Wars Between Rabbis Make: Mamzerim, Doubtful Mamzerim, and Laaz about Mamzeruth
– Call 605-562-3130 then enter code 411161#
The rabbinical world is split. The major Gedolim stay with the Shulchan Aruch, but others break with it. They want to help “Agunoth” by coercing husbands to divorce their wives even when not permitted by the Shulchan Aruch. Some states in America and Canada have passed laws forcing husbands to give their wives a GET when the wife demands it. Major rabbis consider this GET invalid and the children born from it to be mamzerim or doubtful mamzerim. But some rabbis are silent or feel that pressuring the husband is a good deed, in defiance of the Shulchan Aruch Poskim and Gedolei HaDor.
In the recent trial of rabbis who tortured husbands to force them to give a GET, the defense was that some rabbis felt that torturing a husband to force a GET is a mitzvah. But they had no source for this to violate the Shulchan Aruch and the major Poskim and Gedolim
Thus, in the next generation, people from Torah and Haredi homes will become engaged, and somebody will find out about the GET the mother had; then people will decide if they want to marry somebody considered to be a mamzer by Gedolei HaDor who stick with the Shulchan Aruch, such as Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner, or maybe they should allow the marriage that will produce more mamzerim, generation after generation.
The rabbinical world is split. The major Gedolim stay with the Shulchan Aruch, but others break with it. They want to help “Agunoth” even though that makes mamzerim. Thus, in the next generation, people from
ReplyDeleteTorah and Haredi homes will become engaged, and somebody will find out about the GET the mother had; then people will decide if they want to marry somebody considered to be a mamzer by Gedolei HaDor who stick with the Shulchan Aruch, such as Rav Chaim Kanievsky and
Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner.
In our previous telephone conference the topic was What Beth Din is Kosher? Forcing a GET is permitted only with the permission of Gedolei HaDor according to a letter from Gedolim including Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner zt”l. But many rabbis such as Rosh Yeshivas who don’t know halocho so well and rule against the Shulchan Aruch cannot be a
Beth Din. If they coerced a GET the mother is considered as one who got a GET from an invalid Beth Din. The coercion is surely not valid. See Mishpitei
Yisroel pages 5-12, with letters from Gedolim in Israel and America about
coercing a GET and going to civil court.
Rabbi Moshe Heineman openly advertises on ORA’s website to back coerced Gittin.. He praises their forcing 150 husbands to give a GET through public humiliation. The Rashbo in VII:414 clearly states that humiliating a husband to force a GET is forbidden in nearly all cases, even regarding a husband who is not a man. The Radvaz and Chazon Ish pasken this way as well. And in Even Hoezer 77 par 2 and 3 all of the poskin forbid any kind of pressure on the husband to give a GET when the wife demands an end to the marriage. The Beis Yosef, the Ramo, the Chelkas Mechokake, the Bais Shmuel all forbid it, quoting the words of the Rashbo above. The Gro says that nobody permits it. But Rabbi Heinemann publicly encourages the 150 invalid Gittin produced against the Shulchan Aruch. I asked him his source and he said something about EH 154 that has nothing to do with what he is doing. The Shulchan Aruch is talking there about somebody required to give a GET by the Talmud because he is not a man. Such a person can only be pressured two ways, one is to tell him he is sinning against the Talmud, and the other way, according to Ramo, is to make passive ostracizing. But ORA does active humiliation, which is not permitted by the Ramo. Furthermore, the Shach in the end of Gevuras Anoshiim forbids the ostracizing of Rabbeinu Tam, as does the Chazon Ish.
At any rate, in the next generation, beware who you marry.
does the halacha state mamzer vaiye velo mamzer sofik?
ReplyDeletearen't we all mamzerim otherwise. in the times of Shmuel he said he knew of 2 families that were muchtzik kosher but were really mamzairm. after 1600 years most of us must have at least some nexus to these families. I have seen reports that 1 in 15 americans in the usa for more then 3 generations can trace their lineage to a passenger of the mayflower, that was only 400 years. What will 1600 do to all of us. if we ignore the issue it halashakly goes away.
