Don't Tell: The leniency of the Rema of not revealing previously unknown mamzerim

update - limitation on non revealing the information
The issue was raised regarding the producing of mamzerim through the giving of an invalid Get. Isn't this really a non-issue since if the mamzer is not revealed - there is no prohibition of marriage and therefore everyone is presumed to be kosher?

I am presenting the Rema which is the source for this view.  It is clear that if in fact the information can definitely be concealed then there is no problem. However it seems obvious that with a growing awareness of the regularity that invalid Gittin are being given - that the chezkas kashrus of divorced people disappears. As Rav Sternbuch has noted, at some point when there is a systemic problem there will be a need to investigate each case of the offspring of a divorced couple. The only issue seems to be whether we have reached that point or will reach it in the near future. The leniency of the Rema applies when there are only isolated cases. In addition - even when in general the information can be concealed - but there will always be cases where the information is inadvertently revealed and then the problem of mamzerus spreads through the family like a nuclear chain reaction.

Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 2:5): If a family of cohanim has a definite challel amongst them then every woman of that family is prohibited until she is checked and if she marries she must be divorced. The same applies if there is a family that a sofek mamer or definite mamzer. Rema: However all of this applies only if it is definitely known to be true. However a family that has a person who is invalid for marriage – but it is not public knowledge- since he has been successfully mixed in then let him remained so. Someone who knows about this invalid person – is not allowed to reveal the information but the family members are to be left with their presumption of validity (chezkas kashrus). That is because all such families which have an unknown invalid person amongst them will be declared as fully kosher in the Messianic Era. Nevertheless is appropriate to reveal this information to those who can keep a secret (This is implied by the Ran). However this ignoring of the information is only when the invalid member is successfully mixed in and concealed from public knowledge. But as long as he is not mixed in then we reveal the invalid members and publicly announce it so that unblemished people will avoid marriage with them. See Choshen Mishpat 25 as to who is believed to testify about a families pedigree.

Edios (8:7): Rabbi Yehoshua said, I have received a tradition from Rabban Yochanon ben Zakkai who heard it from his rebbe and his rebbe heard it from his rebbe as a halacha l'Moshe m'Sinai (Tradition given from Sinai) that Eliyahu will not come to declare unclean or to pronounce clean, to put away or to bring near. But rather he will put away those brought near by force and to bring near that who have been put away by force. The family of Beis Zerephah was on the other side of the Jordan and Ben Tzion put it away by force. And there was already another family there and Ben Tziion brought it near by force. For such people Eliyahu will come to declare unclean or to pronounce clean, to put away or to bring near. Rabbi Yehuda disagreed and said Eliyahu will bring near but not put away. Rabbi Shimon said that will come to resolve disputes. The Sages disagreed and said that Eliyahu will neither come to put away nor to bring near but rather to make peace in the world. As is stated in Malachi (3), Behold I will send Eliyahu the Prophet to you... And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children and the heart of the children their fathers.

Bartenuro (Edios 8:7): It is a halacha L'Moshe m'Sinai  that G-d showed Moshe at Sinai... that Eliyahu will not come to declare unclear or clean or to make distant or bring close to clarify doubts concerning which individual are problematic who have been mixed in the family - but these doubts will be left and they will be kosher in the future. The halacha is that a family which has posul individuals successfully mixed in and unidentified- they will remain unidentified as posul. ... those families where posul individuals have been successfully mixed in and they are not know as posul individuals but are presumed kosher - Eliyahu will leave them that way.

However the following claims that the prohibition of revealing information is only when it is based on rumors - but not on the testimony of two witnesses.

Chelkas Mechokek (2:5.9): One who knows that there is a mamzer is not allowed to reveal this information – But it is stated in Shulchan Aruch (EH. 2:3) that two people had testified that a family has a mamzer or challel. How can they do this since they are violating the halacha of not revealing this information? However saying they shouldn't testify also presents a difficulty since we pasken in this sif that if there is a doubt whether there is a mamzer in a particular family that someone who marries a member of that family needs to get divorced – so why isn't it a mitzva to reveal this information because today or tomorrow witnesses will come and testify that there is a mamzer in the family and consequently the children of this family will be considered sofek mamzerim? A possible answer is that concerning the Ran on which the leniency of the Rema is based, he could be talking about a case where it is not clear that a member of the family is actually a mamzer – but merely that there is a rumor. Perhaps it is only such a case where the Ran is saying that there is no need to reveal this information except to modest people [who won't spread the information]. However when two witness know for certain that a mamzer assimilated into this family it is very difficult to claim that they should not testify since the children of this family - once the information becomes public that there is a mamzer who is mixed into this famly –will henceforth be sofek mamzerim.

