It is a threat , since some ppl know who he is, nowhere is it mentioned that everyone needs to know, and as far as I know the person is a observant new, (even though he dosent have to be) עדות שלא בפני בע"ד does not apply since AF is not the baal din, at this point he isn't affected by RNG determination, since at this point it's clear she has no shibud to him The problem with the psak is something else entirely
Is there is na "baal din" on a shaaleh of issurim since there is no baal dovor on issurim. Rabbi Dovid Feinstein has not made AF come to the meetings of his BD, because there is no "Lifnei baal dovor" in this case.
The rofeh mimchah that wrote the 2nd report is not known to the public, so it will not endanger his parnosoh. My understanding is that the rofeh mumchah bases his conclusions in the report, on the 1st Doctors report (that wrote a report many years ago) and acc to R Feldmans letter this 1st doctor was certainly not shomer shabbos.
Rav Rominek's assertion that alll of the (second) Doctors information came from Tamar is not entirely correct, as acc to R S Kamintesky's letter (and see R Feldman's reply) the (second) Doctor based his conclusions on the report written many years ago by a separate Doctor (whom R Feldman indicates never saw AF but Rabbi Kaminetsky's letter seems to indicate that the 1st Doctor did see AF) ... Also Rav Romineck's assertion that the report is secret, every doctor knows (.. and it's a nightmare to every doctor..) that a court of law or BD may force the report to be opened to the public via a surpeana, so even if the report is secret it can be revealed with time & even many years later ... Rav Moshe Feinstein did agree to do mekach taus on a mental illness unlike the achrionim Rav Rominek quotes ...
Why does Rav Romineck not bring up the question that the Doctor is a Eid Echod here (and that is not enough in a Dovor Shebe"ervah and it needs two witnesses to pasken in a BD) ? And, is an eidus in writing (via the doctors report) without an interview, enough for a din eidus to be matir an eishes ish ?
Well I guess the doctor has what to be afraid, he is afraid of a major lawsuit by AF, where his whole credibility can be tested by major professionals, and he can only hide behind a phony BD of RNG and RSK who care less about Halacha
According to the regulations of his umnos, you cannot diagnose in absentia and being shomer T'U' is not in his favor. Indeed, he is mera umnoso with such and has no eidushaft to contribute.
Of course Rav Rominek is correct on all points, but one does not need a Rov of the caliber of Rav Rominek to make the case; a "bar bay rav d'chad yoma" knows that this is so. This is what makes the :"hetter" so egregious.
What is even more outrageous is that the only place where you can find a protest online against this horrendous abuse of Hallacha is this blogspot. Instead of Seforim being sent to Shevah V'esrim Umeah Medinah there is only a deafening silence. OI Lanu kee chotunu.
(Incidentally, there is one further argument that Rav Rominek didn't present.. In a case where it is evident that an "Uman" was "mareh umnoso", clearly one cannot argue that there exists a "Chazakah Ayn Uman Mareh Umnoso".in order to rely on the discredited "Uman". Here doctor after doctor chimed in with their opinion that this supposed "Uman" was behaving unprofessionally in issuing an opinion under these circumstances. Clearly this supposed "Uman" was "Mareh Umnoso". Even if we assume that Rav Rominek is not correct (which of course is not the case for he is most definitely right) and one can rely on a psychiatrist's testimony even if based on hearsay and even if based on judgement rather than fact and even retrospectively nine years after the fact and even assuming that this "diagnosis" constitutes a fatal flaw to which the concept of "taus" applies, it is ludicrous to even consider the "professional testimony" of this unprofessional practitioner.
But the most powerful argument of all is the one that Rav Rominel presents towards the end of his letter when he cites the Noda Beyudah who would not help a hapless Agunah by annulling her Kedushin. Case closed.)
Of course he's correct. If not, she would've brought this "proof" to court to "save" her daughter. After all, a severely paranoid person can believe his own daughter is part of a plot with her mother to harm him, and he could harm her first. A severely OCD person can re-check if his car door is locked for the 53rd time while traveling at 70mph, and ram the car in front of him!
Yet, both the Baltimore BD & the Washington court saw him as equally capable of providing child care. It leads one to believe that either a) she knows it won't hold up in court, b) his paranoia & OCD are very mild, and don't affect his job performance or ability to provide child care, or c) she doesn't value her daughter's safety.
As a friend, happily married for over 35 years, told me, "Paranoid? OCD? That's me! It helps make me effective at my hashgacha job because I'm suspicious, and my wife knows how to deal with it." He's probably accurate, too. Yet, 10 girls were asked by RSK whether they would even go out with someone diagnosed as PDD & OCD, and they all emphatically answered in the negative... AHA!!! Kidushei Ta'us!!! Except that's not what actually happens. She goes out with a guy, she likes him. On the 5th date, he mentions that he takes medication for 2 issues that sometimes affect him a little. She asks a high school friend of his, who says it wasn't noticeable back in high school before he started meds, and so it should just be a tolerable annoyance she will need to deal with using patience & wisdom. She marries the guy, deals with the situations as they come up.
Parenthetically, just to show how the balance of "science" & "art" is different for an MD than for a psychiatrist, I asked a big psychologist a few years ago, "How come diagnoses seem to go in waves? First, everybody has Addictive Personality Disorder, then everybody has non-Hyperactive ADD, then they're all Bipolar, then PTSD after Sexual Abuse, then they're on the Autistic Spectrum, etc." He answered two answers, "Firstly, after a mental health professional learns about a new diagnosis & complex, s/he sees it everywhere & in everybody. Secondly, everybody wants to get paid, and so they follow which diagnoses are being paid for by the insurance companies, and bunch diagnoses among those for which claims not being denied - even if factually they're treating those patients differently for a different mental illness."
Hmmm... so psychiatry isn't a precise science? Especially with a patient they haven't seen multiple times in multiple settings & situations? Interesting...
It is also evident that they know that he is not reliable ( as we know), since IF he exists, he did something ethically fatal, such as not taking in Aharon's input and releasing the report without his approval, if he exists.....then again, according to them (and according to your account of events), the younger RSK wasn't present by the Bais Din or conference (whatever you decide to call it) of Rav Dovid Feinstein to answer for himself
How so? He has no fear of those who do know who he is? In fact, they are the one's who hired him to write this type of report!
עדות שלא בפני בע"ד does not apply since AF is not the baal din, at this point he isn't affected by RNG determination, since at this point it's clear she has no shibud to him
Oh, but it affects him in many ways. And, the moredes remains with her shibud.
What nonsense. A woman is the kinyan of her husband of course he is the baal din, you cannot take away a woman "mitachas baaloh" like this. You still haven't provided a single Mekor, but you have taanus on Rav Rominek. This is the punim people like RNG have.
THis is not true in Kidushin. Kidushin is a Kinyan ishus and the woman cannot be freed without the husband. RG has had some shiurim with Mekoros on this subject if I recall from a long time ago
You can get multiple doctors reports each with a contradictory report. TO be matir an eishes ish with hafkuas kidushin like this based on a doctors report is such an unprecedented thing that in a prior generation such Rabunim would have been decried by all Gedoilim. It sounds like Rav G is correct that this is becoming the new trend.
Rav Moshe was the only one to write a Tshuva but in practice he never did it or allowed it. Besides he was indeed the only Rav to ever write about allowing a annuling a kidushin, not a single other Rav before or during his time agreed or even thought about it. You can simply not do something when for hundreds of years no one did it except Rav Moshe wrote a tshuva.
In the USA there is an ICD (or DSM) code for every person. In oher words a doctor can diagnose every single person in the USA with some kind of mental health diagnosis. RSK and RNG have a ready stream of clients now to annul marriages. THe joke is on us, they are laughing!
You write: "But the most powerful argument of all is the one that Rav Rominek presents towards the end of his letter when he cites the Noda Beyudah who would not help a hapless Agunah by annulling her Kedushin." Actually, that is his least powerful argument, as R' Moshe would use this heter. [Before you take out your knives, I am not sugesting that R' Moshe would approve of using it in this case; just that the Noda BeYehuda had a categorical objection to using it, and R' Moshe did not.]
Thought it worthwhile to give some "introduction" about Rav Rominek, with permission from our host, of course. ...
Rav Rominek was designated as one of the dayanim to be part of the Bais Din to force Avrohom Rubin to give a get. He wrote a letter that the get was no good - even though he stood out (and also with possible retribution) from the other 4 dayanim including R Belsky, now that's business! Rav Gestetner wrote in his Kuntres that he called her father 2 days after the keffiya that she remains an aishes ish. He confirmed that on the phone to me.
Not sure what exactly is rediculous. Relying on this מומחה is obviously garbage, for many reasons. Let us begin.
1. He never met AF. lol. joke. Diagnosing someone without meeting him. lol. joke. His "diagnosis" wouldn't hold up in a kangaroo court in Zimbabwe, let alone בית דין.
2. Even, If he would have diagnosed him, and AF was purely insane (he isn't). Who says it didn't happen after the marriage started ?? Who says it was a an old hidden illness ??? Also, there is no proof that she didn't know of the מום beforehand !!!! No עדים that he had this מום, and didn't tell her!!
3. Psychological diseases are not a clear science, like other diseases. Doesn't show up on an X-ray. Not on a blood test. It's not a cancer. It's not a blood disease. It is almost impossible to say מקח טעות. She met him. She liked him with his personality. She married him with his personality. not clear that it's possible on a psychological disease to say מקח טעות.
4. מקח טעות means he knew of something beforehand. He didn't tell her. He plainly should have told her. If she knew she would have never married him. As soon as she found out she "returned the merchandise and said give me my money". (None of this happened)
Ask AF or anyone who knows AF if there was anything he hid ? If the only one who figured out there was something hidden is some "professional", it is not a מקח טעות. If it is something which the average person doesn't see as a problem. What value does "professional" bring to the table ?? When to everyone else, there is no problem. The מקח טעות defense is that for everyone it would be a problem, not for some psychiatrist it would be a problem.
5. Psychiatrists today are diagnosing everything. If we are to believe that everything is a disease, no one needs a get!!! Shy disease, arrogant disease, clean disease, dirty disease. OCD, ADD, sleep disorder, ED. It's all diagnosis. All diseases.
The only thing that works in TE favor, is that women are so difficult nowadays, that anything that is not on their "Shidduch list" is enough to overturn the apple cart. So perhaps any little nothing that AF had, would have been enough of a reason for her to have said no to the Shidduch originally. With that said, she was unquestionably מקבל.
Unless there is something I don't know, it seems rather open and shut to me.
meaning she was not seeking a divorce based on his mental health and that was in fact able to remain in the marriage except for her belief that she could do better. Thus there was no basis for a heter of mekach ta'us. As she presented it it wasn't even a case of ma'us alei. A personality disorder which is not noticed or is not burdensome can not be a basis to annul the marriage
And in her diary (which was a court document in the custody battle) from the time of the couple's separation, states clearly the reasons she's asking for a Get and no mention of the OCD and other mental issues are included in her Diary (she even writes that she likes him etc and maalos and other reason why she wants a separation and divorce, which happen to jive with exactly the words the BBD write taht she told the BD why she wants a separation and divorce). If this Diary is not a "admission" of the reasons for the separation at that time, I dont know what is. Reb Dovid and his BD need to be made aware of this Diary which was hand-written by Tamar.
Someone, please make Reb Dovid aware of this Diary.
So we have a difference of opinion. I love it! We can agree to disagree. My point of disagreement with your point is as follows:
I concede that HaRav Moshe Feinstein זצוק"ל was a very, very great man and a very, great פוסק , arguably the greatest פוסק in America in his time. It is possible that he was also the greatest פוסק in the entire world both in his time and ever since. (Although truth be told, the שו"ת אגרות משה can scarcely be found in Bnei Brak.)
On the other hand, the Noda Beyudah was and is still the undisputed רבן של ישראל , the פוסק אחרון par excellence, the greatest giant among the giants of his generation. To argue against his פסק , which has not been disputed (except by Harav Moshe Feinstein) is either ludicrous, or one most have very broad shoulders indeed.
But Harav Moshe Feinstein did have very broad shoulders. Nonetheless, as they say is Yiddish, די קשיא איז דארט , the burden of proof lies upon Harav Hagaon Rebbe Feinstein. Why did this venerated Rabbi disagree with the Noda BeYudah? Possibly, he was not familiar with that Tshuvah. Or perhaps he had some persuasive argument that superseded the Noda BeYudah's פסק We don't know what was in the great Gaon's mind and we cannot know.
At the very best, we are at a Hallachik Mexican standoff. On one side we have the great sage of 250 years past, the Noda Beyudah who towered over the luminaries of his generation, such as Rav Yakov Emden, Rav Shaul of Amsterdam, Rav Itzikel of Hamburg, ant the ten Chachmei Brody. His ruling is that we cannot annul Kedushin even if the woman remains an Agunah forever.
In the other corner, we have the great פוסק of our time Harav Hagoan Rebbe Moshe Moshe Feinstein, who it seems unilaterally suggested in the year 1955, that in a case where the insanity of the husband is undeniable (the U.S. Army confined him to an insane asylum hospital, and also the man's parents stated that he was a paranoid schizophrenic who could not be approached by any stranger.) the marriage might be annulled, if there was absolutely no possibility of obtaining a get under any conditions.
