   |
update: just restored the original post - see here
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2015/11/baltimore-beis-din-tamar-epstein-is.html
I just received a call from Rav Mordechai Shuchatowitz of the Baltimore Beis Din saying that my post - regarding their letter that they had written in Tamuz - was insulting to major talmidei chachom and full of lies. He demanded that it be taken down and that I apologize for what I wrote. I was a bit taken back by the vehemence of his words.
I told him that I disagreed with his assessment but for the sake of shalom bayis I would take it down (disclaimer my son is married to his brother's daughter) and asked him if he was planning on issuing a more current letter? He said simply that there is nothing to discuss until I take down the post.
I sincerely apologize for upsetting him and the other members of the Baltimore Beis Din. I have in fact placed the post in draft mode for the time being.
There is no question of the sincerity or competence of the Beis Din - but there clearly are diverging views of what is going on, goals and how to get there. However what is important is that it is not helpful to have unnecessary additional conflicts in this incredible situation - that hopefully will be resolved in the near future.
I just downloaded the letter from the website where it was originally posted on, before it's taken down from there also. I wonder why RDE was the only one to be asked to take it down.
ReplyDeleteLol, lol, lol
ReplyDeleteSee how they all protect rabbi Kaminetsky's kavod, very honoroble
However some new bombshells on the way, and they won't survive that
Has anybody spotted "Nathan of gaza" recently? He's MIA...
ReplyDelete“Baltimore Beis Din: Tamar Epstein is still married to
ReplyDeleteAharon Friedman and is forbidden to remarry without first receiving a Get”
The Baltimore Beis Din should resolve custody and
division of assets disputes. Why? Bring
the 2 sides to court and let each present his/her case etc.
I charged your magistrates at that time as follows,
“Hear out your fellow men, and decide justly between any man and a fellow Israelite
or a stranger. You shall not be partial in judgment: hear out low and high
alike. Fear no man, for judgment is God’s. And any matter that is too difficult
for you, you shall bring to me and I will hear it.” (Deuteronomy 1:16-17)
Sanhedrin 7b:
“ “between any man and a fellow Israelite” . . . R.
Judah says that this refers to disputes between brothers about trifles such as,
for instance, who should occupy the lower and who the upper part of a house. “or
a stranger” . . . This, says R. Judah, refers even to so insignificant a
dispute as one concerning a stove and an oven. [גרו
interpreted here as sojourner, who sojourns in the same house. The nature of
the disputes between them will be mostly over articles associated with the
household, stoves and ovens].”
The Baltimore Bait Din may be baffled on the dispute
whether T.E. needs a get and such. Why? Here
we needs scholars on how to interpret the Torah and the Mishna and the
Schulchan Aruch etc,
I quote:
If a case is too baffling for you to decide, be it a
controversy over homicide, civil law, or assault—matters of dispute in your
courts— you shall promptly repair to the place that the Lord your God will have
chosen, and appear before the levitical priests, or the magistrate in charge at
the time, and present your problem. When they have announced to you the verdict
in the case, you shall carry out the verdict that is announced to you from that
place that the Lord chose, observing scrupulously all their instructions to
you. (Deuteronomy 17:8-10)
Nathan was injured in a car accident around 3 weeks ago , he suffered severe head trauma, and will never be the same again
ReplyDeleteBecause people look to this Web site for the truth - if you look at the right pane on this site there have been over 36k page views in the last seven days.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't the letter that they were offended by it was the accurate description of events from seven years ago that needed to be kept hush hush.
The Baltimore Beis Din should resolve custody and
ReplyDeletedivision of assets disputes. Why? Bring
the 2 sides to court and let each present his/her case etc. The court has “to decide
justly between any man and a fellow Israelite or a stranger.” Money matters.
I quote:
“I charged your magistrates at that time as follows,
“Hear out your fellow men, and decide
justly between any man and a fellow Israelite or a stranger. You shall not be
partial in judgment: hear out low and high alike. Fear no man, for judgment is
God’s. And any matter that is too difficult for you, you shall bring to me and
I will hear it.” (Deuteronomy 1:16-17)
Sanhedrin 7b:
“ “between any man and a fellow Israelite” . . . R.
