I am moving this topic from the comments of "Eternal Jewish Family rescues women captives with ...": to its own post Please reference the comments on the original posting.
Roni wrote:
REb Yid, after a simple question, you refer me to what?
The question is:
a) where does it say that Bais Din Kavua from Jupiter can force someone from MArs to appear in front of them when in MArs there is another beis din kavua?
b) And bichlal, what is going on here? This is not about a *din torah* between two parties where all the halachos of choshem mishpat apply; we are dealing with an issue of issur veheter, where one Rabbi follows his rabbonim and where does it say *anywhere* in any of the sources you wrote that "bais din kavua" has got *anything* to do with this?
You wrote a lot of mareh mekomoss which i am not privy to them. If you produce them online we will benefir to see if they relate to any of the two above questions!
So far, the source of Shulchan Oruch that is clear for me to check HAS GOT NOTHING (but nothing) to do with the two questions raised above.
I'll quote them for the benefit of the onlookers:
Then there is what is meforash in the Shulchan Aruch Ch"M 7:6.
מי שתובעין אותו לדון לפני דיין שקטן ממנו, אין הדיין יכול לכופו לילך לפניו, אלא מכנפי מאן דאיכא התם מחכימי ח ט) ומעיינים בינייהו.
a) Where does he talk a- beis din kavua versus beis din kavua?
b) and it does not apply at all to issur beheter pssokim!
Roni wrote:
Let me rephrase the whole matter of bais din kavua in three questions:
1) does Bais din Kavua of one place have a power in a different continent?
2) Especially, if at the different there is another Bais Din KAvua?
3) And most important than all questions: Where does it begin to say that "bais din kavua" has *any* relevance regarding questionspertaining to "issur veheter" (yoreh deah) as opposed to diney torah of choshen mishpat?
Any reference would be apprecited if the text can be linked!
The Choshen Mishpat 7:6 reference does not BEGIN to deal with any of the above!
Mekubal wrote
Issur V'Heter was actually a sefer that extracted from the Shulchan Aruch only the laws of Kashrut(food). Thus the laws of Kashrut found within Yorah Deah have colloquially begun to be called Issur V'Heter.
As far as the issues that a B"D has the right to rule on See Siman 1 of Choshen Mishpat. There you will find it explicitly spelled out, that marriages, divorces and conversions are within their purview.
R' Tropper is from the US, there is no B"D kavua in the US as has been stated in the iggros Moshe, Iggros Moshe Choshen Mishpat Vol iI end of siman 3).
The reference that I pointed you to in the Shulchan Aruch dealt with whether a Talmid Chochom, has the right to refuse a summons to appear before a B"D. If you had bothered to read the meforshim, especially the SM"A, you would have found that he does not even if he must travel a great distance.
What I find with you Roni is that whenever you begin to lose an argument halachically you begin to do two things. First is that you start to make personal attacks. Secondly you start an elaborate smoke and mirror show.
Sorry but I do not have digitized copies of these texts, and I have no intention to taking the time to type them in.
In the end R' Tropper is faced with a letter from a B"D telling him to cease and desist until such time as he can provide haskamot. This means two things.
1)First that his conversions are not universally accepted as any group that is part of the Eida, i.e. Satmar, Toldot Aharon, Bratslav, Belz and a few others, will see that this is geirut done in direct contradiction to the ruling of their B"D, and thus invalid.
2) It puts R' Tropper into an unenviable position of appearing to ignore a summons by a B"D. Which in itself considering that he is a Rosh Yeshiva ect. creates a Chillul HaShem and a serious issue of Marit Ayin as certainly people will come to think that if he pays no heed to the B"D neither do they need to.