https://www.newsweek.com/10k-christians-rip-greenes-christian-nationalism-betrayal-our-faith-1729377
Sunday, July 31, 2022
10K Christians Rip Greene's Christian Nationalism: 'Betrayal of Our Faith'
Ukraine drone strike hits Russia Black Sea fleet HQ 'spoiling Navy Day' - so sad!
https://www.jpost.com/international/article-713523
Friday, July 29, 2022
The New Proliferation of Female Pseudo-Orthodox “Rabbis” and More
https://yated.com/the-new-proliferation-of-female-pseudo-orthodox-rabbis-and-more/
What Happens to the Brain in Alzheimer's Disease?
https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/what-happens-brain-alzheimers-disease
Amyloid plaques
Thursday, July 28, 2022
Dynamic shifts between Fox News, Donald Trump
https://thehill.com/homenews/3577133-dynamic-shifts-between-fox-news-donald-trump/
Settlers claim road terror in fatal West Bank car crash
https://www.ynetnews.com/article/by4cp9y65
Trump Threatens To Sue CNN And Other Outlets For Dismissing His Voter Fraud Claims
Trump threatens CNN with lawsuit over ‘defamatory’ reporting
Decades of Alzheimer’s research may have been fabricated
https://www.wkbn.com/news/national-world/decades-of-alzheimers-research-may-have-been-fabricated/
Jewish communities grapple with addiction as fentanyl crisis ravages US
CUNY sued over failing to deal with antisemitic instances on campuses
https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-713076
Wednesday, July 27, 2022
Marjorie Taylor Greene's words on Christian nationalism are a wake-up call
US cardiologist falsely promotes Covid-19 vaccine recall
https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32EZ82K
Another rabbi ignores halacha: "Withholding a Gett: Unjewish and Evil "
Update Jan 17: Rav Sternbuch states that if it is clear to the beis din that there are objective reasons why the woman can't stand her husband and they paskened that the husband should give a Get - he says it is cruel and sinful for the husband to not divorce his wife out of spite and hatred. This is clearly not saying that a woman has the right to leave the marriage for any reason and that the husband must give a get immediately when the Get is request as R Brackman mistakenly states. If the husband is refusing to give a Get because issues have not been resolved - and not because of cruelty and spite - Rav Sternbuch,. Rav Ovadiah Yosef and Rav Eliashiv are not condemning such a person.
Force husband to prevent wife from committing adultery - not as a right to get on demand or because it is immoral to withhold a Get and only if he is objectively repulsive
Rav Ovadiya Yosef (Yabiya Omer 8:2.2): In previous generations the husband was given permission to take an additional wife if his first wife was declared to a moredes (rebellious wife). The first wife would remain an agunah for the rest of her life until she became an old lady with white hair as punishment for rebelling against her husband. An example of this is found in Shut Mishpat v’ Tzedaka b’Yaakov (2:36).... Similar cases are found in other Achronim. Nevertheless our contemporary society has weakened and there is now a strong possibility that the agunah will deviate from religious observance because of her aguna status. This is a dissolute generation and people do not obey authority. And if the woman makes up her mind later to accept the get from her husband there is a clear concern that her husband will refuse to give her a get out of spite because he is already married to another woman and it is impossible to force him to give a get to his first wife and therefore she will just reject religion and go on a bad path. Because she is still married however, any children she subsequently has with another man will increase the number of mamzerim in the world. A possible solution is that before he can remarry he needs permission from the beis din and thus it is relatively easy to use that to influence him to deposit a get for his first wife with beis din. Only when he has deposited a get then can we give him permission to remarry according to halacha. After I thought of this, I saw that Rav Masas wrote in his sefer Tevuos Shemesh (E.H. 30), “Even though in all the seforim of the Achronim concerning previous rabbinic courts (beis din), the beis din ruled that in the case of moredes she remained an agunah her entire life until she became an old lady with grey hair and the husband was allowed to marry another woman if he wanted – without first divorcing her. This was a common ruling and the first wife remained unable to remarry until the day that she died. However this approach was appropriate in previous generations when the spirit of Judaism permeated the people and there was no one who would dare do a serious sin – in particular not to openly transgress the serious sexual sins. But it is no longer true true in our day which to our great sorrow the spirit of individual freedom has become dominant and faith has weakened. We no longer have the power to have people properly comply with religious rulings and there is a great concern that people will go off the path of religious observance. There is no question that all our rabbis acknowledge that all efforts need to be made to have the get deposited with beis din...He concludes his words by saying that in the year 1950, all the rabbis of Morocco gather together and they made a decree through the official rabbinical confederation – that no man could remarry until he divorced his first wife who was a moredes and had declared that she couldn’t stand living with him (ma’os alei). This decree was accepted and it became a regular occurrence for the beis din to rule accordingly. This get that the husband was required to give before remarrying was not considered get me’usa ( a coerced get). That is because he had the choice of not remarrying and therefore he didn’t have to give the get. However with a moredes who simply wanted to afflict him and torture him and consequently refused to accept the get – there was no choice but to require that the get be deposited in beis din as we mentioned before....Click link for rest of the teshuva
