I have gotten a direct answer to the question from a well qualified source. He stated categorically that Rav Feurst had agreed with the heter but he added that there are others. Rav Feurst is a well regarded posek and also a talmid of Rav Moshe Feinstein. Thus we are not talking about Rav Greenblatt having an off day and following the Daas Torah of Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky. We see that there are poskim - who clearly should know better - who agreed to this "heter" without bothering to check the facts as presented by R Shalom Kaminetsky and did not bother to hear the other side. Thus the corruption in the system is significantly worse than if the entire responsibility was on Rav Nota Greenblatt. It is also astounding that a posek of Rav Feurst's stature would not acknowledge that he was a major player in the "heter" or even acknowledge that he was involved.
I have also heard reports that this isn't the first time that Rav Feurst has declared that a Get wasn't needed because of "mekach ta'os". Someone mentioned that he has done it at least 15 times. At the present time I do not know whether this report is correct and whether the conditions specified by Rav Moshe Feinstein were met in the other cases. However there is no question that in Tamar Epstein's case Rav Moshe Feinstein would not have accepted the false data and the false conclusions.
It is time for Rav Greenblatt and Rav Feurst to either defend their psak or retract it. As Rav Greenblatt has noted, a secret psak by anonymous poskim is not to be taken seriously.
It is also astounding that a posek of Rav Feurst's stature would not
ReplyDeleteacknowledge that he was a major player in the "heter" or even
acknowledge that he was involve.
It is not astounding or even surprising if you know a bit about R' Fuerst and some of the things he has been involved in.
There's another case right now in Toronto where R Gedalia Schwartz from Chicago was mattir an eishes ish with mekach to'us. She just got remarried, even though many rabbonim cautioned against being mesader at that wedding.
ReplyDeleteThere is not enough of an outcry about these situations. In the past it was just a MO thing so nobody really cared that much. But now we have real chareidi rabbonim doing these things? Horrible.
I have also heard reports that this isn't the first time that Rav Feurst
ReplyDeletehas declared that a Get wasn't needed because of "mekach ta'os". Someone mention that he has done it at least 15 times.
I've heard similar reports.
Is Rav Feurst's assumed involvement all based only on your one source who claims so?
ReplyDeleteRav Gavriel Stern is one of the other matirim, if sholom Kaminetsky gets desperate he will release the other names
ReplyDeletePlease give more details
ReplyDeleteThe question is not whether this is a valid heter or not. Rav Moshe ZT'L already said that such a heter exists. But Rav Moshe Zt"l did not make up an imaginary illness as was done in the Friedman case. This case was decided by Rabbis (the Kaminetskys) who received big money over many years from the wife's family. They based their diagnosis on the opinion of a marriage counselor (not a medical doctor) who told the husband that he sees a hope for the marrriage.
ReplyDeleteHe joined Mendel Epstein and Rabbi Belsky in the infamous Schatner case. OK, there Rabbi Belsky retracted, but R. Feurst was in on it.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, the incomprehensible behavior of Rabbi Feurst in the seminary scandal should say a thing or two about his psakim.
If this indeed true, they can't all be wrong, lets reevaluate the psak, we cannot say that numerous גדולי תורה are all wrong, I retract my previous statements and will reapproach the question with an open mind
ReplyDeleteI cannot fathem that rav Shmuel rav sholom rav Greenblatt rav Gavriel Stern rav furst, are all wrong in this matter
ReplyDeleteNone of them know Aharon Friedman. The problem isn't a theoretical - it is applying a heter to a situation that does not fit the criteria - they are using a made up illness.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.toanim.co.il/article/627-bytvl-nyshvyn-mshvm-qdvshy-t-vt.html
ReplyDeleteMy jury is still out. But I made some comments here: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/2012/03/tamar-epstein-agunah.html#disqus_thread
ReplyDeleteI will post more specifics once I have verified.
ReplyDeleteIt's not "assumed." It's a fact.
ReplyDeleteSorry, but the case in this article is so far removed from the reality of the Friedman that the comparison is laughable, and were someone else to raise it, I would accuse them of intellectual dishonesty.
ReplyDeleteA schizophrenic (on meds) who attempted suicide and was left a vegetable. Really??? Any shaychus to this case? Beyond ridiculous. Sorry for my harsh words, but try to stay on point.
My guess is that at least some of them did do some sleuth work, I will be reaching out to them
ReplyDeleteDid RSF do any research, or did he take Shalom K's word on all the (made up) facts as well?
ReplyDeleteDid RSF ever retract his annulment psak in the Schatner case?
ReplyDeleteI'm troubled that you posted this link without comment. The case presented in Haifa and this one are as different as שמים and ארץ.
ReplyDeleteToo many soidos and too many lies, If they felt they were right, why don't they open the books. Neisei sefer venechze and let's see whether the eidus were right, the diagnosis was correct. Soid H' won't cut it. Why don't they consult with Gedoilei oilom? The answer my friends, is they are like dust in the wind. They mucho afraido to be called shaygets. Give it a few more days, umakloi yagid loi, and they will run back to their rat holes screaming Roitse ani, ich vel shoin zayn gut.
ReplyDeleteNathan, now you seem like a double agent. Is you whole name ulay Jonathan .P....
lol
ReplyDeleteAn inability to understand or fathom does not change the reality.
For example, if a blind person (G-d Forbid!) csannot fathom the color green, that does not have baring upon anything colored green. Same with the color red.
More-so, if a person chooses to stubbornly refuse to see the truth and admit making a mistake, that does not have any baring upon the reality and the truth.
Why don't you make your brilliant comments here? Why the run around?
ReplyDeleteWhy not? Maybe they all relied on the false and misleading information presented to them?
ReplyDeleteI once was challenged on my blog torahhalacha.blogspot.com to write that Rabbi Feurst was lenient in such an issue. I called him up and he assured me that he was not lenient in that issue. But I heard from people who claim that he is strongly suspected of these things. I am not a detective like my brother and I don't talk about people unless I see it very clearly myself. But if I was a detective I might talk about my impression about my conversation with Rabbi Feurst when he denied doing these things.
