Tuesday, February 3, 2015

Weiss files motion to dismiss Rivky's remaining claims because they are lies

Uziel Frankel
Update - see Weiss supplement to motion to dismiss Feb 11 2015

At this point Rivky has failed to produce evidence for any of her claims against her husband or his family. Most of the claims have beenr rejected by the courts. It has clearly been shown that her beis din is not an actual beis din and the seruv and the psak that were issued are not authentic.

 This document asserts bluntly that her claims are lies and provides evidence to support this claim. Furthermore it alleges that Uziel Frankel is the mastermind behind Rivky's campaign against Yoel Weiss and his family. 
Rivky's Face Book Picture

It is now up to the judge to decide whether to throw out Rivky Stein's case and thus vindicate Yoel or to accept the possiblity that the charges are valid and proceed with a trial.

This is the 6 page filing. It does not include the supporting documents which will be published later.



==========update Feb 3 ==
SEE Rav Menashe Klein's teshuva  that states the majority of achronim(including the Maharsham and  Rav Moshe Feinstein] pasken that if the wife goes to secular court without the permission of beis din - the husband does not need to deposit a get with beis din - unless he wants a heter meah rabbonim [as stated by Rav Moshe Sternbuch]. She only receives the get when she renounces all rulings of the secular court

121 comments :

  1. Did Yoel get a heter meah rabbonim?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Asher pihem diber shavFebruary 1, 2015 at 10:26 PM

    How ironic that you post the Rivky/Yoel case right after you post the gemara "לא חרבה ירושלים אלא שדנו דיניהם דין תורה ״ Basically, they did the exact law, and didn't realize that this was not the time or place for it.

    Now we all know that the halacha is with Yoel. He isn't obligated to give a get to Rivky. However, why he chooses not to, and to keep this marriage going, is beyond common sense. It is obvious to all that she won't be sleeping with him anymore. There is a possibility of her sleeping with someone else, eventually if he doesn't give her a get. The Rambam says Kofin "shelo yihyu Bnos Yisroel Hefker". He seems to be winning in court. Good for him! But what is there in it for him to be married to her ? it is foolish in my opinion. I am here to open his eyes to the obvious. It is obvious that eventually, he will give a get to Rivky. Therefore, knowing that he will eventually give this get, what is to be gained by not giving it earlier ?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Asher pihem diber shavFebruary 1, 2015 at 11:06 PM

    פוטר מים ראשית מדון ולפני התגלע הריב נטוש. True now there is a lawsuit. Who guided him till this point ? Why would it ever come to a lawsuit ? Of course, now there are multiple issues. My advice is brilliant. Other than throwing his Halachic right at me, which I don't deny, do you have any reasons why he benefits by not giving a get ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Asher we have been around this circle before. Please tell me the posek you accept who says to give a divorce when not only are issues not resolved but she has filed a multimillion dolloar law suit against him in secular court which has not be resolved. In addition Uziel Frankel has filed another lawsuit against him.

    Which posek says to give a Get in these circumstances?

    In sum - you are throwing out nonsensical advice without bothering to find out what the facts are.

    ReplyDelete
  5. One reason might be that once she has a Get and doesn't want or need anything more from him, she'll be completely free to continue stomping all over him and never have to undo the damage she already caused him. If she wants the Get badly enough, there remains the possibility that she'll cease and undo her damages in return for receiving a Get.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Daas Torah,
    What Asher means is simple. Even if the husband is right halachically and morally to withhold the Get, it is not in his best interest to refuse the Get. By refusing to give the Get he is ruining his reputation and is making it less likely that a good girl will be willing to marry him.
    Had he given the Get right away, he could have been married today to a fine Jewish girl and been on his way to building a large family. One day he and the others you have encouraged to refuse the Get will realize this. They will realize that due to the encouragement they received from their supposed friends, their lives are now ruined. Please, have Rachmanus on the poor kid and encourage him to give the Get.

    ReplyDelete
  7. How is Rivky Stein, an eishes ish, going around bareheaded, as per her Facebook picture?

    ReplyDelete
  8. RDE: I think you should start a new post/thread discussing the halachic implications of the Gittin that Mendel Epstein/Mordechai Wolmark coerced via physical violence against husbands who didn't want to divorce.


    1) How many such Gets are there? The Federal indictment states Mr. Epstein said he did it about every four to six months. This occurred over a 15 year period. This indicates there may be as many as 45 coerced Gets.


    2) Are those coerced Gets considered to be invalid "Get Me'usas"?


    3) If so, and the wife remarried, she was still an eishes ish and committed adultery with her new "husband". Are her new children mamzeirim?


    4) If so, should the community make an effort to track down these women who hired Epstein to beat their husband into giving her a Get and later remarried based on that invalid Get Me'usa. We should be able to track them down by finding out which men were beaten into giving a Get and who their "ex" wife is.


    5) Should a registry be established listing these women's new children so that these mamzeirim should not chas v'shalom marry into Klal Yisroel's kosher families?

    ReplyDelete
  9. @David - good idea - please write a guest post on the topic!

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Moshe Ahron - why do you keep recycling your position. Do you think that repeating it 101 times has more influence than 100?

    We have a very fundamental disagreement. You keep insisting that one should ignore the halacha and the consensus of poskim through the ages - and the husband should simply give in to his wife's demands so that they can start life again - with the wife retaining most of their wealth and custody of the kids - as well as providing him with a crushing debt for the rest of his life.

    I think that is not only immoral but stupid while you think it is moral and of maximum benefit to husband, wife and children. I don't see repeating this is going to change anyone's position.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Apparently not, at least not a valid one, as that would require him to leave an unconditional get with the beit din. See Igros Moshe E.H. 4:3, that even if he has valid claims he cannot simultaneously withhold a get to enforce his claim and get a heter meah rabbonim.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "if the husband is right halachically and morally to withhold the Get" - Then it is certainly right and proper that he should withhold the GET until his wife withdraws from archaos and settles all issues according to halacha.

    "it is not in his best interest" - So you're saying that Torah Jews should do what's in their interests and forget about doing the right thing. Well, its certainly contrary to halacha and NOT in the husband's interests to give a GET at this point. Unlike the ORA/JOFA/MO feminist rabbis and activists, some Jews still believe in doing what's right halachically and morally as opposed to trying to ingratiate themselves with the corrupt, misandrist, anti-Torah "agunah" movement.



    If the husband seeks to remarry, he has every right (the tshuvas were posted here) to deposit a GET in Bais Din and obtain a heter meah rabbanim.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "leave an unconditional get" - You're attempting to put a feminist ORA spin on halacha here. It may be true that if he obtains a HMR he can't claim he wants to keep his wife. But he certainly has a right to have all issues settled by Bais Din, not archaos, before she is allowed to pick up the GET. This is mentioned in Shulchan Aruch, Evan HaEzer, and Igros Moshe would not try to nullify this halacha.

