Regarding Tamar's Husband #2, whose name was on the publicized marriage license, does anyone know who he is? Some people must've heard of him or know him if he is real. Is here a real person? Who is he?
Protest against heter of Rav Shlomo Miller, Rav E.B. Wachtfogel
The Headline is misleading! It sounds like r shloma miller rav EB Wactfogel are are protesting rav shlomo Miller? should read Protest against the Tamar Freidman/epstein Heter by reb shlomo miller,Reb Wachtfogel R m Green R Y tauber etc.
Reb Shlomo Miller, Rav Eli Ber Wachtfogel, Rav Moshe Green, and Rav Yechiel Tauber of Machon Lihoro in Monsey. It is hoped that very shortly more rabbis will added to those already known to protest the heter.
The big question is what Rabbi Greenblatt and Rabbis Kaminetsky will do now. Tamar has been destroyed, an adulteress, who may produce mamzerim. Is this how people in their nineties behave? I have a long protest on my blog torahhalacha.blogspot.com that discusses two things, whether Tamar may go back to her first husband, and a message to Rabbis Greenblatt and Kaminetsky.
It is possible that next week or so the flood gates will open. HaSHem should bring them to confess their errors as soon as possible. Otherwise, their names will be trash. Look what these idiots did to a yesoma, rachmono litslon. Tamar has no father and her rebbe is Rabbi Shmuel Kaminetsky. I just heard that a major posek in Monsey heard about what Rabbi Shmuel wanted to do with Tamar and called him up. It ended in a shouting match. When this gets a few more signatures, I don't know what will happen. People are furious at these fools. And the tragedy is that they are not the only ones in town in this business of helping women at all costs including making mamzerim.
Reb Shlomo Miller and Rav Yechiel Tauber are heavily involved in paskening every day. Reb Eli Ber Wachtfogle and Reb Moshe Green are Roshei Yeshiva who have gone through Shass and poskim time and time again. If they say something, it is solid.
It may be a ploy. I'm not convinced either way whether it is or not. It seem unlikely but possible that it is a sham marriage originally intended to scare the the husband into giving a Get.
I am mocheh against the act of bizui talmidei chachamim in this comment. Even if one grants that they are totally mistaken, calling them idiots and fools is beyond the pale.
These are just more names of MACHMIRIM who would have fought against Rav Moshe Feinstein were he to have ruled "kiddushuie taus" and given a "hetter nisuin" himself, so nothing new here, they just hate MEIKILIM like Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky who it does not look is backing down in any way.
Again, for those who may be lacking and understanding about how Gedolim are judged who are on the Moetzes Gedolie HaTorah of Agudas Yisroel of America, since they have been voted into lifetime tenure positions on the Moeetzes and are then in a position to speak for Daas Torah, it is very difficult, in fact impossible for ANYONE, including top Rebbes and Roshei Yeshiv and Poskim, no matter how many of them, to "knock off" or "Knock down" or "knock out" a Moetzes member such as Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky who is also a "second generation" Moetzes member.
So far only one out the ten others, namely Rav Aron Feldman the Rav Hutner Talmid who is the RY of Ner Israel in Baltimore, has written a letter QUESTIONING and ASKING FOR FEEDBACK as to the merits and demerits of what RSK and R Greenblatt have done to allow the woman in question to remarry based on a Pesak of Kiddushui Taus.
Thus nothing has really happened so far, and nothing will happen, besides a lot of people shouting and venting, it is there right, but they will not get anywhere until such time as a MAJORITY of Moetzes members speak out in opposition, and the magic number for that is 6 rabbis, since there are 11 active Moetzes mebers who signed with RSK in a Kol Koreh against the OOs recently.
Add in that the Moetzes also has an in-house Posek Moetzes member, namely Rav Dovid Feinstein who is a renowned Posek, and son of Rav Moshe Feinstein and he would know how to judge the true merits and demerits of if his Father's Pesak is being correctly applied by RSK and R Greenblatt or not, and so far Rav Dovid Feinstein has NOT said a word. A letter from RDF against RSK would be a fatal blow, and so far none has been forthcoming. So the Monsey rabbis can shout all they want it won't help them. We must assume as far as RDF it is "shtika kehodaa" and that therefore it is correct to deduce and assume that Rav Dovid Feinstein agrees with Rav Shmuel Kaminetkzy in this case, unless he explicitly denies it, which he has not done to date.