It says that when Moshiach comes he will know everything and point everything out to everyone. But the one thing the seforim say Moshiach will not do, is say such-and-such people are mamzeirim even though for centuries they and their offspring all thought and assumed they are kosher Jews. So Moshiach will permit those who were assumed to be non-mamzeirim to remain considered non-mamzeirim even though in reality they should be considered as mamzeirim.
ReplyDeleteDoes not this fact have relevance to this discussion?
@David - yes this is the key issue. There is no prohibition of marrying the offspring of an adulterous relationship. The revelation of the prohibited relationship that produced him/her is what creates the issur. That is why in general people are told not to take it upon themselves to investigate individuals - but to go to a gadol and ask what - if anything- to do about suspicions.
ReplyDeleteIs it possible that perhaps this point is what those lenient rabbis who endorse pressuring a husband to give a divorce rely on as their fall-back position -- that in any event even if they're wrong and the stringent position correct regarding the permissibility of pressuring the husband to give a divorce, the rule is we don't ask too many questions that could potentially cause someone to be a mamzer by declaring the relationship between the parents to have been forbidden?
ReplyDeleteThus they don't worry about potentially causing a mamzer situation of the wife's future children after her first husband was pressured to give a Get.
See Aruch HaShulchan EH 2:1 who says that anyone who marries a woman whose family has a mamzer in it [even though the family is mostly kosher people and each has chezkas kashruse and sofek mamzer is permitted by the Torah and forbidden by the rabbonon - despite all of this] Eliyohu HaNovi writes his sin and ties him up and HaShem whips him." Now, if it is so easy to erase a mamzer, why is this?
ReplyDeleteAll of the women who have forced Gittin from ORA and then have a baby if it is considered a mamzer or a doubtful mamzer, do we just ignore the problem?
See Bear Hativ EH 2:4 the law in Lita was that one may not perform a marriage unless we have a proof about the fact that they are Jewish and what family they come from.
See EH 4:14 An argument if a baby is a mamzer we take the stringent view that it is forbidden as a doubtful mamzer. See Bais Shmuel there #38 that a doubtful mamzer is permitted by the Torah and forbidden by the rabbis.
With all do respect, you make it seem as the US rabonim are nuts and willing to adapt the torah to the times. But these are our teachers the ones we follow, and if some rabonim in EY disagree with them fine let each group follow their teachers, as you say some rabbonim are going against the shulchon aruch, i do not belive i think the correct, the terms you should use is, the rabonim are going against YOUR interpretation of the shulchan aruch.
ReplyDeletedave,
ReplyDeleteIf Rabbi Moshe Heinemann publishes in ORA's website his support for their coercing Gittin for 150 women, and I say that this is wrong, and I bring a Rashbo in VII:414 that forbids humiliating a husband to force a GET even if the husband is not a man, and this is held by the Radvaz and the Chazon Ish and nobody disagrees, and I ask Rabbi H what is source is and he told me something ridiculous, I am still right in pointing out that these rabbis don't have a source. If you want to follow them, and you can't get a source out of them, you are doing the wrong thing. Any rabbi who disagrees with the Rashbo, the Radvaz, and the Chazon Ish, and disagrees with the words of the Rashbo quoted in EH 77 par 2 and 3, is a Reform rabbi. You can say to me what you want. But you will have to repeat yourself to Beth Din Shel Maalo, why you, with no sources, simply dismissed the Rashbo, the Radvaz, the Chazon Ish the Shulchan Aruch EH 77 par 2 and 3, and all of the commentators there who completely agree with the Rashbo that a wife who demands a GET has no right to coerce the husband to give it. The commentators are Beis Yosef, Ramo, Gro, Chelkas Mechokake and Beis Shmuel. Maharsham says we are accustomed to follow the Beis Shmuel. And surely in this case where nobody disagrees. Go ask your rabbis what they do with these sources and produce them on this blog? I guarantee you. THEY HAVE NO SOURCES.
And ask Rabb Shmuel Kaminetsky why he approved Mrs. Freidman's right to remarry without a GET, when everyone in the world disagrees. Because these people don't bother with sources. They say what they want. If you can't believe that, check it out. GET ME A SOURCE.