Many are puzzled how to explain or even understand R Nota Greenblatt's involvement in the Tamar Epstein Get annulment
The facts are clear and are publicly available
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/07/kaminetsky-greenblatt-heter-does-gadol.html
Tamar Epstein and her husband were going to a well known and highly regarded beis din - the Baltimore beis din
At no time did Tamar mention the claim that she thought her husband was mentally ill. She wanted a divorce because she and her mother decided she could do better. Not a basis for forcing a get or annulment.
R Shmuel Kaminetsky's son wrote an embarrassingly ignorant letter outlining the reason for dissolving the marriage without a get that he claimed to have shown to his father and gotten his approval. The letter was sent to many poskim trying to get someone to agree to it. The letter makes claims about incurable mental health issues based on an anonymous source as well as claiming to be based on the psakim of Rav Moshe Feinstein. Neither Shalom or Shmuel Kaminetsky are viewed as experts on the laws of Gittin
The letter was widely ignored/ridiculed by those poskim that received it. Which is why it was shown to me even when it was not made public
The correct procedure would have been to bring the so called evidence of incurable mental illness to the Baltimore beis din which had been accepted by both sides instead Shalom Kaminetrky bypassed this and tried to get any outside posek to annul the marriage
R Nota was one of the outsiders contacted and he agreed not only to annul the marriage but to remarry her to another man.
This was absurd and in addition he agreed to do this without investigating the facts of the case or speaking to the husband or the Baltimore Beis din. R Shmuel made his acceptance dependent on the approval of Rav Dovid Feinstein. When Rav Dovid decided the heter was invalid he withdrew his support. Rav Nota bizarrely did not.
In sum Rav Notah was annulling a marriage based on facts he didn't know to be true, an invalid heter and he had not been authorized to intervene in the case of the authorized beis din and refused to alter his position when the only basis for his involvement was removed.
I will now try to defend this absurd behavior which was universally condemned by all the major rabbis and rabbinic leaders
Defense:
R Nota viewed the request to be involved by a recognized gadol as binding at least as a rabbinic halacha.
R Kaminetsky is on record claiming the request of gedolim is at least as binding as any rabbinic takkanah
https://mishpacha.com/they-dont-teach-corporate-in-yeshivah-the-conversation-continues/
As long as R Kaminetsky did not ask him to withdraw his heter he felt he was obligated to support it.
In sum R Nota did a horrible perversion of halacha because he felt the need to obey the words of a gadol and the gadol insists incorrectly that Rav Nota was an independent authority that can be relied upon. As a result of this nonsense a marriage was destroyed and an adulterous relationship was given credibility to the loud acclaim of feminists and incompetent "orthodox" rabbis.
“Defending R Nota Greenblatt” I accept the defense. Makes good common sense to me. A heter by a gadol + a bogus PhD psychology letter + angry wife + public support etc
ReplyDelete“She wanted a divorce because she and her mother decided she could do better.” My case Aranoff v Aranoff Susan wanted a divorce because Susan and her mother thought she could do better too.
Torah thought this week’s parsha Balak “4And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Take all the chiefs of the people, and hang them up unto the LORD in face of the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may turn away from Israel.’ 5And Moses said unto the judges of Israel: ‘Slay ye every one his men that have joined themselves unto the Baal of Peor.’ 6And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, while they were weeping at the door of the tent of meeting. 7And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, and took a spear in his hand. 8And he went after the man of Israel into the chamber, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.” (Numbers 25:4-8).
My theory. This was an easy call for Phineas. God Himself in passage 4 ordered hang them. No one was doing anything to Moses’ charge in passage 5. Bravo Phineas did the right thing at the right time.
Thanks for this post, Rabbi Eidensohn. Too easy for supporters of Tamar to scream agunah help Tamar. Too easy to submit to a bet din a bogus PhD psychology letter.
ReplyDeleteBravo Wyoming ruled on Friday drop boxes for ballot by mail – illegal, violates state rules on voting by mail. Too easy to cheat with no proof of cheating with drop boxes for ballots by mail.
I like Kethuboth 2a: “Mishnah. A maiden is married on the fourth day [of the week] and a widow on the fifth day, for twice in the week the courts of justice sit in the towns, on the second day [of the week] and on the fifth day, so that if he [the husband] had a claim as to the virginity [of the maiden-bride] he could go early [on the morning of the fifth day of the week] to the court of justice.”
