      3)"Does he also have smicha from his father? "
      4) Which demonstrates your ignorance.
      5) I think it pretty sick that you would try to slander the grandfather for the sins of the grandson.


      1) Just wondering whether he is somech al "kvar horeh hazoken."
      2) Sorry, have no clue where I said such. Lo minei velo miktzosei.
      3) You seem to have it that smicha is metaher mamzerim. It is "KESSEF" that is mitaher, my friend
      4) If unfamiliar with genealogy demonstrates ignorance, so be it. Besides, what does that have to do with the price of eggs in Denmark?
      5) I think you got this just the other way around. 'Adrabah' , R' Aron was from gedoilei hador.
      6) You keep on harping hamlotzes as if s'michas, R' Dovid mentioned more than once that he has smichas as well as Shimush, both from R' Moshe and R' Elyashiv, you seem to ignore, besides, shal neolecho, you couldn't even polish his shoes, even if you wanted to.
      7)"I think it pretty sick that you would try to slander the grandfather for the sins of the grandson."
      I gather that you at least are modeh al hoemes, that labeling a NIRDAF as a RODEF is a sin, thank you.
      8) "Such filthy language that a talmid chacham should be called a sexual pervert", you are stretching it. The mamzer has not asked to be brought into this world with such a grandiose handicap. Anyone contributing to such, is godol avono minsoi, and the damage this does to chances of getting married is even greater than molesting. Unlike the talmid Chacham of Lakewood that his blood has been spilled, and then claiming "Yadenu lo shofcho es hadam hazeh", as a hakores hatov for saving other children. Call it Sdomwood and Fakewood.
      9) A doctor that has great expertise in a particular field of which is his major specialty, is not a comparison to one that is either a lecturer or at best a general practitioner, if any. The key here is, "BAKI BETIV GITTIN VEKIDUSHIN", velo bichdi 'al yehei esek imohem', kappish.
      In addition, without disclosing a detailed report of a scientific proof or a meheichan dantani in this case, it is worthless.
      10) " I am left to conclude that you have no idea of the laws of Gittin." Your conclusions are baseless, without rhyme or reason, abi geredt. yada yada yada...
      11) "Right. And Rav Eliyashyv promoted..."
      hi mosiv lah, vehi mefarek lah
      "Hindsight is always 20/20. We have Gedolim, not Neviim. They cannot see into the hearts of men and see what evil lurks there."
      Granted! At least you've one right.

      Delete
    13. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 1:57 PM

      "6) You keep on harping hamlotzes as if s'michas, R' Dovid mentioned more than once that he has smichas as well as Shimush, both from R' Moshe and R' Elyashiv, you seem to ignore, besides, shal neolecho, you couldn't even polish his shoes, even if you wanted to."

      Um wrong. When questioned about his supposed semichas he said that one was the hamlatza that Rav Moishe Feinstein gave him for his book. The other was a letter of Beracha that Rav Eliyashyv gave him when he said he intended to start a Beis Din. What he has repeatedly done very clearly is claim these hamlatzas as semichas.

      As your reading comprehension is such that you couldn't grasp that point, I see no reasin in going further with your nonsense and obfusication.

      Delete
    14. A shoite becomes a tipeshMay 15, 2014 at 4:45 PM

      "Um wrong..."
      Um what???

      "As your reading comprehension is such that you couldn't grasp that point, I see no reasin in going further with your nonsense and obfusication.
      Osiyos mackimos pessi." read on

      "I have semicha from Reb Moshe Feinstein zt"l that "he knows me many years as someone who penetrates deeply into difficult questions and clarifies them" and I have semicha from Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l to b a Rosh Beth Din using his name."

      A shoite becomes a tipesh, turning into a pathetic pessi. Never mind comprehension, just read the words, maybe it is your remedy. Outside of that, you are a great sport, since you conveniently skipped the first five and all the rest. You are a pathetic liar and a supporter of child molesters, and a mevaze of true talmidei chachomim. I have heard shtussim ank lukshen, but such, I have never heard. Why don't you take two eggs, place them in your shoes, AND BEAT IT!

      Delete
    15. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 5:40 PM

      ""I have semicha from Reb Moshe Feinstein zt"l that "he knows me many years as someone who penetrates deeply into difficult questions and clarifies them" and I have semicha from Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l to b a Rosh Beth Din using his name." "

      Precisely. He is quoting his hamlatza as a semicha. Same thing with Rav Eliyashyv, it is a hamlatza that he is quoting as a semicha. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

      Delete
    16. Mamesh mamesh a yesh meayin. Just read " I have semicha", it does not state I have hamlotze, ve'ein ledayan elo ma she'einov royois. veda"l. Do you understand?

      Delete
    17. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 9:39 PM

      """I have semicha from Reb Moshe Feinstein zt"l that "he knows me many years as someone who penetrates deeply into difficult questions and clarifies them""
      I'm sorry what sort of semicha is that precisely? His semicha says, "I have known him many years ect..."?!?!?!
      Please!!!! This supposed semicha, is the hamlatza in is book. If you go back to his first claim he said clearly Rav Moishe gave him a semicha for his book that he knows him many years ect... He has no actual Yoreh Yoreh or Yadin Yadin from Rav Moishe. He has a hamlatza, NOTHING MORE!!!