See Rav Ovadia Yosef 3:20
Rav Ovadiya Yosef (Yabia Omer E.H. 3:18.13) : And in truth even according to the view of the poskim who hold that one does not force the husband to give a get when she claims ma'us alei, nevertheless there is a view that says there is a mitzva for the husband to divorce her and surely when there is a concern that because of the delay in get a get she will go off the derech. As we find in Shita Mekubetes (Kesubos 64)," Rabbeinu Yona wrote, "Even though we don't force a man to give a get when the wife says he is ma'us alei (disgusting to me) - that is only referring to forcing him by beating him with staffs. However beis din informs him that he has a mitzva to divorce her and they advise him to divorce her. And if he doesn't not in fact divorce her then this is a case of when a person transgresses the words of the rabbis that it is permitted to call him a sinner. However Rabbeinu Tam disagreed and said that even this we don't say to him but if he should come to ask whether he should divorce her without her getting the kesuba then beis din gives him the advice that he should divorce her immediately." Furthermore the Rema (Y.D. 248:20) writes that when the wife says ma'us alei the husband is obligated to divorce her. The Taz notes that the Rema here is only reporting the view of the Rambam but the Rema's true view is recorded in E.H. 77 where he doesn't mention that the husband should be forced to divorce her. But according to what we have said the words of the Rema (Y.D. 248.20) has a solid basis and that is the words of Rabbeinu Yonah. This is also noted by my friend the Tzitz Eliezar (5:26.4) based on the Noda B'Yehuda Kama (YD 68) who brings the words of the Rema as halacha l'maaseh and foundation principle. He notes that there is a basis to utilize this view at times of need according to the specific facts and needs of the time and appropriateness - depending on the evaluation of the beis din. I also say that in contemporary society with the degradation of the generations in free countries where every man does what he thinks is correct and there is a great increase in arrogance in the world and experience has taught that when a woman leaves her husband with the claim of ma'us alei and she is in limbo without receiving a get - that she will go and live with other men without the slightest shame or sense of embarrassment. As a result there is an increase in mamzerim in the world. In such a case we say that their degradation is to their benefit. This is expressed by the Ramban (Kesubos 63b), "Chas V'Shalom I am not arguing against the decree of the Gaonim to force him to divorce his wife and not only that but I strongly criticize those who say that it is not correct to follow their decrees but only the law as stated in the Talmud. In fact it is correct to listen to the Gaonim and to follow their decrees. Nevertheless now it is best to be very concern not to follow their decree because it has been abrogated because of the immorality of the generation." In other words in the time of the Ramban, even though women then had the brazenness to claim ma'us alei but they did not reach the extreme of chutpza to live with another man without receiving a get as we find in our days. But in the days before Moshiach as we are in now it is extremely relevant to considering returning to the decree of the Gaonim. And this is surely true when she is young and there is a real concern that she will go off the derech and there isn't much chance that she will return to her husband. Therefore it would appear that those who want to do something to force the husband to give a get have a solid basis for that decision. That is because the concerns that existed at the time of the Gaonim that the woman might go off the derech have returned. [In the time of the Gaonim the concern was that the woman would convert to Christianity for Islam rather than face end her days as an aguna]. Thus we see that whether the get should be forced or not is dependent on the particular time and era. And thus I have seen the gedol hador - Rav Chaim Palaggi in his Chaim v'Shalom (2:35) where he writes regarding forcing the husband that the view of a number of poskim including the Beis Yosef that the husband should not be forced to give a get. He writes, "Nevertheless according to everyone agrees that the woman is not forced to live with the husband. Therefore after a year or two after the time that they have separated from each other it would appear that he should be forced to divorce her. That is because there are two factors. The man is not able to exist without a wife and the wife herself is not able to be without a husband. And this is surely true where she is young that we have to be concerned for disastrous results when she is chained as an aguna. Just look at how lenient the poskim are concerning preventing agunos in particular when she is young until they even go the extreme of relying on a minority opinion. And surely the obligation lies on every dayan to be lenient is this manner in order to avoid trouble for both the man and the woman." Rav Chaim Palaggi is a great tree that one can rely on and surely in our day. And it is the same thing in cases where it is possible to combine various disputes of the poskim besides the claim of ma'us alei to be lenient. Also study Chaim V' Shalom (2:112), If there is a dispute between a husband and wife and the wife wants to be divorced and the husband refuses - one should establish a limited time for the matter to be resolved. And if we wait until 18 months and we have despaired of reconciliation and it appears to beis din that there is nothing more than can be done for the marriage - they should separate the couple and force the husband to give a get until he proclaim,I want to give it.All of this that I have written is for the honor of G-d and His Torah." It is possible that Rav Palaggi is not talking about forcing with clubs but rather just calling him a sinner or similar techniques which is in accord with the view of Rabbeinu Yona and the Rema which we mentioned before.
