audio link
Joseph Orlow replies to Eddie “Stealth? I told him my name. Deception? Aharon Friedman is my friend, the friend to which I refer. What's with the accusations anyway? Chutzpah? The calls were made under the guidance of my Rabbis.”
O: This is Joe Orlow. Can I speak with Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky?
K: Speaking
O: How are you? I wanted to ask the rav a question
K: Yeah
O: I have a friend who is married and his wife left him
K: Oy
O: And she went to live with another man
K: Oy
O: Oy, yeah. That is not permitted, right?
K: Definitely not
O: So should I tell her she has to separate?
K. Of course
O: OK
K: Does he know about it? He believes her? If he doesn’t believe it maybe, it’s mutar
O: I’m sorry. Say that again.
K: Does the husband believe that?
O: Yeah, yeah. It is very public. She did it very publicly
K: Oy
O: I wanted to ask you about this specific case
K: Yes
O: You may be aware of it. It’s Tamar Epstein and Adam Fleischer. I was wondering why you hadn’t told them to separate since you are saying that it is the right thing to tell them
K: Well because he had psakim from rabbonim that it is mutar, I mean.
O: That it is mutar.
K: Yeah
O: So Reb Dovid said that it is mutar? Rabbi Dovid Feinstein
K: He said it is not mutar. But there are other rabbonim. Some other rabbonim say its mutar. So I don’t get involved in this.
O: So you are not involved in this.
K; Yeah
O: So the rabbonim say that it … Reb Dovd should have told them to separate maybe, even if other rabbonom say yes. Did he tell them to separate?
K: I have no idea
O: OK. So you wouldn’t tell her to separate yourself because other rabbonim
K: Yeah
O: Who are the other rabbonim if I can ask? Are there any names that you can give me?
K: R’ Notason
O: I am sorry I didn’t catch that
K: R’ Nota
O: R’ Nota. R’ Nota Greenblatt from Memphis. OK
K: That is what I heard
O: Alright. I thank the rav for taking my call. Thank you very much.
K: All the best, bye bye.
O: Kol tuv. Shalom
RSK says that the annulment and remarriage are halachically acceptableIn the conversation, RSK says that he holds that the annulment and remarriage are completely legitimate under halacha. He acknowledges that RDF says it is not mutar but says there are other rabbonim who say it is mutar - and RSK says that he doesn't get involved in deciding which psak is correct. At the beginning of the conversation, RSK says that if a married woman is living with another man, one must tell them to separate. But he says that this is not the case with the Fleischers because the annulment and remarriage are a legitimate macholokes between different poskim and it is perfectly acceptable under halacha to rely on the view of the rabbonim who say it is mutar.This shows that the letter from R' Sholom [posted on the top right side of the blog] ] claiming that his father accepts RDF's psak is not true. The letter is the fig leaf behind which the "yeshiva world" [the moetzes of agudah, for example] claims that RSK disapproves of the annulment and remarriage, but this recording destroys that fig leaf.And it is not not only that RSK does not take a position on whether RDF's psak is correct or not, RSK and R' Sholom were the ones who sent letters to rabbonim around the world [previously posted on the blog] asking them to annul the marriage.It is ironic that the Moetzes is attacking the Open Orthodoxy movement, while one of its members [and a signatory on the letter below, for example] has gone as far as, or perhaps even further, than any of the Open Orthodox in rejecting halacha. The Open Orthodox reject halacha in principle according to the Moetzes, or in the Open Orthodox's own view work within the confines of acceptable halachic practice to reach halachic outcomes that are more in line with their own views of what is practical, moral and modern. It is not clear whether RSK also does so in principle or perhaps only in order to assist the VIP families. It is also not clear to me which is worse.