    ReplyDelete
  14. According to the Psak of HaRav Shternbuch (4:301) that RDE posted here on the previous Get discussion (Re: Brackman), Rav Shternbuch rules if a wife uses the secular courts to obtain non-halachic remedies against her husband, her husband is permitted to obtain a Heter Meah Rabbonim and deposit the Get with a beis din that will hold the Get until the wife stops her violating her husband with the goyish court and remedies and returns to to her husband the ill-gotten gains she achieved in non-Jewish court.

    Rav Sternbuch (4:301): Question: I received a question from America where - due to our many sins - it is common that women rebel against their husbands and afterwards go to secular courts - Gd forbid! The secular court makes a judgment in her favor - through coercion and not in accord with the law of the Torah...

    Answer: In my humble opinion there is no validity to her claims and therefore the husband should be given a heter so he can marry another woman. The only limitation is that he needs to deposit the get with beis din as is the established practice... Furthermore if the wife refuses to go to beis din, then that itself gives her the halachic status of moredes as is clear from Divrei Chaim (E.H. 51). and he cites the Chavas Daas who ruled that a woman who refused to go to beis din was a moredes and the gedolim agreed with him. ... According to this if she goes with him only to beis din then he is obligated to give her a get. However when she goes to secular court in addition to make monetary claims - she is not able hold on to both sides. In other words she can't go to the secular court with monetary claims and at the same demand that he give her a get in beis din. If she forces him to accept the rulings of the secular court in marriage matters he has no obligation to give her a get... So in the case of moredes the decree of Rabbeinu Gershom which was meant to benefit women was not intended and the husband can remarry with the heter of 100 Rabbis and he deposits the get with beis din until the judgment of the secular court is nullified.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You are not summarizing my position correctly. For the sake of avoiding unnecessary debate I am agreeing with you and I am assuming that the husband is right morally and halachically to withhold the Get. All I am saying is that it is a dumb move to refuse a Get. And that is what Asher said.
    The husband and his children are both worse off by the Get refusal, and he is ruining his life and his kids life.
    What benefits have accrued to him and his children by refusing to give the Get?

    Had he given a Get right away he could have been remarried to a fine girl and already had more children, and his 1st set of children would be much better off when they go to him that they are part of a more normal and stable family situation.
    Nothing I wrote here disagrees with any Poskim!

    ReplyDelete
  16. This is pure evil. Doing this will make you into one of the most evil people in the history of Klal Yisrael. Why don't you get advice from real Daas Torah, someone like R' Dovid Feinstein, R' Yerucham Olshin, or R' Shmuel Kamemetsky, and ask them if this is a good idea.
    I am shocked that you could entertain this idea for even a moment. It is pure evil.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Being allowed to do something halachically or morally does not mean that you have to do it!
    I am allowed - halachically and morally - to eat in a restaurant tonight. But I don't have to, and I won't because it costs too much money.
    So too, the husband might be allowed to withhold a Get - halachically or morally. But now he could decide not to because he and his children are worse off by refusing the Get.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "It is pure evil." - You really seem to be suffering from feminist delusions. Publicizing married women who are living with other men, or married women falsely claiming to be single, is NOT evil at all. It is a great mitzvah, and it serves both the married women and their male victims.

    Your value system is obviously based on feminism, not Judaism. Why don't you decide which religion you want to practice?

    ReplyDelete
  19. He can remarry before she receives a Get so he loses nothing. See Rav Shternbuch's teshuva which says the husband can get a heter meah and remarry while the beis din holds the Get until the wife cancels her use of secular court and returns anything the court awarded to her.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Why can't you answer a simple question: What benefits have accrued to him and his children by refusing to give the Get?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Here is the Tshuvah from Igros Moshe in full:

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

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

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

    משה פיינשטיין


    He says what I said he did. I see that Rav Shternbuch disagrees. However, Rav Moshe Feinstein is unequivical that he considers the position Rav Sthrnbuch holds to be inconceivable.



    Yes, he can have all the issues resolved in Beit din before giving a Get, but he can't get a hetter meah rabbonim without giving an unconditional get first.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Well, that's the question. Is he worse off? If his wife is in the process of filing multi-million-dollar RICO lawsuits against him and his family, there's a good argument to be made that he'd be worse off surrendering any weapon he has/

    ReplyDelete
  23. The way to tell who is delusional is simply to ask R' Dovid Feinstein, R' Yerucham Olshin, or R' Shmuel Kamemetsky. Or ask a regular respected Rabbi like Rabbi Yair Hoffman, Rabbi Yitzhak Adlerstein, or Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer.
    When you see that no one agrees with you - then you will realize who is delusional.

    ReplyDelete
  24. That's quite clear, and what I've always understood R' Moshe's psak to be. I wonder if those who trumpet R' Shternbuch's psak in this matter actually follow his rulings across the board.

    ReplyDelete
  25. See the aforementioned Psak Halacha in the Teshuva from Rav Sternbuch 4:301. He clearly paskens that the husband can get a heter meah and remarry while the beis din holds the Get until the wife corrects the damages she caused.

    ReplyDelete
  26. @Moshe Ahron - Why aren't you calling for Rivky to do the right thing by her and just move forward with following halacha and procuring her Get. Isn't that in her best interest - to move on so she can find a new husband and live a happy life? Why is it all on Yoel? And please don't so say she is trying. Why in the world hasn't she gone to a well established Beis DIn to try to resolve this from start? Are they all no good? Why has ORA dropped her? Do they know something we don't know? Is this bad PR for them? Seriously, can't you see something is wrong here? He would have to be a fool to just roll over and give her everything she wants only to be tortured later. [BTW, I'm not the same David you responded to earlier regarding coerced gittin. Maybe I'll change my name to "Not The Evil David"]

    ReplyDelete
  27. Have to say that Moshe Ahron's position not to make a registry,is worth examining. Setting up a Bais Din that would have access to all the relevant information is not really practical. Even with all the data available, there are going to be cases that are going to be monumentally hard to "call". Plus, such a registry would only be addressing some cases, so would be incomplete. And perhaps most importantly, who's going to foot the bill for this registry?

    ReplyDelete
  28. There's no reason to think someone doesn't follow Rav Shternbuch on this as well as other matters. And it is none of your concern in any event. You can follow whoever you accept as posek, and no one will question you, and others can follow whoever they accept as posek and you cannot question them.


    But since you did question it, do you follow Rav Moshe across the board? I am quite certain you never, ever, chas v'shalom, have an air conditioner timed to go on during Shabbos, because as you're surely aware of Rav Moshe's famous psak forbidding having an air conditioner set to go on during Shabbos with a timer.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Ok and some people might feel eating in a restaurant makes more sense for them because they have a hectic schedule or they don't know how to cook. To each their own I guess. So if you agree that he is halachically and morally in the right, why are you so against him doing what he thinks is right "for him" and is halachicailly and morally allowed to do?