Husband is not forced to give get when wife demands one- even if wife might commit adultery
update Jan 17
Rav Sternbuch(5:345): Question: A woman who has been separated from her husband for a number of years and she claims ma’us alei and there is a clear basis for this claim which has been verified. It is clear that there is no chance that they will reconcile. The husband is close to one of the chassidic rebbes who gives him great honor. The beis din has met with the couple many times and is firmly convinced that there is no possibility of reconciliation. Therefore they asked the husband to give his wife a get. However the husband has acted cruelly and refused. Even though I am presently traveling but since this is an emergency situation I will answer briefly. You should know that many of the Rishonim including the Rambam and Rashi ruled that in a case of ma’us alei we force the husband to give a get. And some say that we force the get because of a decree of the Geonim. In contrast, Rabbeinu Tam and the Ri as well as other Rishonim disagreed and they held that a get can not be forced in a case of ma’us alei. The Rosh writes (43:6) that since there is a major dispute as to what the halacha is we don’t stick our heads between the great mountains. He also writes that whoever is lenient and forces a get results in an increase in mamzerim. The Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 77:2) also says not to force the get. So even though we agree that the halacha is that the get can not be forced when there is a claim of ma’us alei, nevertheless such a husband should not be given honor. Therefore it is necessary to inform the rebbe who is honoring him that he is giving the husband help to torment his wife which is a severe sin.
However prior to putting pressure on him through the rebbe, this the couple should be given 12 months during which efforts should be made to convince them to reconcile and expert marriage therapists should be used to deal with their issues. However when the beis din is convinced that there is no chance that they will reconcile and they paskened that it it appropriate for him to divorce his wife and not leave her an agunah – and nevertheless the husband refuses to divorce her. If we see there is no hope that he will give her a get – then his rebbe should be contacted and requested to stop honoring him. If he will listen to daas Torah he will not lose anything and one who observes mitzva will not know harm.
update: added my rebuttal in yellow
I don't have time now to write a rebuttal of this article. Hopefully next week - but I thought it would be helpful to read this well written - though mistaken - piece. One of the comments summarizes the problem well.
Rivka Gornall Leiner · Top Commenter · Graphologist and Counselor at Self-Employed
Adds nothing but one more snowball in the avanche of one sided articles written by those who sleep quietly while female get refusal, child alienation, false abuse accusations, monetary extortion (on both sides) and cruelty play out because of the woman's spite or greed. This might help your rabbi points in feminist pc Denver but it ignores reality.
Why? That is clearly not the view of the Torah. See Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 77:2-3). So what is meant by wrong no matter what? Does that mean that the husband should not request marriage counseling first? Does that mean a mistaken belief that the Torah requires a Get on demand? What if the wife takes the kids and moves to another state. He is simply supposed to give a Get and forget about his children? Or perhaps it mean that if all issues are settled, the is no basis for reconciliation and yet the husband out of spite refuses to give a Get that he is wrong? If it is the latter than I agree totally but if the former conditions - I disagree strongly.
Yes it is true that the Torah is concerned out not hurting the feelings of others - especially one's wife. But the sources cited are not dealing with divorce - but rather the conditions for a viable marriage. Similarly it is well known that there are a variety of laws about not hurting other people's feelings. However there are also laws that require criticizing others as well as saying bad things about them - even if it hurts there feelings. We don't refrain from telling others not to steal because it might hurt their feelings. We don't refrain from punishing murderers - even though it hurts them and embarrasses their family. Chastisement is a mitzva as is loving your fellow man. One can not legitimately claim that the Torah categorically prohibits hurting the feeling of others - especially one's wife. If Rabbi Brackman has sources for doing so - I would appreciate see them. Like most things in life - the various Torah obligations need to be prioritized and balanced.
