Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Tamar Epstein heter: Five steps needed to bring about a resolution

It is clear at this point that Tamar Epstein is still married to Aharon Friedman - because the "heter" she received to remarry is a sad joke based on a clear corruption and misuse of halachic principles. Consequently her marriage to Adam Fleicher is invalid, she is committing adultery and future kids are mamzerim.

It is clear that Aharon Friedman has been severely mistreated and abused - not only by Tamar but a number of major rabbis - not limited to Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky, Rav Sholom Kaminetsky,  Rav Nota Greenblatt, Rav Herschel Schachter amd Rabbi Jeremy Stern.

It is clear that Aharon Friedman's daughter's abduction by Tamar was aided and abetted by a number of rabbis - some deliberately and some by incompetence.

It is clear that Aharon's rights as a father have been severely violated and that the normal relationship with his daughter has been damaged without any justification according to the Torah.

It is clear that Aharon Friedman received some singularly bad advice from a number of well meaning rabbis who were no match for Tamar's brain trust of gedolim and lawyers. These rabbis serious misjudged their ability to reason with Tamar's brain trust who treated these rabbis as country bumpkins and outmaneuvered them at every step. As one major posek told Aharon recently - he should have gone straight to the police when Tamar abducted their daughter. The reason that he didn't was that he trusted the assurance of various rabbis that they could handle the situation and their mistaken assertion that not relying totally on the beis din was a severe violation of Torah.

It is clear that the well meaning rabbis misgauged the degree to which Tamar and her family gamed the system - corrupting gedolim and halacha in the process.

It is clear that Tamar and family were guided by a strong feeling of entitlement that was encouraged by the Kaminetskys and Rav Herschel Schachter.

Aside from the public abuse and humiliation that Aharon has unjustly received over the years he has also been blocked from participating in the shul's in his neighborhood. Their rabbis claiming that he is a get refuser and needs to be punished. This in direct contradiction to the undeniable fact that the Baltimore Beis Din (the only one authorized by halacha) refused to issue a psak that he was required to give a Get. These shul rabbis relied on the invalid pronouncements and seruv issued by Rav Shmuel  Kaminetsky and Rav Herschel Schacter. Strangely enough even after Tamar announced she didn't need to give a Get they still excluded him since they claimed he was still a Get refuser. 
========================================
Given the above it is time to get beyond the focus on condemning Tamar for remarrying based on a phony heter. 

First step - there needs to be a clear demand from all the rabbis - that the unjust restrictions of the area Shuls need to be removed and Aharon needs to be welcomed back.

Once this overdue step is taken - it might be possible about taking additional steps. 

BUT WITHOUT THIS MINIMAL ACT OF DECENCY - THERE IS NO BASIS FOR AHARON TO BE INVOLVED IN ANY ADDITIONAL STEPS. 

Especially since a gadol has clearly stated that Aharon has no need to give Tamar a Get.

Step two -   the restoring of Aharon's access to his daughter by having her move back into the Baltimore-Washington area. This step needs to be fully guaranteed by halacha and law that this arrangement will not be changed against Aharon's wishes.

Step three -  Aharon needs to give Tamar a Get. It is important to note that Aharon should not be first depositing a Get with Beis Din. The obligation is on Tamar to do what is necessary and then Aharon will reciprocate.

Step  four - an internationally respected beis din needs to be formed to decide what Tamar should do next  In the meantime it is clear that she needs to separate from her new husband.

Step five - an internationally respected beis din should decide an appropriate response to  Rav Greenblatt and the Kaminetsky's regarding their responsibility in generating a false heter and corruption of the halacha and halachic process.