The Torah makes it hard for a man to make a false charge. Follow KA, Garnel, IR? Our Torah is perfect, came from God through Moses.
Torah thought this week’s parsha Balak “4And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Take all the chiefs of the people, and hang them up unto the LORD in face of the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may turn away from Israel.’ 5And Moses said unto the judges of Israel: ‘Slay ye every one his men that have joined themselves unto the Baal of Peor.’ 6And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, while they were weeping at the door of the tent of meeting. 7And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, and took a spear in his hand. 8And he went after the man of Israel into the chamber, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.” (Numbers 25:4-8).
ReplyDeleteMy theory. This was an easy call for Phineas. God Himself in passage 4 ordered hang them. No one was doing anything to Moses’ charge in passage 5. Bravo Phineas did the right thing at the right time.
I like Kethuboth 2a: “Mishnah. A maiden is married on the fourth day [of the week] and a widow on the fifth day, for twice in the week the courts of justice sit in the towns, on the second day [of the week] and on the fifth day, so that if he [the husband] had a claim as to the virginity [of the maiden-bride] he could go early [on the morning of the fifth day of the week] to the court of justice.” Follow KA, Garnel, IR?
Thanks for adding this to the post, Rabbi Edensohn. ““It appears to me that Rabbi Kamenetsky still actively supports the annulment."
ReplyDeleteMy theory. Supporters of Tamar did a fake scream agunah help Tamar. Rabbi Kamenetsky sought and produced a fake bogus PhD psychology letter. Susan supported Tamar over 10 years. I quote (internet 2012)::
“Supporters of Tamar Epstein, whose ex-husband, Aharon Friedman, refuses to give her a religious divorce, have been pressuring Friedman's boss, U.S. Rep. Dave Camp, R-Michigan, to fire Friedman. They have protested in front of Camp's office, signed a petition at change.org, started a website (freetamar.org) and in February, bombarded Camp's official congressional Facebook page. But Susan Aranoff, director of Agunah International, which supports Jewish women seeking divorces, said social media has little effect because many husbands still are resistant after all the bullets have been fired."
Torah thought this week’s parsha Balak “4And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Take all the chiefs of the people, and hang them up unto the LORD in face of the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may turn away from Israel.’ 5And Moses said unto the judges of Israel: ‘Slay ye every one his men that have joined themselves unto the Baal of Peor.’ 6And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, while they were weeping at the door of the tent of meeting. 7And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, and took a spear in his hand. 8And he went after the man of Israel into the chamber, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.” (Numbers 25:4-8).
My theory. This was an easy call for Phineas. God Himself in passage 4 ordered hang them. No one was doing anything to Moses’ charge in passage 5. Bravo Phineas did the right thing at the right time.
Thanks for adding this to the post, Rabbi Edensohn. ““It appears to me that Rabbi Kamenetsky still actively supports the annulment."
ReplyDeleteMy theory. Supporters of Tamar did a fake scream agunah help Tamar. Rabbi Kamenetsky sought and produced a fake bogus PhD psychology letter. Susan supported Tamar over 10 years. I quote (internet 2012)::
“Supporters of Tamar Epstein, whose ex-husband, Aharon Friedman, refuses to give her a religious divorce, have been pressuring Friedman's boss, U.S. Rep. Dave Camp, R-Michigan, to fire Friedman. They have protested in front of Camp's office, signed a petition at change.org, started a website (freetamar.org) and in February, bombarded Camp's official congressional Facebook page. But Susan Aranoff, director of Agunah International, which supports Jewish women seeking divorces, said social media has little effect because many husbands still are resistant after all the bullets have been fired."
Torah thought this week’s parsha Balak “4And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Take all the chiefs of the people, and hang them up unto the LORD in face of the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may turn away from Israel.’ 5And Moses said unto the judges of Israel: ‘Slay ye every one his men that have joined themselves unto the Baal of Peor.’ 6And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, while they were weeping at the door of the tent of meeting. 7And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, and took a spear in his hand. 8And he went after the man of Israel into the chamber, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.” (Numbers 25:4-8).
My theory. This was an easy call for Phineas. God Himself in passage 4 ordered hang them. No one was doing anything to Moses’ charge in passage 5. Bravo Phineas did the right thing at the right time.