The above statement is not supported by the gemora, Shulchan Aruch or poskim. As noted above - I would appreciate sources for what seems to be a declaration that the concern for a wife's feeling is more important than all the other Torah obligations and Torah rights that a person has as well as the welfare of her children. That simply is not so.
The above statement as a categorically statement is false as is clear from the gemora, Shulchan Aruch and poskim.
He fails to note that in the Chareidi world the prenup is understood to be an example of financial pressure and thus is problematic as Get Me'usa. If his intent is to proclaim that only the Modern Orthodox understanding of halacha is legitimate - then he should say so instead of giving the clear but false impression that all Orthodox poskim agree with his view
===============================
Finally Rabbi Brackman posted a statement on Facebook criticizing those such as myself who have a "mistaken" understanding because we don't agree with his views concerning Get.
He fails to note that such disagreement is not just that of the simple people such as myself - but is in fact the normative view of poskim through the ages as I have shown in many posts on my blog [just search for term "get me'sua" (or "get meusa" or "forced get") in the archives.
https://www.facebook.com/levi.brackman/posts/10205684977302618
There we go, it was bound to happen, Daniel Eidensohn, in his Daas Torah blog read my article and characterized it as a "well written - though mistaken - piece" and me as a "rabbi ignores halacha." I wonder what part is mistaken or against Halacha?
Perhaps the line that: "The Torah is very protective about the feelings and dignity of women — even more so than that of men."
Perhaps he thinks this is a mistake: "Refusing to give a Gett is also the mark of a man who lacks basic human empathy and common decency"?
Or maybe he disagrees with this: "the refusal to give a Gett by a husband, for any reason, will cause pain to his wife and therefore is not only contrary to the spirit of Judaism it contravenes the letter of the law as well."
He probably disagrees with the general idea that men should not be allowed to use the Get to further control and intimidate their wives.
Whatever it is he disagree with, the fact that his opinion is shared by so many of his circle is deeply troubling. What on earth is wrong with these people. It boggles the mind.
Tshuva by suicide?
Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabiya Omer Y.D. 2:24.8)… In fact this issue is very confusing in my opinion. How is it possible that the mitzva of repentance can be done by means of the major sin of suicide? Our Sages have said that a person who deliberately commits suicide has no portion in the World to Come… This matter is an explicit verse (Yechezkeil 33:11): “Say to them, As I live, says the L‑rd G‑d, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked should turn from his way and live; turn, turn from your evil ways; for why will you die?” And there is nothing that repentance doesn’t help. So why would anyone think R’ Chiya attempt to kill himself in response to what he thought was a sin with an unmarried prostitute - was according to the halacha (Kiddushin 81b)? Look at Sefer Chasidim (#674) …How could he tell his students to do teshuva in a manner that caused them to be killed? It would seem that the Sefer Chasidim is a major support for the Shevus Yaakov. This is a very difficult issue that requires study. Nevertheless in my opinion one cannot learn halacha from stories such as these. Therefore it is prohibited to kill oneself – even for the sake of repentance. I also saw this point in Shevet Shimon (345) which expresses great astonishment at this Shevus Yaakov and he concludes that the halacha is in accord with the Yafos To’ar [and not the Shevus Yaakov]. This is also the conclusion of the Chida in Birchei Yosef (345:3), that even though normally the Shevus Yaakov is more authoritative but logic is in agreement with the Yafos To’ar. [There are many other sources that come to this conclusion and reject this Shevus Yaakov]…
Igros Moshe (C.M. 2:69.4): Also this view (Yaavetz 1:43) that someone who has deliberately transgressed a sin that is liable to the death penalty and he commits suicide that he is not only not punished but it is also a meritorious act – is clearly prohibited even if he had been halachically warned not to do the crime. It is a shameful thing that Rav Yaakov Emden stated and his view on this matter should be totally disregarded.
Kiddushin (40a): Rav Kahana was selling workbaskets. A matron asked him to have intercourse. He said that he first had to get dressed properly. He went up on the roof and jumped. However Eliyahu came and caught him. Eliyahu criticized Rav Kahana for having forced him to travel 400 parsangs to rescue him. Rav Kahana said that the reason that the incident happened was that his poverty forced him to go among women to sell his wares. Eliyahu gave him a purse of money.