ReplyDeleteI am giving a free telephone conference on Major Rabbis who Make Mamzerim and Defy the Shulchan aruch Thursday night Dec 3 at 9 PM. I am going to describe rabbis that I know are doing terrible things.
Call 641-715-3580 then enter code 884800#. All are welcome. There will be time for comments and questions.
The main idea we must accept from all of this rabbinic destruction is that in the future generation we are going to have to be very careful when we marry somebody. Such as the pesak of Gedolim in Israel in the work Mishpitei Yisroel. The main idea is what I personally heard from HaGaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l, that a Beth Din that coerces Gittin loses Chezkas Beth Din, that is, it is not a Beth Din and its work is not recognized.
If you tune in to my free telephone conference on Thur night at 9 PM you may hear some interesting laws of Even Hoezer. Dial 641-715-3589 and cod 884800#. Dovid Eidensohn
ReplyDeleteHow can you have an open mind in a world that doesn't know the Shulchcan Aruch but accepts anyone who is a "Gadol" to pasken whatever he wants?
ReplyDeleteWell we see that the majority of Rabbonim stand against the marriage and the rest are in the minority. In either case we have a problem in this Generation where you have a bunch of outlaws that do whatever they want and we have no centralized Bais Din system. Therefore one can no longer trust a Bais Din decision in any matter UNLESS they cite sources in the Poskim to back them up. I dont care if they are the Aguda, badatz, YU, etc... titles mean nothing anymore and especially the long beards are worthless. This is why I admire Rabbi Gestetner, because not only is he courageous to speak out , but he always cites his sources. Once again the heter given to Tamar is baseless for the fact THAT AHARON WAS ALWAYS WILLING TO GIVE A GET AND THEREFORE NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THE LENIENCY OF AN ANULLMENT WAS WARRANTED!
ReplyDeleteNot sure who you are, but your blog post makes you look like a fool at best. Quote - "I have no clue why he refuses to give his wife a Get. But his lack of doing so is unconscionable I [sic] my view." As I said, foolish at best, rasha at worst. Not sure why the moderator allows you to advertise your mishegass here.
ReplyDeleteI'm here for nothing other then the אמת
ReplyDeleteYou might be right about many of your points but don't kid yourself Aharon was not really willing to give a Get. and not excuse K and company but even if you think he had a right not to give one before I'm sure you should agree that by now everything is a little out of hand and if he would just give the Get it will help solve a lot of problems in Klal Yisroel.
ReplyDeleteThose are not his comments, but rather they're from none other than Harry Maryles, a fool who spouts nonsense that he hasn't spent a minute researching. Instead he find current events and comments on them without knowing a smidgen of the facts. This post is entirely typical. He smears a person like AF just because he "thinks" he ought to. For shame! He has his 20 followers who then spend days hashing out the important issues that "Reb Harry" has raised.
ReplyDeleteI can absolutely guarantee that he did absolutely zero independent research. If you know SF, you know that he is renowned for his simplicity and gullibility. It's a marvel that the Chicagoans still call him for shailos. His credibility is shot through and through. The sharper ones there caught on long ago.
ReplyDeleteI can't fathom "God" yet he exists. Our ability to fathom is indicative of nothing.
ReplyDeleteTo my knowledge the only time S Feurst retracted a psak was in the seminary case where he was forced to lay his cards on the table in the expanded BD and realized that he had nothing to go when he engaged in the mass slaughter that he [and a few others] perpetrated. At that point, he had no choice but to go along with the others and retract his silliness but alas, for too many, it was too late.
ReplyDeleteG Schwartz is anything but a Chareidi rabbi. He's as MO as they come.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. Without even knowing that he was the source of the hetter I suspected it might be him because he's exactly the type of gullible fool that would be thrilled to be invited to inveigh on this sort of thing by a Kaminecki and he'd say anything to be called a second time.
ReplyDeleteRabbi E - I am still waiting for the names of the Poskim who endorse your Pilegesh idea, whose purpose is to nip potential problematic Mamzerus cases in the bud by preventing the marriage מעיקרא. At the time I asked you last you said that their support was not yet public. Has that changed?
ReplyDelete“We see that there are poskim - who clearly should
ReplyDeleteknow better - who agreed to this "heter" without bothering to check
the facts as presented by R Shalom Kaminetsky and did not bother to hear the
other side.”
Nathanofgaza writes: “Stop talking about Susan, she's
not the subject.”
Yevamoth 63b:
“Raba said: [If one has] a bad wife it
is a meritorious act to divorce [גרש] her, for it is said, "Expel [גרש] the scoffer and contention departs, Quarrel
and contumely cease.”(Proverbs 22:10)
I suspect that Susan is indeed the subject behind
“I have also heard reports that this isn't the first
time that Rav Feurst has declared that a Get wasn't needed because of
"mekach ta'os". Someone mention that he has done it at least 15
times.”
I quote:
It is not right to be partial to the guilty And
subvert the innocent in judgment. The words of a fool lead to strife; His
speech invites blows. (Proverbs 18:5-6).
To answer a man before hearing him out Is foolish and
disgraceful. (Proverbs18:13)
The first to plead his case seems right Till the other
party examines him. (Proverbs 18:17).
A passerby who gets embroiled in someone else’s
quarrel Is like one who seizes a dog by its ears. (Proverbs 26:17)
I guess you should ask him... But disparaging me is not a new tactic. It's been done here before. I stand by that statement (although not by the typo!).
ReplyDeleteNo. This is hostile territory. Most comments here are acerbic at best, generally nasty. Commenting here is best kept to a minimum.
ReplyDeleteI am on point. Your assertions are incorrect. Sorry!
ReplyDeleteRabbi YG Bechhofer is from the talmidei chachamim muvhakim, mechaber of sifrei Bigdei Sheish, and also the Modern Metropolitan Eruv. Rosh vrishon lchol davar shebikedushah. Has online shiurim on bavli and yerushalmi, and many individual topics. Yadav rav lo bnigleh uvnistar.
