Daas Torah - Issues of Jewish Identity

It is possible to understand the Rambam that way. ...

2012-05-28T22:52:54.812+03:00

It is possible to understand the Rambam that way. However the Otzer Haposkim does not mention such a possibility nor have I seen the poskim in general discuss this. Which implies that it is not accepted.

Rereading the Acharonim on kefiyya, it is plausabl...

2012-05-28T19:29:15.691+03:00

Rereading the Acharonim on kefiyya, it is plausable, that kefiyya of a bes din, even if mistaken, is a psul Derabannan, but kefiyya of a person on the street, when not warranted, would make it a psul De'oraysa. It is meduyyak in their language, and would answer a lot of questions. It should be analyzed more. This post does not note the differentiation.

You are simply spinning a tale - without any justi...

2012-05-28T16:15:36.152+03:00

You are simply spinning a tale - without any justification. Please back up your accusations with some textual justification.

It is interesting to note that contrary to your theory - Tamar Epstein's beis din was chareidi - Rav Schachter signed on the letter of seruv but did not sit on the beis din.

No charedim want to take the stringent view upon s...

2012-05-28T15:55:06.006+03:00

No charedim want to take the stringent view upon stringent view. They know that the MO who are also orthodox, are taking the mainstream view, as do the sefardi charedim. And because the charedim want control over the gets, they will scare the public by convincing them that the stringencies are actual halacha.

Don't you see how this is the same as the pedophile issue? How are you so blinded on this one, DT?

Perhaps wishful thinking that Stan's post woul...

2012-05-28T15:39:03.262+03:00

Perhaps wishful thinking that Stan's post would provide a greater depth of understanding of this issue. I did give Rabbi Tzadok the option of having all these offensive posts blocked. Stan's language only has served to discredit his position rather than degrade Rabbi Tzadok. I have blocked about half of Stan's comments.

I have no opinion on this subject (since I have li...

2012-05-28T14:51:48.123+03:00

I have no opinion on this subject (since I have little knowledge of it) and I don't support (or oppose) either side.

I will note however that you, Rav DE, are allowing a lot of ad hominem attacks on Rav MT (arrogance, clueless, etc). Why are you approving these posts?

You clearly hold the view that halacha is totally ...

2012-05-28T10:01:07.729+03:00

You clearly hold the view that halacha is totally arbitrary and therefore the rabbis can posken anyway they want. And obviously according to you they should posken according to a liberal secular view point.

You are clearly wrong - that is not what halacha is. That is simply Conservative Judaism.

What would be the point of ruling a stringent view...

2012-05-28T09:49:31.755+03:00

What would be the point of ruling a stringent view that the kids are mamzerim?

The rabbonim have a choice. They can decide how to rule on this. If they want to state your left is your right and your right is your left, we are supposed to hold that.

And there is obviousy a choice on this issue. First is the decision/choice whether or not to allow pressure put on one who withholds a get, and the second decision/choice, is whether or not a pressured get can in anyway be invalid, and the third decision, is, if it would be considered invalid, do we risk mamzerim.

Which sounds very political, similar to the gerus issue to me. If we threaten that a gerus is not valid according to our charedi rules, then we just pulled the rug out from under those BD, because no one wants anyone to consider their gerus invalid.

So if we decide that there is a threat of mamzerim if you don't give the get according to our charedi rules, then of course, we will do what you say, because G-d forbid we should produce mamzerim.

But what is the truth? The truth is, with all due respect, the rabbonim dont have to 'go there', as we say. Just like they did not have to choose to focus on the issues of "moser" and "if it's not penetration, it's not molestation" regarding the pedophile problem, they do not have to take this stance on the get issue. There is what to hold for the very first decision, that one can put pressure to gain a get. Ask any frum jew, and they would know that of course one can pressure for a get. Now, when the MO are the ones using that halacha to help klal yisroel, the charedi stand to lose control over the get issue, and suddenly, this stringent view comes out of the woodwork. Is this emes??

