Last week, the Five Towns Jewish Times ran an article about the unfortunate dilemma of agunos. A number of points were made in the article. One point was that Rav Hershel Schachter, a leading halachicposek and a champion of the rights of agunos, had voiced serious dissent against what he sees as radically innovative methods propounded by the International Beis Din established by Rabbi Simcha Krauss.
The approach, in essence, creates annulments by unilaterally dissolving marriages by a light investigation where the three members of the beisdin determine that there were never valid witnesses in the first place.
This author further pointed out that ultimately the “annulment approach” to resolving the agunah crisis would both create pariah status for the descendants of those who received IBD annulments as well as cause a marriage rift in Orthodox Judaism. I presented the argument that we must certainly address the agunah crisis, but not at this double cost of making these young women and their children pariahs and of causing a rift within KlalYisrael where people will not marry into them.
Update
Since then, the Five Towns Jewish Times has obtained specific rulings that have emanated from the IBD. It seems that the IBD has thus far issued annulments to seven women. The 5TJT has seen the alleged arguments for three of these rulings. Essentially, the IBD views videotapes of the weddings and seeing no witnesses standing in the front, assumes that there were no previously specified witnesses in the audience and thus annuls the marriages. They also assume incompetence on behalf of the officiating rabbi, an assumption that is, at best, halachically questionable.
Initially, the IBD claimed that they would have full transparency in regard to all their annulments. Unfortunately, the rulings were never made public, even though a full seven annulments have been issued. Only after pressure has some of the information been released.
Further clarifications have also revealed that Rav Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg had never backed the IBD initiative. Previously it was reported that he had initially supported the idea but backed away. It seems that this is entirely incorrect. Inquiries have revealed that Rav Goldberg had never backed the IBD initiative in any manner.[...]
How can IBD Halachically base facts on a video? If the camera man happened not to film the witnesses, does that signify there wern't any? What if that clip has been edited, does that also undo the witnesses that it never happened? What if you play the film backwards, the Chassan removes the ring froom the Kallah's finger, puts it back into his pocket and decides to go back from whence he came from? Can you pasken through that as if the groom changed his mind not to marry her? It is a befeirush a video?
ReplyDeletePutting all video business aside, how will the IBD do away with the mishnah Haisha niknis Bishlosha drachim the third option? Will the IBD also pasken that odom osseh beiloso beilas znus? Will the IBD disqualify all those witnesses that realized the couple living as husband and wife in a Jewish neighborhood? If the Chupa happened without witnesses, is this what you call BAKI betiv Gittin veKidushin? Or much rather "nisht zu kiddush and nisht zu havdala"? No wonder they didn't want to disclose to the public their newly discovered Einstein method of Going back in Time with this new Time Machine widget, since it is still Patent pending. Just by the press of a button, Rewind, Undo and Wallah, afkinhu lol moron verabonon kidushin lemafrea. Mamash Gaoness and revolutionary! Not even Chachmei Chelem were able to capture "Warped Time in a sealed barrel", moving it freely back and forth at will without batting an eye. Mekudash Mekudash, Megureshet Megureshet, FREE FREE, SHE IS FREE FOR ALL, You love me You love me not, Here comes the Bride, now you see and now you don't. The questions go on and on, and so it goes. BTW, what is the fate of the children, do they also disappear back in time or back to the future Fast Forward without any presence? Suppose, if you can capture all those member Dayanim those that are known and those that are yet unknown into a time capsule and whiff away back in time or fast forward it into the future, video it in real time, "ma thei aleihen"? Or better yet, A virtual tallis shekulo tcheiles harei zu muteres lechol odom or is it achizat einayim only upotur mitchiyas Hameisim? Yelamdenu no Rabeinu Dayeynu, meheichan Dantani? This wouldn't be funny, if it weren't so sad.
Seven annulments will "cause a marriage rift in Orthodox Judaism"?
ReplyDeleteAlso, why demand that their psakim be published?
First, Practically NO Battei Din in America Explain ANYTHING in their psakim as to WHY they paskened as they did. (I'm not saying that's right, but that's reality.
Second, wouldn't this Aguna Beis Din's NOT publishing their psakim be better, so that their ruling not set precedent?
The more the mystery, the more the reason for people to stay away. The gene pool would be tainted, and choice matches will be very limited. It is the beholders that have the last word.
ReplyDeleteOf course you can accept a video.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't invite the (ex) husband, or in this casethe mesader kiddushin (officiating rabbi), you'll end up with decisions like this.
If you want acceptance of a controversial bet din, if you want to change halacha, if you want acceptance of your psakim by prospective future husbands snd mesadrei kiddushin, you publish your psakim.
ReplyDeleteAgree about #2, not #1, #3, or #4.
ReplyDeleteSham Battei Din, which includes most of them (and all Zabla), have their psakim accepted, even though the outcome primarily has to do with which side has more money and influence or with whom they most identify.
As for prospective husbands and missadrei keddushin, all that's needed is one of each, not everyone in the world.
That's why I say they should skip step #1.
Ironically, in the post above "A heartfelt plea to Agunos", my 9th Grade Rebbe in St. Louis Rabbi Simcha Krauss was one of the undersigned.
ReplyDelete