      Delete
    18. And how exactly are you privileged to know that he does not have smicha. Indeed, if he did print this in his sefer, how would he have these shnei gedoilei hador let him get away with it. FYI, how does, having him known for many years negate the word "SMICHA". It is very common to add such a phrase as knowing someone for many years, observing his psokim, recommending him with high regards, kdei lehotzi milibam shel tzedoikim, that he barely knew him altogether.

      Delete
  14. Why is this issue so cloudy? What exactly is meaning of FREE? When you find a shailo on the lungs of a beheima it is called a sircha, regardless of the psak whether kosher or not. When none was found, that is when it's called Glatt. That is, no shailos have ocurred. This tamar parsha definitely has a sircha, and the sirachon smells to high heaven. Can anyone explain the meaning and choice of the word FREE? Why not
    such as muteres lehinosse, muteres lechol odom etc.?

    ReplyDelete
  15. It is very telling that those criticizing Rabbis Eidensohn claim that their position is that “all cases of Gittin are the wife's fault.” Neither Rabbi Eidensohn has taken that position. In fact, it is their critics who take that position, but in reverse – that all cases where a wife demands a get are automatically the husband’s fault, and that in all cases the wife must be given a get immediately upon demand regardless of the resolution of issues such as child custody, and that the halacha that coercion may generally not be used to compel the giving of receiving of a get must be overridden as outdated and oppressive.

    It appears to me that what Rabbis Eidensohn have said is that each case must be judged on its merits. A get may generally be given and accepted only by choice; and coercion of any nature is not permitted absent specific circumstances. And Rabbis Eidensohn have also not taken the position that where a wife continually insists upon divorce that she shouldn’t generally be given a get. They have merely noted that halacha invalidates a get obtained through coercion of any nature absent grounds for coercion. They have furthermore noted that a get is not the only issue that must be resolved as part of a divorce and that other issues should also be resolved in a good faith manner. It is true that Rabbis Eidensohn have also noted with dismay the increasing prevalence of divorce within the Orthodox community. This position infuriates those who believe that a woman has an absolute right to a divorce no matter the circumstances and that there can be nothing inherently wrong with destroying a family no matter the grounds or lack thereof (a belief without basis in Judaism, and derived from the worst of 1960s counterculture); and that furthermore a get must be given regardless of the wife’s behavior such as child abduction and preventing her children from having a meaningful relationship with their father.

    Perhaps what is most notable is that Rabbis Eidenshon are not afraid to criticize rabbonim (such as in Vienna and Philadelphia), no matter how prominent those rabbonim are, who irresponsibly intervene in disputes on behalf of insiders and the wealthy and powerful that are acting in an abusive manner, with the effect of inciting and encouraging such abuse and blaming and ostracizing the victim.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rick,
      I think you really said it well.
      Thank you.

      Delete
    2. Hamlata becomes semicha,
      Tell me. The letters published on this blog and distributed elsewhere signed by Rabbi Kaminetsky that called upon the community to terrorize and humiliate a husband for no reason permitted by the Shulchan Aruch, and I mention it, am I saying lies? That is the pattern here. The Rosh Yeshivas do things completely forbidden by the Shulchan Aruch, Rishonim and great poskim, including the great rabbis in Israel today, and when I say this, and show the sources for my complaints, and mention that I spoke to many of these Rosh Yeshivas, including RSK, about the laws of Gittin, and they don't know the laws of Gittin, along comes somebody and says whatever they say. Of course, no sources.

      Delete
    3. Hamlata becomes semicha,
      Tell me. The letters published on this blog and distributed elsewhere signed by Rabbi Kaminetsky that called upon the community to terrorize and humiliate a husband for no reason permitted by the Shulchan Aruch, and I mention it, am I saying lies? That is the pattern here. The Rosh Yeshivas do things completely forbidden by the Shulchan Aruch, Rishonim and great poskim, including the great rabbis in Israel today, and when I say this, and show the sources for my complaints, and mention that I spoke to many of these Rosh Yeshivas, including RSK, about the laws of Gittin, and they don't know the laws of Gittin, along comes somebody and says whatever they say. Of course, no sources.

      Delete
    4. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 1:51 PM

      Where does the Shulhan Arukh say that people cannot encourage a person to give a get? That is all a protest is.

      Delete
    5. I assume you are familiar with the view of Rabbeinu Tam?

      If I tell you that you give a person the choice of having a broken arm or giving a get - what is wrong with that. It is simply encouraging a person to give a get - it is up to him to and his free choice to convince himself which is more important? Let's make it easier - what is the choice is to be chained in front of the shul and everybody spits on him or giving a get? Simple persuasion right? He can decide that the withholding of the get is more important to him. He does have free choice. It is simply persuasion. Right? What if he has a choice of losing his job or giving the get. Free choice by persuasion. Right? The person is simply persuading himself which he prefers.. Right? So as long as he can chose the refuse to give a get - there can not be a case of get me'usa according to your profound understanding of the halacha. Right?