    ReplyDelete
  30. This is pure evil. Doing this will make you into one of the most evil people in the history of Klal Yisrael.

    My, my. So, this is your definition of "evil"? Neat. Additionally, your absolute arrogance at feeling that you have the ability to decide what would turn a person "into one of the most evil people in the history of Klal Yisrael" is astounding.

    Historical fact: Rabbi Lazer Silver (of Cincinnati, Ohio) got up at the meal of the brith of a boy and notified the all present that the child is a mamzer. He came to the same boy's bar mitzvah - uninvited - and notified all present, again, that the boy is a mazer.

    I guess Rav Silver joins your list of "one of the most evil people in the history of Klal Yisrael". Nu, not bad company!

    Do yourself a favor, and be honest. Your name is not Moshe Ahron. You have never asked Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky a question as to how to proceed in your personal life. Off the net you do not claim to be "CHareidi". Why don't you face your evilness first?

    Good luck.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Or ask a regular respected Rabbi like Rabbi Yair Hoffman, Rabbi Yitzhak Adlerstein, or Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer.

    Lol. So you chose some questionable bloggers as your "regular respected Rabbi". LOL

    The sad part is, is that you think you sound intelligent.

    ReplyDelete
  32. You ask questions on "Moshe Ahron" as to why he is singling the husband, but doesn't make any demands on the wife to quit her vicious behavior? Well, well, he may just declare you as an "evil" person. Oy, oy, oy.


    But in reality, he has no answer. You make very valid points.

    ReplyDelete
  33. R' Shternbuch b'makom R' Moshe Feinstein eino Mishnah.

    ReplyDelete
  34. David,
    I never gave my opinion in this case on who is right or wrong. I think it is irrelevant. I am focusing on what is smart and wise. Yes, it could be that it is also in the best interest of the wife to be mevatter. But if the wife is not mevatter it is still in the best interests of the husband and his kids to be mevatter and give the Get. It is better for him and his kids to just give the Get. He would be better off today had he given the Get right away. And Rabbi Eidensohn is ruining his life by encouraging him to refuse to give the Get. How would he be in a worse situation today if he had given a Get right away?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Kishkeyum - there is no such principle and hopefully you are aware of that fact. In addition I don't know why you insist that they disagree. As I recall Rav Moshe Feinstein is referring purely to financial issues but doesn't mention arkaos while Rav Sternbuch is referring specifically to arkaos and I assume would agree if only financial issues are at stake
    Going to Arkaos is a significantly different type of transgression and it is possible that Rav Moshe Feinstein woud agree with Rav Moshe Sternbuch on this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  36. DT, I believe I've seen an Igros Moshe that states that a woman who goes to archaos after a GET is done creates a "chashash gadol" or a "laaz" on the GET.

    So even IF Mike_S2500 is citing an authentic tshuvah, (meaning the tshuvah was not forged after Rav Feinstein's death by persons with an agenda), it does not seem that the tshuvah could apply to cases where the wife is continuing in archaos.

    ReplyDelete
  37. @Moshe Ahron - it is incredible what confident pronouncements you make without concern for halacha, morality, psychology or reality. You are a true believer in a principle which is very questionable. You are not even statiing that perhaps it might be true - but that is clearly and unequivocally true and true in all cases!

    It says more about you then it does about the reality of divorce

    ReplyDelete
  38. Were we to take a poll of readers of this blog on various topics it certainly would not be indicative of what the majority of frum yidden believe. This blog attracts a certain group that has opinions on the fringe that are not representative of what most frum people believe. I come here so that the unsuspecting who are reading this blog could see other opinions.

    The sad thing is that all the commenters here are encouraged by each others opinions and thereby think that most frum people agree with them.

    It is easy to pick on me, but my opinions are much closer to the mainstream. There are many people who think that the opinions expressed on this blog are extreme but entertaining and discusses interesting gossip.

    If you think that Rabbi Yair Hoffman, Rabbi Yitzchak Adlerstein, or Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer are questionable then you are clearly not part of the mainstream.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Actually, there is lots and lots of reason to think someone doesn't follow R' Shternbuch across the board, especially an American and a non-Eida-Jerusalemite.

    ReplyDelete
  40. It's not a principle, it's a fact. R' Shternbuch is a perfectly fine poseik, but the idea that he's in R' Moshe's league is laughable.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @Kishkeyum - he doesn't have to be in Rav Moshe's league for his psak to be acceptable and perhaps more univerally accepted. Furthermore no one has presented any evidence that they are disagreeing- they seem to be talking about two different cases.

    ReplyDelete
  42. @Moshe Ahron you keep insisting you know better than anyone who disagrees with you - but you have presented zero evidence. The majority here disagrees wth you. Please brings some mainstream poskim who view the world as you do. Clearly the Rabbis Hoffman, Adlerstien and Bechhoffer you cited are fine yidden and talmidei chachomim - but no one has them on their list of world class poskim

    Even these rabbis - you have presented absolutely no evidence that they agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  43. @TruthSeekerJew - good point!

    look at Igros Moshe EH IV 115 page 187
    EH IV 116 page 188
    EH III 37 page 481

    ReplyDelete
  44. David,
    Are you able to think of any benefit that he has gained from withholding the Get?
    Did his wife come back to him?
    Did he get more custody?
    Did he get more money?


    And in another case, I pointed out that even though the husband did in the end receive a better custody deal that he wouldn't have received had he given the Get right away, however, those benefits definitely did not outweigh the loss of reputation and the fact that there was a lower chance of a good girl being willing to marry him.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Moshe Ahron: You've been expressing ringe opinions on this website over the past few weeks that very few frum Jews agree with. Most of what Rabbi Eidensohn expresses here is strongly backed up with halachic sources and is agreed with by the majority of mainstream Chareidi Jewry. Your opinions, Moshe Ahron, are left-wing modern orthodox beliefs that would make folks like Avi Weiss proud.

    ReplyDelete
  46. @Kishkeyum - your keep ignoring the fact that going to arkaos - while it might result in taking money not in accord with the Torah - is inherently prohibited without permission from beis din. You can't bring a proof from a wife stealing money from her husband as to what Rav Moshe holds regarding going to arkaos.
    You have no proof that he disagrees with Rav Sternbuch!

    ReplyDelete
  47. 2 points:


    1) In one of the other cases discussed on this blog, the husband never gave a Get. And the husband never received any benefit from withholding the Get. And his life is now ruined. He never remarried, never raised a large family and he has no happiness. Is it a fact or opinion that he would have been better off giving the Get?

    All it takes to determine if I am right and wrong is to go back to each case discussed on this blog and tell us what benefits did the husband receive from withholding the Get and compare it to the loss of reputation and the lower chance of marrying his dream girl.