(Incidentally, at that time Harav Eliyahu Henkin, no slouch in Hallachah himself, and who some might argue was as great an expert as was Harav Moshe Feinstein vehemently opposed the application of "kedushay taus" under the very same circumstances that Ran Feinstein allowed it.)
So how does one decide between the Noda Beyudah and Harav Feinstein? Eeny, meeny miny, moe? Or perhaps we might consult a "Tinohk, Lo chochom V'lo Tipaysh", as to whose Gedolim card is worth more, the Noda Beyedah's or Rebbe Moshe Feinstein's.
No, my friend, IMHO normative Hallachah requires us to decide based on what was Klal Yisroel's accepted position in generations past. Harav Hagoan Rav Moshe Feinstein's unilateral opinion כבודו יהי' מונח cannot be followed in the face of the accepted פסק of the Noda Beyudah.
In order to veer away from accepted tradition, more is required that relying on a דעת יחיד. no matter how great. Otherwise we run the risk of people relying on "poskim" of dubious credentials such as Rabbi Ysoscher Katz of the OO movement. After all he did receive Semichah from Harav Yecheskel Roth in 1986, did he not?
He can create a BD without TE, because she is still the Kinyan of AF, so only AF need be there. There is no problem in creating a BD to say TE is still an Eishes Ish, but they cannot do what RNG and RSK did to be mevatel Kidushin without AF. It is certainly a tricky situation at best. What the Matirim-Maskilim are trying to do is mafkia the kinyan meikoro, therefore claiming there was never a kinyan.
But what really matters it is that she knew of it and was mekabel. Apperrantly when she went to through the Baltimore BD proceedings she never uttered a word even, all this is nothing more then a politically and money charged heter based on a whimsical blood libel on AF.
Reb Moshe was a YUCHID in undreds of years, there is not a single Poisek before Reb Moshe who you can cite in the Posik who did it. Great Anav cited הר צבי of the מהרש"ם however there is nothing further from the truth when you look up the מהרש"ם. Otherwise its all the Schmadanut who have no סמכות at all.
Thank you, we rest the case! It's the biggest joke we heard since the start of this parsha! If a person can go through BD to seek a Get, (let alone live with him for two years and not having realized the severity of the mum) and then after all is said and done she creates a new so called "realization" retroactively, then you have effectivly undermined Toras Moshe, and if this is the basis of RSK/RNG then good luck.
Please do so. I am sure the "sources" only talk about a situation where the couple was still together and the "realization" came before separation, not post-facto and certainly not after a BD convening upon the the woman's request has ruled upon separation issues. BTW the Rama has a great Teshuva decrying all this nonsense, but let's wait to see your sources first please.
The Noda Beyehuda cited by Rav Rominek is only exemplary, there is not a single other Posek throught the last few hundred generations who was matir in practice Hafkuas Kidushin, except for Reb Moshe, hence one cannot duplicate him.
It is not so. I have heard that Rav Scheinberg and Rav Yechezkeil Roth have also done it - aside from the admission of Mordechai Tendler there is also Rav Shmueli Fuerst and Rav Greenblatt. I have been told many others including well known poskim have been done but don't want their names revealed.
The basic difference in this case is that the basis of the heter are known and they are a joke. So it is not that Rav Moshe was the only one
Your argument will not convince someone like RNG, who is a talmid of Rav Moishe, that he may not pasken like his rebbi against the Noda Biyehuda. Rav Moishe was matir shaving on Chol Hamoed although the Noda Biyehuda was not, and there are many that use this kula. Can you tell them to stop?
RDE, what do you know about cases of it being done by Rav Scheinberg and/or Rav Roth? And which "admission" of Tendler are you referring to? Rabbu Fuerest acknowledged doing it or how else are you aware of it?
A rabbi told me he has documenation regarding Rav Scheinberg and Rav Roth. In an interview Tendler admitted that he had done many anullments. Rav Fuerst admitted to someone that he has done at least 15 - and that person told me. other people have claimed that big rabbis have used kiddushei ta'os. I don't have a score card. Point is that it wasn't simply Rav Moshe
Well you are still only refering to rabunim of our generation. Please show a single Posek pre-Reb Moshe Zt"l (or Rav Abramski), for hundreds of years as well as going back to the Rishonim Zt"l era not a single posek was matir in practice to do it, ad shebo Reb Moshe, while Reb Moshe's case is very different as I will respond elsewhere soon, the other rabbonim make a joke out of it. The single biggest question I have is: Why was there not a single Posek until Reb Moshe to be matir hafkuas kidushin? This is not a case of new technological issues that has occured a first time in our generation or post war. Before World War II not a posek would be matir this.
If there's been so many as you describe, I'd think people who'd have been hearing about some of these cases as the first husbands would be screaming against what happened. I mean if Rav Fuerst alone did at least 15 and Tendler did many and the others did more, surely the world would have heard about at least some of these cases.
No - there was no platform to report these cases and/or people didn't want to speak badly about their rabbinical leaders and assumed that they knew what they were doing.
See also Or Zarua (c.1180-1250) who records (761) a case in which his contemporary Rabbenu Simchah of Speyer ruled that a wife should be released without a Get on the grounds of kiddushei ta’ut when an unknown defect in the groom is revealed.
Nice speech, but it misses the point. R' Moshe is definitely a bar samcha, so writing that the citation of a Noda BeYehuda that R' Moshe disagreed with is the "most powerful argument of the teshuva" is false.
RDE: What is your opinion of the cases that Rav Scheinberg, Rav Roth, Rav Fuerst and Tendler did in these cases? Or at least what do you think of the legitimacy of the idea of them doing something like that?
DOn't expect anything. The greatest weapon RSK, RNG and all their likes have is to hide their skeleton's in a closet and issue so called secretive directives! As long as they continue to do so we are in good shape!
FOrget the Noda Beyehuda, forget Rav Rominak, show us or let RNG show us a single posek before the War who ever allowed annulment even for גבו"א, let alone a case like AF. Reb Moshe was a Yuchid, and it was in גבו"א, and RNG has no feet to stand on even being a talmid of Reb Moshe, he truly has no grounds.
BTW for your info, R' Roth you cite, has a teshuva that a husband may be injected with a drug to relax/confuse and make him like a shikur during the Get process, he cites not a single מקור. Is this the posek you want to use for an annulment? I will not delve into his other problems now. Which Rav Greenblatt are you referring to? RNG?
Come on, Reb Moshe talks about a conservative or reform wedding, although he is still a Yuchid as stated elsewhere, it still has no resemblance to the cases of our times where there are children, normal people albeit alleged health claims may be raised, they are so far fetched from Reb Moshe's cases that it's beyond comprehension.
First, Rabbi Rominek was a friend of my in-laws and made a bracha under my chupah. Nevertheless, the Noda Biyehuda he quotes is quite difficult to understand. The case was that a man moved into a town and the understanding was that he was single. He married a widow, stole all her money, and ran away. It was found out that he was an apostate for years, and was currently married to a gentile woman. The rabbi wanted to annul the marriage, as was only way to free her, and gave a few reasons, including kiddushei taus, but the Noda Biyehuda would not agree.
So this poor widow was destined to suffer for the rest of her life?
Well it is not what the Noda Beyehuda writes, it is what he and all other poskim in the last 500 years did not write. Not a single posek thought for a moment to be matir what Reb Moshe or others after him did. The Tora did not start post World War II.
It is indeed a strong argument, though not the only one. Reb Moshe was a Yuchid, for hundreds of years not a single posek was matir to do Annulment, nonetheless even Reb Moshe talked only about conservative and reform annulments or as stated elsewhere גבו"א where the husband admitted and there was no חיי אישות ביסוד to begin with. What kind of comparison is this to the cases that the so called maritim do nowadays?
What if a husband traveled from Europe on business across continents, through Oceans and Africa, and never returned and was never heard from again after 5, 10, 15 years went by?
Is his poor wife destined to suffer for the rest of her life?
You keep saying this -- not a single poseik -- how do you know? Are you familiar with every pesak of every poseik for the last 2000 years? Are you a great expert in teshuvos sefarim? Or are you just making your best guess based on nothing at all?
Well please you find me a single posek in the last 500 years or even 300 years that was matir למעשה an annulment, the אור זרוע wasn't discovered in our generations by the Agunah International Inc. reformadox פוקרים, he was a rishon and a yuchid, rov rishonim did not allow annulement, and no acharonim until Reb Moshe ever used that, while even Reb Moshe inly used it to annul conservative non religious marriages and/or a case of addmitted גבו"א which was also never used by anyone prior in 500 years. I challenge anyone here or the world over to please come forward and disprove my statement הלוואי
In a case where the husband is shaking or afraid and uneasy to go through the Get, it means basically that where the halacha said there must be צלול הדעת he did not care. Injecting relaxing or similar Drugs have severe repercussions especially it can have differing effects on different people, and it can make a person feel like a shikur, especially if they also consume alcohol. I mean this is the type of Gedolim we are dealing with? It matters not what type of situation he permitted it on, others will use it in any situation, this is the current day and age, just like the Maskil RNG will make secret annulments based upon another Teshuva of his Rebbe Reb Moshe.
He most certainly is a Baal Din. The so called shomer Torah Umitzvot mumche is attemting to bring a chov on AF in undoing his kinyan with a lie. It has to be bifnei baal din! Ha ha, "she has no shibud???"! Ridiculous, How so??? When did her shibud expire? The worthless piece of rag he testified on is not worth the rag and the mumche liar disqualified himself altogether, of which in any case is nidan didan at hand. Where do you come in to jump the gun, huh? don minah uminah, veoikei abasrah. One step at a time. This Heter will never fly. All their attempts in stalling for time is over. The beating of the Drums continue. All the Allies are requested to enter the theater of operations.
Yes, however RMF would have found one of the wittnesess to be posul based on some kinda garbled ground, and would have let her remarry ... Is that what u would prefer
Ah freilichen Purim. We're discussing the Noda Biyehuda and Rav Moshe Feinstein, and you bring Shmuely Feurst and Mordechai Tendler as additional "Rabbonim".
Thanks for the belly laugh.
Tendler has done "hundreds". And we're supposed to believe that their were legitimate grounds in all those cases? And he has taanos noch der tzu, on Rackman et al for not "applying the process correctly." What a clown.
And Feurst in little bitty Chicago, has done 15. I won't even comment on the level of research Feurst is known for. We know that Feurst is a fraud and Tendler may be worse than that.
You've totally bolstered Moshe Abramsons point- no Rav has used such a hetter. If my garage mechanic gives a hetter, that doesn't count.
I think Rav Eidensohn simply attempted to bring samples, examples and cases or Rabbonim involved in it. I appreciate for him taking the time and effort to clear this up, this should come out in the open now, rather than allow such annulments to go on. He simply cited those to show that it is happening and that RSK.RNG weren't the first (apart from RCYB of courts). The problem is there, we may not have been aware of it, it was always shoved under the rug, and now it is coming out, it is just like the Posole Gittin, it has been going on for a long time, until one case wakes it up and things bust. Enter Mund-Chinn where Rav G busted the Posole Gitin gang, he then continued with other cases busting the gittin meusin gangs in droves on his BD line, since then things are open books. The same thing is now happening with annulment, except there are still some in the Frum world who try and hope for a cover up, claiming that a cover up will help the matirim to withdraw....
I did not say that, if you want I will bring enough credible stories on him, but I do not want to divert the issue of bogus annulments. I cannot say about any annulments he has done, because there is of course no record... only hearsay. I just wanted to show that Rav Roth paskening איסורי כריתות against the halacha with absolutely no מקור is beyond my comprehension. And even if he knew what he was doing, he opened a can of worms for others to follow in his path of that teshuva. I am not condoning nor attacking any Rav personally, just their positions. They may be very big tzadikim in their own right, none of us fly high in heaven to see cheshbonos up there, but chazal say "....חכמים הזהרו בדבריכם.
Rav Rominek's brief is quite persuasive. As to which of his points is the most powerful is rather moot, don't you think. The bottom line is that the hetter is bogus, and TE is a married woman living with another man with the approval of of a chareidi Rov.
The reason why the Noda BeYehudah resonated so powerfully for me was because most of Rav Roninek's arguments were in the nature of אין הנידון דומה לראיה , that is the the Epstein case is not comparable to the one that Rav Moshe Feinstein deals with in his תשובה , for the various reasons pointed out by Rav Rominek:
1) The professional's opinion in this case is based on hearsay, namely the wife's narrative which is hallachally not credible . 2) The practitioner's credibility is based on his unwillingness to be exposed as substandard in his profession, which doesn't apply here because his opinion was issued anonymously.
3) The credibility of a professional is limited to what he states that he personally observed, according to the Chasam Sofer. The opinion of a professional based on his judgement, professional or otherwise carries no weight.
4) The determination of what constitutes a fatal flaw is subjective and in this case the "diagnosis" is so far from compelling that it ought not be considered.
All of Rav Rominek's points are true, but they are refutable and an argument could be made that the case is comparable to the one dealt with by Rav Moshe:
Point 1) The practitioner's opinion was not based on hearsay but on direct examination of the husband.
Point 2) The professional did not issue his opinion anonymously, because the Rabbi's are aware of his identity.
Point 3) One may rely on a professional's opinion based on his judgement if given with definite assurance (contrary to the ruling of the Chasam Sofer).