ReplyDeleteNot sure who you are
ReplyDeleteHere is Rabbi Bechofer's web page:
http://www.aishdas.org/rygb/
As I said, foolish at best, rasha at worst.
You may disagree with his opinion, but that does not make him a fool or a rasha.
But he didn't give it.. and because he didn't give it that is why this situation happened. It's hard to say if his claims about not seeing his daughter are valid being a lawyer and it is known that lawyers work over time and don't spend much time with family. Just because Tamar moved out of state does not mean Aharon couldn't do the same if he wanted to spend more time with his daughter. I am not saying that Tamar is right for moving the daughter but to me it does not sound like he is being correct either.. not far fetched that both of them have mental health issues .. using the get as a card to get what you want is wrong. Give the get and get it over with. This is going on for over five years already.. if Aharon really cared for his child he would bring closure. How do you think she will feel when she knows that her father did this? Nobody knows what really went on in the marital home since technically nothing could be proven without witnesses and the like..
ReplyDeleteThis is hostile territory.
ReplyDeleteHostile to whom?
Most comments here are acerbic at best, generally nasty.
Nasty? Like your comment?
acerbic
Like this comment: "No."
"This is hostile territory."
Lol
"...Rav Shmuel Feurst joined Rav Nota Greenblatt in giving the "heter"...Rav Feurst had agreed with the heter but he added that there are others.
ReplyDeleteRav Feurst is a well regarded posek and also a talmid of Rav Moshe
Feinstein...this isn't the first time that Rav Feurst
has declared that a Get wasn't needed because of "mekach ta'os".
Someone mention that he has done it at least 15 times..."
This would explain why the American Aguda's Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah, as well as the Israeli Moetzes of both Agudas Yisrael and Degel HaTorah, do not agree with the position of Rav Shternbuch and the BADATZ.
This is indicative if a split straight down the line between American Litvish Poskim who are Paskening like their Moreh Derech the RASHKEBEHAG Rav Moshe Feinstein and the Chasidisha and Meah Shearimidikka Oilem that is Paskening like Satmar that has long objected to Rav Moshe Feinstein's Pesakim.
This is like arguing over growing beards versus being clean shaven, sheitlach versus shaven heads, Chalav Stam versus Chalav Yisroel, no Limuddei Chol versus going to college, education for women versus keep them working at home. Etc etc etc.
so nothing new here, and nothing will chnage, and from this point on this is a useless discussion that just amounts to the spinning of wheels and forum form Rabbio David Eidiensohn of MOnsye's Quixoic camipigns simplky because he does noit like it that is not a good enoiugh reason to cahnge anaything.
Sorry, but that is teh way it seems right now.
RaP you have an amazing ability to ignore facts and announce that this is simply a machlokes of halacha.
ReplyDeleteIt is not and the majority of rabbis - including the silent ones do not believe this is a legitimate machlokes but a clear example of corruption.
Please produce any evidence of disagreement of major rabbis and organization with Rav Sternbuch. I have not heard of any- have you? or is it just your fertile imagination that says so?
your attempt to trivialize this is utter nonsense. Please deal with facts and not the content of the discussion that is going on in your mind.
Where is your evidence?
Joe Orlow wrote:
ReplyDeleteI spoke with Rabbi Greenblatt soon after he did the marriage under
discussion.
I seem to recall that his attitude was not "...a secret psak by anonymous
poskim is not to be taken seriously."
It was more like "listen to the Gedolim -- end of discussion."
Please review Rav Feldman's letter at
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.com/2015/11/rav-aharon-feldmans-letter-against.html
Please explain why his reservations are not applicable in yor opnion.
After I wrote the above, I looked at the FM blog and guess what, he is saying far worse about you and your brother, you need to check that out and respond, see http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2015/11/agunah-allowed-to-remarry-without-get-%C3%BCber-haredi-rabbis-lash-out-234.html
ReplyDeleteAs one who actually respects your opinion :), what do you think about the fact that the diagnosis here was made without the professional in question even meeting the husband? The biggest problem with this pesak, to me, is that giving a hetter to an eishes ish based solely on her claims of her husband's mental health problems is at best irresponsible. This is made even worse by the fact that in the many sessions with the Baltimore Beis Din, she did not raise any of these claims, lending credence to the claim that she developed them with the specific goal of getting this hetter.
ReplyDeleteIm ken, why were you sitting on the translation with your Ashdoidi, kept on saying mochor yihye ho'ois haze. You were about to blow everybody's mind, and you still never coughed up who the witnesses were etc.. Now, that is the Emes. The next thing coming from the Rabbonim is a cherem on his Yeshiva. Hakol shovim chuts M.....Veal yevakshu Torah mipihu, close shop, vehakol al mekomo yavo without Shalom. Vesholom al Yisrael.
ReplyDeleteOich meer a godol. Wow. Niskatnu hadoros.
ReplyDeleteA very good idea in fact. It was discussed a few years ago by a Rav in the UK.
ReplyDeleteYou see, here is the story.
ReplyDeleteLets us say a child was abducted by someone who would like to raise the child. Let us say it was your child. They run away and avoid justice. Now, while seeking to complete their adoption papers for this child, they are told that they cannot complete the papers since the father of the child - you! - are opposing it. You are now approached by the kidnapper and told "This is ridiculous! Just sign over the child and be done with all pesky paperwork!"
Glad that you can understand the analogy if it is your child.
No need doing so. Epstein ramProd sentencing is coming up short short, and he will drag down all those Ham Sandwich condemners asher lo haya velo nivra and those beater uppers of fake and make believe recalcitrant husbands in absentia. The lahADAM rabbis of Rackman style will be singing and ALL those complicit in these illicit so called Aguna mamzerim manufacturing business will be singing along Betsavsa in the chad gadyah. And NO, they will not open up the jail cell upon recitiing Sfoch chamoscho. That will put an end to all those discoverers and followers of SA Hachadasha asher HERIM YODO BETORAS MOSHE! Buz aleihem! Pilegesh beGivo all over again, and the list of mamzeirim will be publicised, and those belonging to the SHEVET, lo yehe lonu esek imohem. They can intermarry amongst themselves outside of Kahal Hashem, and into these so called R'L' LAH*ADAM rabbis.