    2) Why do you say that I have no concern for halacha and morality. I never discussed who is halachically or morally right in this case. I said that even if the husband is right halachically and morally, it is still not in his best interest to withhold the Get. If the husband would be right halachically or morally, that would just mean that he is allowed to withhold a Get, that doesn't mean it is smart or wise.

    To repeat: I have never said who I think is right or wrong in this case. I don't like discussing people, I prefer discussing ideas.

    ReplyDelete
  48. It can be acceptable, but (a) R' Moshe's psak is a source for those who say otherwise, and (b) when these two R' Moshe's are in dispute, I know which side I'd want to be on.

    The cases are not exactly the same, true, but the line I quoted from R' Moshe is unequivocal. Also, he includes a case in which the wife was תופס money from her husband, which is shelo k'din, and states: שום ב"ד דגאונים לא תיקנו ולא יתקנו באופן שיוכל הבעל לעגנה לגמרי או עד שתתן לו כמה שירצה

    He's quite clear that the takanah of heter me'ah does not include a right to be מעגן her in order to get what he wants, even if she acted wrongly.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Quite a few non-Israeli Jews follow the Eidah on halachic matters.


    Additionally, there's no obligation or expectation to follow one posek "across the board".


    And, finally, you don't follow Rav Moshe's prohibition against setting an air conditioner to go on during Shabbos with a timer, so who are you to talk anyways?

    ReplyDelete
  50. kishkeyum: You are quoting a piecemeal of Rav Moshe's teshuva after skipping the original shaila. The shaila asked in Rav Moshe's teshuva is a different circumstance than the shaila asked in Rav Shternbuch's teshuva. So they do not conflict as each of their teshuvas is appying based on each of the different circumstances of their respective shailas.


    (And even if they did conflict, as RDE said, everyone has the right to follow the posek of their choice.)

    ReplyDelete
  51. We all read the psokim of the gedolei haDor that these get meusse is kecahsfei bealma, she remains an eishes ish and their children from hence on are mamzerim. It is imperative to notify the public "leafrishei meissurei". You might also add to the list, the NAMES of those bnei bliyaal pochzim vereikim anshei zroa vofesha that are mesayea lidvar aveirah aka Epstein Wolmark et al wrecking botim beYisroel. Another misnomer of ORA vesiyatom, calling these fake Agunnah's as such as well as "Withholding The Get". Nothing is being withheld, the get is a process, the process is a set of terms to be executed before handing over the get, and YES, there is an order of precedence spelled out within Halacha. It is crystal clear that handing over the Get is the last step in the Process and NO NADA GURNISHT skipping can overrule. Just like you cannot cross to the other side of the river without crossing the bridge, same here, no shortcuts. So please, stop calling it withholding, if anything, it is SHE that is withholding PROTOCOL. Therefore, ORA might change direction and beat the daylights out of where the the Devil truly resides rofl. Kindly call a spade a spade, ty.

    ReplyDelete
  52. What's the difference how she steals the money, by grabbing it or through arkaos? They are both equally forbidden. Yet, R' Moshe says that he must give the get before utilizing a heter me'ah.

    Surely you are not suggesting that R' Moshe would withhold the get as a punishment for sinning. There's no basis for that at all.

    ReplyDelete
  53. You might be right, but the majority of frum yidden definitely do not agree with you. You surround yourself with people who agree with you, and then you think that everyone agrees with you. When you go to a website geared to the general frum population - Yeshiva World, Vos Iz Neias, and Kikar Shabbas, when those web sites have discussed divorce issues the majority agreed with me!

    Rabbi Bechoffer has once written that once there is a civil divorce then it is a chillul Hashem to withhold a Get.

    And if you would read enough of Rabbi Adlerstein's writings, you would know that he would never support the withholding of a Get. As a side note, he wrote that he uses the halachic pre-nup when he is mesadder kiddushin

    ReplyDelete
  54. The risk of mamzeirim marrying into other families is far more severe.


    An online mamzer registry could be set up fairly inexpensively and made available to the public worldwide.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Are you not letting some of my comments through?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Even if these two Gedolei Yisroel disagree with each other (something that is certainly not a given), and irregardless of which of these Gedolim is greater, you are free to choose as your source to say otherwise (as you put it.) But if the husband's posek holds like Rav Shternbuch, you are nobody to interfere with his right to follow that psak and get a heter meah rabbonim - even if you disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  57. What is everyone over here upset with me about? I have never said if I believe He or She is right or wrong in this case. I do not like discussing people; I only want to discuss ideas.
    All I have said, is that it is in his best interest to give a Get whether or not he is right or wrong.
    To disprove my opinion, all you have to do is (1) explain what benefit he is receiving by withholding the Get and (2) explain if that benefit outweighs the loss of reputation.
    Not one person on this blog has even attempted in coming up with a reason for 1 & 2, all they do is try to attack me.

    ReplyDelete
  58. @Moshe Ahron - how many times do you need to be answered before you notice it?

    ReplyDelete
  59. Additionally, there's no obligation or expectation to follow one posek "across the board".

    Oh, please. Anyone with integrity understands that cherry-picking psakim is bad practice, especially when you're picking R' Shternbuch over R' Moshe Feinstein, and especially if you usually follow R' Moshe, and never follow R' Shternbuch, which I would say is the case for the vast majority of American Jews.

    How do you know what I follow? As it happens, I don't have an air conditioner on a timer, so your supposed argument is moot. Will you now wax philosophical? If I would have an air conditioner, and I would have a timer, and I usually follow R' Moshe...

    In any case, by the terms of R' Moshe's own teshuva, R' Moshe himself would be matir timers on AC today, since such use for air conditioners is now widespread, and thus there is no longer a maris ayin. You need to update your well-worn argument.

    ReplyDelete
  60. @Moshe Ahron - please read the following discussion of Rabbi Bechhoffer views regarding secular courts

    http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/05/r-bechhofer-using-secular-courts.html

    ReplyDelete
  61. Thanks for the link, I will read it.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I've answered this question of yours many many times, including on this very thread. If she desperately wants the Get, she might be encouraged to stop violating her husband in non-Jewish court if she hopes to receive the Get. He, even before she stops violating him, can get a heter meah and remarry.

    ReplyDelete
  63. a) arkaos is a greater violation against a fellow Jew than stealing from him b) withholding the Get isn't a punishment for sinning but rather a method to pressure the wife to not violate her husband. And the Get is provided once she is in compliance.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I have been begging you the entire day to say what benefit the husband has received from withholding the Get.

    ReplyDelete
  65. @Kishkeyum

    See the following http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/05/r-bechhofer-using-secular-courts.html

    ReplyDelete
  66. @Moshe Ahron - no I am not blocking your comments.