54 comments :

  1. I agree
    But the order needs to be changed
    Step one
    Ahron Friedman needs to give a get asap

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rav Moshe Feinstein disagrees with you- he says the Get comes last

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Get is only issued in accordance with normative halachic procedure in divorce cases after all other outstanding divorce issues are first resolved at the end of the beis din process.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Your obviously very naive - if Aharon were to give a Get as step one none of the other steps would ever happen. If Tamar and her team wouldn't have abused Aharon she would have had a Get seven years ago. I suggest you go back and reread the post and if you still come to the same conclusion I suggest you call ORA, they are always looking for brainless followers who can only focus on one point at a time (or maybe you are one already).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah, and as soon as she has the Get, she's out of there, and off to
    וואו דער שווארצע פעפער וואקסט

    ReplyDelete
  6. He went to court, that's the visitation he has, and nothing will change, if he wants to stay the way hi he's for the remainder of his miserable life let him be my guest

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why must he first give a "get". Tamar and her Rabbis insist she doesn't need one and they aren't asking for one.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Not as far as SA is concerned, it is not ma sheasui asui. Recall the D vs W. before a Get krissus, all scores MUST be settled FIRST. AF Nero yoir veyofia, has all the support from the Halacha abiding BDinim in the world along with klall Yisroel! His future is B'H bright as shivosayim keor haboker. Long live Aharon Ish Shalom And I still owe you one, yet outstanding, the check is in the mail.

    ReplyDelete
  9. And I thought it was an MT. Welcome on one step backwards.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Btw from my knowledge a father has no rights of custody to his daughter
    הבת אצל אמה!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. We're talking about visitation.

    ReplyDelete
  12. He didn't got to court. He went to בית דין. She forced him to go to court. Anything that she gets through ערכאות is not כדין. If TF wants to be a Torah Jew, she will do תשובה and go back to בית דין.
    After Aharon gets his היתר מאה רבנים, he will happily move on with his life, while TF will be living in sin, pumping out little ממזר'לאך.

    ReplyDelete
  13. If she wants her future kids to be considered mamzairm by 99.99% of the world let it stay the way it is. She's been living in her own self centered world anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  14. http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/rav-sternbuch-divorcewho-gets-custody.html

    ReplyDelete
  15. The father has the right and the duty to raise his daughter i.e visit her, speak to her, teach her the right values etc etc. There was no question of where she will be living and btw, did you experience what A. F. Has been through in the last 7-8 years. As a 'Dad' I would expect more sympathy for another Dad.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Rav Sternbach has a Teshuva that says that when a woman goes to ArKoos the husband doesn't need a heter Maoh Rabonon to remarry. For all we bloggers know, maybe he already married???

    ReplyDelete
  17. No such thing as visitation in shulchan aruch

    ReplyDelete
  18. He says only לכתחילה

    ReplyDelete
  19. Please admit that you were wrong about custody!

    ReplyDelete
  20. @Dad it is interesting that you make incorrect assertions and when you are refuted you don't acknowledge your ignorance.

    ReplyDelete
  21. @Dad Rav Moshe says to give the Get last. Do you understand that when you say Ahron should give it first that goes against Rav Moshe's psak

    you seem to have a problem acknowledging that you are mistaken

    ReplyDelete
  22. Will not, look in shulchan aruch, rav shternbuch has many chidushim

    ReplyDelete
  23. Most רבנים who have not voiced there opposition are of the opinion that the psak is without the range of halachik pesika

    ReplyDelete
  24. I have a problem acknowledging that reb Moshe was posek achron

    ReplyDelete
  25. U think that reb Moshe and reb Moshe are פוסקי אחרון, and what you don't acknowledge is that the fact is that reb Moshe was the architect of קידושי טעות that led us to where we are today

    ReplyDelete
  26. Does the SA state dinah demalchusse dineh?

    ReplyDelete
  27. @Dad you comments become stranger and stranger. You can't acknowledge that you are ignorant. Reb Moshe is not just a posek. Someone who follows Reb Moshe's psak not to give a Get till the end is fully justified in ignoring your call that a Get be given first - who are you anyway.

    Your latest "joke" is to try to dismiss Reb Moshe by saying he is the architect of Kiddushei ta'os. What utter nonsense. Reb Moshe never agreed to the nonsense that R Greenblatt and R Kaminetsky call a heter.

    Sounds like you want us to pasken by your uninformed pronouncements instead of accepted seforim and poskim.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @Dad you are right - you clearly have problems. Either you are claiming you are a greater posek than Reb Moshe or that you claim someone else is greater. Since you have not told us who you consider greater than Reb Moshe and it is clear that you are not greater - you are simply spouting nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  29. As reb Chaim berlin writes that using kidusbei taut is a slippery slope,

    ReplyDelete
  30. @Dad your comments are becoming less and less relevant to the discussion. I quote Reb Moshe and you dismiss him as not being posek achron - though you don't say whois. I quote Rav Sternbuch and you avoid the issue by saying that he has many chiddushim. Please produce your poskem acharon who trumps the psak of Reb Moshe. Please produce cite a major posek who says that RavSternbuch's view of custody is not acceptable.