Point 4) Rov Rominek may be unimpressed with the vagueness of the diagnosis, but Rabbi Greenblatt finds Rabbi Sholom Kaminetzky's assurances more persuasive.
Although Rav Rominek's assertions are correct, Rabbi Greenblatt can always argue that he disagrees with Rav Rominek that the Epstein case is not comparable to Rav Moshe's case. Rabbi Greenblatt will argue that in his opinion the cases are similar.
That is why I thought that the strongest argument was that the Nodah Beyudah absolutely and unequivocally rejected the annulment of kiddushin through applying the the concept of kiddusay taus It is a final and universal ruling with absolutely no wriggle room to maneuver around.
You are of course free to disagree with how I prioritized the arguments. However if you agree that in the final analysis the hetter is fraudulent, than we are basically on the same page.
The Luavitcher Rebbe was Matir at least one I read about with a cohen who wanted to marry a divorcee. The Rebbe voided the marriage and called the Cohen up for an Aliya Cohen so that everyone should know he was still a valid Cohen. He may have done more, but these things are kept quiet.
You can read about additional possum permitting a heter at http://gt.cross-currents.com/archives/2014/01/30/8347/ These include Rav Elyashiv, Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank, Rav Ovadia Yoseph, Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinsky, Rav Moshe Feinstein, and Rav Yaakov Yechiel Weinberg. The sources for some of these are given in the article. I am sure there are many more that we don't know about, both in the recent past, and over the centuries. You can be upset about this particular RSK heter, but don't rewrite history and pretend that only Rav Moshe Feinstein did this and no other Poskim. That is patently false.
No, many of these are truly Mekach Taos, dysfunctional, mentally ill, homosexual, or not religious. The husbands don't scream because they don't care, they just disappear. The women present themselves to the community as either single, or divorced with Get. Only their new husband, the Mesader Kedushin, and a few close friends know the truth. Everyone else thinks there was a Get. I personally know two cases and heard about a third one, but I'll never tell anyone who these people are. They have melted back into the fabric of orthodoxy and in a generation no one will know, as it has been done for centuries.
A drunk person is Halachikally the same as a sober person: all his transactions are binding. So his divorce is valid. This is provided he hasn't reached Lot's stage.
Shhh. Please speak in a whisper. Thank you. Hopefully it will help you remain calm.
Are you trying to divert from the RSK issues?
What brought you to this conclusion? No, that is not my point. My point - that is obviously not of interest to you - is it seems that the choshuveh rov who disregarded the issur of eishes ish for his daughter with all types of excuses, either was or became a person to whom the issurim of ervah and abuse was also permissible with excuses as well....
First, in that case, since he may be alive, we can't do much without establishing what happened. But we still would bend over backwards to use even info which ordinarily would not be admissible in beis din.
Second, gemara says all soldiers who went to war in David's time, had to give a get al tnai beforehand to prevent such situations.
But this case has to do with the rishus of a scoundrel whom she never would have married in the first place.
We are basically on the same page, but I think it is important to note the following: There are two different approaches to disagreeing with this hetter. One is to say that kiddushei ta'us should never be employed, and the other is to say that although R' Moshe did employ this method, this case is nothing like his case. If anyone is going to try to convince the mattirim to retract, the only route to go is approach #2. Approach #1 will not convince any mattir to retract, as they will simply say that they are following R' Moshe. So, by stating that the best point of R' Rominek is approach #1, you have effectively rendered his teshuva irrelevant to the discussion.
It's over three weeks that this convening has moved nowhere. RSK offered to go to R' Dovid, but he never showed up. RSMiller offered his contribution to go and that didn't happen, most likely because RSK the person of interest threw in a monkey wrench by not showing up. This is a pattern that has being going on for far too long. This last resort to clarify matters for the Heter if any has obviously failed and the ball remains in BBD's court where it was and should be from Adam, and BBD has ordered the couple to depart. Apparently that is not happening either. RHS has also said that we cannot just move backwards up to Moshe Rabeinu's BD nor can we move sideways, sheim kein ein ledovor sof and in any case he has already paseled this Heter. The fact on the ground is nispardo hachavilo and is neither here nor there. Time to move on, what are we waiting for.
The lubavitcher rebbe z''l was first, never got involved in psak so couldn't do such a hetter. And in the famous case, it was a case of 'machzir gerushato', where the rebbe just told him to verify if he really was a cohen. Turned out he really wasn't.
And the admissions in the Diary (written at the time of the divorce and produced in Court) written by TE states clearly her reasons for the Divorce, And it doesn't mention any mental incapacity - she even writes that she likes her husband very much but he's not social-able, doesn't help enough with the baby. and that she can do better. Someone, pls show this Diary to Reb Dovid Feinstein and all the other Rabbonim.
Anyone know of any Tshuvos etc of such a case of a Doctor or mumchah who does something unethical (as in the case of this Doctor for writing a report and and also releasing it to other people), if this Doctor can still be believed ? Can he give an eidus on an unrelated matter in a Bais Din court, since he has a breach of ethics on his part ? He is not a posul l"eidus as he is not burglar or oiver on of the lavim but he has done something unethical, so does he lose his "neemonus"?
If there is a din baal dovor to say TE is a eishes ish, then there is a din baal dovor to say the opposite that TE is not an eishes ish -- you cant split this.
Good point. Why doesn't the BBD take the bull by the horns, assert it's proper and accepted jurisdiction, deliberate and issue an official psak halacha that Tamar is and remains Aharon's eishes ish.
I have a feeling that's what happens next. Rabbi Shlomo Miller gave the last opportunity leravche demilsa giving a shot to RSK's request out of respect to R' Dovid but the K's obviously declined. This paved the way for action of lihyos asidim layom hazeh. No more stalling, no more excuses, no more funfening around. It is hight ime for R' Aron to come out of Golus, Vehitzdiki es haTzadik vehirshiu es Horosho, VehoElokim Yevakesh es haNirdaf. All those that pained R'Aron need to beg Mechila Borabim, vehakol yavo al mekomo beshalom. Amen.
BDD has already stated that Tamar Epstein is still married to Aharon Friedman. Things appear at a stalemate. Some suggestions of things we can do: 1. Strongly protest any public honor given to RSK 2. Continue to keep public that any children of TE and her boyfriend are mamzerim 3. Encourage people not to donate or send their children to philly yeshiva while RSKx2 have positions there, 4. Encourage people to protest and not donate to Aguda while RSK has official position there. This might at least encourage rabbis not to follow in RSKs footsteps.
I don't understand your point. You can not count poskim who didn't deal with the question. You can count the Noda Biyehuda who did. Against that you can count the Chavos Yair the Bais Halevi and the Maharsham who did "think for a moment" to be matir. But you can't count the silence of all the poskim of the last 500 years.I don't believe there was a large volume of such cases until recently. Even today Rav Moishe's criteria are very difficult to meet. Only the AF case sets a precedent that allows for a far broader application of the heter. Additionally, the Or Zarua quoted by Rav Frank and others was not published until 1943. Finally, the Litvishe tzibbur in the US considers Rav Moishe the posek hador, and this is asrei demar. Rav Elyashiv said that all the time. There are many areas in halacha that Rav Moshe was a daas yachid and the Litvishe Tzibbur in US (and in some areas the Chassidishe as well) practices his psakim. For example, most poskim were not matir Hatzala members to drive back on Shabbos (where there's no future sakanas nefashos involved). Rav Moshe's heter has no basis in the poskim of "the last 500 years". And all Hatzala members in US rely on Rav Moshe to drive back. No posek in the last 500 years was matir shaving with a machine besides Rav Moishe. And the majority of the Litvishe Tzibur relies on this. There are a number of psakim in Hilchos Niddah like this as well.
in the same vein, the Satmar Rav was a big tzadik, so he can call other gedolim "shkutzim and apikursim". But his talmidim, like Rav G., can not copy him. You have about as much chances convincing Rav Gestetner about that as you have of convincing talmidim of Rav moshe to your position.
So why do the Litvishe in America and elsewhere reject Rav Moshe's psak that it is forbidden to put an Air Conditioner on a timer on Shabbos? All the litvish at home, in their yeshivos and shuls have air conditioners running on and off on Shabbos in contradiction to Rav Moshe's psak,
You are right about the Hell, but I don't think you can deny that we are living in a situation of hell with this mamzeiros and posole gittin situation going on. I am not questioning Reb Moshe's psokim, all I am saying is that he was a Yuchid, so even if he did so we cannot copy him, he is not alive, there is not a doubt in my mind that he would have gone mad on seeing the annulments going on in his name.
Besides which, once למעשה everybody does it, it becomes מותר even acc. to R' Moshe, since there is no מראית עין any more (as he says with alarm clocks).
I followed your link and found an article by Yair Hoffman that claims the the Rabbi s you mentioned namely. Rabbis. Elyahsiv, Frank. Yoseph Grodzinsky, and Weinberg are included in what Hoffman calls "Category B", meaning that they except the hetter under certain circumstances and ONLY IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER HALACHIK MITIGATING FACTORS (emphasis mine).
Rav Moshe Feinstein remains the onlye major posayk that accepts annulment based solely on the the claim of mekach ta'us.
a) How did it come to the point that "everybody does it" in the Litvish oilem? Till they got to that point you're saying they were going against Rav Moshe's psak on Shabbos.
b) See the Igros Moshe cited below by RDE. It is a more severe violation against Shabbos, per Rav Moshe, than מראית עין. So the "everybody does it" excuse doesn't eliminate Rav Moshe's issur against it.
I wonder why the BD of RDF needs AF at all. ממה נפשך if ESK and/or RNG agree to abide by their psak then all they need do is provide the (purported) evidence they have and used for their so called heter, and all the new BD needs to do is simply go over them and say weather the heter is good or not as per the (purported) evidence used for the heter. On the other hand if the evidence is not being provided to the BD, as has been stated here before by others that the BD needs AF to show that they have seen all evidence to get the matirim/maftirim to withdraw, then it means that RSK and/or RNG have not agreed to participate/abide by this new BD, hence what's the point, as this BD will have no teeth to get them to cooperate and admit/retract. The excuse that AF's compliance to come and attend will get the matirim to withdraw appears now so hollow and nothing more than enforcing what Rav G has claimed. I just listened to his new weekly shiur, he left it on #355 and redid the whole shiur, I am not sure I follow everything he says but the above fact came to my realization after listening to this new shiur on the issue.
That's not the A/C teshuvah. That's about setting a timer to cook food on Shabbos. The A/C teshuvah was in Am HaTorah I think, and as I recall, the issue was hashma'as kol, which is a maris ayin issue.
"Rav Moshe Feinstein ztz”l opposed using a Shabbos clock for anything but lights and many follow that custom." https://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/ostroff/archives/shabbos5_9.htm
I'm also enjoying his speech, but being a bar samcha alone foes not suffice, because WHICH bar samcha do we pick, like Reb John said, "eeny meeny miny moe"?
The teshuva you cited does not say "anything but lights." It discusses setting a timer to cook on Shabbos, and differentiates between that and lights. As I recall, the Am HaTorah teshuva discusses A/C explicitly, and gives the reason as hashmaas kol. It's been quite a few years since I've seen it, though, so I might be misremembering.
Rab Dovid may not give a full Judgement on the issue without seeing AF in person because: 1. by seeing AF in person, this allows the BD to see in person, if AF is normal or not (and to decide if the description of AF in Rabbi Kaminetsky's letter is true or not, and if the rofeh mumchah's report is correct) which is the essence of the shaalah in front of the BD 2. If the BD sees AF, they could have permission from AF to review the rofeh mumchah's report 3. If the BD has AF in front of them they can be mekabel eidus (and the eidus will be bifnei baal din) from all the different parties involved here. 4. If AF comes before the BD, presumably AF will agree to abide by the psak of Rab Dovid's BD. 5. The evidence that Rab Sholom used to pasken for the mekach taus, may not be enough evidence and Rab Dovid may need alot more evidence to pasken. And that includes seeing AF in person.
It simply isn't true. Tamar can claim that Rav Dovid is not an expert in mental illness and that a discussion with him does not reveal the severe personality disorders that she was not aware of despite living with Aharon - until this mumcheh "revealed it"
They don't need permission from AF to read the report - it was done with AF's knowledge in the first place
They don't need AF to hear testimony
AF is not interested in a psak from Rav Dovid as to what he should do - he already has a beis din
There is no need for more evidence - the case is clear from the halachic point of view - the problem is the political one
There's an additional reason for AF showing up. A large part of the necessity to make this hetter was the aspect of igun. Even Igros Moshe permitted kidushei ta"us only in a case of extreme igun. RNG was convinced that TE was a true agunah and that all effort had been expended toward receiving a get. AF can offer the BD background on how and to what extent she can be considered an agunah.
If the evidence of RSK does not give enough for RDF to pasken then the Heter is out the window! If it is sufficient they do not need AF, it is this simple. Additionally, if anyone still has the slightest doubt that AF is not normal, they need a doc! If A person who works as a lawyer and for a congressman is crazy, then we are all crazies, and please sell me the Twin Towers, I will buy it from you.
Good reason for her to only mention social awkwardness, and not extreme suspicion & jealousy and/or endlessly repeated tics & motions to the BD, then. Considering that they're so severe that no woman would be "savra v'kiblah", that's a bit of an oversight, wouldn't you think?