    ReplyDelete
  67. You stated that the Poskim disagree with me. Question #1 & #2 is not a question for a Posek. It is something that any person should be able to assess. Is the husband receiving any benefit by withholding the Get, and does that benefit outweigh the reduced chances of marrying the girl of his dreams?

    ReplyDelete
  68. @Kishkeyum - you seem to be ignorant of rather elemenatry things. For example what does it say in Shulchan Aruch regarding one who goes to secular court without permission of beis din? Does it say the same thing regarding someone who stole money?

    I am saying that there is no evidence that Rav Moshe Feinstein would disagree with Rav Moshe Sternbuch regarding someone who went to secular court instead of beis din.

    ReplyDelete
  69. For example what does it say in Shulchan Aruch regarding one who goes to secular court without permission of beis din?

    If you have an argument to make regarding the difference between the two cases, go ahead and make it. I'm interested in hearing what it is. But simply asserting that there is a sevarah to differentiate is not convincing.

    ReplyDelete
  70. See above. See above. See above. See above. See above.

    Read.Read. Read. Read. Read.

    ReplyDelete
  71. You, Sir, are making a bunch of false assumptions. First of all, most poskim don't pasken like any single major posek zt'l (Rav Moshe or anyone else) "across the board". No one is cherry-picking. Except you when you insist that others follow the psak you want others to follow irregardless of their posek. The vast majority of American Jews do not pasken in accordance with Rav Moshe "across the board". And the air conditioner example is prime proof of that. Even from the earliest time Rav Moshe issued that psak the vast majority of American Jewry didn't accept it then nor ever after. The American Chasidish world, in general, never accepted Rav Moshe as their default posek. Nor had the American Sefardic world. Nor had the American Modern Orthodox world. And the American Litvish world that did accept Rav Moshe as their Posek Achron, while they accepted him in general for a majority of issues, even they as a rule did not accept him straight-line 100% "across the board". So there are many valid reasons Americans, be they Litvish, Chasidish, MO, Sefardic or other, may 100% legitimately go in accordance with another posek.

    P.S. I would be very surprised if you claimed with a straight face that you (and your parents) never had an air conditioner go on with a timer on Shabbos in your home or vacation/rentals over the last 45 years.

    ReplyDelete
  72. " most poskim don't pasken like any single major posek"

    Who's talking about how poskim pasken? I'm talking about who laymen follow, and yes, this is cherry-picking.

    ReplyDelete
  73. a) Says who? b) In R' Moshe's case too, withholding would pressure her not to violate him. Yet, he forbids it.

    ReplyDelete
  74. I looked at it. i see a guest post from someone who claims that 70 Rishonim say it's okay not to deposit a get with beis din until the woman drops the secular court case. I am skeptical. Was R' Moshe not familiar with these Rishonim?

    I myself do not have time to go through his 70 Rishonim, so I'll just take R' Moshe's word for it.

    ReplyDelete
  75. "Uziel Frankel" LOL!

    What kind of person is that who runs around creating fake "Batei Din" as if they were made to order cheap on the fly "mobile homes" out of thin air in obscure places, uses dubious names of shady "rabbis" creating an illusion on "legality" when he is just creating problems using his insider's knowledge of what makes a Bais Din tick and then using that AGAINST the very institution (Bais Din) to fight it, mock it, destroy it and annul it? There CANNOT BE a bigger Menuval Birshus HaTorah than this!!!

    Who can forgive such a person who not for the first time "creates" a phony-baloney "beit din" in this case in some far-off Chabad house trailer shull in a corner of Brooklyn even Chabad cannot place, pays the Chabad rabbi to use it, then when the rabbis is asked if he knows anything about it, he puts the "rebbetzin" on the phone to say they "know nothing about it' (hehehe, of course, with enough pay-off anyone can get "selective amnesia") and then hires all sorts of shmegagy people to put their names on so-called "beit din" photo-shopped "documents" placing a Jew in "cherem" without there even being the right address or phone number to contact anyone? This is pure extortion and crookedness worthy of the Mafia, but even the Mafia has better "ethics" than that and it least respects its own church something this forger does not do regarding his own religion as a play-thing to play practical jokes on people for pure self-gain!!!

    This is what happened to Yoel Weiss, and Uziel the fixer has done this a few times before making an utter mockery of the Bais Din system just so that he can have fun, and EXTORT money, along the way. There must be a special place in Gehinom reserved for such crooked manipulation and outright lies and deceit. Shame on you, go back to where you came from. Another person who should be forcibly conscripted into the Israeli army (if they will even have him) and go use his tricks in the Mossad to outsmart Israel's enemies and not cause mayhem and chaos in unsuspecting Jewish communities not used to this level of Geneivas Daas, Krumkeit, Menuval Birshus HaTorah, and outright Sheker, Rishus and Chillul HaShem Berabim. If these are not signs of sociopathic and psychopathic behavior then nothing is! HaShem Yeracheim Aleinu Ve'al Kol Yisroel!!

    ReplyDelete
  76. Ah, of course we're talking about poskim. The husband if following his posek's instructions. The husband can't receive a heter meah without rabbinic support. And in this situation his posek rules in accordance with or the same as Rav Shternbuch does. You feel an ability to tell all the poskim of the world that they must follow how or who you want them to follow and in your hollowed opinion no one may dare accept the psak halacha of Rav Shternbuch or rule similarly to him. But the poskim and the husband need not take your advice. After receiving his heter you, of course, can join ORA in protesting outside the chasuna hall when he is getting remarried with his friends singing Kol Sosson V'Kol Simcha, Kol Choson V'Kol Kalo.

    ReplyDelete
  77. a) Rashi says someone who uses arkaos desecrates G-d's name and gives value to avoda zora. Both Rambam and the Shulchan Aruch say someone who uses arkaos has reviled, blasphemed, rebelled and raised a hand against the Torah and he is a rasha. b) Rav Moshe is not talking about a case where someone is using arkaos. So he does not prohibit in an arkaos case but rather in a simple theft case. Additionally, other major gedolei poskim, as has been discussed here, explicitly permit giving him a heter to remarry while the Get is held in beis din.

    ReplyDelete
  78. "my opinions are much closer to the mainstream" - Yes, your opinions are the mainstream of ORA, JOFA, NOW, and misandrist feminist politics. But your opinions and "Rabbi" Bechhofer's opinions on divorce matters have no sources in authentic Judaism and have nothing to do with Torah Judaism. So have you decided which religion you'd like to practice yet?