Judah says that this refers to disputes between brothers about trifles such as,
for instance, who should occupy the lower and who the upper part of a house. “or
a stranger” . . . This, says R. Judah, refers even to so insignificant a
dispute as one concerning a stove and an oven. [גרו
interpreted here as sojourner, who sojourns in the same house. The nature of
the disputes between them will be mostly over articles associated with the
household, stoves and ovens].”
The Baltimore Bait Din may be baffled on the dispute
whether T.E. needs a get and such. Why? Here
we need scholars on how to interpret the Torah and the Mishna and the Schulchan
Aruch etc. This is not money matters.
I quote:
If a case is too baffling for you to decide, be it a
controversy over homicide, civil law, or assault—matters of dispute in your
courts— you shall promptly repair to the place that the Lord your God will have
chosen, and appear before the levitical priests, or the magistrate in charge at
the time, and present your problem. When they have announced to you the verdict
in the case, you shall carry out the verdict that is announced to you from that
place that the Lord chose, observing scrupulously all their instructions to
you. (Deuteronomy 17:8-10)
The rabbis uphold the so-called "black wall of silence" hence the need for laymen like us to hold the flag of כבוד שמים, when we come to the next world we will see עליונים למטה ותחתונים למעלה
ReplyDeleteNo, he was DOA. I also smell some sholom in the air, tartei mashma. Some asher .... nassi with some ashrei hador, with some accomodations as Shmuel did for the King of the time. I hope and pray that I am correct. VeSholom al yisroel.
ReplyDeleteThat same description of events is still available on this website on a three year old post here discussing this case.
ReplyDeleteIt is possible to discuss the issues without personal disrespect. I respect rabbi G. and both rabbis K. But believe that invoking kiddushey ta'us should be avoided. I am sure those close to the case know what it would take to have the husband give a get, and there are wayz to help him reach that decision. The idea of a psychiatric diagnosis as a reason for kiddushey taus is also perplexing, the illnesd could be treatable, and it could have been milder and subclinical at the time of the marriage. It is not like kidushey taus because of a wooden leg, where the facts can be definitively established.
ReplyDeleteOf course Philly is behind this. Any news with the convention? Did the Philly people manage to get it off the agenda again?
ReplyDeleteperhaps he is in Izmir or Constantinople, waiting for Shabetai to return
ReplyDeleteI'm not close to the case, and I can tell you what it would take for Aharon to give her a Get, that is for TF to negotiate in good faith regarding visitation rights of their daughter.
ReplyDeleteHowever I don't know if TF is even interested in a Get at this point, because that would be admitting that she actually needs one, which in turn forces her to admit that she committed adultery with AF.
Granted it's may seem unusual, but there's no way to avoid that, but to be מתיר an aguna we must go to great lengths , as the poskim have done for hundreds of years
ReplyDeleteYou have no idea what the גדולי הפוסקים were מחדש to achieve this, I would suggest to read the responsa of rav yitchak elchanan
Yesterday I wanted to write a post about Baltimore BD's statement being the most significant - not because of their involvement in the original proceedings but because they, unlike Eida, Hisachdus or R. Dovid, have to deal with Philly RY and his henchmen. Didn't have to wait too long...
ReplyDeleteEhud יקירי, אין שלום ולא יהיה שלום, המתירים לא יחזרו מפסקם, שהרי יש יתד לסמוך עליו, וא"א לומר שטעו בשיקול הדעת, ולכך הרבנים השפויים החליטו שאין למחות נגד פסק זה אעפ"י שהם עצמם לא היה מתירים, צא וראה שר' דוד פיינשטיין אינו אומר לא איסור ולא היתר, והאוסרים לא יתירו גם מה שהתיר באגרות משה, והמחלוקת היא אותו חילוקי דעות שחלקו על ר'משה בחייו, ולכן אין כאן חדשות כלל, וכל אחד יעמוד על משמרתו
ReplyDeleteIt was the critique by RDE that was the problem. You can search for the cached page and see what he wrote.