So for now, nothing has happened, and we need to stay tuned and watch closely if there is any fracturing within the so far solid silence of the Moetzes members, besides Rav Feldman who is a known trouble shooter but not a Posek or Dayan, since Rav Feldman seems to have a chazaka of sorts in entering a controversial situation and skidaddling the parties at the center of the dispute whom he does not like (or maybe he likes them, but he has been given a mission by his superior, such as the most powerful Moetzes member RAS to carry out a secret mission, as we know RAS does not listen or care about Batei Din at all) Rav Feldman just specializes in breaking up Batei Din and reducing the ability of Dayanim to Pasken as happened in the Meisels case, when he blindsided and sidelined Rabbi Feurst who is a genuine known Posek in Chicago and on the CBD fighting sexual abuse.
This story has many angles and nuances to it, so it requires a deftness and knowledge of Aguda and Moetzes political science, something akin to that old "Kremlin watching"!
Rabbi Shlomo Kaminetsky - with the full backing of his father Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky went to a number of poskim - as documented on this blog by one of those poskim approached . [I have heard of a number of other poskim who were approached personally by Rav Shalom Kaminetsky - who told them his father agreed the facts was with the request for a heter.]
Rabbi Shalom Kaminetsky told them here are the facts as provided by various therapist, we want to know if you will pasken that this is kiddushei ta'os.
In what sense are can it be claimed that the Kaminetskys were not supporting this heter?
Speaking of angles and nuances, I am sure you are aware that R. Feurst is a genuine known posek who was a signatory on the kiddushei taus case that was castigated several years ago. This is less about intrigue and more about fallible people doing what they think is proper.
Rav Feldman just specializes in breaking up Batei Din and reducing the ability of Dayanim to Pasken as happened in the Meisels case, when he blindsided and sidelined Rabbi Feurst who is a genuine known Posek in Chicago and on the CBD fighting sexual abuse.
That is a completely ignorant and false comment. As usual, you have it all backward.
Your point is obvious but this does not contradicts what I wrote.
Rabbi Feldman would not have written that the Kaminetsks denied if they have not.
It is clear to me that they were in charge of the effort to help Tamar, but at the same time they deny that they hold of the heter, the reason is because they cannot defend the halachic position. I therefore suggested that 'Chaim' should not count them and he is not left with Rabbi Greenblat alone.
we have a simple problem with English. They organized the effort to obtain the heter and they specifically asked poskim if they would agree to give the heter. In what sense are you saying they don't hold by the heter? It is clear that they agreed with the halachic validity of the heter. Rabbi Greenblatt simply rubber stamped the facts and agreed with their request
This is really very simple to understand. R' Kamenetzky the younger conceived of the heter and wrote it up. R' Kamenetzky the elder endorsed it. It was then sent out to actual poskim for their input and agreement, most of whom declined. R' Greenblatt agreed. That's what happened.
If you are so sure that they believe in the halachic aspect of this Heter then why would they deny it when apparently they were approached by Rabbi Feldman.
Thank you. Why do you think that RSK has not gone through Shas and Poskim time and time again? I always assumed that he had. Do you have any reason to think otherwise (apart from his Psak in this case, which you believe to be nonsense)
If I may speculate, perhaps what happened was that one of the Rabbi Kaminetzkys (either the RY or his son) sent out a proposed heter to various poskim. Rav Greenblatt agreed with it and implemented it. The other poskim, either all of the rest or certainly most of the rest, disagreed with the proposed heter for Tamar to remarry without a Get.
But it might be arguable that the proposed heter by Rav Kaminetzky sent out to the poskim for review was not intended by Rav Kaminetzky as an indication that he supported it. But rather Rav Kaminetzky offered a halachic theory he came up with (or perhaps another unnamed posek came up with) for input by the multiple gedolei poskim he sent it to for review, feedback and opinion.
So even though Rabbi Kaminetzky submitted it for review, he wasn't necessarily saying he thought it was a good heter but rather was asking whether the various poskim thought the proposed heter based on the facts of the situation that he compiled was a valid heter.
I know that they were firmly convinced of the validity of this psak.
I don't know why they are denying it nor do I know why they won't publish it.
The question is a good question.It is not possible to deny that they believed in its validity and they put a lot of effort into establishing it.