    ReplyDelete
  79. a) These are sources for a חומרא in בין אדם למקום, not in בין אדם לחבירו. Insofar as her husband is concerned, none of this has to do with him. These are her sins toward God. The salient point with regard to the husband is that she used arkaos to grab his money. R' Moshe paskens that where a woman grabs her husband's money, he may not use heter me'ah and withhold the get. Her sins בין אדם למקום have nothing to do with this.

    b) I don't hear any differentiation between stealing by grabbing and stealing through arkaos. The only poseik I've seen mentioned here on this question other than R' Moshe is R' Shternbuch.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Jews who keep the Torah have Rabbonim they follow. I follow Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn. In a particular divorce case, Rabbi Eidensohn considers the pressure exerted on the husband sufficient to be against Halacha, and thus if the husband gives a Get at this point, Rabbi Eidensohn would consider the Get invalid. A number of otherwise learned and respected Rabbonim I've contacted disagree. I believe Rabbi Eidensohn is right, because he brings sources for his position, while the other Rabbonim seem to have an attitude of "well, I just don't think that that pressure would invalidate a Get".

    So, what is the use of a registry if many Rabbonim, and thus their followers, ignore it?

    I think that we first need a registry of Rabbonim who have demonstrated they are unaware of the Halachos of Gittin and who are misleading their followers. The purpose of this registry would be to warn people not to pay attention to their Rabbi, if he's on the list, in the area of marriage and Gittin. Next, we can discuss the practicality of making a registry of married women claiming to be single, and of Mamzerim from subsequent "marriages" of these women.

    ReplyDelete
  81. No, we're taking about blog opinions. There are no poskim posting here. If a legitimate poseik makes a hora'a not like R' Moshe, I have no quibble with it (although I have my doubts about any poseik who is not of a caliber to reason things out himself, and instead relies on what others have said, and then chooses R' Shternbuch over R' Moshe Feinstein).

    ReplyDelete
  82. Plus, a man who discovers his wife is married to another man will have to move out immediately. We will need to set up a network of places where these men can live temporarily. Furthermore, we will need to set up a system so that the Mamzerim can get married in such a way so as not to produce more Mamzerim. It's my understanding that this involves buying slaves from a place that has real slave markets. One more thing. Families that have to disband will be devastated. How do we deal with that? And again, where's the money coming from for all this?

    ReplyDelete
  83. You explained his strategy as to why he is withholding the Get. But his strategy has not yet worked. He has not yet received any of the benefits that he hoped to obtain.

    I agree that many times a husband will achieve certain benefits from using his Get leverage, better financial arrangements and some more custody.
    But unless, the husband is facing an extreme situation of almost no custody or unbearable financial arrangements it has to be weighed against what he is losing.
    Most girls will not be willing to marry a husband who withheld a Get for an extended time, and most girls will not marry a man who received a Heter Meah Rabbanim.
    The husband’s second marriage prospects should outweigh some money and a couple of more hours custody.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Joseph Orlow wrote "A number of otherwise learned and respected Rabbonim I've contacted disagree."



    Yes, and those Rabbanim - whether you think they are right or wrong - are the mainstream.


    Did R' Moshe Feinstein or R' Yaakov kamenetzky, or R' Ahron Kotler ever set up a mamzer registry? Do you realize that in addition to being evil, it is also absolutely crazy to set up a mamzer registry?! The commenters here are on the fringe of society.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Do you realize that if you wanted to advertise in the Yated, Hamodia, Mishpacha, or Ami, to fundraise for a mamzer registry, they would not even think of accepting the advertisement?
    Do you realize that none of the Gedolim in America ever set up a mamzer registry? Do you know why? That you don't realize how evil and crazy this idea is is mind boggling.

    ReplyDelete
  86. 1. The husband doesn't need to marry "most girls", he only needs to marry one girl who agrees to marry him. Out of the many single and divorced and widowed girls in the worldwide frum community, he only needs to find one.

    2. "A couple of more hours custody" each week is a humongous deal. Wow, if withholding the Get gets him more visitation than otherwise that alone is worth it. More time each week with his children? Nothing could be better.



    3. The strategy of withholding the Get until the wife agrees to allow him to have his rights does work and has worked. Countless husbands have been successful in this strategy. Just because it wasn't reported in the 6:00 news or in the Forward does not mean there aren't many husbands who this worked for.


    4. And if for a specific husband it hasn't worked yet, then perhaps he just needs to keep holding out. Presumably the wife will want to get remarried someday. If she goes on years without a Get (while violating her husband's rights and/or property) she might start getting a little desperate for a Get. Especially if her biological clock is ticking real quick. It might encourage her to stop suing in non-Jewish court and return her ill gotten gains from arkaos. She knows she'll become an old lady with white hair with no Get and no prospects for remarriage, that might be worth giving up the money she stole or the visitation she prevented. Especially since he already got his heter meah and is happily remarried.


    Bottom line is that he has much to gain (back what is halachicly rightfully his) and not nearly as much to lose. And it is a winning strategy successfully used for many decades and longer by husbands whose moredes wives were stomping all over them and halacha.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Why do you clowns keep referring to the situation as "yoels get refusal" and not more accurately as "rivkys not dropping her frivolous lawsuits and insane demands in order to allow Yoel to give her a get"! Her situation is self inflicted, and the remedy to her situation is in her own hands, so why would you say - either directly or by implication - that Yoel has anything to do with it? All of your arguments are more properly directed at Rivky, who is responsible for the current mess, than at Yoel. So maybe you should go post those comments on Redeem Rivky - if it is still an active page, that is.

    ReplyDelete
  88. "Out of the many single and divorced and widowed girls in the worldwide frum community, he only needs to find one."

    The problem is that the vast majority of these girls will not be willing to marry someone who withheld a Get for an extended period of time (or who has a Heter Meah Rabbanim). True, some girls would be willing, but statistically it is much more likely that his dream girl is from the larger group that won't marry him.


    Your comment in regard to a few more hours custody is also ridiculous. Every happily married father has to choose often to spend less than 24 hours a day with their kids. Their is a balance. You have to work, learn, daven, sleep, shiurim, chavrusas, shopping, exercise, etc. Just like a regular father gives up some quality time with their kid to do these functions, so too it is wise for a husband to lose a few hours of custody so that he can preserve his reputation. Preserving a reputation isn't less of a worthy cause than these other functions.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Again, he doesn't need the "vast majority", he needs one. And it ain't as hard to find one as you think. Meir Kin (I don't know all the details of his situation but I do know this) was in a major public fight with his wife for many years and withheld the Get and was able to find a new wife after getting a heter meah. Forget about the "dream girl", you can marry a frum Jewish girl who you didn't "dream" about. Dreams are for fairy tales. You don't need to dream too much. Chasidim get engaged and married to a girl they never met before after their first meeting and do quite fine. Nu, so he'll do it like the Chasidim in this sense.



    Yes, no one said "24 hours". But some wives try to limit their husband from seeing their children to as little as possible. And then still try to keep him away from the kids.


    Like Rivky Weiss, for example.