ReplyDeleteI put it you without a Guess, they did sleuth work as much as on the Epstein & Wolmark et al STING OPERATION that involved rabonim of International gangsters caliber. They all shoved down the throats of nonexistent husbands an offer they possibly could not refuse, could not see nor hear. It's all about money, and it's all about Power. Nothing is EMES, EMES me'erets titsmach, in the mean time it is tif tayer in der erd.
ReplyDelete"and it is known that lawyers work over time and don't spend much time with family"
ReplyDeleteThere goes the claim, she cannot live with him ein odom dor...
DT, you keep mentioning the silent majority of Rabbis, but apart from some early surprises - RAF, and R' Tauber, we have not seen anyone outside of the eidah/Satmar orbit. There are plenty of "rabbinic councils" that nobody has heard of which make big statements, but even the hareidi press, which regularly has anniversary editions on the Langer case - are quite silent.
ReplyDelete1) schizophrenic on meds who attempted suicide, leaving himself a vegetable
ReplyDelete2) AF - by accounts of people who know him is a stable and normal person. (Even his wife didn't claim that he is unstable or mentally ill) Was diagnosed sight unseen several YEARS after the marriage by psychologists who never met him as having OCD and Paranoia. During the Beis Din procedure, the issue his wife raised is that he wasn't "social" enough for her liking. She never raised concerns about his mental health.
If you think these two cases are comparable, then you really are being intellectually dishonest.
Susan is behind the shooting down the Russia fighter plan in conjunction with turkey
ReplyDeleteNathanof gaza says:” Susan is behind
ReplyDeletethe shooting down the Russia fighter plan in conjunction with turkey”
I sent this today to the NYS Court of Appeal motion #
2015-1219.
Pacer states for convicted Mendel Epstein et al: “Sentencing
set for 12/15/2015 11:00 AM in Trenton - Courtroom 5E before Judge Freda L.
Wolfson.” Susan worked closely with
Mendel Epstein et al for 30 years.”
The NYS Court of Appeals should rule on accepting my
case in 2 weeks. Until then, I can write
to the Court whatever I think will improve my chances for them to decide to
accept my case.
I also wrote: A passerby who gets
embroiled in someone else's quarrel Is like one who seizes a dog by its ears.
(Proverbs 26:17)
The last quote
is relevant because Susan for 30 years has been prominent in feminists' outrages against men.
Ra Shlomo Miller from Canada and the other Litvish gedolim and poskim who condemned the heter are now part of the "Satmar/Eidah orbit?
ReplyDeleteR Shlomo Miller and R Elya Ber Wachtfogel surely are outside the Eidah/Satmar orbit, rather firmly in the Litvishe Orbit.
ReplyDeleteRav Aharon Feldman, Rav Shloime Miller, Rav EB Wachtfogel, Rav Nissim Karelitz's bais din, and Rav Mordechai Willig (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) are actively opposing this heter. They can hardly be accused of being Satmar or Hungarian.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the day I know understand and believe what my father and grandfather always told me. If not for the Chasidim in America after the war klal yisroel in America would not have remained frum. It is now obvious to me that when it comes to mesorah and the Torah the Chasidim rise like lions to protect it at any cost while the litvishe either don't follow it or when it is desecrated bury their heads in the sand.
ReplyDeleteRaP are you saying that my criticism that you are ignoring the facts and just creating false dichotomies is not significant because FM ignores or is ignorant of the facts of the case even more?!
ReplyDeleteFM based himself on the article in Washington Jewish Times which was written by someone who doesn't understand what is going on.
According to you I am supposed to take his ignorant hateful nonsense seriously? He doesn't like me or my brother and surely doesn't like Rav Sternbuch. I view that as something to be proud of.
I cannot fathom how Tamar Epstein fell into a marriage with someone who is so mentally affected that it's impossible to live with, making her marriage a blatant mistake from day one. What do the rabbis say? Her lack of awareness of the facts caused her to err. In New York they say "She was duped"; in Hebrew, "mekach ta'us", or "kiddushei ta'us".
ReplyDeleteCan rabbis also be duped about the facts and err...?
It's amazing that after the revelation of Reb Shalom's letters on this blog, in which he clearly presents the facts about the case in afashion that suits his agenda ("meshuga bimlo muvan hamilo", not mentioning Baltimore BD's involvement, not mentioning the attempted reconciliation, et al), and after Rav NG's affirmation that he relied on Reb Shalom for information, there is still someone who has trouble fathoming how the above rabbanim are all wrong.
If they all relied on that (mis)information to determine the facts (seemingly inconsistent with halacha), is there any question how they came to give the heter, and why retrospectively the psak is a mekach ta'us?
I just read R' Mmiller's letter again, and he states that the heter needs to be backed by Gedolim and B'D. Of course, his view is correct that she is forbidden to remarry without a gett. Perhaps we are not yet near the tipping point. Or perhaps the voices of the few are sufficient to be the tipping point.
ReplyDeleteI've found, that this blog is not personal. It's about discussing things in an intelligent manner. If your comments make sense and you're are on the mark, you will be respected.
ReplyDeleteGerald get a life
ReplyDeleteThat is incorrect. I don't know about R' Miller, but R' Wachtfogel is aligned with the Brisk camp, which has always been close with the Eida.
ReplyDeleteRabbi B,
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to be dismissive, why bother posting here at all?
His assertions are 'incorrect'? I read the Haifa case too. Do you think you could take some time and explain how זה דומה לזה? You posted it, and a few of us don't buy it. At least have the courtesy to engage in a discussion. Otherwise, what's your point of even being here?