Kiddushin (40a): Mighty of strength that do His word listening to the voice of His world (Tehilim 103:20). This is illustrated by R’ Tzadok and his companions. R’ Tzadok was asked to have intercourse by a certain matron. He said he couldn’t do it because his heart was faint – perhaps she had some food for him eat. She replied that she had some unkosher food. He replied that it would seem that those who engage in sexual immorality could eat unkosher food. She lit the oven and placed the unkosher food in it. He then climbed in the oven and sat in it. She asked what he was doing. He replied that anyone who was involved in immorality falls into the fires of Hell. She replied that if she had known that what she had asked him to do was so terrible she wouldn’t have upset him.
Rabbeinu Bachye (Shemos 3): ...Concerning prophecy Moshe was told to remove his sandals which meant to remove physicality which is described as sandals. That is because physicality clings to the body just as a sandal clings to the foot. And just as it is possible for a person to remove his sandal from his foot – so is it possible for him to remove attachments from physicality in order to be prepared for prophecy and therefore be ready to clear to the light of the intellect. Yehoshua was also told to remove a sandal (Yehoshua 4:15) but that was a partial removal of physicality and not all. This was the advantage of Moshe over Yehoshua – that he was more removed from the physicality. This can be seen by the fact that Moshe separated from his wife – something which is not said concerning Yehoshua.
Rambam (Hilchos Ishus 15:3): Anyone whose soul desires Torah constantly, and learns like Ben Azzai and clings to the Torah his whole life – and yet doesn’t get married – has not committed a sin. That is true as long as his yetzer harah doesn’t overcome him. However if his yetzer harah overcomes him, he is obligated to get married. This is required even if he already has children - because he might come to sexual thoughts.
Iyun Yaakov (Kiddushin 81b): [And after his wife revealed that the person he thought was a prostitute that he wanted to sin with was really her] he went and he sat in the oven – Rashi explains that he did this to kill himself. From this we can learn that in the case where he is killing himself for the sake of repentance it is not considered suicide. And this is true even if the sin that he did was not liable to the death penalty - even assuming that he actually did the deed that he intended. This is certainly so since his intent was just to have relations with an unmarried prostitute. And especially according to the implications of the gemora it would seem that he didn’t actually do the deed [Nevertheless he attempted to kill himself to do repentance]. Gra (Mishlei 1:2): To know wisdom and instruction; to understand wise sayings – because even if a person can break his evil inclination and lusts – he must break them according to the rules of Torah and he should not be a greater tzadik from that which is prescribed in the Torah. For example he should not fast the entire week including Shabbos and similar things. The three parts of this verse correspond to the 3 types of intellect found in man – the analytical, the conceptual and the practical. The analytical deals with things like astronomy – the movement of the stars and constellations. The conceptual is to conduct oneself according to principles. The practical is to intelligent live in this world. These 3 correspond to chukim (statutes), mishpatim (rational laws) and mitzvos. Chukim are divine laws (Job 38), mishpatim are rational laws connected with earthly human reasoning while mitzvos join the Heaven and Earth and are the basis for Heaven and Earth and man who joins them. They are also the foundation of Torah and mitzvos and personality traits...
Kiddushin (81b): Whenever R’ Chiya bar Ashi said the tachanun prayer he would say, “The Merciful save us from the yetzer harah (evil inclination).” One day his wife overheard him. She said to herself, “It has been many years that we have not been intimate, so why does he have a need to pray for this – [he obviously doesn’t have a strong sex drive]?” One day he was studying in his garden and she dressed up and repeatedly walked past him. He asked who she was. She replied that she was Harusa (a well-known prostitute) who had just returned. He desired her. She told him to first bring the pomegranate to her from the top of the tree. He jumped up and brought it to her. He came into his house and his wife was firing the oven. He climbed in it [to kill himself – Rashi]. His wife asked him what was the meaning of this? He told her what had happened. She replied that she was the woman involved. However he paid no attention to her until she gave proof with the pomegranate. He said, “Nevertheless my intention was to sin.” For the rest of his life he fasted – until he died from the fasting. Yevamos (63b): It was taught: R’ Eliezar said that one who doesn’t engage in producing children is as if he shed blood… R’ Yaakov said it is as if he diminished the Divine Image…Ben Azzai said that it is as if he shed blood and diminished the Divine Image…They said to Ben Azzai, There are those who preach and also fulfill what they say, others keep but don’t preach – you however preach but don’t do what you say? Ben Azzai, “What can I do since my soul longs for Torah, it is possible that the world can be sustained by others who have children.”