      However for the rest of us who have gone the the relevant teshuvos (which I translated and put on this blog) that is not the understanding of the gedolim throughout the ages. The exception being the Rambam and who readily permits force against a husband.

      Bottom line - according to you a baseball bat or brass knuckles are simply instruments of persuasion and encouragement. Right?

      Delete
    6. Not so encouraging at allMay 15, 2014 at 4:17 PM

      Kidnapping, cattle prodding, bullying, intimidating, giving makos retzach, karate chopping, is that what you call a protest? Of course all they meant was leshem shamayim. What about the grandiose chilul hashem, Huh? All this is giving a black eye for klall yisroel. Have you heard them encouraging to protest the serial molestation of our children? Have they felt the pain of Rabbi _being denigrated in the worst possible manner? For what, for saving other children from being raped? My dear, not so encouraging at all. Only a warped mind can twist around like a pretzel to be metaher such asher Korcho BaDerech nikes. And what have You done to our tinoykes shel beis rabon to encourage a first line of defense outside of mechapeh? Is sitting together with a band of Reshoim limkor es 'Yosef' be'esrim kossef devorim shel ma bekach? Epstein's and cohorts is a beis din chotzif, neged Hashem vetoirosoi.

      Delete
    7. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 4:45 PM

      I understand that your brother is being shown to be a liar regarding his many supposed semichas, and a rambling fool who is sticking his head where it honestly doesn't belong, so you feel the need to defend him. However, how about sticking to the topic instead of just making stuff up?

      Standing on a picket line, even with a megaphone is nowhere near the view of Rabbeinu Tam. Rabbeinu Tam is much worse.

      Where did Rav Kamenetsky ever say to use or threaten violence? Not a single teshuva that you brought discussed verbal protests, NOT ONE. It is very telling that you need to obfusicate with all of these extreme examples, and teshuvas that are about other things, and then say that you have somehow proved your point.

      You are fine with engaging in opikorus and being mevazeh talmid chacham, when you have never even spoken to him or asked him for his reasoning, and you use the title daas torah.

      No wonder all the actual lamdans have left and the only people that populate the comment threads here anymore are your ignorant sycophants. Why don't you get a real rabbi to comment on here, someone with a real semicha not just some hamlatza that he picked up along the way? Or at the very least approach the Gedolim and Talmid Chachams that your are baselessly being mevazeh and actually ask them for their reasoning maybe you and your brother will pick up some Torah along with those hamlatzas.

      Delete
    8. @Ham you seem to be ignorant of the facts of not only this case but also the recent Weiss Dodelson in which Rav Kaminetseky inserted himself without halachic justification for example

      http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2013/11/weiss-dodelson-az-asks-why-i-dont-agree.html

      On the basis of a siruv from a beis din that had no authority Rav Kaminetsky said that the husband should be kicked out of his kollel, the father and uncle should lose their jobs, that it was permitted to embarrass the husband and force him to give a get!

      Regarding your statement about demonstrations - again you seem to be ignorant of the teshuvos and in particular what Rabbeinu Tam permits - unless you are in agreement with Rav Schachter who says he follows whatever Rav Kaminetsky says. Rabbeinu Tam permits withdrawing of benefits not publiclly embarrassing someone. Please show me the teshuva of Rav Moshe Feinstein or Rav Eliashiv or Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach etc that permitts public demonstrations and calls for people to lose jobs as well as articles in the secular press. You might want to read the teshuva of Rav Sternbuch about the care to avoid public embarrassment to avoid get me'usa. Rav Weber of Neve Yaakov once stopped someone from getting up in shul and denouncing the husband "because of the problem of get me'usa." We have gone through this many times and you are the one who is ignorant of the subject and avoiding the issues.

      Delete
    9. @ham you might want to read this also

      http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/04/friedman-epstein-what-halahic.html

      Delete
    10. Read this also where Rav Schachter who apparently approves violence to force a get - no different than an ex- slave who needs to be taught a lesson in the Friedman Epstein case - claims he is relying on Rav Kaminetsky to require a get even when no beis din that heard both sides said such a thing and in fact the beis din of Rav Kaminetsky had not authority in the case - it was still the Baltimore beis din

      http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/04/rav-schachter-i-relied-on-rav.html

      http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/04/rav-schachters-daas-torah-lettercontext.html

      Delete
    11. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 9:30 PM

      " Please show me the teshuva of Rav Moshe Feinstein or Rav Eliashiv or Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach etc that permitts public demonstrations and calls for people to lose jobs as well as articles in the secular press."
      Please show me the Teshuva where they say they are ossur? You are the one who is being mevazeh talmid chacham without so much as speaking to him. The burden of proof is on you. Give a teshuva that says protests are forbidden.

      "On the basis of a siruv from a beis din that had no authority"
      Please I forget what simon of the Shuchan Aruch says that a person is allowed to ignore a summons to a beis din? Where are the teshuvos stating that a person is allowed to ignore a summons to a beis din? You are talking nonsense. Utter nonsense. You need to spend less time blogging and more time learning the Shulchan Aruch.

      As far as financially punishing the father and other relatives, that is mafoorash in the Beis Yosef. It is just the husband that you cannot financially pressure. Maybe you and your brother should actually learn some beis yosefs before you begin to speak on what is and isn't permitted.