    ReplyDelete
  90. @Moshe Ahron - You can't just make blanket statements that it's in the best interest of the husband to just give a Get. Every case is different, Perhaps in some cases it makes sense, but that is a personal choice. In this case we are clearly dealing with someone who is not normal, You have no idea what is going on here. Maybe the benefits that you mention, he doesn't see as benefits at all. You ask did he get this or did he get that. I don't know because it's not over yet, The bottom line is he has the halachic and moral right to do what he wants in this case. But let's be honest here. You started out with the argument that he has a halachic obligation to give a Get. You couldn't win that argument with facts, so then you moved on to the moral aspect. Unfortunately for you, the torah doesn't agree with your vision of a perfect society, so then you say the halacha should be ignored since it's not really moral in today's day and age - nobody bought that one either. So here we are with you looking out for the "best interest" of the husband. I posed the question about why we are only focusing on the best interest of the husband and not demanding anything of the wife and you basically brushed that one off. There is really nothing more to debate about. You believe in Get on demand in all circumstances, but the Torah doesn't support that idea. What else do you want to add to the conversation that you haven't already?

    ReplyDelete
  91. @Kishkeyum - I just posted a teshuva of Rav Menashe Klein. He clearly disagrees with your understanding and clearly indicates that the view of Rav Sternbuch is the view of the majority of achronim including the Maharsham and Rav Moshe Feinstein.

    http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2015/02/if-wife-went-to-secular-court-husband.html

    ReplyDelete
  92. looking at these pics, Uzi and Rivky would have very cute kids

    ReplyDelete
  93. kishkeyum:


    a) 1] The reason the sin of arkaos is so severe is because of the בין אדם לחבירו damage she causes him. So you aren't correct in defining the issur of arkaos as being only a בין אדם למקום problem. It is at least as great a בין אדם לחבירו sin as it is a בין אדם למקום sin. 2] You are also wrong in describing it as a חומרא his obtaining a heter meah rabbonim or otherwise choosing not to give a Get. It isn't a חומרא or a חומרא issue.

    b) Again, Rav Moshe's psak that you refer to only addresses a theft situation and it cannot be carried over to the more severe arkaos situation that Rav Moshe doesn't address in that psak. There is certainly a vast differentiation between these two types of cases.

    ReplyDelete
  94. It might get him more visitation but who says his kids won't hate him for dragging the whole deal out for so long.. as a child of divorce I would resent a parent who drags things out rather than just make things work.. how much time would he actually see his kids anyway if they were still married.. ? not much

    ReplyDelete
  95. Excuse me, while I hear some of the issues.. Just because there were no marks etc..Many abused women do not go to the authorities.. does not mean he did not hit or rape her. That is the typical mark of a denier.. She might have been abused but have been coaxed into the rest by the Frankel person..

    ReplyDelete
  96. Maybe he used to force her into an 8'x8' cage and not let her out for a week and use a stun gun on her every third night while she was caged. Hey, why not speculate?

    ReplyDelete
  97. a) I see no proof to your contention that the stringency of arkaos is b/c of בין אדם לחבירו. The sources you cited above dealt specifically with בין אדם למקום. [in response to your #2, when I used the term חומרא I meant it in the sense of the חומר הענין, not in the sense of an optional חומרא.]

    b) I'm aware that this is your contention, but I haven't yet heard a sevarah to differentiate between which means the wife employs to grab the money.

    ReplyDelete
  98. I saw that you posted it. I don't have time for it now, but hopefullly later or tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  99. A child of divorce may resent a mother who attempts to alienate him from his father and tries to prevent the children from seeing their father. They may also resent her for making wild false accusations against their father and calling tabloid reporters from the New York Post to publicize her fight and give the tabloids juicy bedroom activities to splash across a million newspapers.

    ReplyDelete
  100. a) It's blatantly obvious that using arkaos to sue a fellow Jew is a בין אדם לחבירו violation. The primary (but not only) reason halacha prohibits arkaos is because non-Jewish law differs from Jewish law and the person initiating the arkaos case is utilizing non-Jewish law against a Jew in order to obtain things from the person he is suing that Jewish law does not grant. Openly a בין אדם לחבירו sin.


    b) An example of a sevara that comes immediately to mind is in an arkaos case the non-Jewish judge can invoke remedies such as jailing for non-compliance and other harsh remedies. Getting a Jew unjustly (per Jewish law) jailed is a far worse sin than robbing him.


    And in fact in this Rivky Weiss case she had her husband jailed overnight five times. So in the very case at hand being discussed here, the wife invoked arkaos and had harsh non-monetary penalties applied against her husband that is far worse than any of the monetary damage she already caused. Oh, and for periods of time she unjustly (as even the secular courts later determined) prevented her husband for seeing his children for extended period of times. That is another example of utilizing arkaos in a far harsher damage than caused by theft.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Moshe Ahron,
    You may be right that many people who are Orthodox, even many rabbis, don't think my brother and I are right with regard to coerced Gittin. But I defy you to show one source to those who consider a broken marriage grounds for a forced GET. Those who study the sources agree with Rabbi Elyashev zt'l that the husband has no obligaton to give a GET in a broken marriage. This is based on open rishonim and the famous commentators of the Shulchan Aruch. Again, tell me one major opinion of a Rishon or Acharon that feels that today klal yisroel has decided that a husband can be forced to give a GET. There were in the past great rabbis who accepted that, but from two generations after Rashi these opinions have been rejected in the majority of the world. This blog is filled with the sources and proofs for these things. But you can begin with EH 77 paragraph 2 and 3 and all of the commentators there including the Gro #5 who says that nobody disagrees. (Except your rabbis of course).

    ReplyDelete
  102. Moshe Ahron,
    Can a husband be told to give an invalid GET so that he can get along in the world? That would make mamzerim.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Moshe Ahron,
    Tell me where it says in Shulchan Aruch that somebody should not do something not in his best interest even if the Shulchan Aruch encourages him to do it.

    ReplyDelete
  104. fedupwithcorruptrabbisFebruary 4, 2015 at 4:29 PM

    @Moshe Aaron The benefit of witholding a GET is #1 to make a statement that one gets divorced under the same guidelines that were set at the time of marriage, namely "KEDAS MOSHE V"YISROEL" like the laws of Moses and Israel. When a woman such as Rivky and Lonna Kin violate the Torah in regards to going to secular courts, they lose their rights to a GET. Feminism is trying to pull a veil over the eyes of the uneducated in believing that a GET is a G-D given right. That is not true, but protocol must be followed, and then she earns that priviledge. When a woman does not follow protocol and violates the Torah in the process, she is defined as MOREDET. Once a woman falls into such a category, her halachic rights are forfeited until she corrects what she had done wrong. This is why the next blog above, from Rabbi Menashe Klein, illustrates that a man should deposit a GET and get remarried. However he cautions that if the woman complies with Halocho, she is given the GET. In regards to the husband's reputation, this all depends to the man's fortitude. I applaud Meir Kin who has withstood years of defamation at the hands of ORA and the JP, and remarried to a lovely Brazilian physician. He has demonstrated a complete disregard to Ora's harrassments techniques. I find an eerie comparison of all the feminist leaning people and rabbis with ISIS. They both know how to distort religion in meeting their objectives. The Jewish feminist movement refuses to do the right thing i.e. settle the matter early on or go to a Bais Din because they feel that this weakens the woman's position. But they have no way out because Judaism is built in such a fashion that dictates what the roles are for man and women in Judaism. I can assure you that if Jewish Feminist Rabbis would construct the Torah all over again, it would find at the very least that women and men are equal all the way around. For example, they would make it that a woman can issue a man a get in the same manner as a man issuing her a GET. Therefore the problem that feminist leaning people have is that they cant tolerate that our Torah was not constructed in an "EQUAL GENDER" basis. This is a fact forever and we cant change the TORAH. I hope that many more men such as Yoel Weiss and Meir Kin will stand strong against these reformadox bullies in order to restore once agin the "KEDAS MOSHE V'YISROEL.