Aside from the statement found in Rav Feldman's letter - I have not heard that they denied supporting the heter. Are they saying that they strongly supported Tamar for a number of years in her quest for a Get and then when she decided that he marriage was a mekach ta'os they simply abandoned her?! that make no sense and can't be true.
the marriage being a secular one ( no wedding photos anywhere), was because the husband is not halachically jewish. If I understand correctly, such a situation would not be eshes ish for Tamar, since he is not a Yid. Hence they have no halachic marriage. the children, also are not mamzerim, if they have any. Because the father is not jewish, but the kids are!
As for Tamar, her sin is only of liaising with goy. This may be the least of all evils, since she cannot get a get, and she cannot marry a yid. So she has a goyish boyfriend/husband, and her kids are kosher!
Eddie - what purpose does such nonsensical theories serve?
It is clear what has happened and the second marriage in fact is with a Jew and Rabbi Greenblatt acknowledged performing it - so it isn't a secular one.
Perhaps a more reasonable explanation is that in trying to help her, they devised the basis for this hetter, but would support it only based on widespread backing from poskim, which is why they sent it around. As you know, it is very common in the halakhic literature to find poskim who advance a leniency to write that they will implement their suggestion in practice only if x rabbonim agree. R' Nota was willing to be mattir, but the Rabbis Kamenstzky were not comfortable permitting an eishes ish with such scant rabbinical backing, which is why they now say that they don't support it. This would account for all of the facts of the case, at least all those that are publicly known.
Yehoshua, the people (and I use that term loosely) who you're mocheh on behalf of caused vadai mamzerus, lied and knew they lied. Even if one could loosely decide upon kiddushei taus (laughing), one can't decide this based on the hearsay of a psychologist who only heard Tamar's complaints (complaints refuted by her own diary). A secular judge would know to laugh at such an "expert opinion."
The fact is that this is trick played by many psychologists in get cases, and was designed by the usual culprits who boast of orchestrating false arrests (see ORA press release #60) and of interfering with custody. They're muchzak shakronim and the tricks and defamation are predictable.
It says that one who knows Torah and engages in this conduct is far worse than someone who is merely ignorant (obviously). As for halacha, it says that if you're mocheh in private (as Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn, who you just insulted, did when he phoned Greenblatt) and it doesn't make them repent, it's a mitzvah to be mevazeh them brabim.
By contrast, the person who you're "mocheh" against, has shimush in ishus from Reb Moshe Feinstein, has resolved many divorce cases in not only kosher ways, but in ways that don't make a clear mockery of Jewish law and who writes as Torah says instead of trying to receive the accolades of those who would destroy key Torah principles if it goes against their cause du jour. You should at least post a disclaimer that those who you are mocheh against find themselves in good company.
If R Greenblatt is acknowledged by no less a figure than RAS as one of the greatest poskim in America, then there is an obvious problem. Either R Greenblatt has taken leave of his senses and acted in a reckless and un-halachic fashion (which is the thrust of your arguments), or there is more than meets the eye, and "Adam" may be non Jewish or even non existent. Of course, there is no evidence as to who this Adam really is, or if anyone knows him.
Well, suffice it to say that I don't agree with your analysis. Please compare the terminology R' Aharon Feldman uses when referring to R' Nota, and what terminology your hero used (and, for that matter, you as well).
Based on what I have been reading in this blob over many months I would suggest that indeed they strongly support her [as friends] but they do not seem to hold of this psak. They give her general support and they 'respect her right' to rely on a psak given by Rabbi Greenblat. The adherence to Halacha was clearly compromise by them [as noted by Rabbi Feldman who was in pain to write his letter].
Lets not forget the nasty names he had for Rav Shlomo Miller not too long ago. Oh, and what does he think about Mechon Lehoyra? We've heard him about that as well.
(The truth is that it is surprising that they asked Rabbi Tauber to sign. While he is honest and upright, and led Mechon Lehora well for many years, he has been unable to keep Mechon Lehoyra that way in recent years - as he is not the one who is continuously running it anymore. Why is a captain who cannot keep his own ship in order being asked to get involved in other....?)
I think the interesting question is why is RSK called a Gadol and also accused of being an ignoramus in halacha [by the folks writing on this blog]? That is a bit of an oxymoron to be a Talmid chacham shoteh! there is Chossid shoteh, and there is mamzer talmid chacham, but I've never heard of Talmid chacham shoteh!