      "Read this also where Rav Schachter who apparently approves violence to force a get "
      I have read those LIES that you wrote about Schachter. Convenient to put up a table of contents for a lecture no longer easily publicly available. However, he read a daf of the Gemorro and explained what was written on the daf. He EXPLICITLY said that this isn't done today. Are you advocating cutting out dafs from the gemarra simply because that isn't the final halakha? What narshecheit are you trying to push as daas torah? They only people who hear that as a approval of violence are perverts who want to besmirch a man, and have nothing of any substance with which to do it. It is SHOCKING that a man who writes books in English can't understand English well enough to understand EXACTLY what Schachter said in that recording, and how it isn't the halakha... But why stop with him?!?!?! Rav Reisman teaching the same daf explains how the Gemorro is talking about hitting a husband:
      http://www.mp3shiur.com/viewProd.asp?catID=37
      Is he also advocating violence?!?!?! Are you also going to put up blog posts about that Rosh Yeshiva and how he advocates violence against get refusers? Or is it that it was just convenient for your ends in supporting Friedman to so slanderously mevazeh talmid chacham that you wrote those LIES about Schachter?

      Delete
    12. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 9:35 PM

      "Rabbeinu Tam permits withdrawing of benefits not publiclly embarrassing someone."
      Not allowing a man an Aliyah. Not counting him in the minyan. These things are public embarrassment. If you don't think so, let the Rabbi of whatever shul you doven in(supposing that someone who is so mevazeh talmid chacham even dovens) and have him say that you are such a sinner that you cannot have an aliyah or be counted in a minyan. See if that is not public embarassment!!!!

      Delete
    13. @ham you are showing your utter ignorance. Not giving a person an aliya is not the same thing as having a mob in front of your house screaming at you. If you read Rabbi Sternbuch's teshuva on the subject he says not to publicize that he is being deprived because of the get.

      you don't seem to understand elementary halachic issues - but are simply becoming hysterical. Please stick to the issues or is that too hard for you?

      Delete
    14. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 10:03 PM

      "you don't seem to understand elementary halachic issues - but are simply becoming hysterical. Please stick to the issues or is that too hard for you?"
      GREAT ADVICE!!! You should heed it yourself. You are right having a mob in front of your house is very different than Rabbeinu Tam, it is much less embarrassing.
      I like how you call someone ignorant because there are no teshuvos to back up the nonsense that you are spewing.

      Delete
    15. @ham you can keep repeating how much you know - but your response clearly indicates you are an am haaretz in these matters. Even Rabbeinu Tam can not be used when there is no valid beis din and Rabbi Kaminetsky calling for demonstrations even before they announced that because of the seruv that he should be pressured. At the same time the Baltimore Beis Din - the only one authorized by both sides was saying it was premature since there had been no psak that Ahron needed to give a get.

      Delete
    16. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 11:47 PM

      You can keep hurling insults each time you are shown to be wrong. That doesn't make you a lamdan. So you read a hand full of teshuvos, while ignoring any that didn't agree with your predetermined position. You hurl insults when shown to be wrong... But you have yet to be able to offer a cogent argument that doesn't ignore major portions of halacha.
      Again why don't you talk with Rav Kamenetsky about it, instead of simply being mevazeh talmid chacham?

      Delete
    17. @ham you have not given any halachic defense for Rabbi Kaminetsky's behavior. Your entire explanation is to claim that what I am saying is nonsense. A rather absurd answer for someone who claims to know halacha and that I don't. You haven't shown any evidence of knowing halacha or even the facts of the case.

      To repeat, a person has no obligation to give a get based on a seruv. Rabbi Kaminetsky insisted that Ahron needed to be pressured to give a get at the time that the Baltimore beis din - the only beis din recognized by both sides who signed an agreement to follow - said that there was no psak that he needed to give a get. Without a legitimate psak from a accepted beis din - there is no justification for pressure of any type. But of course you claim that my arguments from halacha aren't valid - without explaining why.

      Rabbi Kaminetsky has been approached and has refused to give explanation for his conduct.

      Rabbi Shalom. Kaminetsy with the apparent approval of his father considers that Tamar is now free - without a get. There is no halachic justification for this view and they have offered no justification even when asked.

      Let me repeat to make sure you understand the problem. Rabbi Kaminetsy has ignored the only legitimate beis din, paskening solely based on non-halachic considerations , encouraging pressure to give a get when halacha doesn't require one - and then after several years of this to suddenly decide that there wasn't a need for a get in the first place withouth any halachic basis and he refuses to offer any.

      Delete
    18. Superintendant ChalmersMay 16, 2014 at 5:09 AM

      I have already refuted the lie that Rav Schachter's letter endorses violence, in past posts on this site. I will repost my remarks here. I find it disturbing that Daas Torah willfully repeats this lie, even after he has read my explanation of Rav Schachter's words.

      The letter is rather straightforward, and does not call for violence. Allow me to summarize what the letter says for those who can't understand Rav Schachter's words on their own.

      1) From R Akiva Eiger and Shvus Yaakov, you see there is kfiya al Hamitzvos to prevent an aguna case. 2) From BK 28a, you see that an individual can do kfiya al hamitzvos without B"D bc naase yado kishliach b"d. Hence, individuals can/should help an aguna receive a get, even without psak of a B"D.