Thank G-d for Rabbi Tzadok...Being part of the rab...

2012-05-28T09:26:50.143+03:00

Thank G-d for Rabbi Tzadok...Being part of the rabbonim of klal yisroel, every time he states his POV, he saves another soul.

Don't be like that guys and we know we have th...

2012-05-28T05:32:18.609+03:00

Don't be like that guys and we know we have the right to choose about other warning to our self it because we know what is the right for us and the best to our self.Be gently and always read Jewish history and weekly torah portion it will help us.

see previous discussion here http://daattorah.blog...

2012-05-27T22:31:30.680+03:00

see previous discussion here
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/04/mamzerim-from-forced-get-in-maus-alei.html

Yachin uVoaz (1:124):[15th Century Algeria] You sh...

2012-05-27T22:22:47.480+03:00

Yachin uVoaz (1:124):[15th Century Algeria] You should know that there are two different types of moredes and they have different laws. There is a moredes who despises her husband and she asserts that he is disgusting to her. On the other hand there is a moredes who says she wants her husband but she wants to torment him In the case of ma'us alei the view of the Rambam is that the husband is forced to divorce her immediately and he learns this from a deduction from the gemora as the Rosh writes. The Rambam states in Hilchos Ishus (14:8) that if a wife refuses sexual relations that the husband is forced to give a a get since she is not like a prisoner who can be forced to have relations with someone she hates. However there has long been an outcry against the ruling of the Rambam by all the commentators and poskim such as Rabbein Tam, Ramban, Rosh, Rashba and many others. They agree concerning forcing the husband to divorce. Whoever forces the husband to divorce in accordance to the ruling of the Rambam increases mamzerim in the world. And they reject the view of the Rambam with clear proofs from the Talmud as the Rosh does. And many proofs are brought to refute and reject the words of the Rambam. And even the Magid Mishna who normally devotes himself in all places to justify the words of the Rambam and to firmly establish their validity with clear proofs - in this case he refutes the Rambam and goes into detail with proofs to contradict the Rambam's reasoning and to reject it. It is unnecessary to repeat them here. The halachic view that has become univeral is that one does not force the husband to give a get when she claim ma'us alei and we do not rely on the ruling of the Rambam nor others who agree with him in this matter. And furthermore that even if the halacha was in accord with the Rambam it would be correct to make a protective fence in this matter to prevent immorality amongst the woman because of the degradation of the contemporary generation. Because woman have become haughty and arrogant in their immorality. We are therefore concerned that a wife might have become interested in another man and she wants to disgard her husband by declaring he is disgusting to me (ma'us alei). If it became known that that would be sufficient to have her husband forced to give her a get then it would surely cause problems. But in fact the Rambam is not the halacha because of the proofs that the opponents of the Rambam bring [And even in Algeria where they always follow the Rambam there are three exceptions and this is one of them and not those who agree with the Rambam...]. However I saw in the Rosh who writes that if in fact the psak of the Rambam was followed and the woman was divorced by force and she remarried - we don't force her leave the second marriage. However many others disagree with the Rosh and they say that if she remarries after a forced get - she must leave the second marriage.

I am not relying on the Chazon Ish. I am simply no...

2012-05-27T22:03:41.030+03:00

I am not relying on the Chazon Ish. I am simply noting that there are significant contemporary poskim including Rav Eliashiv and Rav Sternbuch who hold that active sanctions such as public demonstrations produce a get meusa and thus the problem of mamzerim. Consequently they can be in agreement with the Beis Yosef that the problem is only a rabbinic violation. I offered the possible reason for not accepting the beis yosef's view which might also be the Shulchan Aruch's view with the view of the Chazon Ish. The Chazon Ish is not the starting point nor is it the reason for the view that mamzerim will be produced.
An alternative might simply be that they don't accept that the Shulchan Aruch holds that it is only a rabbinic violation.