Torah thought this week’s parsha Pinchas “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Assail צרור the Midianites and defeat them והכיתם---for they assailed you צררים, by the trickery they practiced against you בנכליהם אשר נכלו לכם---because of the affair of Peor and because of the affair of their kinswoman Cozbi, daughter of the Midian chieftain בת נשיא מדין אחתם, who was killed המכה at the time of the plague on account of Peor על דבר פעור” (Numbers 25:16-18)
ReplyDeleteבמדבר פרשת פינחס פרק כה פסוק טז - יח
(טז) וַיְדַבֵּר יְקֹוָק אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
(יז) צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים וְהִכִּיתֶם אוֹתָם:
(יח) כִּי צֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם בְּנִכְלֵיהֶם אֲשֶׁר נִכְּלוּ לָכֶם עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר וְעַל דְּבַר כָּזְבִּי בַת נְשִׂיא מִדְיָן אֲחֹתָם הַמֻּכָּה בְיוֹם הַמַּגֵּפָה עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר:
רש"י במדבר פרשת פינחס פרק כה פסוק יח
כי צוררים הם לכם וגו' על דבר פעור - שהפקירו בנותיהם לזנות, כדי להטעותכם אחר פעור. ואת מואב לא צוה להשמיד, מפני רות שהיתה עתידה לצאת מהם, כדאמרינן בבבא קמא (לח ב):
Baba Kamma 38
“ Now [we may well ask], could it have entered the mind of Moses to wage war without [Divine] sanction? [We must suppose] therefore that Moses of himself reasoned a fortiori as follows: If in the case of the Midianites who came only to assist the Moabites the Torah commanded Vex the Midianites and smite them, in the case of the Moabites [themselves] should not the same injunction apply even more strongly? But the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: The idea you have in your mind is not the idea I have in My mind.”
My theory. Moses would never wage war without Divine approval. What is the lesson for us today with terrorists that shoot and stab us and with the enemy in Iran?
“The facts are clear and are publicly available http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/07/kaminetsky-greenblatt-heter-does-gadol.html”
ReplyDeleteThanks Rabbi Eidensohn for posting this. I wrote 6 or 7 good daas Torah posts there. Bravo Joe Orlow: “it also seems that the beis din convened by Rabbi Feinstein was intended by Rabbi Kamenetesky as a smoke screen so that he could pretend he doesn't support the annulment.”
Smoke screen = a cloud of smoke created to conceal military operations: a ruse designed to disguise someone's real intentions or activities: I suggest a modern language Rabbi Kamenetesky does judicial overreach. Judicial overreach is when the judiciary starts interfering with the proper functioning of the legislative or executive organs of the government, i.e., the judiciary crosses its own function. Judicial overreach is considered undesirable in a democracy. It also goes against the principle of separation of powers. KA, IR, Garnel would you agree Rabbi Shalom Kamenetesky does judicial overreach in supporting the annulment? Thanks KA for the upticks.
Torah thought this week’s parsha Pinchas “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Assail צרור the Midianites and defeat them והכיתם---for they assailed you צררים, by the trickery they practiced against you בנכליהם אשר נכלו לכם---because of the affair of Peor and because of the affair of their kinswoman Cozbi, daughter of the Midian chieftain בת נשיא מדין אחתם, who was killed המכה at the time of the plague on account of Peor על דבר פעור” (Numbers 25:16-18)
ReplyDeleteבמדבר פרשת פינחס פרק כה פסוק טז - יח
(טז) וַיְדַבֵּר יְקֹוָק אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
(יז) צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים וְהִכִּיתֶם אוֹתָם:
(יח) כִּי צֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם בְּנִכְלֵיהֶם אֲשֶׁר נִכְּלוּ לָכֶם עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר וְעַל דְּבַר כָּזְבִּי בַת נְשִׂיא מִדְיָן אֲחֹתָם הַמֻּכָּה בְיוֹם הַמַּגֵּפָה עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר:
רש"י במדבר פרשת פינחס פרק כה פסוק יח
כי צוררים הם לכם וגו' על דבר פעור - שהפקירו בנותיהם לזנות, כדי להטעותכם אחר פעור. ואת מואב לא צוה להשמיד, מפני רות שהיתה עתידה לצאת מהם, כדאמרינן בבבא קמא (לח ב):
Baba Kamma 38
“ Now [we may well ask], could it have entered the mind of Moses to wage war without [Divine] sanction? [We must suppose] therefore that Moses of himself reasoned a fortiori as follows: If in the case of the Midianites who came only to assist the Moabites the Torah commanded Vex the Midianites and smite them, in the case of the Moabites [themselves] should not the same injunction apply even more strongly? But the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: The idea you have in your mind is not the idea I have in My mind.”