      To summarize, the letter says that you don't need psak of a b"d to help an aguna receive a get. Any mention of violence in any of the sources is besides the point. (There are lots of gemaras that talk about violence, and it is impossible to discuss ANY halachic matter without referring to gemaras that mention violence or physical punishment. if you want to change the Torah and disregard any gemara that refers to violence, then you are the one distorting the Torah.)

      Anyone who takes this letter as a call for violence needs is either intentionally distorting, is a total am haaretz, or needs to work on their reading comprehension. (Perhaps all of the above.)

      Delete
    19. If they checked the ketuba and found an error, she is free... And since the ketuba is with her, not with him, he might not be aware that his marriage was found invalid.

      Problem solved.

      I wonder why you halacha whizzes did not come up with this very easy solution to this problem.

      Delete
    20. @Superintendant Chalmers wrote:
      I have already refuted the lie that Rav Schachter's letter endorses violence, in past posts on this site. I will repost my remarks here. I find it disturbing that Daas Torah willfully repeats this lie, even after he has read my explanation of Rav Schachter's words.
      ==============
      I never said that his letter permitted violence but he does indicate in his shiurim posted at YU - as noted in the post - that he inidcate that violence is permitted to get someone to do the right thing.

      Delete
    21. @patience wrote:

      If they checked the ketuba and found an error, she is free... And since the ketuba is with her, not with him, he might not be aware that his marriage was found invalid.

      your premise is wrong and so is your conclusion. An error in the kesuba does not invalidate the marriage.

      Delete
  16. I personally spoke to R Shmuel Kaminetsky about the laws of Gittin, and I am sure he does not know the laws of Gittin. I also spoke to other major RoshYeshivas who signed various letters in defiance of open halochose in Shulchan Aruch, the Poskim, and the opinions of the great rabbis living in Israel. They are also not qualified and not learned in the laws of Gittin. Why should they be? They are Rosh Yeshivas, meaning they teach a small section of the Talmud over and over. Why should they be experts in Gittin? But if so, why are they writing letters, signing letters, and paskening to destroy men without talking to that man, without knowing well the laws of Gittin? And why has this lady supported for so long by R Shmuel Kaminetsky now declaring herself ready to remarry without a GET and we hear no protest from R Shmuel and his son, his right hand man in the Yeshiva, Shalom, openly supports getting her remarried. Now, is that not a mamzer factory? Just what is it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 14, 2014 at 7:43 PM

      So you know better than Rav Aharon Kotler Z"L, who you claim is your rebbe, Rav Leizerowski, Rav Dov Brisman and Rav Aharon Felder? Excuse me, but that is the most absurd thing I have heard yet. Why would Rav Aharon Kotler give him semicha, a real semicha not just a hamlatza if he was ignorant of the laws that he was giving him semicha to judge and to teach? Why would Rav Leizerowski, who sat on a Beis Din for the Chafetz Chaim, seat him on his own Beis Din to judge and give gittin? Why would Rav Dov Brisman who learned Gittin under Rav Shach and Rav Felder who learned them under Rav Moishe Feinstein allow him to remain on their Beis Din judging and giving Gittin? As the Chaveirim of the Philadelphia Beis Din sit and learn these halachos together three days a week, would they not have noticed that he didn't know or understand those halachos? I am left to conclude that you have no idea of the laws of Gittin.

      Delete
    2. Rav Kamenitsky sat on a bais din with Wolmark - Does that not tell us all we need to know about his integrity.

      Delete
    3. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 14, 2014 at 10:17 PM

      Right. And Rav Eliyashyv promoted Yona Metzger to the chief Rabbinate, he set up a Beit Din for Gerut consisting of Eisenstein, Kohen(a known rapist) and Tropper. So I guess that tells us all we need to know about his integrity as well.
      Hindsight is always 20/20. We have Gedolim, not Neviim. They cannot see into the hearts of men and see what evil lurks there.

      Delete
    4. Does anyone know how the kiddushin was annulled, and do the Roshei Yeshiva in America, such as those mentioned by Hamlatza agree that it is possible to do this?

      Delete
    5. No one agrees, hence they ping pong back and forth. ORA is R' schachter, who posted Tamar is Free, Free my foot! Much rather a Te'eino = a Feig. He claims ukvar 'horeh hazoken". No specifics what hoireh hazoken, what ingredients went into the equation, and as to who the zoken might be, therefore, ein li esek benistoros. This whole purim shpil sounds like an avoideh zoro. They threw in a pitka " Aleh Shor", and wallah, out of the coccoon came out a butterfly, and is now FREE. Veal kaze neemar, "Uvirtzoinom ikru shor", ze Yosef!
      If it sounds like a Fraud, wiggles like a fraud, walks and talks like a fraud, rest assured it is a Fraud. Umidechotzif kulay hay, shma mina...

      Delete
  17. @ Ham. etc
    Is it possible someone is spoofing your profile name? At first you seemed to maintain that Semicha and other indications to an individual that they are capable of being relied on in matters of Torah represents a blanket seal of approval; now you seem to be indicating otherwise...?