RAP, You write, "These are just more names of MACHMIRIM who would have fought against Rav Moshe Feinstein were he to have ruled "kiddushei taus" and given a "hetter nisuin" himself, so nothing new here, they just hate MEIKILIM like Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky who it does not look like he is backing down in any way."
One of the machmirim in this is HaGaon Reb Moshe Feinstein, who writes clearly that although he breaks ranks with great poskim who forbid remarriage without a GET even in extreme cases, he insists that no negation of marriage be permitted if the husband is willing to give a GET, even if that will be very difficult for the wife to agree to his conditions for the GET.
I spoke several times to Aharon Friedman and he said he would give a GET if the custody of their daughter could be improved. Therefore, Reb Moshe would forbid negating the marriage. And that leaves nobody that permits it. Rav Henkin writes in the name of the Noda Biyehuda II:80 of many cases where the husband was a proven monster but without a GET the woman could not remarry.
Add to this the Kovneh Rov, the Gadol HaDor around the time of the Chofetz Chaim, the Bais HaLevi, Rov of Brisk and father of Reb Chaim Soloveitchik and the Soloveitchik dynasty, and you see that this is not just a question of some machmirirm.
Yehoshua, I studied the various protests on my brother's blog and I noticed that out of four protests, two spoke like Rabbi Feldman, honoring the people being criticized, but two of them spoke much differently. Rav Shlomo Miller, Reb Eli Ber Wachtfogel, Reb Moshe Green and Reb Yechiel Tauber wrote that Rabbi Greenblatt was a "rabbi" meaning not really a rabbi. That is pretty insulting. And Rabbi Gestetner declared that Reb Shmuel and Rabbi Greenblatt were in cherem for what they did.
Actually, I called up one of the rabbis who spoke very kindly of the two rabbis. I asked him how that squared with his determination that they are making mamzerim and completely wrong to do so. He told me something which may be right, but it is not a criticism of what I said. He basically felt that the key over here is not to demonize anyone, but to get the monkey down from the tree in a way that this will never happen again. And that means preferably that the two rabbis say openly that it is a mistake.
Even if I will grant that Rabbi Gestetner should be mentioned in the same sentence as gedolei olam such as Rabbis Feldman and Wachtfogel, none of the people you mentioned used the terminology of "idiots" and "fools," which is much more appropriate for a fight between two 6-year-olds than a discussion of a halakhic issue.
. And that means preferably that the two rabbis say openly that it is a mistake.
And for that to happen, we indeed need both types of protests. It will be impossible for anyone to admit mistake if they're vilified by everyone. Therefore, you need Rav Feldman's approach - which takes a a firm but kind stand.
However, this would not be enough. We also need truly reputable people strongly fighting this in order for the clear truth to come out. The clear truth being out is prerequisite for the involved rabbis to backtrack.
More important is to just read Rav Landesman's testimony as to Rav Moshe Feinstein would have ruled. Add to it his criticism of even calling this an "agunah" case, it is obvious that this has nothing to do with chumros.
Who is Rav Moshe green? And is it possible the 4th name is Rav yechiel perr?
ReplyDeleteTamar Epstein: Protest against heter of Rav Shlomo Miller, Rav E.B. Wachtfogel
ReplyDeleteAnd Rav Yechiel Tauber.
Rav yechiel tauber?
ReplyDeleteRav Moshe Green Well Known as
ReplyDeleteZkan Roshai Yeshiva of Monsey New York
(The strong koach behind Citifield Internet demonstration ) and rav Yechiel Tauber of Mechon LiHorayah.Monsey
There are four signatures. Who are the other two signatures?
ReplyDeleteRegarding Tamar's Husband #2, whose name was on the publicized marriage license, does anyone know who he is? Some people must've heard of him or know him if he is real. Is here a real person? Who is he?
ReplyDeleteProtest against heter of Rav Shlomo Miller, Rav E.B. Wachtfogel
ReplyDeleteThe Headline is misleading! It sounds like r shloma miller rav EB Wactfogel are are protesting rav shlomo Miller?
should read Protest against the Tamar Freidman/epstein Heter by reb shlomo miller,Reb Wachtfogel R m Green R Y tauber etc.
Am I correct that only 1 of the 3 names is a Posek? Just asking.
ReplyDeleteReb Shlomo Miller, Rav Eli Ber Wachtfogel, Rav Moshe Green, and Rav Yechiel Tauber of Machon Lihoro in Monsey.