(AF isn't paranoid - there really ARE people out to get him!)
Now that she knows how terribly severe the symptoms are, of course, she should never leave her daughter with him for a minute, right?
“Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter: Rav Eliahu Rominek's teshuva explaining why it is worthless”
Daas Torah says “There is no need for more evidence - the case is clear from the halachic point of view - the problem is the political one”
From my experience, the key mistake Aaron made was his failure to block the civil divorce. I didn’t make that mistake with Susan. Susan begged me for a civil divorce before I gave her the get 2/17/1993. I fought the civil divorce. I moved on with my life and married Yemima and G-d bless us with 3 daughters. I had peace and quiet until Susan got a NYS civil divorce 9/10/2013. With the NYS civil divorce Susan started to steal the marital property. NYS divorce laws are terrible.
This is the political problem of the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter. Tamar got a civil divorce. I think the feminist rabbis and supporters feel that Tamar is divorced even without a get!!! Terrible.
What's more is that according to this published shiur, http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/archive/mb/88mb.htm , the shuls in Silver Spring are violating one of the Cherem D'Rabbeinu Gershom. "In seif 16 the SA rules that even in a beit knesset belonging to a private individual, the owner cannot decide to exclude one particular person. This is mentioned in Orchot Chaim as one of the decrees of Rabbeinu Gershom."
The Bais Din panel consists of R' Dovid, R' H David, and R' Senderovic. Precisely what role does R' Gansweig play?
Secondly, what does "back out" accomplish? The Torah world is anxiously awaiting the decision and direction of R' Dovid, who was mutually agreed upon to decide the merits of this un-owned "heter" and hence future Mamzeirus.
If the Kamenetzky's stonewall the proceedings, the default status remains: She remains an Aishes Ish, and subsequent children, fathered by anyone other than AF, are Mamzeirim.
The above default Psak is the Psak of the authorized Baltimore BD, and every other Posek in the world.
With the exception of R' Greenblat, who claims he knows nothing about the true facts that led to his own Heter, and Rabbis Kaminetzky's who keep insisting that R' Greenblat is a Bar Samcha, (whom they fed false information to).
Undisclosed homosexual certainly is a defect that is mekach taos. Your other examples aren't all as clear cut and some of them might not qualify as a mekach taos.
There is the nub, "after months of research". In the specific case presented to Rav Nota Greenblatt by R. Shalom Kaminetzky, Rav Greenblatt relied upon testimony provided by just the one side who presented the data in such a way they knew Rav Greenblatt would pasken in manner they desired. The flaw was Rav Greenblatt never checked the veracity of the information. he accepted it without question because of the person presenting it to him.
Would Rav Greenblatt have accepted the information so readily if he had known more about the case? According to Rav Hershel Schachter he would not have.
I thought the whole idea of the NY Get Law was that a civil divorce would not be granted until all impediments to remarriage were removed, i.e. a Get had to be issued before a civil divorce could be granted? (at least in NY)
There is no clarity here, ish kol hayoshor beinov omer. This one says RSK didn't show up, the other says he did show up except RNG didn't, the same happens wit R' AF he did and didn't show up. Now we have another player in the field, RCG who says that R' Dovid will mefared es hachavilo. R' S Miller was originally called for, but we haven't heard from him one way or another. R' Dovid hasn't made a sound, and it's 4 weeks already being so uboshesh lovo. This effort was made on behalf if it's possible to find a pesach heter, apparently that failed. Time to throw in the towel.
NYS became the last state to institute No Fault divorce in 2010. So, now, either party can get a civil divorce even if the other party opposes the divorce.
Moe Ginsburg says Gerald - what was the benefit for you to oppose granting a civil divorce?
Yes, I hired a lawyer before I left NY July 1991 to fight the civil divorce. He advised me to get Rabbi Kornfeld, a’h, to write to Susan before I left NY. He had Rabbi Kornfeld prepare a court affidavit. Susan had false court testimony from Irwin and Rivka Haut to try to fight Rabbi Kornfeld’s true statements. See, a NYS civil divorce means nothing, but lies in court are damaging---evil slander. On 3/24/2016 I may find out if the NYS Court of Appeals will hear my case and will order all lower court records with my name for their review.
AF can offer the BD background on how and to what extent she can be considered an agunah.
There is no need for him to that. The Baltimore Beis Din can provide that information. If Rav Dovid Feinstein would like to argue with the BBD, then that is certainly his prerogative. AF has nothing to add if RDF chooses to disagree with the BBD.
Asher Kaufman says: ”I thought the whole idea of the NY Get Law was that a civil divorce would not be granted until all impediments to remarriage were removed, i.e. a Get had to be issued before a civil divorce could be granted? (at least in NY)”
Interesting, what do supporters of the NY Get Law say that I married Yemima on 5/9/1993 in Israel and God blessed me and Yemima with 3 daughters? Yes, Yemima did submit to the NYS court a notarized affidavit that she’s a proper party on the division of my pension etc. Susan started heavy stuff in NYS courts early 1991 and got nothing until a NYS divorce over my objections 9/10/2013. I wrote in motion 2016-125 on 3/6/2016: “With the NYS civil divorce Susan started to steal the marital property. NYS divorce laws make for unnecessary legal fighting.” I must say that the ridiculous 9/10/2013 NYS divorce saved me with 3 IRS cases against me tax years 2010, 2011, 2012. That’s another story.
R greenblat can't appear, since his client will not leave her husband, claiming that any RDF decision is not halachic, but political. Why should she be subject to a olitical vs halachic decision?
It seems the Kaminetzskys and R. Nota Greenblatt have followed the path of Conservative Judaism where pronouncements by rabbis, even if based upon falsehoods or twisted logic, become "Jewish Law" that can be used by those who wish to violate the Torah. Unfortunately this is not an isolated occurence even in this single case. People like Mr. Shmuel Herzfeld who wanted to demonize Aharon Friedman point to a false seruv and approbation by Rav Hershel Schachter as justification. I still cannot fathom how Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky, who should know that no one can kasher the mess TE put herself in, should have even asked Rav Dovid to rule on it? Did he really think Rav Dovid would find an obscure clause somewhere in halacha that could overturn the deliberate sheker his son told R. Greenblatt? Yes, there times when an inadvertent violation, like accidentally pouring milk into a large vat of meat, can be excused. But if the exact same violation is done with deliberate intent (e.g. adding less that 1/60th of milk to a pot of meat) we do not excuse it.
The problem with that is, that her Rabbi, R' Shmuel, has formally acknowledged that R' Dovid is THE Posek in the USA.
Now, given that her other rabbi, R' H Shechter has written that R' Shmuel is THE Zaken (however ridiculous), and that very Zaken endorsed R' Dovid as THE Posek - she can hardly label R Dovid's Psak as political.
Sorry, she will have to live with the fact that she was misled by the Kamentskys.
Rumor has it that Sholom got quite a spanking last Wednesday at the meeting. Let's wait and see....
Operation: Keep Gadol Status - is looking more and more difficult.
I still cannot fathom how Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky, who should know that no one can kasher the mess TE put herself in, should have even asked Rav Dovid to rule on it?
Just a guess- if RD agrees with RS it's good for RS. If he doesn't so RS humbly defers to RD's authority as if RS was right only that he was overruled. Then (in the 2nd case) TE has to get herself out of the mess and RS is no longer part of the problem.
This would be the perfect opportunity for the Silver Spring rabbis and community to apologize to Aharon Friedman. https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/1sh6rb82m8504en8/images/1-77fd04bf5a.jpg
Whilst rabbi ganzwieg is not part of the Beis din, reb dovid relies heavily on his opinion, as to your second question, reb dovid dosnt view himself as a gadol, so he feels that he has no responsibility towards the klal, however in this case he got involved upon the request of some great rabbis, and if it gets to complicated he will back of, which I'm told he already has, ppl who have asked him his opinion are told that he does not have enuf Indo to issue a definitive ruling
she (supposedly) told RNG (and or RSK) that she will leave AF (the second) if its a halachic decision, not a political decision. by the vary nature of this RDF effort, its a (internal jewish) political matter. 2. its already a month. nothing doing here. forget about the RDF effort. no one is cooperating. its already purim,. the week after is already pesach. then its omer, followed by the summer camp season, followed by rosh Hashanah. by then, she'll be preg. case closed.
Why doesn't R' Dovid order to depart in the meantime? Is it also possible that this whole bout is a bobbe meise? This is unbecoming of gedoilim, I therefore doubt if any statements might come forth from this alleged convening if there ever was. The fact on the ground remains that there are constant inventions stalling for time. Time ran out, vekol mi sheyesh lo lelamed zchus yovo veyilmod ad itzumo shel yom. Veim lav .....nispardo hachavilo ....
The BBD can only report on AF's behavior vis-a-vis the BBD. AF can offer much more background and commentary about all his behavior from the day of separation until today.
Is it assur d'oraita for a Rav (married /gateshead semicha) to put his arm around the waist of a married woman in his Shul? Or is it considered part of his chattel?
Ridiculous, the matirim know who the רופא מומחה is, he also happens to be a שתו"מ, and as far עדות בפני בעל דין, it does not apply for many reasons
ReplyDeleteSo what if they know? It is not a threat to his parnosa - after all he did what he was hired to do!
ReplyDeletePlease elaborate on your second point.
It is a threat , since some ppl know who he is, nowhere is it mentioned that everyone needs to know, and as far as I know the person is a observant new, (even though he dosent have to be)
ReplyDeleteעדות שלא בפני בע"ד does not apply since AF is not the baal din, at this point he isn't affected by RNG determination, since at this point it's clear she has no shibud to him
The problem with the psak is something else entirely
Is there is na "baal din" on a shaaleh of issurim since there is no baal dovor on issurim.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Dovid Feinstein has not made AF come to the meetings of his BD, because there is no "Lifnei baal dovor" in this case.
The rofeh mimchah that wrote the 2nd report is not known to the public, so it will not endanger his parnosoh.
ReplyDeleteMy understanding is that the rofeh mumchah bases his conclusions in the report, on the 1st Doctors report (that wrote a report many years ago) and acc to R Feldmans letter this 1st doctor was certainly not shomer shabbos.
Rav Rominek's assertion that alll of the (second) Doctors information came from Tamar is not entirely correct, as acc to R S Kamintesky's letter (and see R Feldman's reply) the (second) Doctor based his conclusions on the report written many years ago by a separate Doctor (whom R Feldman indicates never saw AF but Rabbi Kaminetsky's letter seems to indicate that the 1st Doctor did see AF) ... Also Rav Romineck's assertion that the report is secret, every doctor knows (.. and it's a nightmare to every doctor..) that a court of law or BD may force the report to be opened to the public via a surpeana, so even if the report is secret it can be revealed with time & even many years later ... Rav Moshe Feinstein did agree to do mekach taus on a mental illness unlike the achrionim Rav Rominek quotes ...
ReplyDeleteWhy does Rav Romineck not bring up the question that the Doctor is a Eid Echod here (and that is not enough in a Dovor Shebe"ervah and it needs two witnesses to pasken in a BD) ?
And, is an eidus in writing (via the doctors report) without an interview, enough for a din eidus to be matir an eishes ish ?
Please cite Mekoros for what you say or else your statements carry no weight
ReplyDeleteWell I guess the doctor has what to be afraid, he is afraid of a major lawsuit by AF, where his whole credibility can be tested by major professionals, and he can only hide behind a phony BD of RNG and RSK who care less about Halacha
ReplyDeleteAccording to the regulations of his umnos, you cannot diagnose in absentia and being shomer T'U' is not in his favor. Indeed, he is mera umnoso with such and has no eidushaft to contribute.
ReplyDeleteOf course Rav Rominek is correct on all points, but one does not need a Rov of the caliber of Rav Rominek to make the case; a "bar bay rav d'chad yoma" knows that this is so. This is what makes the :"hetter" so egregious.
ReplyDeleteWhat is even more outrageous is that the only place where you can find a protest online against this horrendous abuse of Hallacha is this blogspot. Instead of Seforim being sent to Shevah V'esrim Umeah Medinah there is only a deafening silence. OI Lanu kee chotunu.
(Incidentally, there is one further argument that Rav Rominek didn't present.. In a case where it is evident that an "Uman" was "mareh umnoso", clearly one cannot argue that there exists a "Chazakah Ayn Uman Mareh Umnoso".in order to rely on the discredited "Uman". Here doctor after doctor chimed in with their opinion that this supposed "Uman" was behaving unprofessionally in issuing an opinion under these circumstances. Clearly this supposed "Uman" was "Mareh Umnoso". Even if we assume that Rav Rominek is not correct (which of course is not the case for he is most definitely right) and one can rely on a psychiatrist's testimony even if based on hearsay and even if based on judgement rather than fact and even retrospectively nine years after the fact and even assuming that this "diagnosis" constitutes a fatal flaw to which the concept of "taus" applies, it is ludicrous to even consider the "professional testimony" of this unprofessional practitioner.
But the most powerful argument of all is the one that Rav Rominel presents towards the end of his letter when he cites the Noda Beyudah who would not help a hapless Agunah by annulling her Kedushin. Case closed.)