    ReplyDelete
  18. @ Ham
    The criticism of this Bais Din is not hindsight. You can read about the accusations made against the Bais Din on this blog by myself and others from 2 years ago. The FBI arrests only verified what we all already knew. Yet R’ Kamenetsky chose to align himself with such individuals.

    “A musmach of the Chafetz Chaim, Rav Leizerowsky felt that Rav Kamenetsky knew what he was doing in the halachot of Gittin and such to seat him on his Beis Din.”

    @Ham please do explain R” Kaminetsky’s position on this matter - this from an article in the Washington Jewish Week from December 2010.

    “”Currently, the Epstein-Friedman case remains open but dormant, as “neither party has approached” the Baltimore beit din, requesting that it reconvene, according to Rabbi Mordechai Shuchatowitz, a rabbi on the court. “Right now,” he said, “the ball is in [Epstein's] court” because, as the party seeking the get, she is responsible for reinitiating proceedings. Since the court has yet officially to order a get, Shuchatowitz said, it’s “a bit premature” to be holding rallies and other events meant “to pressure [Friedman] because he’s not been given his day in court.” After all, “you can’t disobey something you’ve not been told to do.”
    Other rabbinic authorities, however, have backed Epstein, decreeing that once a civil court resolves a divorce, there is no excuse for a man to deny a get. "Despite the fact that a civil divorce is already final," Friedman is unethically holding Epstein hostage, wrote Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky, a dean at the Talmudical Yeshiva of Philadelphia” “”

    R’ Kamenetsky feels that he can act as the judge, jury and executioner and that he can defy a Bais Din?

    If he feels that he can defy a Bais Din it isn’t such a stretch that he can annul a marriage is it?

    Now Ham who is the one that is ignorant in Halacha?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 2:02 PM

      There were rumors about Wolmark two years ago. So what? The Beis Din to which you are protesting was from more than two years ago.

      Further I challenge you to put that same criteria to Rav Eliyashyv. He put Kohen on a Beis Din AFTER the man had been convicted of rape. Turned out that he was a pedophile too, for which he now sits in jail. Do you think it was advisable to put a convicted rapists on Beis Din that primarily handled geirus of women?

      Simply because a gadol misjudges someone's character now and again does not mean that they are lacking integrity or knowledge.

      Delete
    2. Only at that time it was already known their shmutzig tactics. As for R' Elyashiv, Yochonon Kohen godol tochiach.

      Delete
    3. @YisStein - "R’ Kamenetsky feels that he can act as the judge, jury and executioner and that he can defy a Bais Din?" - Your comment is right on target despite Ham's obfuscations.

      In fact, the truth is much worse than what is being revealed here. If you'll carefully investigate, you'll find that R’ Kamenetsky has a history of supporting Jewish women in divorce situations K'NEGED HALACHA.

      There are in fact many other cases of R’ Kamenetsky's involvement in divorce conflicts K'NEGED HALACHA but the victimized Jewish husbands rightfully fear retribution in the "Orthodox" community should they speak out with the EMES.

      Delete
  19. Dont forget the truthMay 15, 2014 at 4:24 PM

    Please re-read what YisStein wrote above. The Baltimore Beis Din, clearly the beis din that both Friedman and Epstein agreed to go to, NEVER, I repeat NEVER NEVER gave the psak or even told Friedman to give a get. Epstein 'ran away' from the beis din, did not want to follow their orders. Epstein then goes beis din shopping, all of whom turn her down, until she gets a seiruv against Friedman, from none other then those now awaiting trial after being arrested by the FBI. Again, NO PSAK to give a get, Epstein is simply a moredes. The only question is whey the Baltimore beis din did not write a seiruv agains Epstein. They simply don't have the 'backbone' to do so and are very scared of the Epstein party.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "Despite the fact that a civil divorce is already final," Friedman is unethically holding Epstein hostage, wrote Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky, a dean at the Talmudical Yeshiva of Philadelphia” “”
    He may or may not be correct.
    But ethics is not Torah, and Torah is not ethics.
    for example:
    is it ethical???
    a person born from a union of a married woman and another man - a mamzer to be forbidden to marry into the Kahal. what did the person do wrong?
    buy and sell slaves.. they are human beings: how can you sell them?
    Bais din kills someone for killing ... for cursing ... for working on Shabbos?
    ask the peta people.. how can we slaughter animals?? to eat ??? to sacrifice on the mizbaiach... to use for clothing??? is this ethical??
    there is halacha and there is ethics
    never confuse the two...the torah - halacha and bais din were never mechyaiv mr friedman to give a get.. don't tell me about ethics
    don't mix the two

    ReplyDelete
  21. There is no one that has yet to explain the basis in Halacha for R Kamenitsky's position not HAM not avf not even R Kamenitsky himself.

    "Don't forget the truth" HAM read what I wrote but there was no explanation 3 years ago and there still isn't one now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 15, 2014 at 5:45 PM

      Why don't you sit down with Rav Kamenetsky and ask him instead of being mevazeh talmid chacham? I understand that Torah is dangerous to ignorance, but it won't hurt you to bad to learn a little bit.