My theory. Moses would never wage war without Divine approval. What is the lesson for us today with terrorists that shoot and stab us and with the enemy in Iran?
“Defending R Nota Greenblatt” No. The question is why so loud passion support for Tamar and so soft passion protests against R Nota Greenblatt? Rabbi Greenblatt married Tamar over the objections of her husband Aaron. This relates to this week’s parsha Chukas/Pinchas. “Phinehas, son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back My wrath away from the Israelites by displaying among them his passion for Me, so that I did not wipe out the Israelite people in My passion.” (Numbers 25:11).
ReplyDeleteבמדבר פרשת פינחס פרק כה פסוק יא
פִּינְחָס בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן הֵשִׁיב אֶת חֲמָתִי מֵעַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּקַנְאוֹ אֶת קִנְאָתִי בְּתוֹכָם וְלֹא כִלִּיתִי אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּקִנְאָתִי:
רש"י במדבר פרשת פינחס פרק כה פסוק יא
פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן - לפי שהיו השבטים מבזים אותו, הראיתם בן פוטי זה שפיטם אבי אמו עגלים לעבודה זרה והרג נשיא שבט מישראל, לפיכך בא הכתוב ויחסו אחר אהרן:
בקנאו את קנאתי - בנקמו את נקמתי, בקצפו את הקצףג שהיה לי לקצוף. כל לשון קנאה הוא המתחרה לנקוםד נקמת דבר, אנפרימנ"ט בלע"ז [חמה]:
My theory. In the midrash. The trolls at the time attacked Pinchas that Pinchas’ father did avoda zara and here Pinchas kills a prince. God punished the whole people for the sin of the Golden Calf, because of widespread public support of the sinners and so little protest of the sinners. Here Pinchas, who in the midrash is Elijah, displayed his passion for God, and no one supported the sinners. Beautiful. This is what God wanted: no public support for sinners. Here in Bnei Brak I hear no public support for Tamar and her illegal Rabbi Greenblatt marriage to Adam. IR, why all these removals of my posts? Can’t we respectfully disagree and continue a conversation?
Your comments that are not related to post are deleted - I offered you an alternative
ReplyDeleteI have NOTHING to do with the removal of your comments.
ReplyDeleteRDE, the blog owner, is the one who runs things here, and he decides what deserves to be deleted.
Daas Torah thought daf hayomi Yevamot 122b
ReplyDelete“This [is a point in dispute between] Tannaim. For it was taught: Witnesses on matrimonial matters [i.e., evidence on the death of a husband] are not to be subjected אין בודקין to enquiry and examination. These are the words of R. Akiba; R. Tarfon, however, ruled: They are to be subjected. And they differ [in respect of a ruling] of R. Hanina. For R. Hanina stated: Pentateuchally both monetary, and capital cases must be conducted with enquiry and examination, for it is said, Ye shall have one manner of law [Lev. XXIV, 22. As capital cases are subject to such enquiry (v. Deut. XIII, is) so are also monetary cases], what then is the reason why they have ordained that monetary cases do not require enquiry and examination? In order that you should not lock the door in the face of borrowers [Sanh. 2b, 32a. Were difficulties to be placed in the way of creditors they would altogether decline to advance any loans.] And it is on this principle that they differ: One Master is of the opinion that since the woman has a kethubah to receive [From the estate of her dead husband. The terms of the marriage contract entitle a woman to her kethubah when she lawfully marries again.] [such cases are] on a par with those of monetary matters [hence his opinion that no enquiry and examination of the witnesses is necessary], while the other Master is of the opinion that since we are thereby permitting a married woman to marry a stranger [lit., to the world] [such cases [since intercourse with a married woman is punishable by strangulation] are] on a par with capital cases [where full enquiry and examination is required].”
Beautiful. Wow the Sages debated whether inquiry and examination can be dispensed with in court of law. Is it true a PhD psychologist wrote a damning letter on Aaron? No matter because the court must overrule Tamar’s husband and allow Tamar to marry the one she prefers over her husband. Really? What of Torah rules and 10 Commandments forbidding adultery? IR, KA, Garnel: any thoughts?