ReplyDeletelink please
ReplyDeleteoch und vey izmir
ReplyDeleteSurely, the Baltimore Court is baffled, much as we
ReplyDeleteare. The Baltimore Court could conduct
hearings on visitation rights, before the 2 parties, as Deuteronomy 1:17
requires. This is like money matters. Looks like T.E. is afraid of a hearing on
visitation rights with her husband testifying against her in court. T.E. lies to the court. If T.E. doesn’t want
a hearing on visitation rights, what can the Baltimore beis din do??
On non-money
matters, the Baltimore Court (and us too) must do as Deuteronomy 17:8:” If a
case is too baffling for you to decide, be it a controversy over homicide,
civil law, or assault—matters of dispute in your courts— you shall promptly
repair to the place that the Lord your God will have chosen, and appear before
the levitical priests, or the magistrate in charge at the time, and present
your problem.”
In my case with Susan the courts resolved the non-money
matters in Susan’s favor without hearing my side. They have the NYS legal power to do so. The Brooklyn Supreme Court ruled me in
contempt of court, that I never divorced Susan in 1993, that I did not marry
Yemima in 1993 lawfully, that my children from Yemima are illegitimate,that I
must pay $25,000 fines, and that I must appear. I quote Judge Pesce 1996: “I have discussed
the matter with Mr. Rothbart, as well as justice Rigler. According to him, he told you that your two
children in Israel could be considered illegitimate if brought here because New
York did not recognize your Israeli divorce.”
But with me alive and
well and “repeatedly submitting papers” (Susan's 11/4/2015) Judge Prus cannot
take away my property as his September 25, 2015 Order states without hearing my
side. In the Talmud, a Court could make rulings against a husband ``when the
husband is a deaf-mute or has become insane or is imprisoned.'' Hello, I'm
alive and well and I live in Israel.
I'll be 70 12/1/2015 in good health and spirits, but poor in assets. In the Talmud, the husband alive and well
must be heard fully. In the Talmud, angry wives are afraid of their husbands
that they might appear before the court
of law and testify against them.
First of all, TF is not an agunah. She's a Fakegunah. As has been reported here many times by people in contact with him, her husband was, and is, actually willing to give her a Get, provided that she be reasonable about visitation rights.
ReplyDeleteInvoking the responsa of R' Yitzchak Elchana is a red herring. The key word here is "responsa". He and other גדולי הפוסקים wrote teshuvos explaining what their heter was based upon. They also asked their colleagues to weigh in the matter. In cases where the heter wasn't so straightforward, they sometimes stipulated that at least two other גדולי רבנים agree with the heter.
Was any of this done in this case? NO! So let's not disgrace R' Yitzchak Elchanan's memory by comparing RNG to him, and pretending that he's our generation's גדול הפוסקים. Is RNG bigger than R' Moshe Feinstein, who put his heterim into writing, and published them in his seforim?
Finally, we must remember an explicit halcha in Shulchan Aruch (YD 242:10) that a rabbi is not allowed to permit something that people perceive as being prohibited. Period. However there happens to be a leniency formulated by the Shach (s.v 17), IF the rabbi provides a clear rationalization for his ruling.
ש"ך יורה דעה סימן רמב, ס"ק יז
שאסור לחכם כו' - נראה דהיינו דוקא אם מתיר בסתם... אבל אם אומר לשואל טעם בדבר ומראה לו פנים, או שמביא ראיות מתוך הספר מותר. עכ"ל.
Hence, the rabbi(s) involved in this alleged היתר are either halachically prohibited from making such pronouncements (as per the Shulchan Aruch), or they are duty bound to explain the basis for their leniency (as per the Shach).
The public is waiting to hear the defense of this unusual
ruling. The burden to explain such a ruling lies on those who made it. Until they do so, the ruling is allowed to be criticized. In fact, it MUST be criticized, since this is part and parcel of the halachic process.