      Delete
    2. I did - 4 years ago - and the rosh yeshiva said - 'there is nothing to talk about , it has been settled let him give a get'

      Delete
    3. I'm not being mevazeh a talmid chacham - with his actions he has embarrassed himself.

      Delete
    4. friend,
      Four years ago, there was not even a purported "seruv" or any beis din order to give a get. In fact, the beis din to which the parties brought the matter and actually had several hearings with the participation of both parties did not rule that a get should be given. At the time, that Beis Din said that taking any actions against Friedman was wrong.
      Rabbi Kamenetsky intervened and made public pronouncements contradicting that beis din and attacking Friedman because he was advocating on behalf of the Epstein family to which he is very close.
      Rabbi Kamenetsky's statements should be taken for what they are: advocacy on behalf of the Epstein family, even though that advocacy was contrary to the Beis Din that actually heard the case.

      Delete
  22. "what is the choice is to be chained in front of the shul and everybody spits on him or giving a get? Simple persuasion right? "

    That's exactly why I am convinced that get extortion is extortion (Nötigung) and a crime, or at least it is undue pressure that can make transactions invalid.

    If a man withhold a get for a long period of time (after civil divorce) and says. "Give me 500'000$ and I will give you the get", I think
    1) The wife can recuperate the sum because she wad taken advantage of (Übervorteilung in swiss civil law)

    2) it might be possible that this even fullfills the crime of extortion (Nötigung), and she might not pay and have him punished (although this would fail to procure her the get, so it is better that she gives a check, receives the get, and goes to court afterwards, as this french woman did.

    http://medias-presse.info/tempete-dans-la-communaute-juive-le-grand-rabbin-michel-gugenheim-eclabousse/9939
    (withholding the get for several years and sa

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Patience, it appears that you are assuming that she has a "right" to the get in the first place. What is the basis of your assunmption that there is such a "right"?

      Delete
    2. get extortion begins only when all issues are settled c'halacha and a legitimate bais din (that has authority) paskens that the husband is obligated by halacha to give a get or when a legitimate bais din paskens to issue a seiruv because the husband refuses to go to din.
      it also begins - on the part of the wife - if she goes to secular court to settle the issues and refuses to go to bais din. then she is guilty of extortion.

      Delete
    3. Contrary to what your cult leader jeremy stern has told you. Not every woman is entitled to a get because they ask for one. The gemara lays out who really is entitled to one and who is not.

      Delete
    4. The fact that he wants a sum of money in exchange for the get in itself is extortion.

      And no Rabbi or Beith Din should condone this kind of deals...

      The blog owner condones asking for money in exchange for a get. Therefore, he has lost all credibility in my eyes.

      Delete
    5. A man who is a shomer mitzvoth should give a get, after a settlement period of 6-12 months at most, because if he does not, he is over
      - lifney iver al tassim michshol (what if she has an affair?)
      - not to be cruel to your neighbor
      If he asks for money in exchange for the get, he also commits
      - ona'at rea
      - gezel

      Delete
    6. @Patience - do you have children? If you were divorcing would you give up on your child? Is insisting on a relationship with your child and not giving a get in order to get fair custody arrangment something you would insist the husband give up because he should be more concerned that his wife will commit adultery if he doesn't give in to her demands?!

      If the wife caused major debt through legal fees - without halachic justification - in the process of taking their child away and the only way to recover that loss is by making the get conditional on her repaying that debt - then there is no gezel and there is no extortion. In fact it is the wife who threatened and in fact caused him major financial loss if he did accept her taking their child away from him - who is doing the extortion and gezel.

      I would agree that if a man arbitrarily said he wasn't giving a get unless he got a million dollars that that would constitute extortion. But to recover money that was spent to preserve elementary Torah rights to custody is not extortion.

      Delete
    7. Thje Friedman guy (and also the Weiss guy) has access to his child.

      He would like more, he sees a problem because it takes a long drive, but he can have access to his child if he wants.

      In general, it is better to entertain a good relationship with the ex, for the child's sake.

      The get-refusal tactic undermines positive relationships between the parents, and guess who will suffer? You got it: the child.

      So, yes, He has a child: one more reason to stay on good terms with his ex, one more reason to give the get.

      I am often appalled at the mores in the US where non-custodial parents run to court every monday and thursday, to force their child to see them (even against their will).

      Do you really think this kind of strategy is conducive to a strong bond with the child and an appropriate climate for the child to grow up in.

      I have a friend. Her husband wanted shared custody, she did not, so she left custody to him (had to pay child support to a jewish, frum man). The children refused to see her at one point in time (they were probably brainwashed by their father). What did she do? Nothing. Because you cannot do anything. Anything you do (e.g. bring the children with the police) will make the situation worse, not better.

      That what the Friedmanns, Weisses, Joes, Emesle yaakov, Eidensons of this world fail to understand.

      Delete
    8. @Patience you are wrong and I assume you have no children. of course it is good if there is no tension between parents. In fact it would have been even nicer if they got along and didn't get divorced. You keep bringing this subject up as if you have something new to say that only you understand - not the rest of us mortals. You have some basic inablity to understand the facts of these cases.