Rabbanim need to band together and
ReplyDelete1) declare that despite all additional 'machshirim' and 'matirim', their p'sak remains Chai v'kayum and that
2) that we ask all people to declare on whose side they are and if they are with the 'heter', we forever separate from them or at least least put their children in the mamzer register.
I humbly say that i have had some part in efforts made on this behalf: the future of Klal Yisroel. Question now is: what can WE do to combat this problem?
NOW, I call out, mi laShem ailuy: we now make it or break it!
Let me put it to you another way. This is with the caveat that i personally am not a supporter of the alleged heter, and although I like Rackman's books, I would not rely on a heter of that BD either.
ReplyDeleteThe debate above between RaP and DT is whether this is a legitimate machloket, or a fight between orthodoxy and a new type of reform.
So far, i've seen a short note by Rav Miller saying she needs a get, and the heter is not valid until backed by Gedolim (which it is).
Outside of theSatmar/eda orbit, i've not seen anyone calling Kamenetsky a reformer of perverter of halacha.
Not seen anyone in the American Aguda perform ke'riah.
Not seen any Yated style articles blasting the new reform Yeshiva in Philly. Instead they show pleasant photos of Rav Kamenetsky.
I haven't seen Rav Wachtfogel's protest, is there a post on this blog?
And he is the godol.
ReplyDeleteIn opposition to an established bet din that still has jurisdiction.
Mortara case. Should the jewish community (with agreement of US, other governments have given up?
ReplyDeleteSilence from YGB.
ReplyDeleteI suppose he decided it is safer to stay uninvolved.
You didn't get my point. This has nothing to do whetherAaron gave the get or not. But rather this has to do whether the heter to remarry was justified in a situation where a man is willing to give it. He has a right to request to see his daughter or to live near him. Her refusal does not justify an annulment according to all poskim
ReplyDeleteSorry, I must have missed some of the developments -
ReplyDelete"Rav EB Wachtfogel, Rav Nissim Karelitz's bais din, and Rav Mordechai Willig"
can you point me to the sources for these opposers?
thanks
If you look at it another way, the addition to R' Fuerst to the players behind the Get makes it a bigger problem than we initially thought. It is not just a single man, or his son and a useful R' Greenblatt, it is now a major section of poskim that you have to contend with.
ReplyDeleteA couple of years back, there was another machlokes between Gedolim in Israel. It was much more angry than this one. I do not wish to name names, but one of the posts on this blog was "Hareidi world continues to self-destruct".
And that was one group of gedolim saying another Gadol was a zaken mamre or such. This was a very serious dispute, no different from the current one, since a zaken mamre has onesh mita.
But that has gone quiet, and nothing has changed. So don't expect this to be something bigger.
Hi Rabbi Bechhofer, although I have seen you in several Internet forums, I take the opportunity to welcome you to our "hostile" terrain as you may call it. The reason this place is so hostile is because many here have either experienced, know people who have experienced or have otherwise found out about the harsh reality among botei din, secular courts, rabbonim and society in general, regardless of ethnicity.
ReplyDeleteWithout desire to be personally offensive, this article is troublingly misleading:
I have met Aharon Friedman. He's the sweetest guy on two feet. You don't know why he he he doesn't give a get? Simple: he wants reasonably accommodating parenting time that he's entitled to. Although, he may be halachicly entitled to attorney fees for all that he paid for to defend his rights, he isn't asking for that.
Also, your assertion that ANY "recalcitrant" husband can be beaten as per that Rambam (I'm Perek 2 in Hilchos Geirushin) is erroneous. Think about it, if that were true, then there won't be any din of get me'usa! That Rambam is said on a case where al pi halacha he must divorce be it mid'oraisa (ex.: a gerusha to a Kohen) or mid'rabbonon (ex.: Adam Fleischer to Tamar Epstein AFTER she receives a get from Mr. Friedman).
Rabbi Bechhofer,there's so much to clarify on this topic, but I just want to close by again, welcoming you.
Thanks
What's your source that Rav Mordechai Willig is actively opposing?
ReplyDeleteOh, and one more thing. ....can I invite you to Rav Eidensohn's shiur this upcoming Thursday night, that he mentions in his post a few entries below? The shiur is always informative and never "hostile". I know him to be a gentleman of the highest regard. Shall you participate, you are certain to leave memorable and indelible mark on all participants! Any doubts of possible confrontation can be cleared up at your request. Here is a chance for a reward in a windfall of a shiur!
ReplyDeleteWhat nonsense.
ReplyDeleteI'm starting to feel very sorry for Susan.
ReplyDeleteR' Wachtfogel is aligned with the Brisk camp, which has always been close with the Eida.
ReplyDeleteOh, please. That hardly puts him in the Satmar camp.
But wait! He sometimes eats from Satmar shechitah, and once he put on a shtreimel on Purim! You're right, he's mamash a chusid.
You can ask him yourself, just like my source did.
ReplyDeleteHome tel. 718-796-8208
Who?
ReplyDeleteIs FM now also an opinion to be considered? He's a rabid anti-semite who regales in criticizing anything Torah related. You can't possibly be serious.
ReplyDeleteI never said that ANY recalcitrant husband can be beaten. Did Harry Maryles say that? I wish they could. It is true that every story has two sides, but the Chillul Hashem here is ayom v'nora.
ReplyDeleteI speak from experience. A general rule of thumb is that when commenters are for the most part anonymous, their inhibitions are lessened.
ReplyDeleteAccording to R' Shalom Kamenetsky as per http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2015/11/tamar-epsteins-heter-r-shlomo.html at least one of the doctors dealt with the husband directly. It is unclear if the second one did or did not.
ReplyDelete1. The suicide is irrelevant. That made the issue more urgent, but was not the basis for the heter.
ReplyDelete2. Except not according to the first doctor cited by R' Shalom K. who met with the husband (it is possible that even the second doctor met with him).
3. Yes
I don't think he was aware of the Haifa teshuvah. He can argue on it, but he must address it.