Gamal,
ReplyDeleteI also make statements about what happened for hundreds of years. But when I do, I bring sources. Just what source do you have? And what about the Kovneh Rov Rav Yitschok Elchohnon who said just the opposite of what you write here? And why did you not mention the Noda Biyehuda II 80 where women were in much worse situations than Tamar with far more hideous husbands, and he absolutely refused to consider negation of the marriage. And what do you do when Reb Moshe himself who admits that the great rabbis of past generations did not agree with what he paskened that certain advanced Agunah cases can result in negation of the marriage. And here is the clincher. Reb Moshe only permitted of negation of marriage if the husband is absolutely not willing to give a GET. That is, the woman must go to any length to accept it rather than negate the marriage. But along somes Reb Moshe's talmid Greenblatt who disagrees with his rebbe and permits Tamar to remarry and refuse a GET, because to get the GET she would have to return the child she took away to Philadelphia and restore custody rights to the father.
If I was Aharon I would consider asking for satisfaction from the attempted kidnapping and torture Tamar's mother paid for, but he is not talking in those terms. He just wants to see his daughter. For this some "rabbis" invented lies and halacha that fly in the fact of Mishneh, gemoras in Kesubose, Shulchan ARuch Even Haezer 38 and 117 and other places. If nobody permitted these things for centuries, why start now with lies about Tamar and Aharon?
Eddie,
ReplyDeleteNest time you make such a remark, why don't you visit the hospital and see people with severe head traumas?
You are misusing the term aguna. Tamar was (and is) not one.
ReplyDeleteI see a parallel between T.E. and Susan. Astounding, T.E. and her supporters got a
ReplyDeleterabbi to permit T.E to remarry, without a get with her husband alive and well
and free!! Astounding, Susan and her
supporters got NYS Judge Prus to throw me out of my house in Brooklyn, though I
live in Israel, and I’m alive and well and submit opposition papers.
צא ורה שר' נטע הלך לבקר ר' דוד בשבוע שעבר, ור' דוד לא הסכים איתו כלל וכלל ואמר לו שאין שום יתד (חוץ מהעיתון) לסמוך עליו
ReplyDeleteThanks for publishing me on your blog. You can see me on http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/17942
ReplyDeleteI love to hear comments.
What is the source for this?
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't Eddie. Next time you make a comment, why don't you check who you are replying to?
ReplyDeleteאמת, אבל ג"כ לא מחה נגד ההיתר, רק אמר שהוא עצמו לא היה מתירה
ReplyDeleteShe's a real aguna, whilst some may question the kidushai taut aspect, its common knowledge that he's a super loner, no one sees him anywhere in the community, he dosnt come to shul, he comes home from work to microwave dinners, noone can live with him
ReplyDeleteGerald, ur obsessed with Susan, get a life and move on!!!!
ReplyDeleteYou view every story to how it compares to yours, MOVE ON
1) Your claim
ReplyDeleteוהמחלוקת היא אותו חילוקי דעות שחלקו על ר'משה בחייו Is obviously a lie, as you are now admitting that Rav Dovid opposed this supposed "heter."
2) Your claim
שהרי יש יתד לסמוך עליו is opposed by Rav Dovid.
3) Your claim
והאוסרים לא יתירו גם מה שהתיר באגרות משה is a lie and opposed by Rav Dovid.
4) Your claim
אמת, אבל ג"כ לא מחה נגד ההיתר is a contradiction. He opposes it and is very, very clear about it. However, his form of הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך is in a way that he feels he will be most productive. At this point, he does not feel that a public protest by him will be most productive.
Through the grapevine. I only mentioned this fact after people were falsely claiming that Rav Dovid does not disagree with this "heter." Please notice that even "dad" doesn't deny this.
ReplyDeleteDoes a simple mistake deserve such a strong condemnation - or is this part of an old score you guys still need to settle?
ReplyDeleteYou are right. But i think this was just a cynical joke about a blogger here named "Nathan of gaza" , obviously nobody has any information about anyone chas v shalom having an accident.