    Unless you start producting real sources I will simply start deleting your wild assertions

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Dad we don't accept "prophets" here. Produce your sources that support your claim.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Joe Orlow wrote:
    market@softwine.press


    May I point out that the first condition on the latest post is not
    based in reality.

    "there needs to be a clear demand from all the rabbis - that the
    unjust restrictions of the area Shuls need to be removed and Aharon needs to
    be welcomed back."

    First, the charge against Aharon is being led by the President of the
    Washington Vaad, Rabbi Dovid Rosenbaum. I spoke to him in person
    recently.

    He is against Aharon being allowed to Daven in a Shul. A local Shul
    that is not part of the Vaad welcomed Aharon and there was a riot. I wasn't
    there but people, some members of the Shul, others not, took it on themselves to do things like walk out of the Minyan, block others from
    entering, confront Aharon etc. So I asked Rabbi Rosenbaum: I'm starting a Minyan specifically for Aharon, can I have some assurance people won't be stirred up to riot? Rabbi Rosenbaum declined to give me that assurance.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Feel free to delete me
    As a typical BT you take everything literally, u cannot differentiate between עיקר הדין , לכתחילה, מנהג and you think that there is on gadol who all need to follow, not one mainstrem rav ever agreed with your aproach or method so hey delte me

    ReplyDelete
  34. If reb dovid feinstein does come out against the hetter , what does that tell you

    ReplyDelete
  35. Dina demalchuta Dina applys only in limited cases, see ET
    Mainly only when it benefits the entire community תקנת בני מדינה, ראה שו"ת השיב משה בענין

    ReplyDelete
  36. @Dad I suppose you will want to blame Moshe Rabbeinu for all those who distort Torah laws. The fact is that this "heter" is not consistent with what Reb Moshe requires.

    ReplyDelete
  37. @Dad it tells me you don't know Reb Dovid very well.

    ReplyDelete
  38. @Dad you are simply spouting nonsense and justifying with ad hominem arguments or illogicl statements. If you want to act like a troll you will be treated like one.

    First you take a black and white apporach and make categorical claims. When I challenge you by saying Reb Moshe Feinstein or Rav Sternbuch disagree - you dismiss them. Now you are turning around and claiming that I am not able to see gradiation etc etc.

    I can deal with normal halachic disputes but not with your illogical and irrational claims.

    So yes I will feel free to delete your incoherent assertions

    ReplyDelete
  39. And it tells any thinking person that reb dovid does not think that reb nota psak demands a machua

    ReplyDelete
  40. No it doesn't . Reb Dovid is none to stay away from public disputes.

    After his father died he was approached by a number of major rabbonim and asked to clarify some of his father's views. His response was "you can believe whatever you want to belive but I am not getting involved".

    So the fact that Reb Dovid has not made a public statement or protest does not mean that he approves of something.

    In fact the unconfirmed word going around is that he has told Rabbi Greenblatt that his father would not have accepted his psak in this case.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Joe Orlow should ask Rabbi DR, what is his halachic basis for his ostracizing Aharon? Which Daas Torah ruled so? If it's because AF hasn't given TF a Get, she's not interested in a Get, she claims she was never married to AF. If TF does need a Get, which beis din that had jurisdiction in the case ruled that AF is obligated to give a Get.

    If they can't get to first base on this item, then obviously there will be no progress on further items on the list.

    ReplyDelete
  42. There are some other things that (IMHO) also need to be done.

    a) There should be an open statement of who the poskim were. If this cannot be done (in the historical Langer case, R' Goren took public accountability and hid the identity of the others in his BD), the main posek must take accountability.

    b) The main posek must produce a psak din, so that it can be evaluated by halachic authorities, at least in America, if not worldwide.



    c) There should information on if/where the couple were married, and who were the eidim etc.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Can someone explain the lack of consistency between this statement with the 2010 letter put out by the BD of Washington Vaad, signed by Rabbi Rosenblum?