Not true. Her money is her money. But strange th...

2012-05-25T20:42:16.707+03:00

Not true. Her money is her money.

But strange that you should think so. I heard that this mentality is quite widespread.

My Rabbi said: in the hypothetical case where the wife is a millionare, but says she wants to use none of her capital, and the husband lives in utter poverty, he is still obliged to give the shirt from his back to provide for her.

Therefore, yy is clearly wrong when he says he does not have to provide for her, since she has her own money.

DT, what is your problem? Censorship, you have ban...

2012-05-25T20:34:40.120+03:00

DT, what is your problem? Censorship, you have banned many of my posts already so you are a joke with such a threat.

"even if you disagree violently with them!" -censor youself where have I threatened violence against anybody? it's your big friend tzadok who wished violence against me with his fez gedolim standing around watching.

you have allowed many personal attacks against me, especially from the tzadok, so let's get serious here.

how about your brother calling schachter a potential rotzeach? I only called a bad dude.

finally stop fence sitting. either you are for the halochoh, which is what rav gestetner and rav abraham stand for, or against the halochoh which is what the MO and the other corrupt charedi botei din in nyc stand for? so please clarify! are you scared to say you are for the torah? frankly i do not know what your problem is. after all i am not a phd in psychology!

Emes, Since when did the Yachin U'Boaz, Maggi...

2012-05-25T18:57:17.771+03:00

Emes,

Since when did the Yachin U'Boaz, Maggid Mishneh, Ramban and Rashba become the greatest ahskenazi poskim of the last five hundred years?

The question is how to understand the Rosh. The BY understands it one way. On what basis do you disagree? On the basis of a (mis)citation on a blog? Please read my post above and tell me how that quote of the Yachin U'Boaz (which, btw, is not 1:123) supports RDE.

He clearly states that the Rosh holds a woman remarried after a forced Get does NOT have to separate from her wife.

RDE is WRONG in his citation of the Yachin U'Boaz and WRONG in understanding of the Yachin U"Boaz and WRONG in his understanding of the Rosh (at least according to the Yachin U'Boaz)

RDE, The problem with your position, and the reli...

2012-05-25T18:48:42.777+03:00

RDE,

The problem with your position, and the reliance on the Chazon Ish, is that his views on the authority of law are a huge chiddush that go against the vast majority of Sephardic and Ashkenazic poskim, namely, that the authority of the law rests on the gadlus of the posek. I find that view untenable.

More importantly, I dont think you can find Rishonim who agree. The vast consensus is that the authority of the law rests on its acceptance by klal yisrael. That is why we had to say naaseh venishma. That, says the Rambam and others, is why the Bavli is the final authority, because it was accepted by all of Israel. So too, the Shulchan Aruch (with the Rema for ashkenazim) was accepted as law. Now, there are always exceptions to every rule and instances in which the SA is not the final word but we can discuss those later. The point is that the shulchan aruch as a fall back position for a rav who isnt sure (CI) is not exactly a well developed and received philosophy of law.

Not sure which Tropper affair you are refering to ...

2012-05-25T18:10:59.020+03:00

Not sure which Tropper affair you are refering to Rav Dovid Feinstein was not a supporter of Tropper nor was Rav Eliashiv. If you are referring to Rav Reuven Feinstin then when he supported in writing and recording - contradicted what Tropper was doing. Similarly Rav Eliashiv's written teshuva clearly went against what Tropper was doing.

So we had a case where the position of poskim was not in accord with what Tropper was doing. The big question was not the halachic view of gedolim but rather aside from the Bedatz while there was no outcry against Tropper.

So the issue you are raising is very important but was not what we have been discussing. You are now raising the question of what determines when gedolim protest against certain halachic practices that they clearly have indicated are incorrect. Or alternative when do gedolim remain silent in the face of what they consider violations of the halacha.