Of course he's correct. If not, she would've brought this "proof" to court to "save" her daughter. After all, a severely paranoid person can believe his own daughter is part of a plot with her mother to harm him, and he could harm her first. A severely OCD person can re-check if his car door is locked for the 53rd time while traveling at 70mph, and ram the car in front of him!
ReplyDeleteYet, both the Baltimore BD & the Washington court saw him as equally capable of providing child care. It leads one to believe that either a) she knows it won't hold up in court, b) his paranoia & OCD are very mild, and don't affect his job performance or ability to provide child care, or c) she doesn't value her daughter's safety.
As a friend, happily married for over 35 years, told me, "Paranoid? OCD? That's me! It helps make me effective at my hashgacha job because I'm suspicious, and my wife knows how to deal with it." He's probably accurate, too.
Yet, 10 girls were asked by RSK whether they would even go out with someone diagnosed as PDD & OCD, and they all emphatically answered in the negative... AHA!!! Kidushei Ta'us!!!
Except that's not what actually happens. She goes out with a guy, she likes him. On the 5th date, he mentions that he takes medication for 2 issues that sometimes affect him a little. She asks a high school friend of his, who says it wasn't noticeable back in high school before he started meds, and so it should just be a tolerable annoyance she will need to deal with using patience & wisdom. She marries the guy, deals with the situations as they come up.
Parenthetically, just to show how the balance of "science" & "art" is different for an MD than for a psychiatrist, I asked a big psychologist a few years ago, "How come diagnoses seem to go in waves? First, everybody has Addictive Personality Disorder, then everybody has non-Hyperactive ADD, then they're all Bipolar, then PTSD after Sexual Abuse, then they're on the Autistic Spectrum, etc." He answered two answers, "Firstly, after a mental health professional learns about a new diagnosis & complex, s/he sees it everywhere & in everybody. Secondly, everybody wants to get paid, and so they follow which diagnoses are being paid for by the insurance companies, and bunch diagnoses among those for which claims not being denied - even if factually they're treating those patients differently for a different mental illness."
Hmmm... so psychiatry isn't a precise science? Especially with a patient they haven't seen multiple times in multiple settings & situations? Interesting...
It is also evident that they know that he is not reliable ( as we know), since IF he exists, he did something ethically fatal, such as not taking in Aharon's input and releasing the report without his approval, if he exists.....then again, according to them (and according to your account of events), the younger RSK wasn't present by the Bais Din or conference (whatever you decide to call it) of Rav Dovid Feinstein to answer for himself
ReplyDeleteIt is a threat , since some ppl know who he is,
ReplyDeleteHow so? He has no fear of those who do know who he is? In fact, they are the one's who hired him to write this type of report!
עדות שלא בפני בע"ד does not apply since AF is not the baal din, at this point he isn't affected by RNG determination, since at this point it's clear she has no shibud to him
Oh, but it affects him in many ways. And, the moredes remains with her shibud.
What nonsense.
ReplyDeleteA woman is the kinyan of her husband of course he is the baal din, you cannot take away a woman "mitachas baaloh" like this.
You still haven't provided a single Mekor, but you have taanus on Rav Rominek.
This is the punim people like RNG have.
As long as Rabunim will do things secretly nothing good will come of it.
ReplyDeleteTHis is not true in Kidushin. Kidushin is a Kinyan ishus and the woman cannot be freed without the husband.
ReplyDeleteRG has had some shiurim with Mekoros on this subject if I recall from a long time ago
You can get multiple doctors reports each with a contradictory report.
ReplyDeleteTO be matir an eishes ish with hafkuas kidushin like this based on a doctors report is such an unprecedented thing that in a prior generation such Rabunim would have been decried by all Gedoilim.
It sounds like Rav G is correct that this is becoming the new trend.
Rav Moshe was the only one to write a Tshuva but in practice he never did it or allowed it.
ReplyDeleteBesides he was indeed the only Rav to ever write about allowing a annuling a kidushin, not a single other Rav before or during his time agreed or even thought about it. You can simply not do something when for hundreds of years no one did it except Rav Moshe wrote a tshuva.
In the USA there is an ICD (or DSM) code for every person. In oher words a doctor can diagnose every single person in the USA with some kind of mental health diagnosis.
ReplyDeleteRSK and RNG have a ready stream of clients now to annul marriages.
THe joke is on us, they are laughing!
You write: "But the most powerful argument of all is the one that Rav Rominek presents towards the end of his letter when he cites the Noda Beyudah who would not help a hapless Agunah by annulling her Kedushin." Actually, that is his least powerful argument, as R' Moshe would use this heter. [Before you take out your knives, I am not sugesting that R' Moshe would approve of using it in this case; just that the Noda BeYehuda had a categorical objection to using it, and R' Moshe did not.]
ReplyDeleteThought it worthwhile to give some "introduction" about Rav Rominek, with permission from our host, of course. ...
ReplyDeleteRav Rominek was designated as one of the dayanim to be part of the Bais Din to force Avrohom Rubin to give a get. He wrote a letter that the get was no good - even though he stood out (and also with possible retribution) from the other 4 dayanim including R Belsky, now that's business! Rav Gestetner wrote in his Kuntres that he called her father 2 days after the keffiya that she remains an aishes ish. He confirmed that on the phone to me.
Not sure what exactly is rediculous. Relying on this מומחה is obviously garbage, for many reasons. Let us begin.
ReplyDelete1. He never met AF. lol. joke. Diagnosing someone without meeting him. lol. joke. His "diagnosis" wouldn't hold up in a kangaroo court in Zimbabwe, let alone בית דין.
2. Even, If he would have diagnosed him, and AF was purely insane (he isn't). Who says it didn't happen after the marriage started ?? Who says it was a an old hidden illness ??? Also, there is no proof that she didn't know of the מום beforehand !!!! No עדים that he had this מום, and didn't tell her!!
3. Psychological diseases are not a clear science, like other diseases. Doesn't show up on an X-ray. Not on a blood test. It's not a cancer. It's not a blood disease. It is almost impossible to say מקח טעות. She met him. She liked him with his personality. She married him with his personality. not clear that it's possible on a psychological disease to say מקח טעות.
4. מקח טעות means he knew of something beforehand. He didn't tell her. He plainly should have told her. If she knew she would have never married him. As soon as she found out she "returned the merchandise and said give me my money". (None of this happened)
Ask AF or anyone who knows AF if there was anything he hid ? If the only one who figured out there was something hidden is some "professional", it is not a מקח טעות. If it is something which the average person doesn't see as a problem. What value does "professional" bring to the table ?? When to everyone else, there is no problem. The מקח טעות defense is that for everyone it would be a problem, not for some psychiatrist it would be a problem.
5. Psychiatrists today are diagnosing everything. If we are to believe that everything is a disease, no one needs a get!!! Shy disease, arrogant disease, clean disease, dirty disease. OCD, ADD, sleep disorder, ED. It's all diagnosis. All diseases.
The only thing that works in TE favor, is that women are so difficult nowadays, that anything that is not on their "Shidduch list" is enough to overturn the apple cart. So perhaps any little nothing that AF had, would have been enough of a reason for her to have said no to the Shidduch originally. With that said, she was unquestionably מקבל.
Unless there is something I don't know, it seems rather open and shut to me.
So how can Rabbi Dovid Feinstein creat a Bais Din without AF and TE present, if there is a din "lifnei baal dovor" on a Get Taus ?
ReplyDeleteShe didn't recognize the symptoms and there severity at the time she was in the Baltimore BD
ReplyDeleteIsn't there a certain level of מום that everyone agrees is enough to be מבטל קידושין, such as איילונית?
ReplyDeleteYour point #4 is incorrect. It does not matter if the party with a defect is aware of it and hides it or not.
ReplyDeletemeaning she was not seeking a divorce based on his mental health and that was in fact able to remain in the marriage except for her belief that she could do better. Thus there was no basis for a heter of mekach ta'us. As she presented it it wasn't even a case of ma'us alei.
ReplyDeleteA personality disorder which is not noticed or is not burdensome can not be a basis to annul the marriage
"Since at this point it's clear she has no shibud to him." What??????? What sheker!
ReplyDeleteRabbonim doing stuff like that is called a joke - and that is in RNG's words in a letter he wrote regarding the Ort case....
That's right, the million dollar question! ......
ReplyDeleteAnd in her diary (which was a court document in the custody battle) from the time of the couple's separation, states clearly the reasons she's asking for a Get and no mention of the OCD and other mental issues are included in her Diary (she even writes that she likes him etc and maalos and other reason why she wants a separation and divorce, which happen to jive with exactly the words the BBD write taht she told the BD why she wants a separation and divorce). If this Diary is not a "admission" of the reasons for the separation at that time, I dont know what is. Reb Dovid and his BD need to be made aware of this Diary which was hand-written by Tamar.
ReplyDeleteSomeone, please make Reb Dovid aware of this Diary.
I can show u multiple sources stating that if the condition existed and the severity was only realized at a later date, is grounds for mekach taut
ReplyDeleteSo we have a difference of opinion. I love it! We can agree to disagree. My point of disagreement with your point is as follows:
ReplyDeleteI concede that HaRav Moshe Feinstein זצוק"ל was a very, very great man and a very, great פוסק , arguably the greatest פוסק in America in his time. It is possible that he was also the greatest פוסק in the entire world both in his time and ever since. (Although truth be told, the שו"ת אגרות משה can scarcely be found in Bnei Brak.)
On the other hand, the Noda Beyudah was and is still the undisputed רבן של ישראל , the פוסק אחרון par excellence, the greatest giant among the giants of his generation. To argue against his פסק , which has not been disputed (except by Harav Moshe Feinstein) is either ludicrous, or one most have very broad shoulders indeed.
But Harav Moshe Feinstein did have very broad shoulders. Nonetheless, as they say is Yiddish, די קשיא איז דארט , the burden of proof lies upon Harav Hagaon Rebbe Feinstein. Why did this venerated Rabbi disagree with the Noda BeYudah? Possibly, he was not familiar with that Tshuvah. Or perhaps he had some persuasive argument that superseded the Noda BeYudah's פסק We don't know what was in the great Gaon's mind and we cannot know.
At the very best, we are at a Hallachik Mexican standoff. On one side we have the great sage of 250 years past, the Noda Beyudah who towered over the luminaries of his generation, such as Rav Yakov Emden, Rav Shaul of Amsterdam, Rav Itzikel of Hamburg, ant the ten Chachmei Brody. His ruling is that we cannot annul Kedushin even if the woman remains an Agunah forever.
In the other corner, we have the great פוסק of our time Harav Hagoan Rebbe Moshe Moshe Feinstein, who it seems unilaterally suggested in the year 1955, that in a case where the insanity of the husband is undeniable (the U.S. Army confined him to an insane asylum hospital, and also the man's parents stated that he was a paranoid schizophrenic who could not be approached by any stranger.) the marriage might be annulled, if there was absolutely no possibility of obtaining a get under any conditions.
(Incidentally, at that time Harav Eliyahu Henkin, no slouch in Hallachah himself, and who some might argue was as great an expert as was Harav Moshe Feinstein vehemently opposed the application of "kedushay taus" under the very same circumstances that Ran Feinstein allowed it.)
So how does one decide between the Noda Beyudah and Harav Feinstein? Eeny, meeny miny, moe? Or perhaps we might consult a "Tinohk, Lo chochom V'lo Tipaysh", as to whose Gedolim card is worth more, the Noda Beyedah's or Rebbe Moshe Feinstein's.
No, my friend, IMHO normative Hallachah requires us to decide based on what was Klal Yisroel's accepted position in generations past. Harav Hagoan Rav Moshe Feinstein's unilateral opinion כבודו יהי' מונח cannot be followed in the face of the accepted פסק of the Noda Beyudah.
In order to veer away from accepted tradition, more is required that relying on a דעת יחיד. no matter how great. Otherwise we run the risk of people relying on "poskim" of dubious credentials such as Rabbi Ysoscher Katz of the OO movement. After all he did receive Semichah from Harav Yecheskel Roth in 1986, did he not?
Never heard of him
ReplyDeleteGo ahead, we're waiting. ...as usual. ...
ReplyDeleteHe can create a BD without TE, because she is still the Kinyan of AF, so only AF need be there. There is no problem in creating a BD to say TE is still an Eishes Ish, but they cannot do what RNG and RSK did to be mevatel Kidushin without AF.
ReplyDeleteIt is certainly a tricky situation at best.
What the Matirim-Maskilim are trying to do is mafkia the kinyan meikoro, therefore claiming there was never a kinyan.
But what really matters it is that she knew of it and was mekabel. Apperrantly when she went to through the Baltimore BD proceedings she never uttered a word even, all this is nothing more then a politically and money charged heter based on a whimsical blood libel on AF.
ReplyDeleteReb Moshe was a YUCHID in undreds of years, there is not a single Poisek before Reb Moshe who you can cite in the Posik who did it.
ReplyDeleteGreat Anav cited הר צבי of the מהרש"ם however there is nothing further from the truth when you look up the מהרש"ם. Otherwise its all the Schmadanut who have no סמכות at all.
Again besides Reb Moshe not a single Posek has done it, and as big a tzadik Reb Moshe Zt"l was his talmidim can still not do copy him.
ReplyDeleteThank you, we rest the case!
ReplyDeleteIt's the biggest joke we heard since the start of this parsha!