    ReplyDelete
  44. EVERY Rov and Posek and Godol Hador who has voiced an opinion on this issue had said that Tamar's second "marriage" is invalid and that her first marriage remains in force and that any future children will be mamzeirim.

    ReplyDelete
  45. It tells me he hasn't considered this case since he's not involved or that he doesn't want his opinion to be publicly known.

    ReplyDelete
  46. מסקנה הלכתית זו עולה אף מפס"ד של ביה"ד הגדול, ערעור תשי"ח/157 (כבוד הרבנים עבדיה הדאייה, בצלאל ז'ולטי זצ"ל, ויבלח"א הרב אלישיב שליט"א) פורסם בפד"ר חלק ד' עמ' 93 ואילך. וראה שם בעמ' 95 שהביאו דברי הכנה"ג שהובאו לעיל. (לגבי המקרה הנדון שם כתבו שהיות והמרחק לעיר אחרת היה של שעות בלבד ולא של ימים הרי כולם מודים שבכה"ג וודאי יכולה האם לקחת הבת עימה).

    So according to Rav Elyashiv, a mother is entitled to take her daughter to live in a different town, if it's only a few hours away. And even if it's further, the following applies:

    כל דברי המהרשד"ם נאמרו רק לכתחילה, אבל אם כבר הוליכה האם את הבת עימה לעיר אחרת, אפילו הרשד"ם מודה שאין מחזירין אותה לעירה.

    From here:

    http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/psk/psk.asp?id=62

    ReplyDelete
  47. Interesting point. But then again Aharon presently has no chiyuv to give a Get and Tamar says she doesn't need one - so your point is not relevant at this time.

    would like to see the original however

    Link doesn't work.
    =================

    ADODB.Recordset error '800a0bcd'

    Either BOF or EOF is True, or the current record has been deleted. Requested operation requires a current record.

    /daat/psk/psk.asp, line 18

    ReplyDelete
  48. Sorry, the link got cut off:

    http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/psk/psk.asp?id=625

    ReplyDelete
  49. Point of ostracizing husband, as a get
    refuser – nothing to do with T.E. taking baby away. My theory is that these feminists and their
    supporters will demonize the husband forever as a get refuser, though nothing
    to do with T.E. taking baby away and nothing to do with custody arrangement,
    visitation. Rabbi Schechter is a feminist
    supporter. To demonize husband without a hearing of 2 sides.

    My interpretation of:

    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)

    Requires that rabbis, such as Rabbi Schecter who are
    judges, cannot demonize a husband as get refuser without a hearing with husband
    present. Seems T.E. and her supporters got
    rabbis to demonize her husband as get refuser without a hearing with husband
    allowed to give his side. Among
    feminists and their supporters, a get refuser is a serious evil person who must
    be ostracized. The parallel to me is
    that Susan and her supporters got NYS judges to demonize me as a deadbeat
    husband without me allowed to give my side.
    Among feminists and their supporters a deadbeat husband is a serious
    evil person who must be ostracized.

    Gittin 10b:

    “Mishnah. All documents which are accepted in heathen
    courts [ערכאות], even if they that signed them were
    gentiles, are valid [for Jewish courts] except writs of divorce and of
    emancipation. R. Simeon says: these also are valid; they were only pronounced
    [to be invalid] when drawn up by unauthorized persons.”

    I personally heard Rabbi Lookstein, the son, in the
    1980’s, at a feminists demonstration in NYC, say, that after a civil divorce,
    the husband must give the get. The problem is that Rabbi Lookstein labels the
    husband as a get refuser without the husband to give his side.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Harei sheloch lefonecho:

    דינא
    דמלכותא דינא

    בגיטין י׳: — אמתניתין דכל השטרות העולים בערכאות של עכוים אף על פי שחותמיחם

    גברים בשרים, חיץ מגיטי גשים ושחרורי עבדים ונו׳ —

    פריך בגמרא במאי קא קני, לאו בהאי שטרא והאי שטרא הספא בעלמא הוא .

    אמר שמואל דינא רמלכותא דינא

    ReplyDelete

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