ReplyDeleteRather unintelligent comment. The shuls ostracize him and then you bring the fact that he is not in shul that he is a loner?!
ReplyDeletewhat do you mean " I took down this letter fro sholom Bayis"? This case pivots itself on the fact that Aharon is justified based on A BAIS DIN decision. Now you take it down because the Bais Din asks you? The truth is the truth and cannot be erased and i disagree with what you have done. This is no different than a gay man asking a jewish printer to remove part of the Torah that talks about Toeiva because its a thorn in his eye. DT I expected you to be stronger than that?
ReplyDeleteHe has no halachic obligation to give a Get. Nothing in Shulchan Aruch obligates him to give a Get. So she is not an agunah. And no one has an obligation to give a Get unless and until a duly competent beis din with jurisdiction that heard both sides formally rules a halachic obligation exists to give a Get. This has never occurred in this case.
ReplyDeleteA catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules. An example includes: To apply for a job, you need to have a few years of experience; but in order to gain experience you need to get a job.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_%28logic%29
In order for Aharon to not to be be labeled a loner, he needs to come to shul. But he isn't allowed to come to shul.
Dad, a little bit of empathy is in order. I don't wish this on you, but if you would have gone through what Gerald was put through, you wouldn't be talking so callously. This is besides for which, that Gerald's story isn't over yet, due to ongoing litigation.
ReplyDeleteIf you're a "Dad", with a wife and kids, I encourage you to go for sensitivity training, for their sake.
אם נכונים דבריך הרי על ר' דוד לצאת ולמחות נגד ההיתר, ובזה שלא עשה כן מוכח שאינו חושב שר' נטע טעה בדבר משנה
ReplyDeleteRDE's son is married to R' Shuchatowitz's brother's daughter. For the sake of his son's shalom bayis, something every parent desires for his children, RDE agreed to remove the letter. He then explained exactly what is the only reason he removed it.
ReplyDeleteWhat new bombshells?
ReplyDeleteI would very much agree with this.
ReplyDeleteWe're not talking about Susan right now...
Common sense obligates him
ReplyDeleteThe problem with whts going on is, that all the crazies who have a ax to grind r coming out of the woodwork
ReplyDeleteCommon sense dictates that he take care of his best interests first.
ReplyDelete"Dad", "crazies", now you're resorting to name calling. You don't know Gerald and his story. Gerald has been posting here for some time. You're the newcomer here, and you start by insulting people. Wow. You really need help!
ReplyDeleteAka, harotsachto vegam yorashto, aka shvor et hachavit ushmor et yeynah. Look at the world of support Aharon gets. He is not alone, far from it. The downfal of ORA veSiyatom *sharya* is in sight.
ReplyDeleteTattele tayers, they have a choice either they recuse and bring a Korban Nossi in line of Kimu vekiblu, or po thehei K...... c.v. with a Kol Kore bchol tfutsot Yisroel of *veal yevakshu torah mipihu*, aus kaplutchmacher and aus yeshiva. The Taus is not mekach or lekach, elo To'oh bidvar mishna mefureshes, pausing on sovro vekiblah only dug it deeper veyotso srochoi behefsedoi. The smell is so strong that even the Yoshev rosh had to lufter aus in avira deYisroel. Even R' Dovid wasn't maskim, * רק אמר שהוא עצמו לא היה מתירה*
ReplyDeleteand that was only miktsas shvocho befonov (of R'NG), in synch with his father R' Moshe. Even R' Moshe's Heter was only in a case when it was a dovor shein lo matirin beshum oifen achar vekolu kol hakitsin, of which here is not so the case. The chidush is so gevaldig, that such was not even mekubel misinai afilu letalmid vosik.
P.S
Please, consider this as the raincheck promised.
And what happened to his meilits Ashdoidi? Was he there as well?
ReplyDelete@Fedup - please go back and study Torah - in particular Yaakov.
ReplyDeleteThere is no requirement for absolute truth - it depends upon the situation.
You might also study the laws of chanifa - in particular their application in education, shalom bayis and business
I meant shalom bayis in a more general sense. There would be no repercussions for my son if I didn't take down the post.