ReplyDeleteIt is hoped that very shortly more rabbis will added to those already known to protest the heter.
The big question is what Rabbi Greenblatt and Rabbis Kaminetsky will do now. Tamar has been destroyed, an adulteress, who may produce mamzerim. Is this how people in their nineties behave? I have a long protest on my blog torahhalacha.blogspot.com that discusses two things, whether Tamar may go back to her first husband, and a message to Rabbis Greenblatt and Kaminetsky.
It is possible that next week or so the flood gates will open. HaSHem should bring them to confess their errors as soon as possible. Otherwise, their names will be trash. Look what these idiots did to a yesoma, rachmono litslon. Tamar has no father and her rebbe is Rabbi Shmuel Kaminetsky. I just heard that a major posek in Monsey heard about what Rabbi Shmuel wanted to do with Tamar and called him up. It ended in a shouting match. When this gets a few more signatures, I don't know what will happen. People are furious at these fools. And the tragedy is that they are not the only ones in town in this business of helping women at all costs including making mamzerim.
If he wasn't a real person, the furore wouldn't exist.
ReplyDeleteOne isn't enough? (Assuming only one here is.) There were other poskim who signed the other letters, of which there are multiple.
ReplyDeleteReb Shlomo Miller and Rav Yechiel Tauber are heavily involved in paskening every day. Reb Eli Ber Wachtfogle and Reb Moshe Green are Roshei Yeshiva who have gone through Shass and poskim time and time again. If they say something, it is solid.
ReplyDeleteIt may be a ploy. I'm not convinced either way whether it is or not. It seem unlikely but possible that it is a sham marriage originally intended to scare the the husband into giving a Get.
ReplyDeleteI am mocheh against the act of bizui talmidei chachamim in this comment. Even if one grants that they are totally mistaken, calling them idiots and fools is beyond the pale.
ReplyDeleteThese are just more names of MACHMIRIM who would have fought against Rav Moshe Feinstein were he to have ruled "kiddushuie taus" and given a "hetter nisuin" himself, so nothing new here, they just hate MEIKILIM like Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky who it does not look is backing down in any way.
ReplyDeleteAgain, for those who may be lacking and understanding about how Gedolim are judged who are on the Moetzes Gedolie HaTorah of Agudas Yisroel of America, since they have been voted into lifetime tenure positions on the Moeetzes and are then in a position to speak for Daas Torah, it is very difficult, in fact impossible for ANYONE, including top Rebbes and Roshei Yeshiv and Poskim, no matter how many of them, to "knock off" or "Knock down" or "knock out" a Moetzes member such as Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky who is also a "second generation" Moetzes member.
So far only one out the ten others, namely Rav Aron Feldman the Rav Hutner Talmid who is the RY of Ner Israel in Baltimore, has written a letter QUESTIONING and ASKING FOR FEEDBACK as to the merits and demerits of what RSK and R Greenblatt have done to allow the woman in question to remarry based on a Pesak of Kiddushui Taus.
Thus nothing has really happened so far, and nothing will happen, besides a lot of people shouting and venting, it is there right, but they will not get anywhere until such time as a MAJORITY of Moetzes members speak out in opposition, and the magic number for that is 6 rabbis, since there are 11 active Moetzes mebers who signed with RSK in a Kol Koreh against the OOs recently.
Add in that the Moetzes also has an in-house Posek Moetzes member, namely Rav Dovid Feinstein who is a renowned Posek, and son of Rav Moshe Feinstein and he would know how to judge the true merits and demerits of if his Father's Pesak is being correctly applied by RSK and R Greenblatt or not, and so far Rav Dovid Feinstein has NOT said a word. A letter from RDF against RSK would be a fatal blow, and so far none has been forthcoming. So the Monsey rabbis can shout all they want it won't help them. We must assume as far as RDF it is "shtika kehodaa" and that therefore it is correct to deduce and assume that Rav Dovid Feinstein agrees with Rav Shmuel Kaminetkzy in this case, unless he explicitly denies it, which he has not done to date.