If a person can go through BD to seek a Get, (let alone live with him for two years and not having realized the severity of the mum) and then after all is said and done she creates a new so called "realization" retroactively, then you have effectivly undermined Toras Moshe, and if this is the basis of RSK/RNG then good luck.
Please do so.
ReplyDeleteI am sure the "sources" only talk about a situation where the couple was still together and the "realization" came before separation, not post-facto and certainly not after a BD convening upon the the woman's request has ruled upon separation issues.
BTW the Rama has a great Teshuva decrying all this nonsense, but let's wait to see your sources first please.
The Noda Beyehuda cited by Rav Rominek is only exemplary, there is not a single other Posek throught the last few hundred generations who was matir in practice Hafkuas Kidushin, except for Reb Moshe, hence one cannot duplicate him.
ReplyDeleteIt is not so. I have heard that Rav Scheinberg and Rav Yechezkeil Roth have also done it - aside from the admission of Mordechai Tendler there is also Rav Shmueli Fuerst and Rav Greenblatt. I have been told many others including well known poskim have been done but don't want their names revealed.
ReplyDeleteThe basic difference in this case is that the basis of the heter are known and they are a joke. So it is not that Rav Moshe was the only one
Your argument will not convince someone like RNG, who is a talmid of Rav Moishe, that he may not pasken like his rebbi against the Noda Biyehuda. Rav Moishe was matir shaving on Chol Hamoed although the Noda Biyehuda was not, and there are many that use this kula. Can you tell them to stop?
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to the her father, Mr. Mund? Why was he forced to flee Montreal? Had this site been around then, would he have been a hot item here?
ReplyDeleteNu, bring out the goods. Why are you hiding it?
ReplyDeleteRav Hutner held that it was more than a heter - but that one should shave on Chol Hamoed - he clearly didn't base himself on Rav Moshe's psak
ReplyDeleteRDE, what do you know about cases of it being done by Rav Scheinberg and/or Rav Roth? And which "admission" of Tendler are you referring to? Rabbu Fuerest acknowledged doing it or how else are you aware of it?
ReplyDeleteA rabbi told me he has documenation regarding Rav Scheinberg and Rav Roth. In an interview Tendler admitted that he had done many anullments. Rav Fuerst admitted to someone that he has done at least 15 - and that person told me. other people have claimed that big rabbis have used kiddushei ta'os. I don't have a score card. Point is that it wasn't simply Rav Moshe
ReplyDeleteWell you are still only refering to rabunim of our generation.
ReplyDeletePlease show a single Posek pre-Reb Moshe Zt"l (or Rav Abramski), for hundreds of years as well as going back to the Rishonim Zt"l era not a single posek was matir in practice to do it, ad shebo Reb Moshe, while Reb Moshe's case is very different as I will respond elsewhere soon, the other rabbonim make a joke out of it.
The single biggest question I have is:
Why was there not a single Posek until Reb Moshe to be matir hafkuas kidushin? This is not a case of new technological issues that has occured a first time in our generation or post war.
Before World War II not a posek would be matir this.
If there's been so many as you describe, I'd think people who'd have been hearing about some of these cases as the first husbands would be screaming against what happened. I mean if Rav Fuerst alone did at least 15 and Tendler did many and the others did more, surely the world would have heard about at least some of these cases.
ReplyDeleteNo - there was no platform to report these cases and/or people didn't want to speak badly about their rabbinical leaders and assumed that they knew what they were doing.
ReplyDeleteIs your position that Rav Roth and Rav Scheinberg and all the others were wrong for having done what they did in those cases?
ReplyDeleteWhere did you hear Mr. Mund had to flee Montreal?
ReplyDeleteSee also Or Zarua (c.1180-1250) who records (761) a case in which his contemporary Rabbenu Simchah of Speyer ruled that a wife should be released without a Get on the grounds of kiddushei ta’ut when an unknown defect in the groom is revealed.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.agunahinternational.com/halakhic.htm
If you read carefully, this has nothing to do with kiddushei ta'us. R' Tendler is talking about the no kosher witnesses hetter.
ReplyDeleteNo I didn't say any such thing - I am merely noting that Rav Moshe was not the only one
ReplyDeleteNice speech, but it misses the point. R' Moshe is definitely a bar samcha, so writing that the citation of a Noda BeYehuda that R' Moshe disagreed with is the "most powerful argument of the teshuva" is false.
ReplyDeleteRDE: What is your opinion of the cases that Rav Scheinberg, Rav Roth, Rav Fuerst and Tendler did in these cases? Or at least what do you think of the legitimacy of the idea of them doing something like that?
ReplyDeleteWhat's the point to discuss Mund here?
ReplyDeleteHow does that apply to AF's case?
Are you trying to divert from the RSK issues?
No need to!
ReplyDeleteDOn't expect anything.
ReplyDeleteThe greatest weapon RSK, RNG and all their likes have is to hide their skeleton's in a closet and issue so called secretive directives!
As long as they continue to do so we are in good shape!
Needless!
ReplyDeleteFOrget the Noda Beyehuda, forget Rav Rominak, show us or let RNG show us a single posek before the War who ever allowed annulment even for גבו"א, let alone a case like AF.
ReplyDeleteReb Moshe was a Yuchid, and it was in גבו"א, and RNG has no feet to stand on even being a talmid of Reb Moshe, he truly has no grounds.
How do you compare Shaving on CHol Hamoed to איסורי כריתות and ממזרות?
ReplyDeleteWhat the hell is going on here?
BTW for your info, R' Roth you cite, has a teshuva that a husband may be injected with a drug to relax/confuse and make him like a shikur during the Get process, he cites not a single מקור.
ReplyDeleteIs this the posek you want to use for an annulment?
I will not delve into his other problems now.
Which Rav Greenblatt are you referring to? RNG?
Come on, Reb Moshe talks about a conservative or reform wedding, although he is still a Yuchid as stated elsewhere, it still has no resemblance to the cases of our times where there are children, normal people albeit alleged health claims may be raised, they are so far fetched from Reb Moshe's cases that it's beyond comprehension.
ReplyDeleteAnd how!
ReplyDeleteFirst, Rabbi Rominek was a friend of my in-laws and made a bracha under my chupah. Nevertheless, the Noda Biyehuda he quotes is quite difficult to understand. The case was that a man moved into a town and the understanding was that he was single. He married a widow, stole all her money, and ran away. It was found out that he was an apostate for years, and was currently married to a gentile woman. The rabbi wanted to annul the marriage, as was only way to free her, and gave a few reasons, including kiddushei taus, but the Noda Biyehuda would not agree.
ReplyDeleteSo this poor widow was destined to suffer for the rest of her life?
yes
ReplyDeletesee my latest post
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2016/03/kiddushei-taus-rav-moshe-feinstein-is.html
Ok will respond there to the issue. Thanks for a separate post.
ReplyDeleteWill respond on the new post
ReplyDeleteWell it is not what the Noda Beyehuda writes, it is what he and all other poskim in the last 500 years did not write.
ReplyDeleteNot a single posek thought for a moment to be matir what Reb Moshe or others after him did.
The Tora did not start post World War II.
It is indeed a strong argument, though not the only one.
ReplyDeleteReb Moshe was a Yuchid, for hundreds of years not a single posek was matir to do Annulment, nonetheless even Reb Moshe talked only about conservative and reform annulments or as stated elsewhere גבו"א where the husband admitted and there was no חיי אישות ביסוד to begin with. What kind of comparison is this to the cases that the so called maritim do nowadays?
What if a husband traveled from Europe on business across continents, through Oceans and Africa, and never returned and was never heard from again after 5, 10, 15 years went by?
ReplyDeleteIs his poor wife destined to suffer for the rest of her life?
In what circumstances does Rav Roth permit injecting the husband?
ReplyDeleteYou keep saying this -- not a single poseik -- how do you know? Are you familiar with every pesak of every poseik for the last 2000 years? Are you a great expert in teshuvos sefarim? Or are you just making your best guess based on nothing at all?
ReplyDeleteNon-answer alert!
ReplyDeleteWell please you find me a single posek in the last 500 years or even 300 years that was matir למעשה an annulment, the אור זרוע wasn't discovered in our generations by the Agunah International Inc. reformadox פוקרים, he was a rishon and a yuchid, rov rishonim did not allow annulement, and no acharonim until Reb Moshe ever used that, while even Reb Moshe inly used it to annul conservative non religious marriages and/or a case of addmitted גבו"א which was also never used by anyone prior in 500 years.
ReplyDeleteI challenge anyone here or the world over to please come forward and disprove my statement
הלוואי
In a case where the husband is shaking or afraid and uneasy to go through the Get, it means basically that where the halacha said there must be צלול הדעת he did not care. Injecting relaxing or similar Drugs have severe repercussions especially it can have differing effects on different people, and it can make a person feel like a shikur, especially if they also consume alcohol. I mean this is the type of Gedolim we are dealing with?
ReplyDeleteIt matters not what type of situation he permitted it on, others will use it in any situation, this is the current day and age, just like the Maskil RNG will make secret annulments based upon another Teshuva of his Rebbe Reb Moshe.
He most certainly is a Baal Din. The so called shomer Torah Umitzvot mumche is attemting to bring a chov on AF in undoing his kinyan with a lie. It has to be bifnei baal din! Ha ha, "she has no shibud???"! Ridiculous, How so??? When did her shibud expire? The worthless piece of rag he testified on is not worth the rag and the mumche liar disqualified himself altogether, of which in any case is nidan didan at hand. Where do you come in to jump the gun, huh? don minah uminah, veoikei abasrah. One step at a time.
ReplyDeleteThis Heter will never fly. All their attempts in stalling for time is over. The beating of the Drums continue. All the Allies are requested to enter the theater of operations.
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2016/03/kiddushei-taus-rav-moshe-feinstein-is.html
ReplyDeleteYes, however RMF would have found one of the wittnesess to be posul based on some kinda garbled ground, and would have let her remarry ... Is that what u would prefer
ReplyDeleteAh freilichen Purim.
ReplyDeleteWe're discussing the Noda Biyehuda and Rav Moshe Feinstein, and you bring Shmuely Feurst and Mordechai Tendler as additional "Rabbonim".
Thanks for the belly laugh.
Tendler has done "hundreds". And we're supposed to believe that their were legitimate grounds in all those cases?
And he has taanos noch der tzu, on Rackman et al for not "applying the process correctly." What a clown.
And Feurst in little bitty Chicago, has done 15. I won't even comment on the level of research Feurst is known for.
We know that Feurst is a fraud and Tendler may be worse than that.
You've totally bolstered Moshe Abramsons point- no Rav has used such a hetter.
If my garage mechanic gives a hetter, that doesn't count.
You've avoided the question, so I'll assume you're just guessing based on nothing at all.
ReplyDeleteAha, so since you disagree with some teshuva of R' Chatzkel Roth's, he's already pasul.
ReplyDeleteI think Rav Eidensohn simply attempted to bring samples, examples and cases or Rabbonim involved in it.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate for him taking the time and effort to clear this up, this should come out in the open now, rather than allow such annulments to go on.
He simply cited those to show that it is happening and that RSK.RNG weren't the first (apart from RCYB of courts).
The problem is there, we may not have been aware of it, it was always shoved under the rug, and now it is coming out, it is just like the Posole Gittin, it has been going on for a long time, until one case wakes it up and things bust.
Enter Mund-Chinn where Rav G busted the Posole Gitin gang, he then continued with other cases busting the gittin meusin gangs in droves on his BD line, since then things are open books.
The same thing is now happening with annulment, except there are still some in the Frum world who try and hope for a cover up, claiming that a cover up will help the matirim to withdraw....
I did not say that, if you want I will bring enough credible stories on him, but I do not want to divert the issue of bogus annulments.
ReplyDeleteI cannot say about any annulments he has done, because there is of course no record... only hearsay.
I just wanted to show that Rav Roth paskening איסורי כריתות against the halacha with absolutely no מקור is beyond my comprehension.
And even if he knew what he was doing, he opened a can of worms for others to follow in his path of that teshuva.
I am not condoning nor attacking any Rav personally, just their positions.
They may be very big tzadikim in their own right, none of us fly high in heaven to see cheshbonos up there, but chazal say "....חכמים הזהרו בדבריכם.
Did I avoid? I answered you that so far no-one has shown what I asked for, and until someone does, it remains to be the case.
ReplyDeleteRav Rominek's brief is quite persuasive. As to which of his points is the most powerful is rather moot, don't you think. The bottom line is that the hetter is bogus, and TE is a married woman living with another man with the approval of of a chareidi Rov.
ReplyDeleteThe reason why the Noda BeYehudah resonated so powerfully for me was because most of Rav Roninek's arguments were in the nature of אין הנידון דומה לראיה , that is the the Epstein case is not comparable to the one that Rav Moshe Feinstein deals with in his תשובה , for the various reasons pointed out by Rav Rominek:
1) The professional's opinion in this case is based on hearsay, namely the wife's narrative which is hallachally not credible
.
2) The practitioner's credibility is based on his unwillingness to be exposed as substandard in his profession, which doesn't apply here because his opinion was issued anonymously.
3) The credibility of a professional is limited to what he states that he personally observed, according to the Chasam Sofer. The opinion of a professional based on his judgement, professional or otherwise carries no weight.