ReplyDelete@ fedup
ReplyDeleteAs for the latest developments and sad state of affairs, it is clear that the ball is halachically in the BBD;s court. Letovas hainyan they asked for a time out, ulay yeshivun, tartei mashma. I am confident that when the time is ripe, we will be privy to uforsu es hasimlo.
It is crystal clear that she is a moredes.
ReplyDelete"Ehud", your comment should have been directed to "Dad".
ReplyDelete"You have no idea what the גדולי הפוסקים were מחדש to achieve this"
ReplyDeletePlease be more specific. We need to see that a questionable argument was accepted not just kulos of eid echod where there is a good reason to believe him because he is muchzak to say the truth.
Also, what about the fact that she now claims that she left him because of his condition but in Beis-din she didn't say the most obvious thing which is the 'real' reason why she wanted a divorce. You realize that the Heter is based on her Ne'emanus when even according to her she did not say the truth
ROFL! If this is not an oxymoron, than I don't know what is. This is not a stam av melocho veyoiser mishtiss, but avi avos AND mother of all mothers ve'em kol hashtussim. R'NG went to seek support tfrom R Dovid vehi noifel al hmito asher gam R' Moshe oleho levakesh al nafshoi ki ra'ah ki kolso eilov veal chaveirov horo'oh of malchei rabonon. R' Dovid replied, mi hu ze vei ze hu asher melo'oh libo laasos ken, I would never have done such a thing, hagam lichbosh es Ovi imi baboyis? R'NG nivas venifchad veyotso ovel vachafui rosh, veze kol hasipur. FYI This is nothing less than a full mechoeh, bederch kavod, befonov.
ReplyDeleteall the crazies .... r coming out of the woodwork
ReplyDeleteYep, yep. You wouldn't be referring to yourself, would you?
I meant my comment as a follow up to yours, see it as vov mosif al horishonim = ( aka/ also known as). You even got an upvote from me. Kindly think of it as a SIDEWINDER MISSILE driven like a drone with a crypted address homing in to it's target.
ReplyDelete"its common knowledge that he's a super loner"
It is possible that Dad wants to reinforce the Mekach toches claims. 2litl 2 l8
First of all, it's a chidush and chidush mechidush lo gamrinan. besides, chodosh ossur min hatorah :)
ReplyDeleteVeal kol ele yeviacho Elkim bamishpot!
ReplyDeleteChase away ORA's goons stalking him and everybody else that is koisher kshorim itam, and then we talk. Please tell them gam oleichem ta'avor kois, shene'emar vaHoelokim yevakesh es haNIrdof. Please watch closer how they and their family fare, because they will not disclose it to you on their own. They are licking their wounds in solitude. veNetsach Yisroel lo yeshaker!
Common sense is that he not give a Get until she complies with the Baltimore beis din and halacha and his visitation rights per halacha.
ReplyDeleteHe was like this (besides for going to Shul) before they got married
ReplyDeleteRabbi Moshe Heinemann has a published letter on ORA's website calling for everyone to support them because they coerced 150 husbands to give a GET. Here is a rabbi calling for creating coerced Gittin, and the 150 ladies who were freed with coercion are still married because the GET is forced and a forced GET is invalid.
ReplyDeleteWhere does it say in Shulcan Aruch that you can coerce a GET when the wife demands it? See Shulchan Aruch 77 paragraphs 2 and 33, the Shulchan Aruch, the Ramo, the Gro, the Chelkas Mechokake and the Beis SHmuel all say, with nobody disagreeing, the words of the Rashbo VII:414 that a woman has no power to coerce a GET from her husband. But Rabbi Heinemann disagrees. And he makes a public demand to support the mamzer makers.
I am beginning to understand why you don't sign your real name.
ReplyDeleteHey Dad! Do you still hold steadfast to:
ReplyDeleteהמתירים לא יחזרו מפסקם? They Matirim are struggling amongst themselves of who is responsible to tell them to separate, and which choice of words to use.