So for now, nothing has happened, and we need to stay tuned and watch closely if there is any fracturing within the so far solid silence of the Moetzes members, besides Rav Feldman who is a known trouble shooter but not a Posek or Dayan, since Rav Feldman seems to have a chazaka of sorts in entering a controversial situation and skidaddling the parties at the center of the dispute whom he does not like (or maybe he likes them, but he has been given a mission by his superior, such as the most powerful Moetzes member RAS to carry out a secret mission, as we know RAS does not listen or care about Batei Din at all) Rav Feldman just specializes in breaking up Batei Din and reducing the ability of Dayanim to Pasken as happened in the Meisels case, when he blindsided and sidelined Rabbi Feurst who is a genuine known Posek in Chicago and on the CBD fighting sexual abuse.
This story has many angles and nuances to it, so it requires a deftness and knowledge of Aguda and Moetzes political science, something akin to that old "Kremlin watching"!
Rabbi Feldman wrote that RSK denied backing up this heter, if so then you only have one Rabbi on Tamar's side and a number on the other side.
ReplyDeleteIt simply is not true.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Shlomo Kaminetsky - with the full backing of his father Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky went to a number of poskim - as documented on this blog by one of those poskim approached . [I have heard of a number of other poskim who were approached personally by Rav Shalom Kaminetsky - who told them his father agreed the facts was with the request for a heter.]
Rabbi Shalom Kaminetsky told them here are the facts as provided by various therapist, we want to know if you will pasken that this is kiddushei ta'os.
In what sense are can it be claimed that the Kaminetskys were not supporting this heter?
Same thought crossed my mind ...
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of angles and nuances, I am sure you are aware that R. Feurst is a genuine known posek who was a signatory on the kiddushei taus case that was castigated several years ago. This is less about intrigue and more about fallible people doing what they think is proper.
ReplyDeleteWhat made RSK a posek?
ReplyDeleteAlso the big supporter of the Menuval Weingarten
ReplyDeleteRav Feldman just specializes in breaking up Batei Din and reducing the
ReplyDeleteability of Dayanim to Pasken as happened in the Meisels case, when he
blindsided and sidelined Rabbi Feurst who is a genuine known Posek in
Chicago and on the CBD fighting sexual abuse.
That is a completely ignorant and false comment. As usual, you have it all backward.
I agree - his comment is completely ignorant and false
ReplyDeleteYour point is obvious but this does not contradicts what I wrote.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Feldman would not have written that the Kaminetsks denied if they have not.
It is clear to me that they were in charge of the effort to help Tamar, but at the same time they deny that they hold of the heter, the reason is because they cannot defend the halachic position. I therefore suggested that 'Chaim' should not count them and he is not left with Rabbi Greenblat alone.
we have a simple problem with English. They organized the effort to obtain the heter and they specifically asked poskim if they would agree to give the heter. In what sense are you saying they don't hold by the heter? It is clear that they agreed with the halachic validity of the heter. Rabbi Greenblatt simply rubber stamped the facts and agreed with their request
ReplyDeleteThis is really very simple to understand. R' Kamenetzky the younger conceived of the heter and wrote it up. R' Kamenetzky the elder endorsed it. It was then sent out to actual poskim for their input and agreement, most of whom declined. R' Greenblatt agreed. That's what happened.
ReplyDeleteIf you are so sure that they believe in the halachic aspect of this Heter then why would they deny it when apparently they were approached by Rabbi Feldman.
ReplyDeleteA valid but irrelevant question.
ReplyDeleteמידי הערה לא יצאת.
ReplyDeleteThank you. Why do you think that RSK has not gone through Shas and Poskim time and time again? I always assumed that he had. Do you have any reason to think otherwise (apart from his Psak in this case, which you believe to be nonsense)
ReplyDeleteIf I may speculate, perhaps what happened was that one of the Rabbi Kaminetzkys (either the RY or his son) sent out a proposed heter to various poskim. Rav Greenblatt agreed with it and implemented it. The other poskim, either all of the rest or certainly most of the rest, disagreed with the proposed heter for Tamar to remarry without a Get.
ReplyDeleteBut it might be arguable that the proposed heter by Rav Kaminetzky sent out to the poskim for review was not intended by Rav Kaminetzky as an indication that he supported it. But rather Rav Kaminetzky offered a halachic theory he came up with (or perhaps another unnamed posek came up with) for input by the multiple gedolei poskim he sent it to for review, feedback and opinion.
So even though Rabbi Kaminetzky submitted it for review, he wasn't necessarily saying he thought it was a good heter but rather was asking whether the various poskim thought the proposed heter based on the facts of the situation that he compiled was a valid heter.