Daas Zekenim of Baalei Tosfos (Bereishis 9:4): And surely your blood of your lives will I require… - This is a prohibition against committing suicide. Bereishis Rabbah asks, “You might mistakenly think that this prohibition applies to cases such as Chananiya, Mishael and Azariah – therefore it says “ach” (and surely). That means that you might think that even in this case where people are dying to glorify G d’s name that one is not allowed to bring about one’s death - even if he is afraid he cannot withstand the pressure to violate the Torah. Therefore the Torah says ‘ach’ to teach that in times of pressure to violate the Torah - that it is permitted to commit suicide. Similarly concerning Shaul who committed suicide to avoid being tortured – an exception is made to allow suicide in such cases where a person doesn’t think he can withstand the torture. This analysis is used to justify killing children during times of religious persecution to make sure they are not converted...
Bamidbar Rabbah (9:3):.. There was an incident with a woman to whom a man made advances. She asked him where he wanted to have their meeting. [After he told her] she went and told his wife. His wife went to that place and they had intercourse. He was very upset when he found out what had happened and prayed for death. His wife told him, “But it was your own bread that you ate from and it was from your own cup you drank.” She said that the cause of his trouble was that he thought that he was better than other men. The solution was to view himself as the equal of other men.
Ritva (Avoda Zara 18a): It says in agada that when R’ Chanina ben Tradyon was being burnt alive by the Roman he refused to open his mouth so that he would die faster from the fire - because he considered it as committing suicide. However Gilyonei Hatosfos quotes Rabbeinu Tam that in a situation where a person is afraid of being forced to violate religious prohibitions that it is permitted to commit suicide. This is also stated in Bereishis Rabbah (34:14): That the prohibition against suicide is Bereishis (9:5), “I will hold you responsible to take care of your life. This teaches that it is prohibited to commit suicide. I might think that suicide is prohibited even in a case like Shaul who killed himself because he was afraid of being forced to violate religious prohibitions – therefore the verse says ‘ach’ to allow suicide in those cases. From here we learn that it is permitted to kill our children during the Crusades because we are afraid that they will be forced to violate religious law.” These words require further study and much investigation but the ruling has already been given by Gilyonei Hatosfos. In addition I heard that the major authorities of France also permitted this as practical halacha. (However see Daas Zekeinim of the Baalei Tosfos to Bereishis 9:5).
Rashi (Avoda Zara 18b): Some say that R’ Meir left Israel for Babylonia because of the incident with his wife Beruria. That is referring to the time that Beruria scoffed at the statement of our Sages (Kiddushin 80b): Women are light-minded. Her husband R’ Meir objected and told her that eventually she would come to acknowledge the validity of the Sages words. He commanded one of his students to try and seduce her. After trying for many days she eventually agreed. She committed suicide from shame. R’ Meir fled Israel out of shame.
Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Y.D. 345:1): A person who commits suicide - See Besamim Rosh (345). Whether it is allowed to commit suicide when overwhelmed with lust and unable to avoid sin see Beis Yosef (Y.D. 157) and Berchai Yosef (Shem haGedolim 10:27). The Ritva (Avoda Zara 18) writes that it is allowed to do so. Therefore if it is permitted it would not be considered suicide. See Shevus Yaakov (2:111) regarding person killing himself in order to repent
Shevus Yaakov (2:111): Question: Someone who has committed adultery and as an act of repentance to comply with the capital punishment he deserves, drowns himself in a river which is equivalent to the punishment of strangulation – is he considered as if he committed suicide or is it considered a positive act of repentance and thus he has the status of one who died a natural death? Answer: … a proof can be brought from Kiddushin (81b) which describes R’ Chiya bar Ashi putting himself in an oven as an act of repentance… Thus we see clearly that it is permitted to repent a sin by suicide… Another proof is found in Bereishis Rabbah (65:22) in which a man died by subjecting himself to punishment which involved the equivalent of all 4 death sentences and it was declared that this allowed him to merit the World to Come… He did this as an act of repentance and thus it was not considered as a forbidden act of suicide… We similarly see the case of the washer man in Kesubos (113b) who jumped off the roof when Rebbe Yehuda HaNasi died and a heavenly voice praised him. Thus it was considered a proper action. The Maharit in his commentary to Kesubos said that he killed himself as an act of repentance…We see then from these sources that if a person kills himself for the sake of repentance it is not considered as suicide and he merits the World to Come. That is because in the place where a baal teshuva stands, a complete tzadik is not able to stand.