ReplyDeleteFor some reason Disqus is not forwarding me all the comments, and certainly not in a timely fashion. Could I trouble you to forward me subsequent comments to ygb@aishdas.org? Thank you.
ReplyDeleteI spoke to him and he was sputtering in fury about what they did.
ReplyDeleteI have never seen FM argue anything intellectually.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, Wikipedia states that he gets PAID for his 'post';)
Too bad your warm welcome was not the spirit of http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/05/r-m-klein-get-invalid-by-use-of-court.html or http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/05/r-bechhofers-pshat-in-rambam-critique.html and http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/05/r-bechhofer-using-secular-courts.html
ReplyDeleteI understand that both Rabbi Willig and Rabbi Schachter are opposed to the heter.
ReplyDeleteIncorrect info.
ReplyDeleteRav G. Schwartz was matir a Cohen to marry a Gerusha.
It is indeed remarkable that Rabbi S. Miller was reluctant to get involved.
Rav EB Wachtfogel signed directly beneath Rav Shloime Miller's signature in the latter's second letter (beginning "B'vais Yisrael raisi shaaruriah".
ReplyDeleteRav Sariel Rosenberg, Av Bais Din of Rav Nissim Karelitz's BD, wrote a few lines about this as well. Although at the time he wrote it, not much was known about Rav Nota's heter, nevertheless the axiom of his ruling, namely, that a woman who is bchezkas eishes ish cannot become permitted by a single dayan only by a bais din, still stands to date: we have yet to see a bais din that was mekabel edus or wrote a ksav heter for this woman.
The images below reflect the above.
As for Rabbi Willig, I personally heard from a reliable dayan who heard so directly from him. As I wrote in a different post, he's available at 718-796-8208.
I am not saying the things you say, do not put words in my mouth. I wrote a comment that now, with you pointing out that it is not just R Greenblatt but now also R Fuerst, added to the Kaminetskys added to the thundering silence of the American Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah minus R Feldman, and add to that the silence from the Israeli Aguda and Degel haTorah and no words from R Chaim Kanievsky, that it now seems that it's a split down the line between the American Litvish Gedolim and Poskim who are either using or supporting the deployment of the Heter that can be traced back to R Moshe Feinstein, and that the opposition is coming from the Satmar-type world and Machmirim and Kanoim in the USA and the BADATZ from the Meah Shearim world.
ReplyDeleteIt is this a classical Chilukei Dei'os and no one is going to change anything or convince anyone to do things differently because now it seems that American Poskim and Roshei Yeshiva see no problem with using the R Moshe Feinstein Heter of Mekach ta'us-Kiddushei Ta'us as it's becoming common place. I know your brother will shout his usual "mamzerim, mamzerim" feel free while it's still a free world, so far.
As for bringing attention to the Fm post about this, it was meant to confirm the type of perceptions out there. You know over the years we go through this routine, someone quotes FM and then I or you object, or you have sometime posted a link and someone objects, and so it goes. But FM is part of the Jewish blogging world and it reflects things out there in the world. Don't forget that at one time you were fighting against child abuse and Tropper and Hersh just like FM was. So you do have times in the past when your interest intersected directly with FM's. Now of course, with your brother setting the agendas for you in an obsessive way, we are in a different era on this blog. Your choice, not mine.
By the way, at this point I am beginning to think that very soon you will owe Tamar an apology for dragging her name and life through the mud and I would not be surprised if she files some sort of defamation suit as we know happened from Guma Aguiar and Michael Hersh and you may be taking down any posts related to her sooner than you think. I say this just judging from the amount of Charedi US Rabbis who are going with the Heter that you are now agitating against and smearing, such as Notta Grennblatt, the Kaminetskys, R Fuerst, the US Aguda crowd that supports the Kaminetskys, and anyone else who does something you or brother do not like. Just a hunch, let's see how things unfold from this point on.
Please stop writing that Shmuel Feurst is a well regarded Posek. He is not. He is basically an Am Haaretz with no one to oppose him or said him straight in Chicago.
ReplyDeleteWith no one to oppose him or said him straight in Chicago. Rav Moshe Schmelczer of Telshe Chicago has a letter from Rav Moshe Feinstein, responding to R Ac Levin of Telshe that says "R' Feurst can be relied upon only B'Shaas Hadchak".
Call M Schmelczer and ask if this is true.
There are 1000 yungeleit in Lakewood wipe the floors with Feurst in learning.
And that probably understates the case.
Check with Rav Nichum Eisenstein of Eretz Yisrael as to Feursts qualifications.
He is a bad joke
RaP again you have no direct information about what is going and therefore you rely on diyukkim which are largely incorrect.
ReplyDeleteThis is not a machlokes of the Litvaks vs Chassidim vs Sefardim vs Modern Orthodox etc etc.
This is not a question of whether Rav Moshe's heter is legitimate!
This is a question of the corruption of halacha. Giving psakim that are wrong because they are based on lies or a universially rejected understanding of halacha.
It is always easier to claim you know everything that is needed about the frum world and any new situation can be generated from that knowledge. But what you are saying is simply wrong! Your interpretations and drashos do not correspond to reality but what you confidently feel must be happening. Fiction is not a substitute for reality.
You have repeatedly claimed that this whole episode is a boring soap opera - but it is not as everyone except for you and FM seems to realize.
This is not about my role or my brother's - it is a fact that the entire Orthodox is shocked and agitated about what is going on.
Your comment about my brother setting the agenda is another one of you fantasies. you can't wrap your head around the fact that this a major crisis. That people are upset about the facts - not because my brother or I are master public media manipulators.
In short if you can't stick the siuation into your Procrustean bed - you simply claim it is so boring because it is an ancient issue that can't be resolved so let's go on to the next issue.
BTW which rabbi support the heter? Rabbi Feurst denies it (why?) Rabbi Shmuel Kaminetsky says it is a complex matter so he relies on Rabbi Greenblatt. Rabbi Greenblatt says he doesn't know the facts so he relied on Rabbi Kaminetsky? Where are the rabbis who view this as machlokes over the legitimacy of Rav Moshe's heter - so far I have not heard of even one.
very good, so we are making progress!