I know that they were firmly convinced of the validity of this psak.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why they are denying it nor do I know why they won't publish it.
The question is a good question.It is not possible to deny that they believed in its validity and they put a lot of effort into establishing it.
Aside from the statement found in Rav Feldman's letter - I have not heard that they denied supporting the heter. Are they saying that they strongly supported Tamar for a number of years in her quest for a Get and then when she decided that he marriage was a mekach ta'os they simply abandoned her?! that make no sense and can't be true.
I have a few theories, here is one of them:
ReplyDeletethe marriage being a secular one ( no wedding photos anywhere), was because the husband is not halachically jewish. If I understand correctly, such a situation would not be eshes ish for Tamar, since he is not a Yid. Hence they have no halachic marriage. the children, also are not mamzerim, if they have any. Because the father is not jewish, but the kids are!
As for Tamar, her sin is only of liaising with goy. This may be the least of all evils, since she cannot get a get, and she cannot marry a yid. So she has a goyish boyfriend/husband, and her kids are kosher!
Eddie - what purpose does such nonsensical theories serve?
ReplyDeleteIt is clear what has happened and the second marriage in fact is with a Jew and Rabbi Greenblatt acknowledged performing it - so it isn't a secular one.
Perhaps a more reasonable explanation is that in trying to help her, they devised the basis for this hetter, but would support it only based on widespread backing from poskim, which is why they sent it around. As you know, it is very common in the halakhic literature to find poskim who advance a leniency to write that they will implement their suggestion in practice only if x rabbonim agree. R' Nota was willing to be mattir, but the Rabbis Kamenstzky were not comfortable permitting an eishes ish with such scant rabbinical backing, which is why they now say that they don't support it.
ReplyDeleteThis would account for all of the facts of the case, at least all those that are publicly known.
I recall seeing a comment here a while ago, saying that a yungerman in Philly wrote up the heter.
ReplyDeleteYehoshua, the people (and I use that term loosely) who you're mocheh on behalf of caused vadai mamzerus, lied and knew they lied. Even if one could loosely decide upon kiddushei taus (laughing), one can't decide this based on the hearsay of a psychologist who only heard Tamar's complaints (complaints refuted by her own diary). A secular judge would know to laugh at such an "expert opinion."
ReplyDeleteThe fact is that this is trick played by many psychologists in get cases, and was designed by the usual culprits who boast of orchestrating false arrests (see ORA press release #60) and of interfering with custody. They're muchzak shakronim and the tricks and defamation are predictable.
It says that one who knows Torah and engages in this conduct is far worse than someone who is merely ignorant (obviously). As for halacha, it says that if you're mocheh in private (as Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn, who you just insulted, did when he phoned Greenblatt) and it doesn't make them repent, it's a mitzvah to be mevazeh them brabim.
By contrast, the person who you're "mocheh" against, has shimush in ishus from Reb Moshe Feinstein, has resolved many divorce cases in not only kosher ways, but in ways that don't make a clear mockery of Jewish law and who writes as Torah says instead of trying to receive the accolades of those who would destroy key Torah principles if it goes against their cause du jour. You should at least post a disclaimer that those who you are mocheh against find themselves in good company.
If R Greenblatt is acknowledged by no less a figure than RAS as one of the greatest poskim in America, then there is an obvious problem. Either R Greenblatt has taken leave of his senses and acted in a reckless and un-halachic fashion (which is the thrust of your arguments), or there is more than meets the eye, and "Adam" may be non Jewish or even non existent. Of course, there is no evidence as to who this Adam really is, or if anyone knows him.
ReplyDeleteEddie you are wrong - Adam Fleischer exits and is mentioned on the Internet as being a real person
ReplyDeletethere are hundreds of peopel by that name, youcan find perhaps 10 such named lawyers in New york alone!
ReplyDeleteWell, suffice it to say that I don't agree with your analysis. Please compare the terminology R' Aharon Feldman uses when referring to R' Nota, and what terminology your hero used (and, for that matter, you as well).
ReplyDeleteBased on what I have been reading in this blob over many months I would suggest that indeed they strongly support her [as friends] but they do not seem to hold of this psak.
ReplyDeleteThey give her general support and they 'respect her right' to rely on a psak given by Rabbi Greenblat. The adherence to Halacha was clearly compromise by them [as noted by Rabbi Feldman who was in pain to write his letter].