If she relies on the alleged "annulment", then she was never married to the first guy, and her marriage to the second guy is therefore not considered adultery.
ReplyDeleteHowever most people consider the "annulment" to be a sham, and every single time the couple is together they are living in sin, and if G-d forbid she has a child, it will be considered to be a Mamzer.
Daas Torah thought daf hayomi Yevamot 122b
ReplyDelete“This [is a point in dispute between] Tannaim. For it was taught: Witnesses on matrimonial matters [i.e., evidence on the death of a husband] are not to be subjected אין בודקין to enquiry and examination. These are the words of R. Akiba; R. Tarfon, however, ruled: They are to be subjected. And they differ [in respect of a ruling] of R. Hanina. For R. Hanina stated: Pentateuchally both monetary, and capital cases must be conducted with enquiry and examination, for it is said, Ye shall have one manner of law [Lev. XXIV, 22. As capital cases are subject to such enquiry (v. Deut. XIII, is) so are also monetary cases], what then is the reason why they have ordained that monetary cases do not require enquiry and examination? In order that you should not lock the door in the face of borrowers [Sanh. 2b, 32a. Were difficulties to be placed in the way of creditors they would altogether decline to advance any loans.] And it is on this principle that they differ: One Master is of the opinion that since the woman has a kethubah to receive [From the estate of her dead husband. The terms of the marriage contract entitle a woman to her kethubah when she lawfully marries again.] [such cases are] on a par with those of monetary matters [hence his opinion that no enquiry and examination of the witnesses is necessary], while the other Master is of the opinion that since we are thereby permitting a married woman to marry a stranger [lit., to the world] [such cases [since intercourse with a married woman is punishable by strangulation] are] on a par with capital cases [where full enquiry and examination is required].”
Beautiful. Wow the Sages debated whether inquiry and examination can be dispensed with in court of law.
Further in defense of Rabbi Greenblatt
ReplyDeleteDaas Torah thought daf hayomi Yevamot 122b
“This [is a point in dispute between] Tannaim. For it was taught: Witnesses on matrimonial matters [i.e., evidence on the death of a husband] are not to be subjected אין בודקין to enquiry and examination. These are the words of R. Akiba; R. Tarfon, however, ruled: They are to be subjected. And they differ [in respect of a ruling] of R. Hanina. For R. Hanina stated: Pentateuchally both monetary, and capital cases must be conducted with enquiry and examination, for it is said, Ye shall have one manner of law [Lev. XXIV, 22. As capital cases are subject to such enquiry (v. Deut. XIII, is) so are also monetary cases], what then is the reason why they have ordained that monetary cases do not require enquiry and examination? In order that you should not lock the door in the face of borrowers [Sanh. 2b, 32a. Were difficulties to be placed in the way of creditors they would altogether decline to advance any loans.] And it is on this principle that they differ: One Master is of the opinion that since the woman has a kethubah to receive [From the estate of her dead husband. The terms of the marriage contract entitle a woman to her kethubah when she lawfully marries again.] [such cases are] on a par with those of monetary matters [hence his opinion that no enquiry and examination of the witnesses is necessary], while the other Master is of the opinion that since we are thereby permitting a married woman to marry a stranger [lit., to the world] [such cases [since intercourse with a married woman is punishable by strangulation] are] on a par with capital cases [where full enquiry and examination is required].”
Beautiful. Wow the Sages debated whether inquiry and examination can be dispensed with in court of law. R. Greenblatt can argue that Tamar v Aaron is a capital case. Today outside of Israel rabbis use common sense and judgment and not strict Torah/Gamara rules. A divorce battle 2 bitter people. Heaven waits for the court below on earth to decide The G-H heter is not garbage. We on earth today outside of Israel can make every leniency possible. We always say mazal tov when a mamzer is born. God commanded us to populate and fill the earth. God created the evil inclination to spur population growth. Follow IR and your supporter? We never say Heaven forbid Tamar has a baby from Adam. We say mazal tov.
"it also seems that the beis din
ReplyDeleteconvened by Rabbi Feinstein was intended by Rabbi Kamenetesky as a smoke
screen so that he could pretend he doesn't support the annulment."
How is it a smoke screen? Do you mean RSK snr?
So he rejects it with one hand, and supports it with the other?
IS there a basis for doing anything like that in halacha?