ReplyDeleteIf everyone denies involvement and passes the buck, then it is very difficult to pin the crime on anyone.
ReplyDeleteWe have seen the letter from R Sholom K. So is he the one who is living in a fantasy world?
No one is taking responsibility for it, yet they each say they relied on someone else. it is a joke.
I too, speak from experience. I too, post anonymously. My experience has been positive.
ReplyDeleteמעשיך יקרבו ומעשיך ירחקוך
עדיות ה,ז
My dear anav, I would be much interested to see Rav Rosenberg's input. I, though, am sure that I have not seen it here ( which is a chiddush). Any site to where you can direct me? Also, any other input from any other rabbonim?
ReplyDeleteReally? Rabbi Fuerst denies it? Didn't the post that is now 2 days old confirm his support? Whereis this documented?
ReplyDeleteBy the way, if pertinent, I can dig up the documentation of the Schattner saga from 2003 where he signed to a bogus kidushay to'us - indeed stark in similarity! - 1) heter beckoned by lies and 2) even if they were true they would pale in significance for cause of heter! If anything, the de ja vu is from here rather than Goren! Please let me know if that documentation would be beneficial.
On one side:
ReplyDeleteSatmer, Eidah, Bnei Brak, and YU (Rabbis Schachter and Willig), Rav Shloime Miller and Rav EB Wachtfogel
On the other side:
Rav Shmuel & Shalom Kamenetzky (who wrote explicitly that they were not matir); Rav Shmuel Fuerst (who has yet to issue anything in writing); Rav Nota Greenblatt (who is clearly trying to find a way out) and the silence of the Moetzes of Agudah (who are not a bais din and rarely get involved in halachic issues). And the silence of Rav Dovid Feinstein (who will never utter a word out of his mouth on anything controversial).
A bit if a stretch for a clear split down the middle between the kano'im/Israelis and the Litvishe Americans
Rap, you're a wonderful fellow and let me suggest: we are armed with the Shulchan Aruch. How can we lose with that!? The Torah upholds those who uphold it. If I may use a little constructive criticism: Rather than spend time with political analyses, displaying your impeccable punditry, which always seems to flow over our grasps, why not base analysis on tangible documents, reliable quotes and concrete facts. Face it, can we learn from Galileo, who could have been more helpful had he taken the time to experiment his theories before finalizing them?
ReplyDeleteRabbi Feurst has denied it - but I can produce documentation that clearly establishes he agreed to it.
ReplyDeleteyes the documentation would be helpful
Okay, will go digging when I can....
ReplyDeleteThanks
And as far as it goes with bringing in Rabbi Fuerst, if we publicize his nearly identical history with the Schattner case, that was turned on its head, the public would fairly be able to connect the two.
ReplyDeleteRav Rosenberg wrote a letter that was together with the original letter of the Baltimore Beis Din. It is on the Otzar Forum - but I was told that he will be coming out with a revised letter
ReplyDeleteAh, B"H, lo alman Yisroel. Would love to see it asap
ReplyDeleteIf not for the Chasidim in America after the war klal yisroel in America would not have remained frum. It is now obvious to me that when it comes to mesorah and the Torah the Chasidim rise like lions to protect it
ReplyDeleteThe greatest corruption in Botei Din is by the "Chassidim."
Shmiel Fried! Low and behold, how many moisdiss have used him and paid him tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars?
Yiddel Gruber.
And way too many more to list.
Hmm. .....guess times have changed. .....
ReplyDeleteBy me, though, I may be accused of favoritism, since you are my 11th or 12th cousin on Geni......though our views can slightly-sharply differ..Lololllllllll....
It was available on the Otzar Forum but I couldn't find it now when I looked.
ReplyDelete"I wish they could. " ???
ReplyDeleteChillul HaShem? By not giving a get? I thought Chilul HaShem when a woman goes to court on trumped up charges, alienating the children from their father and causing his family AND children untold agmas nefesh is considered Chilul HaShem. Why does such a woman deserve a get?
I actually meant for a while to ask you, where does the Torah endorse get on demand? Interesting that on this
A layman like Fried does not represent Chasidim any more than a lay Litvak represents Litvaks.
ReplyDeleteI don't think he was aware of the Haifa teshuvah. He can argue on it, but he must address it.
ReplyDeleteJob one, before addressing any other teshuvos, is to clearly ascertain the validity of the information provided by Sholom K. Who were the therapists? What was their connection to the couple? At what point did they hear about mental illness from the wife? Why did the subject of mental illness not come up in the BD or court hearings? Why was it not mentioned in the wife's diary? The issue here is determining whether the foundational information is based in anything real, if it's true, false, or biased. The issue at this point is not halachic, it's about the supposed facts. R' Feldman made that quite clear in his letter. The problem is that none of these facts can be determined without full disclosure by the architects of the heter, which I do not expect to be forthcoming.
RYGB has said on numerous old threads that he believes a woman is entitled to a Get-on-demand for whatever reason she wants it.
ReplyDeleteNice to meet you, cousin!
ReplyDeleteThis is correct. It is the Shittas HaGe'onim. We are machmir like Rabbeinu Tam, but it is not clear that the ta'am of RT still applies.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I am not being machri'a. I am pointing out that the mechanics of such a heter have been used before.
ReplyDeleteI know for a fact that R' Fuerst was involved in the heter.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. But the mechanics of the heter are not the issue here (or at least they should not be).
ReplyDeleteBut as you acknowledge, RYGB, Get-on-demand is not the Halacha that Shulchan Aruch paskens with. S"A paskens against Get-on-demand. So you acknbowledge, even from your own perspective as a supporter of Get-on-demand, that other valid Halachic shittas oppose Get-on-demand. (Indeed the authorities opposing Get-on-demand are prevalent in how Halacha has been accepted for centuries.)