    ReplyDelete
  105. He likely will lose in terms of reputation. Generally, both husband and wife tarnish their reputations in these public fights. There's a certain percentage of the population that will not, under any circumstances, take a chance with these people. Others who are less discerning, or have flaws of their own, or have been convinced of the innocence of one of the parties, will take their chances.

    ReplyDelete
  106. a) The בין אדם לחבירו is the stealing. The means used was arkaos. The חומר you have showed re. arkaos relates to the בין אדם למקום sin, not to the בין אדם לחבירו result.

    b) True, worse things can emerge from arkaos. But we are discussing a case where arkaos have ruled, and the worse results have not emerged, but rather, she has simply gained funds and rights she would not have gained in beis din. The question is whether he may receive heter me'ah while withholding the get until she returns the gains she received in court. My contention is that acc. to R' Moshe, he may not, since all she has done is steal his money, which is the case he is discussing [at least based on the teshuva in front of us; a question is raised, though, by R' Menashe Klein's citing, as discussed in the later post].

    ReplyDelete
  107. Without conceding any of the other points, the implication of your most recent comment is that you agree with me that in an arkaos case where there has been applied non-monetary secular court judgements and decrees, such as jailing, custody awards, driving license/passport seizures, professional license revocations, etc., that such a case would not fall under the aforementioned psak of Rav Moshe (which only deals with a monetary theft case) and in such a case there would be no conflict between the psak of Rav Moshe to the psakim of Rav Shternbuch/Rav Klein.

    And to again use the example at hand that this thread's been discussing, in the Rivky Stein case where she repeatedly had her husband jailed (five times) and prevented him from access to his children by filing false abuse charges against him (as even the secular courts determined) and is continuing a RICO suit against him seeking his incarceration, the aforementioned psak of Rav Moshe would be inapplicable to this case.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Nu, what you're saying is that in terms of reputation they are both taking a beating. That is true, generally, in public fights - as you said. I'm pointing out that this idea that the idea of not automatically giving a Get-on-demand doesn't hurt his reputation more than hers with most of the frum community. (Note that according to the Pew study in 2013, over 70% of American Orthodox Jews are Chareidi, i.e. more right-leaning.) Of course those with liberal leanings that believe in Get-on-demand will oppose any man not giving it on-demand. Both sides will have their automatic backers and detractors.


    And at risk of sounding like a broken record, he only needs one frum woman in the world to agree to marry him. Also, it is generally easier for a man (divorced or never married) to find a wife than for a woman to find a husband.

    ReplyDelete
  109. I agree that it's possible R' Moshe might agree in the case of non-monetary judgments. I would have to be מעיין in his teshuvah more carefully before answering that definitively (which I doubt will happen any time soon). Sometimes, what seems evident on a quick read will change with עיון.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Another point I intended to point out (and you in fact reminded me with your recent comment on the RMK thread paraphrasing the Maharsham) is that arkaos is at its essence mesira (as is clear throughout the halachic literature discussing arkaos.) And mesira is בין אדם לחבירו.

    ReplyDelete
  111. As I posted there, the Maharsham's psak is not based on the line of reasoning you're putting forward -- that since she did wicked things to him illegally, therefore he's free of Rabbeinu Gershom. His reasoning is much different; that she will be punished down the line by being the victim of mesirah, which would cost him money, which is the equivalent of דברים בינו לבינה, and therefore Rabbeinu Gershom's cherem does not apply.

    ReplyDelete
  112. u should be ashamed of what you just said. My point is that proving abuse is hard to do as it is done within your four walls.. does not mean it did not happen.. I personally think that this is more of a case of her getting really really bad advice rather than her being a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  113. They could resent her also.. that doesn't make him right. There is no proof that her abuse accusations are wrong . Parents have to tread very carefully in what they do..

    ReplyDelete
  114. him not automatically giving a Get-on-demand doesn't hurt his reputation more than hers

    Maybe not more than hers, but it will hurt his reputation.
    Although in this particular case, where he's been accused of unspeakable things, the damage has been done, and he has little to lose at this point in terms of reputation.

    he only needs one frum woman in the world to agree to marry him.

    Ah, but what kind of woman will it be? The worse one's reputation, the less likely he is to draw the interest of the wholesome and emotionally healthy, and the more likely to end up with someone seriously flawed.

    ReplyDelete
  115. The point I am making hasn't anything to do with the Maharsham's psak. The simple (and only) thing I am pointing out is that arkaos intrinsically by its very form and nature is a form of mesira. As the halachas of arkaos clearly define it as mesira. Arkaos = mesira. Mesira = בין אדם לחבירו violation. Thus, arkaos = בין אדם לחבירו violation. Intrinsically.

    ReplyDelete
  116. @liveandletlive - It also does not mean that it did happen. You don't know and I don't know - we both weren't there. The point is that you can't lynch a person based on mere accusations. Just because something is hard to prove doesn't negate the requirement of proof.

    ReplyDelete
  117. @Kishkeyum - you haven't established that Rav Moshe views going to Arkaos as simply another way of stealing - but your comment simply assumes it to be true. Rav Moshe doesn't mention arkaos and you view that as proof that it is subsumed under the case of stealing. I see no reason to accept your assertions.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Indeed, R' Moshe doesn't address the arkaos case. I am being מדמה מילתא למילתא. I see nothing wrong with the comparison. Until you can provide a convincing sevarah to differentiate between the means used to steal the money, I see no reason to accept your assertion that the law would not be the same when the money was stolen through arkaos.

    ReplyDelete
  119. @kishkeyum - it is not a question of a convincing servrah. That in fact exists and been presented to you. The problem is convincing you and so far we have been unsuccessful

    ReplyDelete
  120. Well, we differ on the validity of the sevarah to differentiate. In any case, I think we've exhausted the topic, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Rivky, all the bochurim in the yeshiva love you thanks this website is kosher for filter

    ReplyDelete

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