4) The determination of what constitutes a fatal flaw is subjective and in this case the "diagnosis" is so far from compelling that it ought not be considered.
All of Rav Rominek's points are true, but they are refutable and an argument could be made that the case is comparable to the one dealt with by Rav Moshe:
Point 1) The practitioner's opinion was not based on hearsay but on direct examination of the husband.
Point 2) The professional did not issue his opinion anonymously, because the Rabbi's are aware of his identity.
Point 3) One may rely on a professional's opinion based on his judgement if given with definite assurance (contrary to the ruling of the Chasam Sofer).
Point 4) Rov Rominek may be unimpressed with the vagueness of the diagnosis, but Rabbi Greenblatt finds Rabbi Sholom Kaminetzky's assurances more persuasive.
Although Rav Rominek's assertions are correct, Rabbi Greenblatt can always argue that he disagrees with Rav Rominek that the Epstein case is not comparable to Rav Moshe's case. Rabbi Greenblatt will argue that in his opinion the cases are similar.
That is why I thought that the strongest argument was that the Nodah Beyudah absolutely and unequivocally rejected the annulment of kiddushin through applying the the concept of kiddusay taus It is a final and universal ruling with absolutely no wriggle room to maneuver around.
You are of course free to disagree with how I prioritized the arguments. However if you agree that in the final analysis the hetter is fraudulent, than we are basically on the same page.
The Luavitcher Rebbe was Matir at least one I read about with a cohen who wanted to marry a divorcee. The Rebbe voided the marriage and called the Cohen up for an Aliya Cohen so that everyone should know he was still a valid Cohen. He may have done more, but these things are kept quiet.
ReplyDeleteYou can read about additional possum permitting a heter at
ReplyDeletehttp://gt.cross-currents.com/archives/2014/01/30/8347/
These include Rav Elyashiv, Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank, Rav Ovadia Yoseph, Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinsky, Rav Moshe Feinstein, and Rav Yaakov Yechiel Weinberg. The sources for some of these are given in the article. I am sure there are many more that we don't know about, both in the recent past, and over the centuries. You can be upset about this particular RSK heter, but don't rewrite history and pretend that only Rav Moshe Feinstein did this and no other Poskim. That is patently false.
No, many of these are truly Mekach Taos, dysfunctional, mentally ill, homosexual, or not religious. The husbands don't scream because they don't care, they just disappear. The women present themselves to the community as either single, or divorced with Get. Only their new husband, the Mesader Kedushin, and a few close friends know the truth. Everyone else thinks there was a Get. I personally know two cases and heard about a third one, but I'll never tell anyone who these people are. They have melted back into the fabric of orthodoxy and in a generation no one will know, as it has been done for centuries.
ReplyDeleteA drunk person is Halachikally the same as a sober person: all his transactions are binding. So his divorce is valid. This is provided he hasn't reached Lot's stage.
ReplyDeleteShhh. Please speak in a whisper. Thank you. Hopefully it will help you remain calm.
ReplyDeleteAre you trying to divert from the RSK issues?
What brought you to this conclusion? No, that is not my point. My point - that is obviously not of interest to you - is it seems that the choshuveh rov who disregarded the issur of eishes ish for his daughter with all types of excuses, either was or became a person to whom the issurim of ervah and abuse was also permissible with excuses as well....
First, in that case, since he may be alive, we can't do much without establishing what happened. But we still would bend over backwards to use even info which ordinarily would not be admissible in beis din.
ReplyDeleteSecond, gemara says all soldiers who went to war in David's time, had to give a get al tnai beforehand to prevent such situations.
But this case has to do with the rishus of a scoundrel whom she never would have married in the first place.
We are basically on the same page, but I think it is important to note the following: There are two different approaches to disagreeing with this hetter. One is to say that kiddushei ta'us should never be employed, and the other is to say that although R' Moshe did employ this method, this case is nothing like his case. If anyone is going to try to convince the mattirim to retract, the only route to go is approach #2. Approach #1 will not convince any mattir to retract, as they will simply say that they are following R' Moshe.
ReplyDeleteSo, by stating that the best point of R' Rominek is approach #1, you have effectively rendered his teshuva irrelevant to the discussion.
How is not religious or the other examples truly Mekach Taos?
ReplyDeleteIn your case also, as you admit in my case, we can't do much.
ReplyDeleteRNG was not a talmid of RMF. (His nephew, was.)
ReplyDeleteIt's over three weeks that this convening has moved nowhere. RSK offered to go to R' Dovid, but he never showed up. RSMiller offered his contribution to go and that didn't happen, most likely because RSK the person of interest threw in a monkey wrench by not showing up. This is a pattern that has being going on for far too long. This last resort to clarify matters for the Heter if any has obviously failed and the ball remains in BBD's court where it was and should be from Adam, and BBD has ordered the couple to depart. Apparently that is not happening either. RHS has also said that we cannot just move backwards up to Moshe Rabeinu's BD nor can we move sideways, sheim kein ein ledovor sof and in any case he has already paseled this Heter. The fact on the ground is nispardo hachavilo and is neither here nor there. Time to move on, what are we waiting for.
ReplyDeleteThe lubavitcher rebbe z''l was first, never got involved in psak so couldn't do such a hetter. And in the famous case, it was a case of 'machzir gerushato', where the rebbe just told him to verify if he really was a cohen. Turned out he really wasn't.
ReplyDeleteAnd the admissions in the Diary (written at the time of the divorce and produced in Court) written by TE states clearly her reasons for the Divorce, And it doesn't mention any mental incapacity - she even writes that she likes her husband very much but he's not social-able, doesn't help enough with the baby. and that she can do better. Someone, pls show this Diary to Reb Dovid Feinstein and all the other Rabbonim.
ReplyDeleteAnyone know of any Tshuvos etc of such a case of a Doctor or mumchah who does something unethical (as in the case of this Doctor for writing a report and and also releasing it to other people), if this Doctor can still be believed ? Can he give an eidus on an unrelated matter in a Bais Din court, since he has a breach of ethics on his part ?
ReplyDeleteHe is not a posul l"eidus as he is not burglar or oiver on of the lavim but he has done something unethical, so does he lose his "neemonus"?
If there is a din baal dovor to say TE is a eishes ish, then there is a din baal dovor to say the opposite that TE is not an eishes ish -- you cant split this.
ReplyDeleteAccording to that thinking, a wife doesn't have to showup for her get din torah, since her husband is her kinyan.
ReplyDeleteGood point. Why doesn't the BBD take the bull by the horns, assert it's proper and accepted jurisdiction, deliberate and issue an official psak halacha that Tamar is and remains Aharon's eishes ish.
ReplyDeleteI have a feeling that's what happens next. Rabbi Shlomo Miller gave the last opportunity leravche demilsa giving a shot to RSK's request out of respect to R' Dovid but the K's obviously declined. This paved the way for action of lihyos asidim layom hazeh. No more stalling, no more excuses, no more funfening around. It is hight ime for R' Aron to come out of Golus, Vehitzdiki es haTzadik vehirshiu es Horosho, VehoElokim Yevakesh es haNirdaf. All those that pained R'Aron need to beg Mechila Borabim, vehakol yavo al mekomo beshalom. Amen.
ReplyDeleteBDD has already stated that Tamar Epstein is still married to Aharon Friedman.
ReplyDeleteThings appear at a stalemate.
Some suggestions of things we can do:
1. Strongly protest any public honor given to RSK
2. Continue to keep public that any children of TE and her boyfriend are mamzerim
3. Encourage people not to donate or send their children to philly yeshiva while RSKx2 have positions there,
4. Encourage people to protest and not donate to Aguda while RSK has official position there.
This might at least encourage rabbis not to follow in RSKs footsteps.
I don't understand your point. You can not count poskim who didn't deal with the question. You can count the Noda Biyehuda who did.
ReplyDeleteAgainst that you can count the Chavos Yair the Bais Halevi and the Maharsham who did "think for a moment" to be matir.
But you can't count the silence of all the poskim of the last 500 years.I don't believe there was a large volume of such cases until recently. Even today Rav Moishe's criteria are very difficult to meet. Only the AF case sets a precedent that allows for a far broader application of the heter.
Additionally, the Or Zarua quoted by Rav Frank and others was not published until 1943.
Finally, the Litvishe tzibbur in the US considers Rav Moishe the posek hador, and this is asrei demar. Rav Elyashiv said that all the time. There are many areas in halacha that Rav Moshe was a daas yachid and the Litvishe Tzibbur in US (and in some areas the Chassidishe as well) practices his psakim.
For example, most poskim were not matir Hatzala members to drive back on Shabbos (where there's no future sakanas nefashos involved). Rav Moshe's heter has no basis in the poskim of "the last 500 years". And all Hatzala members in US rely on Rav Moshe to drive back.
No posek in the last 500 years was matir shaving with a machine besides Rav Moishe. And the majority of the Litvishe Tzibur relies on this.
There are a number of psakim in Hilchos Niddah like this as well.
Needles, because Rav Schuchatowitz of the BBD already presented it to RDF and BD.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.onlysimchas.com/news/12660/memphis-welcomes-new-yeshiva
ReplyDeleteSee Igros Moshe O. C. Vol. 1 Siman 55 "Talmidi ... Nota Zvi Greenblatt"
The question wasn't the severity of the issur. The question is whether we can rely on Rav Moshe even when he clearly argues on the Noda Biyehuda.
ReplyDeleteDecent Litvishe people don't use language like "what the hell" even when speaking English.
in the same vein, the Satmar Rav was a big tzadik, so he can call other gedolim "shkutzim and apikursim". But his talmidim, like Rav G., can not copy him.
ReplyDeleteYou have about as much chances convincing Rav Gestetner about that as you have of convincing talmidim of Rav moshe to your position.
You can not bring any proof from the silence of other poskim. Who knows if they had such cases?
ReplyDeleteSo why do the Litvishe in America and elsewhere reject Rav Moshe's psak that it is forbidden to put an Air Conditioner on a timer on Shabbos? All the litvish at home, in their yeshivos and shuls have air conditioners running on and off on Shabbos in contradiction to Rav Moshe's psak,
ReplyDeleteYou are right about the Hell, but I don't think you can deny that we are living in a situation of hell with this mamzeiros and posole gittin situation going on.
ReplyDeleteI am not questioning Reb Moshe's psokim, all I am saying is that he was a Yuchid, so even if he did so we cannot copy him, he is not alive, there is not a doubt in my mind that he would have gone mad on seeing the annulments going on in his name.
Chillul Shabbos is a major issue and d'oraysa,
ReplyDeleteDon't misrepresent R' Moshe's psak. He never said it's chilul Shabbos, neither d'oraysa or d'rabanan. Mares ayin at worst.
Rav Moshe held it was more than maris ayin. Zilzul Shabbos if I recall.
ReplyDeleteBesides which, once למעשה everybody does it, it becomes מותר even acc. to R' Moshe, since there is no מראית עין any more (as he says with alarm clocks).
ReplyDeleteIgros Moshe oc 4 #60 page 91
ReplyDeleteI followed your link and found an article by Yair Hoffman that claims the the Rabbi s you mentioned namely. Rabbis. Elyahsiv, Frank. Yoseph Grodzinsky, and Weinberg are included in what Hoffman calls "Category B", meaning that they except the hetter under certain circumstances and ONLY IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER HALACHIK MITIGATING FACTORS (emphasis mine).
ReplyDeleteRav Moshe Feinstein remains the onlye major posayk that accepts annulment based solely on the the claim of mekach ta'us.
a) How did it come to the point that "everybody does it" in the Litvish oilem? Till they got to that point you're saying they were going against Rav Moshe's psak on Shabbos.
ReplyDeleteb) See the Igros Moshe cited below by RDE. It is a more severe violation against Shabbos, per Rav Moshe, than מראית עין. So the "everybody does it" excuse doesn't eliminate Rav Moshe's issur against it.
I wonder why the BD of RDF needs AF at all.
ReplyDeleteממה נפשך if ESK and/or RNG agree to abide by their psak then all they need do is provide the (purported) evidence they have and used for their so called heter, and all the new BD needs to do is simply go over them and say weather the heter is good or not as per the (purported) evidence used for the heter.
On the other hand if the evidence is not being provided to the BD, as has been stated here before by others that the BD needs AF to show that they have seen all evidence to get the matirim/maftirim to withdraw, then it means that RSK and/or RNG have not agreed to participate/abide by this new BD, hence what's the point, as this BD will have no teeth to get them to cooperate and admit/retract.
The excuse that AF's compliance to come and attend will get the matirim to withdraw appears now so hollow and nothing more than enforcing what Rav G has claimed.
I just listened to his new weekly shiur, he left it on #355 and redid the whole shiur, I am not sure I follow everything he says but the above fact came to my realization after listening to this new shiur on the issue.
That's not the A/C teshuvah. That's about setting a timer to cook food on Shabbos. The A/C teshuvah was in Am HaTorah I think, and as I recall, the issue was hashma'as kol, which is a maris ayin issue.
ReplyDeleteThe teshuva clearly indicates that:
ReplyDelete"Rav Moshe Feinstein ztz”l opposed using a Shabbos clock for anything but lights and many follow that custom."
https://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/ostroff/archives/shabbos5_9.htm
Which would obviously include airconditioners
I sent this to one of the dayanim
ReplyDeleteI'm also enjoying his speech, but being a bar samcha alone foes not suffice, because WHICH bar samcha do we pick, like Reb John said, "eeny meeny miny moe"?