ReplyDeleteSo even if we accept you have a valid Halachic position in support of Get-on-demand (a point that many would dispute is valid considering the position of the S"A, but you do have legitimate sources so let's accept for this conversation that they are a valid Halachic opinion that you could rely on), nevertheless you cannot impose your desired Halachic opinion supporting Get-on-demand on every husband who, as you acknowledge, has very valid Halachic opinions opposing Get-on-demand.
So if it is regarding your own family or those that accept you as their Halachic decisor, you can impose your ruling accepting Get-on-demand. But you cannot deny others from utilizing the very valid (and indeed accepted Halachic opinion) opposing Get-on-demand.
Once again, for some reason I am not getting these comments from Disqus. I cannot and will not participate in any forum with a person who asserts that any gittin issued by any BD with which he has a disagreement are pasul. Such rish'us is mind boggling. He and his ally Rabbi Gestetner. He alludes to their stance above, in http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2015/12/tamar-epsteins-heter-rav-shmuel-feurst.html#comment-2388061646
ReplyDeleteI can't do duplicate discussions. I address this in my comments to Harry Maryles' blog post on the topic.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Bechhofer - we appreciate your contributions to the discussion here. But is not helpful to answer a question by saying that you discussed the matter elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteIt is not appropriate to require someone to go plow through the comments on another blog to know what your views are.
It shouldn't be a major effort for you to cut and paste any relevant previous discussions
I don't see you addressing the above point in your comments on HMs blog.
ReplyDeleteI think I did address the question there. But be that as it may, anyone should feel free to call me at 845-481-0613. No need to give your name.
ReplyDeleteReb Daniel, as I am not specifically advocating for the heter, just raising points that may validate it, I feel that I am spending too much time on the issue. Cutting and pasting is not a major effort if it is for one comment, but for many comments it becomes a burden. Nevertheless, if there arises a question that I did not answer there, and I am notified of it, I will try to answer it directly.
An institution hiring someone for a specific task, be it a lawyer, be it a toen or be it a fundraiser, does not indicate the institution endorses anything he does other than for the task they assigned him.
ReplyDeleteAnd if the way he accomplishes the task he was hired for is through Beis Din corruption then that is OK? Please.
No one beats Harry for his am haaratzus. Someone, needs to kick out from underneath his feet the soapbox. The man has nothing to add to any conversation never mind a complicated one such as is being discussed. It's a pity that a person of stature such as RGB would even give Harry's blog the kavod of commenting there.
ReplyDeleteVery true. He is the definition of the Am HaAretz that Chazal refer to in the Gemara: Someone who knows practically nothing, has a Sinah Chamura for Talmidei Chachomim, spouts opinions like they're mushrooms...
ReplyDeleteIt's mind-boggling that anyone at all would spend time there, let alone RGB.
I took your advice and called R Moshe Schmelczer, as I know him personally. This is what he said:
ReplyDelete"It's sheker Kazav! I have no such letter, nor have I ever seen such a letter, nor do I have knowledge of such a letter! More so, you should know I ask all my shailos to Rabbi Fuerst shlit"a!"
I don't know you, so I can't determine if you really spoke to Moshe Schmelczer or what he said, but I can assure you that I have seen the letter in his house, as have any number of Chicago people.
ReplyDeleteMoshe would always belittle Feurst with this letter.
So if you indeed spoke with him, then he is clearly trying to stay out of Feurst's way, or he doesn't want to tell the truth to strangers who call him randomly.
He used to have guts- I guess the years have wimped him out.
Classic Chicago Telshe
No rov "always belittles" another rov. Or another yid.
ReplyDeleteStyle of a shakran, casting suspicion on the other. What difference if you know me? And, if you are indeed close with R Moshe Schmelczer you certainly do know me! Thus your silly rationalization that he "doesn't want to tell the truth to strangers who call him randomly" is just another deflection to maintain your sheker!
ReplyDeleteRabbi Avigdor Miller often quoted chazal "Mitivan shel krovim ata lamad tivan shel rechokim - u'kshem shain mamish b'zeh kach ain mamish b'zeh" or simply put he would say "the refutation is at hand".
You say you have seen the letter in his house. You also say the letter was written to R' Avrohom Chaim Levin. Please explain to me how Moshe Schmelczer is in possession of such a highly damaging letter written not to him but to Rabbi A C Levin?? Surly RACL would never let such a damaging letter out of his possession - much less give it to Moshe Schmelczer!! Or did Moshe Schmeczer steal it from Rabbi Levin? And then show you his stolen prize - without busha or fear??! And as you profess also to "any number of Chicago people"?! That claim is just so ridiculous and totally irrational!
The refutation is at hand! You never saw such a letter! You are a shakran! Plain and simple!
You guys are cute. First of all, Moshe schmelczer is not a "Rov". Secondly he certainly wasn't twenty years ago which is when the events being discussed took place.
ReplyDeleteAnd Fuerst isn't much of a Rov either- that is precisely the point.
Re: Mivakesh polemic on Sheker, I won't bother refuting such silliness. If you know M schmelczer for any length of time, you have heard about this letter, which he got from his father, the founder with RACL of telshe. If you ARE yourself Moshe S, I apologize for putting you on the spot in this forum; but you shouldn't have run your mouth so much about this letter and it wouldn't come back to haunt you.
Oh and one last thing: Moshe asks Fuerst all his Shailos-?!? That's hysterical; you really are a gullible fellow.
The last person Moshe asked a Shaila to was his aforementioned father- and the very last person he'd ask now that his father is gone is Shmuly Fuerst.
Well, actually, Feurst is second-to-last- Rav Chaim Dov Keller Is the last!!!
Man, telshe politics- as silly as ever.
How is this Telshe politics?
ReplyDeleteAnyone who knows any of the Schmelczers for any period of time has heard about this letter.
On a separate note why not call Rabbi Fuerst and ask him about the letter? 773-539-4241
You can't ask Fuerst about this letter- he's B'Chezkas Shakran
ReplyDelete