      Delete
  23. "Hamlatzas becomes semicha" rants make no sense on one hand he is questioning how dare anyone question r' shmuel because of his semicha from r' aaron but on the other hand he claims r' elyashiv is not a navi and made a mistake. Are you claiming that r' shmuel is higher than moshe rabbeinu or holier than r' yochanan ben zakkaI? While r' shmuel may be head of the moetzes it doesn't mean he is a malach. Only christians believe that their leaders can never make a mistake or fall victim to the yezer hara

    While hbs might not like r' eidensohns tone. You cant ignore the facts that were written from r' gestetners beis din and the concerns that are there. Rabbi eidensohn has dealt with the case and has spoke to the parties involved, has brought sources for his claims. He has given us his real name and number.

    Hbs, please before shooting your mouth off and knocking r' eidensohn why don't you tell everyone your real name and who has given you semicha /hamlatza? Have you spoken to reb shmuel or the joe orlow? Until then why dont you leave the argument to the adults and stop acting like a brainwashed child.

    If in fact r' shmuel did receive toivas hanah from the epstein family for so many years , then his letter attacking aharon friedman is extremely problematic.
    Since you mentioned reb aharon I would like to remind you of the famous mayseh of involving him. . Rav aharon was so yosher that he refused to give a farher to a future shoichet because that shoichet once gave him a gift in his shaloch manos. I am sure that had R' Aharon received toivas hanah from the epstein family he would have never involved himself with a case like this!

    Point is that if the philly yeshivah has or continues to receive toivas hanah from the epstein family how could he pasken on this situation? People have a right to question and find the truth. People relied on the nemanus of shabbsai tzvi and look what he became. I am not c'v saying that reb shmuel is that. All I am trying to say that when it comes to mamzeirus and eishes ish there needs to be an explanation! Attacking those who want to know the truth because they care about fearing hashem and trying to do the right thing is not yosher and a perfect example of what our generation is facing today. If you were a real yirei shamayim and cared about hashem you would do your due diligence before attacking r' eidensohn in a public forum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a messy machlokes, and many of you are not shaving or cutting hair as the case may be. Maybe not even bathing or listening to music etc. If the non Yemenites who keep these restrictions, are so "frum" then try remembering also why you are keeping these strictures. it is not about being part of the self-pity club, it is because you are mourning Rabbis who acted like the people here - insulting each other rather than debating seriously without resorting to insults.

      Delete
    2. eddie is back - not sure what you are trying to say? truth seeker is trying to have a serious halacha debate. HBS has repeated himself over and over with out mentioning anything of substance to the halachic aspect of this debate. His technique of attacking r eidensohn is not answering the serious questions that have been brought up in the post.

      Delete
  24. Hamlatza Becomes SemichaMay 16, 2014 at 12:58 AM

    You can keep spewing your propaganda all you want, that doesn't make it true. Since you have been "covering" this case you have repeatedly ignored teshuvos that don't agree with your predetermined views. You have repeatedly ignored the halacha. You have continuously ignored rational argument. When presented with any of the above you hurl insults and then repeat the same LIES over and over and over again.

    A lie, no matter how many times you repeat it does not become true.

    No matter how many times your brother claims that his hamlatzas are semichas they will not be so.

    No matter how many times you try to say Rav Kamenetsky is ignorant of halacha, it doesn't make it so.

    You can continue to repeat these lies, but they are simply LIES, and their repetition will not make them true.

    "Rabbi Kaminetsky has been approached and has refused to give explanation for his conduct."
    Right... Sure... some commenter that you have never met and don't even know says so, and since it fits into your predetermined views it MUST be so. Have you approached him? Have you gone to him and said, "Hi, I am going to be mevazeh you unless you sit down and tell me your reasons and sources?" NO!!! You simply accept hearsay because you like it and it conforms to what you want to believe and the image you want to project.

    Here is a better question. Assuming that any of the LIES you have put forth have any merit. Have you approached Rav Dov Brisman or Rav Aharon Felder to ask them how it is that they can continue to sit with such a person on a Beis Din? NO!!! And why not, because you don't want to hear the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ham you simply repeat your nonsense and refuse to discuss the issues therefore there is no more reason to post your comments.

      Delete
  25. And I bet 5 years ago when you were trying to get the marriage back together, he said the same thing "there's nothing to talk about". and he also said that he can't get involved because he knows the Epstein family. but when it was time to ruin Friedman's life, then he was able to get involved!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Only a Fraud, there are no FREE lunchesMay 18, 2014 at 2:11 PM

    I would entertain the thought that this whole FREE business is an intentional fraud, so that Mr. Epstein should also be in a bind not being able to remarry, thereby come running on four. Who exactly authorized the so called FREEDOM is under shade, so it is difficult to nail him. "FREE" is not the Talmudic expression of muteres lechol odom. How exactly she was FREED is also not been publicised. Therefore, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, wiggles like a duck, it is a duck. Does anyone clearly know that she is dating and going out, outside of "Redding" shiduchim? Probably only those from the mamzerim factories are being "redd", since this whole kipcaboodle sounds like a smelly red herring. If it should really work, then "Epstein Wolmark and his thugs" are back in business, minus the PRODS.

    ReplyDelete

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