Sunday, October 15, 2017

religion of gedolim

Where are Reb Shmuels defenders who will state that a gadol is more important
than Chazal or truth or even g-d


that is the clear basis of his defense!


10 comments:

  1. You are obsessed. That psak was retracted months ago. You should see someone about your obsession. Your answer to everything is who defends Reb S. Maybe it's time to find something to do besides making a fool out of yourself in your old age.

    ReplyDelete
  2. “Where are Reb Shmuels defenders who will state that a gadol is more important
    than Chazal or truth or even G-d”
    Shmuel Kamenetsky, in exchange for money, claims that Tamar’s marriage to Aharon is nullified and Tamar can marry her lover without a get from Aharon. Probably Shmuel Kamenetsky felt that Tamar had good reason to take her baby and move to a different state, deserting/abandoning her husband Aharon. In civil law: “An action for divorce may be maintained by a husband or wife to procure a judgment divorcing the parties and dissolving the marriage on any of the following grounds: (1) The cruel and inhuman treatment of the plaintiff… (2) The abandonment of the plaintiff…
    As a recognized gadol Shmuel Kamenetsky can override Chazal, truth and even G-d. So many went to the rallies against poor Aharon. Aharon bravely withstood all the pressure. I heard Rabbi Lookstein, the son, say at a rally in the 1980’s to free a trapped woman in marriage, that she got a NYS civil divorce, which is some kind of review/proceedings.
    Shmuel Kamenetsky did the criminal act of a fake psychologist letter damning Aharon. This is fraud, forgery etc. Fraud has no place in “Chazal or truth or even G-d.” We should attack Shmuel Kamenetsky: admit you lied concerning the fake psychologist letter damning Aharon. Oh, if he admits he lied, he will no longer be recognized gadol.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The_Original_Bored_LawyerOctober 16, 2017 at 7:23 PM

    I am no one's "defender," and I agree that what happened here is very disturbing, bordering on a Chillul Hashem.

    But that said, I think you are exaggerating the argument. Chazal tell us that the Sanhedrin has to be followed even if they tell you about the left that it is right or the right that is left. So if you view someone as the equivalent of the Sanhedrin (I don't but they do), then their argument is that he has to be followed because that is Hashem's will. At least in all matters of Torah she be al Peh, which this incident clearly was.

    ReplyDelete
  4. C0NTRARY TO THE FALSE CLAIM RAV SHMUEL VIEWS THE SECOND MARRIAGE AS VALID AND HAS TOLD THE COUPLE NOT TO SEPARATE

    ReplyDelete
  5. Daattorah says: “contrary to the false claim Rav Shmuel views the second marriage as valid and has told the couple not to separate”
    Daf Hayomi Sanhedrin 88a
    “The sage is killed so that disputes will not proliferate in the nation of Israel. R. Elazar says: And if you should say: Why, then did they not execute Akavya ben Mahalalalel? The answer is: Because he did not instruct anyone to adopt his ruling as course of action.”
    Shmuel Kamenetsky instructed Tamar and her lover not to separate, based on fraud/forgery. We observers in Israel are incensed.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Didn't someone write "kvar horeh zaken" an elderly already decided the law?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Daf Hayomi Sanhedrin 84b:
    Mishnah. The following are strangled:. He who strikes his father or mother; or kidnaps a Jew [to sell as a slave]; an elder rebelling against the ruling of beth din; a false prophet; one who prophesies in the name of an idol; one who commits adultery; witnesses who testified falsely [to the adultery of] a priest's daughter, and her paramour.

    Who’s behind Shmuel Kamenetsky ’s view that the second marriage [Tamar to her lover] is valid and Shmuel Kamenetsky is right to tell the couple not to separate? It’s Professor Susan Aranoff of agunahinternational, ORA and the treif prenup etc. Daattorah, allow me to update you how I’m dealing with Professor Susan Aranoff, letter 10/16/2017 to NYS Ct of Appeals:


    8. The Rules of the Court state:
    500.22 Motions for Permission to Appeal in Civil Cases. (a) Filing and notice. Movant shall file an original and six copies of its papers, unless permitted to proceed pursuant to subsection 500.21(g), with proof of service of two copies on each other party. The motion shall be noticed for a return date in compliance with CPLR 5516 and subsection 500.21(b) of this Part. (b) Content. Movant's papers shall be a single document, bound on the left, and shall contain in the order here indicated: (1) A notice of motion (see CPLR 2214). (2) A statement of the procedural history of the case, including a showing of the timeliness of the motion.
    10. Time limits on filing cases based on fraud/forgery etc are extremely long. Often the police and court officials show no interest in evidence of crimes of fraud/forgery. An aggrieved party may have to be patient over many years, as I am, for overwhelming evidence to emerge of crimes fraud/forgery.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Daattorah, thanks for allowing me to write on Professor Susan Aranoff.
    Latest re my undecided motion at NYS Court of Appeals Susan v Gerald: “Not yet been approved.” I said that this means my motion has not been rejected? “Right” proof will come out that she did the forgery/fraud of the fake psychologist letter behind Shmuel Kamenetsky telling Tamar and her lover not to separate. God willing, then Shmuel Kamenetsky will tell Tamar and her lover to separate.

    ReplyDelete

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