We know - thanks to Rav Kaminetsky that gedolim protest against issues they haven't investigated properly because askonim told them to. We know thanks to Tropper that there are also times when apparent halachic violations are ignored - especially when too many big people are involved.

This doesn't alter what I have said regarding the fact that if a wide variety of gedolim of a wide ranger of time assert that a forced get produces mamzerim - it is to be taken at face value - unless it is clear they didn't mean it. In this case they clearly meant it.

the Chazon Ish is a better model - he clearly s...

2012-05-25T17:15:19.339+03:00
the Chazon Ish is a better model - he clearly states that a posek decides on what he thinks is right and the Shulchan Aruch is a fall back position if he doesn't know what to do.

Bottom line in the non-Sefardic world your analysis is not relevant. If the gedolim say that we are to be concerned about mamzerim - then a forced get is understood as producing mamzerim.

The problem with this sort of analysis is that it only works so long as you(or whoever agrees with the Gadol). In this case you do, so there are not questions asked.

However if we go back a few years to the EJF/Rabbi Leib Tropper affair, when Rav David Feinstein and Rav Shalom Yosef Eliashiv backed Tropper and said what he was doing was Kosher, that wasn't good enough. Suddenly we didn't trust the Gadol for some reason.

That sort of reasoning is what leads to people saying things like what we see demonstrated here where people accuse Rav Kanievsky and Rav Nisim Karelitz of issuing bogus seruvim.

What then is the threshold that needs to be crossed? IF what Rabbananut is doing is against Halakha, or at least according to the major Gedolim in E"Y it is against Halakha, why don't they speak out? Instead they sign on a Seruv based entirely on a Rabbanaut Descision?
If what Rav Schachter is doing is against Halakha, again where is the outcry by the Gedolim, instead we are told that there are some who disagree but don't want to put their names to it...? That is just beyond bizarre.

Batmelech, yoy aremaking things up. If a wife had ...

2012-05-25T17:01:18.648+03:00
Batmelech, yoy aremaking things up. If a wife had millions of dollaes, it alll belongs to her husband. She owns none of it.

Which hat did you pull that 42.5% figure from?

2012-05-25T16:54:23.946+03:00
Which hat did you pull that 42.5% figure from?

When it comes to issues such as gittin or geirus w...

2012-05-25T16:32:41.583+03:00
When it comes to issues such as gittin or geirus which affect more than a local community - it is important that significant changes receive the approval of gedolie haposkim. As I have stated - if a number of gedolim state that Rav Schachter's innovations are needed for our times - I would have no problem with what he is doing. However to the contrary - I just have heard criticism by rabbonim - who are not willing to publicly denounce ORA and its innovations

the Chazon Ish is a better model - he clearly s...

2012-05-25T16:25:33.524+03:00
the Chazon Ish is a better model - he clearly states that a posek decides on what he thinks is right and the Shulchan Aruch is a fall back position if he doesn't know what to do.

Then quite honestly the entire argument you or your brother have made against Rav Schachter falls to pieces.

What you have just said is that a posek is free from following the Sh"A if he thinks he knows better. I fail to see the difference between that and Conservative Judaism other than that you are more comfortable with it so long as it leans to Chumra instead of Kula.

@Did you know - your analysis and assertions are s...

2012-05-25T16:22:56.150+03:00
@Did you know - your analysis and assertions are simply inaccurate - but no time now to enumerate the mistakes - will do it after Yom Tov.

Rav Bentzion Abbah Shaul was a Sefardi posek - the...

2012-05-25T16:17:35.294+03:00
Rav Bentzion Abbah Shaul was a Sefardi posek - the Chazon Ish is a better model - he clearly states that a posek decides on what he thinks is right and the Shulchan Aruch is a fall back position if he doesn't know what to do.

Bottom line in the non-Sefardic world your analysis is not relevant. If the gedolim say that we are to be concerned about mamzerim - then a forced get is understood as producing mamzerim.