ReplyDeleteThe teshuva you cited does not say "anything but lights." It discusses setting a timer to cook on Shabbos, and differentiates between that and lights. As I recall, the Am HaTorah teshuva discusses A/C explicitly, and gives the reason as hashmaas kol. It's been quite a few years since I've seen it, though, so I might be misremembering.
ReplyDelete(a) same as alarm clocks
ReplyDelete(b) read the last 8 lines of R' Moshe's Teshuva
Rab Dovid may not give a full Judgement on the issue without seeing AF in person because:
ReplyDelete1. by seeing AF in person, this allows the BD to see in person, if AF is normal or not (and to decide if the description of AF in Rabbi Kaminetsky's letter is true or not, and if the rofeh mumchah's report is correct) which is the essence of the shaalah in front of the BD
2. If the BD sees AF, they could have permission from AF to review the rofeh mumchah's report
3. If the BD has AF in front of them they can be mekabel eidus (and the eidus will be bifnei baal din) from all the different parties involved here.
4. If AF comes before the BD, presumably AF will agree to abide by the psak of Rab Dovid's BD.
5. The evidence that Rab Sholom used to pasken for the mekach taus, may not be enough evidence and Rab Dovid may need alot more evidence to pasken. And that includes seeing AF in person.
It simply isn't true. Tamar can claim that Rav Dovid is not an expert in mental illness and that a discussion with him does not reveal the severe personality disorders that she was not aware of despite living with Aharon - until this mumcheh "revealed it"
ReplyDeleteThey don't need permission from AF to read the report - it was done with AF's knowledge in the first place
They don't need AF to hear testimony
AF is not interested in a psak from Rav Dovid as to what he should do - he already has a beis din
There is no need for more evidence - the case is clear from the halachic point of view - the problem is the political one
a) What's the "same as alarm clocks"?
ReplyDeleteb) What about the last eight lines are you trying to bring out here?
There's an additional reason for AF showing up.
ReplyDeleteA large part of the necessity to make this hetter was the aspect of igun. Even Igros Moshe permitted kidushei ta"us only in a case of extreme igun. RNG was convinced that TE was a true agunah and that all effort had been expended toward receiving a get.
AF can offer the BD background on how and to what extent she can be considered an agunah.
The same should apply to those in the Silver Spring/Washington DC community who have slandered and harassed Aharon Friedman.
ReplyDeleteIf the evidence of RSK does not give enough for RDF to pasken then the Heter is out the window!
ReplyDeleteIf it is sufficient they do not need AF, it is this simple.
Additionally, if anyone still has the slightest doubt that AF is not normal, they need a doc!
If A person who works as a lawyer and for a congressman is crazy, then we are all crazies, and please sell me the Twin Towers, I will buy it from you.
Good reason for her to only mention social awkwardness, and not extreme suspicion & jealousy and/or endlessly repeated tics & motions to the BD, then. Considering that they're so severe that no woman would be "savra v'kiblah", that's a bit of an oversight, wouldn't you think?
ReplyDelete(AF isn't paranoid - there really ARE people out to get him!)
Now that she knows how terribly severe the symptoms are, of course, she should never leave her daughter with him for a minute, right?
“Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter: Rav Eliahu Rominek's teshuva explaining why it is worthless”
ReplyDeleteDaas Torah says “There is no need for more evidence - the case is clear from the halachic point of view - the problem is the political one”
From my experience, the key mistake Aaron made was his failure to block the civil divorce. I didn’t make that mistake with Susan. Susan begged me for a civil divorce before I gave her the get 2/17/1993. I fought the civil divorce. I moved on with my life and married Yemima and G-d bless us with 3 daughters. I had peace and quiet until Susan got a NYS civil divorce 9/10/2013. With the NYS civil divorce Susan started to steal the marital property. NYS divorce laws are terrible.
This is the political problem of the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter. Tamar got a civil divorce. I think the feminist rabbis and supporters feel that Tamar is divorced even without a get!!! Terrible.
Agreed
ReplyDeleteThe key to this entire case is with rav Chaim gansweig, this shabes he told someone in shul that rav dovid most likely will back out
ReplyDeleteWhat's more is that according to this published shiur, http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/archive/mb/88mb.htm , the shuls in Silver Spring are violating one of the Cherem D'Rabbeinu Gershom.
ReplyDelete"In seif 16 the
SA rules that even in a beit knesset belonging to a private individual, the
owner cannot decide to exclude one particular person. This is mentioned in Orchot Chaim as one
of the decrees of Rabbeinu Gershom."
The Bais Din panel consists of R' Dovid, R' H David, and R' Senderovic. Precisely what role does R' Gansweig play?
ReplyDeleteSecondly, what does "back out" accomplish? The Torah world is anxiously awaiting the decision and direction of R' Dovid, who was mutually agreed upon to decide the merits of this un-owned "heter" and hence future Mamzeirus.
If the Kamenetzky's stonewall the proceedings, the default status remains: She remains an Aishes Ish, and subsequent children, fathered by anyone other than AF, are Mamzeirim.
The above default Psak is the Psak of the authorized Baltimore BD, and every other Posek in the world.
With the exception of R' Greenblat, who claims he knows nothing about the true facts that led to his own Heter, and Rabbis Kaminetzky's who keep insisting that R' Greenblat is a Bar Samcha, (whom they fed false information to).
I've been informed by reliable sources that Rav Sholom Kamenezkiy was at the Bd of RDF last week. RNG has yet to show up......
ReplyDeleteCan you point me to a source for this case?
ReplyDeleteHow is it not a Mekach taos when the marriage is based on an undisclosed defect. Are you saying homosexual, mental illness etc is not a defect?
ReplyDeleteUndisclosed homosexual certainly is a defect that is mekach taos. Your other examples aren't all as clear cut and some of them might not qualify as a mekach taos.
ReplyDeleteThere is the nub, "after months of research".
ReplyDeleteIn the specific case presented to Rav Nota Greenblatt by R. Shalom Kaminetzky, Rav Greenblatt relied upon testimony provided by just the one side who presented the data in such a way they knew Rav Greenblatt would pasken in manner they desired. The flaw was Rav Greenblatt never checked the veracity of the information. he accepted it without question because of the person presenting it to him.
Would Rav Greenblatt have accepted the information so readily if he had known more about the case? According to Rav Hershel Schachter he would not have.
I thought the whole idea of the NY Get Law was that a civil divorce would not be granted until all impediments to remarriage were removed, i.e. a Get had to be issued before a civil divorce could be granted? (at least in NY)
ReplyDeleteThere is no clarity here, ish kol hayoshor beinov omer. This one says RSK didn't show up, the other says he did show up except RNG didn't, the same happens wit R' AF he did and didn't show up. Now we have another player in the field, RCG who says that R' Dovid will mefared es hachavilo. R' S Miller was originally called for, but we haven't heard from him one way or another. R' Dovid hasn't made a sound, and it's 4 weeks already being so uboshesh lovo. This effort was made on behalf if it's possible to find a pesach heter, apparently that failed. Time to throw in the towel.
ReplyDeleteNYS became the last state to institute No Fault divorce in 2010. So, now, either party can get a civil divorce even if the other party opposes the divorce.
ReplyDeleteMoe Ginsburg says Gerald - what was the benefit for you to oppose granting a civil divorce?
ReplyDeleteYes, I hired a lawyer before I left NY July 1991 to fight the civil divorce. He advised me to get Rabbi Kornfeld, a’h, to write to Susan before I left NY. He had Rabbi Kornfeld prepare a court affidavit. Susan had false court testimony from Irwin and Rivka Haut to try to fight Rabbi Kornfeld’s true statements. See, a NYS civil divorce means nothing, but lies in court are damaging---evil slander. On 3/24/2016 I may find out if the NYS Court of Appeals will hear my case and will order all lower court records with my name for their review.
AF can offer the BD background on how and to what extent she can be considered an agunah.
ReplyDeleteThere is no need for him to that. The Baltimore Beis Din can provide that information. If Rav Dovid Feinstein would like to argue with the BBD, then that is certainly his prerogative. AF has nothing to add if RDF chooses to disagree with the BBD.
Asher Kaufman says: ”I thought the whole idea of the NY Get Law was that a civil divorce would not be granted until all impediments to remarriage were removed, i.e. a Get had to be issued before a civil divorce could be granted? (at least in NY)”
ReplyDeleteInteresting, what do supporters of the NY Get Law say that I married Yemima on 5/9/1993 in Israel and God blessed me and Yemima with 3 daughters? Yes, Yemima did submit to the NYS court a notarized affidavit that she’s a proper party on the division of my pension etc. Susan started heavy stuff in NYS courts early 1991 and got nothing until a NYS divorce over my objections 9/10/2013. I wrote in motion 2016-125 on 3/6/2016: “With the NYS civil divorce Susan started to steal the marital property. NYS divorce laws make for unnecessary legal fighting.” I must say that the ridiculous 9/10/2013 NYS divorce saved me with 3 IRS cases against me tax years 2010, 2011, 2012. That’s another story.
R greenblat can't appear, since his client will not leave her husband, claiming that any RDF decision is not halachic, but political. Why should she be subject to a olitical vs halachic decision?
ReplyDeleteIt seems the Kaminetzskys and R. Nota Greenblatt have followed the path of Conservative Judaism where pronouncements by rabbis, even if based upon falsehoods or twisted logic, become "Jewish Law" that can be used by those who wish to violate the Torah. Unfortunately this is not an isolated occurence even in this single case. People like Mr. Shmuel Herzfeld who wanted to demonize Aharon Friedman point to a false seruv and approbation by Rav Hershel Schachter as justification. I still cannot fathom how Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky, who should know that no one can kasher the mess TE put herself in, should have even asked Rav Dovid to rule on it? Did he really think Rav Dovid would find an obscure clause somewhere in halacha that could overturn the deliberate sheker his son told R. Greenblatt? Yes, there times when an inadvertent violation, like accidentally pouring milk into a large vat of meat, can be excused. But if the exact same violation is done with deliberate intent (e.g. adding less that 1/60th of milk to a pot of meat) we do not excuse it.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with that is, that her Rabbi, R' Shmuel, has formally acknowledged that R' Dovid is THE Posek in the USA.
ReplyDeleteNow, given that her other rabbi, R' H Shechter has written that R' Shmuel is THE Zaken (however ridiculous), and that very Zaken endorsed R' Dovid as THE Posek - she can hardly label R Dovid's Psak as political.
Sorry, she will have to live with the fact that she was misled by the Kamentskys.
Rumor has it that Sholom got quite a spanking last Wednesday at the meeting. Let's wait and see....
Operation: Keep Gadol Status - is looking more and more difficult.
I still cannot fathom how Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky, who should know that no one can kasher the mess TE put herself in, should have even asked Rav Dovid to rule on it?
ReplyDeleteJust a guess- if RD agrees with RS it's good for RS. If he doesn't so RS humbly defers to RD's authority as if RS was right only that he was overruled. Then (in the 2nd case) TE has to get herself out of the mess and RS is no longer part of the problem.
This would be the perfect opportunity for the Silver Spring rabbis and community to apologize to Aharon Friedman.
ReplyDeletehttps://html1-f.scribdassets.com/1sh6rb82m8504en8/images/1-77fd04bf5a.jpg
Whilst rabbi ganzwieg is not part of the Beis din, reb dovid relies heavily on his opinion, as to your second question, reb dovid dosnt view himself as a gadol, so he feels that he has no responsibility towards the klal, however in this case he got involved upon the request of some great rabbis, and if it gets to complicated he will back of, which I'm told he already has, ppl who have asked him his opinion are told that he does not have enuf Indo to issue a definitive ruling
ReplyDeleteshe (supposedly) told RNG (and or RSK) that she will leave AF (the second) if its a halachic decision, not a political decision.
ReplyDeleteby the vary nature of this RDF effort, its a (internal jewish) political matter.
2. its already a month. nothing doing here. forget about the RDF effort. no one is cooperating. its already purim,. the week after is already pesach. then its omer, followed by the summer camp season, followed by rosh Hashanah. by then, she'll be preg. case closed.
RDF will structure any decision to keep the honor kavod of the BBD.
ReplyDeletewhich is why the various TE sides oppose.
RMF only allowed it for "tzorchei tzibbur", meaning a shul. not even a big private party. read the tshuvah.
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't R' Dovid order to depart in the meantime? Is it also possible that this whole bout is a bobbe meise? This is unbecoming of gedoilim, I therefore doubt if any statements might come forth from this alleged convening if there ever was. The fact on the ground remains that there are constant inventions stalling for time. Time ran out, vekol mi sheyesh lo lelamed zchus yovo veyilmod ad itzumo shel yom. Veim lav .....nispardo hachavilo ....
ReplyDeleteYet it is widely used even in private homes today across the entire frum world.
ReplyDeleteThe BBD can only report on AF's behavior vis-a-vis the BBD. AF can offer much more background and commentary about all his behavior from the day of separation until today.
ReplyDeleteIs it assur d'oraita for a Rav (married /gateshead semicha) to put his arm around the waist of a married woman in his Shul? Or is it considered part of his chattel?
ReplyDelete