Lets not forget the nasty names he had for Rav Shlomo Miller not too long ago. Oh, and what does he think about Mechon Lehoyra? We've heard him about that as well.
ReplyDelete(The truth is that it is surprising that they asked Rabbi Tauber to sign. While he is honest and upright, and led Mechon Lehora well for many years, he has been unable to keep Mechon Lehoyra that way in recent years - as he is not the one who is continuously running it anymore. Why is a captain who cannot keep his own ship in order being asked to get involved in other....?)
What issues exist with Mechon Lehiyra?
ReplyDeleteI don't know enough politics to understand your reply.
ReplyDeleteI think the interesting question is why is RSK called a Gadol and also accused of being an ignoramus in halacha [by the folks writing on this blog]?
ReplyDeleteThat is a bit of an oxymoron to be a Talmid chacham shoteh! there is Chossid shoteh, and there is mamzer talmid chacham, but I've never heard of Talmid chacham shoteh!
RAP,
ReplyDeleteYou write, "These are just more names of MACHMIRIM who would have fought against Rav Moshe Feinstein were he to have ruled "kiddushei taus" and given a "hetter nisuin" himself, so nothing new here, they just hate MEIKILIM like Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky who it does not look like he is backing down in any way."
One of the machmirim in this is HaGaon Reb Moshe Feinstein, who writes clearly that although he breaks ranks with great poskim who forbid remarriage without a GET even in extreme cases, he insists that no negation of marriage be permitted if the husband is willing to give a GET, even if that will be very difficult for the wife to agree to his conditions for the GET.
I spoke several times to Aharon Friedman and he said he would give a GET if the custody of their daughter could be improved. Therefore, Reb Moshe would forbid negating the marriage. And that leaves nobody that permits it. Rav Henkin writes in the name of the Noda Biyehuda II:80 of many cases where the husband was a proven monster but without a GET the woman could not remarry.
Add to this the Kovneh Rov, the Gadol HaDor around the time of the Chofetz Chaim, the Bais HaLevi, Rov of Brisk and father of Reb Chaim Soloveitchik and the Soloveitchik dynasty, and you see that this is not just a question of some machmirirm.
Yehoshua,
ReplyDeleteI studied the various protests on my brother's blog and I noticed that out of four protests, two spoke like Rabbi Feldman, honoring the people being criticized, but two of them spoke much differently. Rav Shlomo Miller, Reb Eli Ber Wachtfogel, Reb Moshe Green and Reb Yechiel Tauber wrote that Rabbi Greenblatt was a "rabbi" meaning not really a rabbi. That is pretty insulting. And Rabbi Gestetner declared that Reb Shmuel and Rabbi Greenblatt were in cherem for what they did.
Actually, I called up one of the rabbis who spoke very kindly of the two rabbis. I asked him how that squared with his determination that they are making mamzerim and completely wrong to do so. He told me something which may be right, but it is not a criticism of what I said. He basically felt that the key over here is not to demonize anyone, but to get the monkey down from the tree in a way that this will never happen again. And that means preferably that the two rabbis say openly that it is a mistake.
Otherwise....
Even if I will grant that Rabbi Gestetner should be mentioned in the same sentence as gedolei olam such as Rabbis Feldman and Wachtfogel, none of the people you mentioned used the terminology of "idiots" and "fools," which is much more appropriate for a fight between two 6-year-olds than a discussion of a halakhic issue.
ReplyDelete. And that means preferably that the two rabbis say openly that it is a mistake.
ReplyDeleteAnd for that to happen, we indeed need both types of protests. It will be impossible for anyone to admit mistake if they're vilified by everyone. Therefore, you need Rav Feldman's approach - which takes a a firm but kind stand.
However, this would not be enough. We also need truly reputable people strongly fighting this in order for the clear truth to come out. The clear truth being out is prerequisite for the involved rabbis to backtrack.
Pretty much the good-cop-bad-cop idea.
More important is to just read Rav Landesman's testimony as to Rav Moshe Feinstein would have ruled. Add to it his criticism of even calling this an "agunah" case, it is obvious that this has nothing to do with chumros.
ReplyDeleteIsn't Rav Wachtfogel also on the Moetzes who signed against the heter? And Rav Feldman didn't just question it; he declared it wrong.
ReplyDelete