There is no such thing as a Palestinian people

 https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-734835

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich dismissed the existence of a Palestinian people in a speech he delivered in Paris on Sunday.

“There is no such thing as Palestinians because there is no such thing as a Palestinian people,” said Smotrich who heads the Religious Zionist Party.

“Who are the [real] Palestinians? I am Palestinian,” he said.

Astrology

 Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 179:1–2): 1) It is prohibited to ask about the future from an astrologer or by using a divination technique. Rema: Because of the prohibition of be tamim with your G-d  (Beis Yosef citing Tosfos based on the Sifri) and it is surely prohibited consult with magicians and diviners of all types. 2) The accepted practice is not to start something new on Monday or Wednesday and not to get married except while the moon is increasing [i.e., first half of the month]. Rema: This is why it is customary to start the new period of Torah learning on Rosh Chodesh because even though we don’t consult divination we do utilize propitious signs. If a person knows that some activity is against mazel he should not do it and have to rely on a miracle. That is because the prohibition is only to seek out this information because of be tamim with your G-d  [but one should utilize the information if he has acquired it].

One-fifth of Fox News viewers trust network less after Dominion lawsuit revelations

 https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3903299-one-fifth-of-fox-news-viewers-trust-network-less-after-dominion-lawsuit-revelations/

Asked whether the lawsuit’s revelations have impacted their belief in the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election, 13 percent of Fox News viewers say their minds were changed and that they now do not believe the 2020 election was stolen. Fifty percent said the revelations had no effect and that they still believe the election was stolen.

Must husband be told about wife's adultery? R Y. Fischer

[ See views of Rav Pe'alim] Rav Yisroel Yaakov Fischer (Even Yisroel 8:85): Question:  A baal teshuva who had returned to Judaism a number of years ago came to me. There remained one thing that bothered him greatly about his past and that was the fact that he had a relationship with a married woman. The question that he was upset about whether he was obligated to tell the husband about his wife’s sin to save him from sinning - since she had committed adultery willingly. The dilemma was that if he told the husband that would destroy the reputation of the family since it was a distinguished family. However if he didn’t tell the husband then he would be responsible for the sins that the husband has constantly since she is now prohibited to him. Answer: This question was addressed already by the Nodah B’Yehuda (Tenina O.C. #35). He said it depended on a dispute between the Rambam  and the Rosh. The  Rambam ruled in Hilchos Kelayim (10:29) that if one sees someone wearing kelayim that is prohibited by the Torah he is required to rip it off the other person – even in the street and even if the person is his teacher who has taught him wisdom. It is clear that the opinion of the Rambam is that this must be done even if the wearing of kelayim did not do it deliberately and in fact is not aware that he is wearing kelayim. Nevertheless it must be ripped off of him without concern for the person’s dignity. The Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 303) agrees with the Rambam. In contrast the Rosh (Nida 9:6) brings the words of the Yerushalmi)Kelayim 9:1),... The Rosh explains,”Rav Ami follows the view of the Amora who permits and it is in a case where either the kelayim is rabbinic or he holds that only in the case where a person finds kelayim in his own clothing he must rip it off because 'there is no wisdom or understanding against G‑d commands.' In contrast if a person see kelayim prohibited by the Torah on another person and that person doesn’t know about it – he should not inform him while he is in public because of human dignity since he isn’t wearing it on purpose to violate the Torah.” Rema (Y.D.#303) agrees  with the view of the Rosh and he states, “And some say that if the one wearing the kelayim is unaware of it it is not necessary to tell him in public.” Therefore the Noda B’Yehuda says that the question is dependent on this dispute. The Rambam’s view is that even if the person is unaware that he is sinning the prohibited kelayim still must be ripped off of him even in public and we are not concerned with his dignity. The Rambam would hold in our case that it is necessary to tell the husband in order that he separate from his wife who is now prohibited to him because the husband is doing an active act which is prohibited. In contrast the  view of the Rosh is that when someone is not sinning on purpose it is not necessary to tell him if this leads to him being embarrassed and degraded. Therefore in our case he would hold that it is not necessary to tell the husband since he isn’t deliberately sinning. However the Noda  B’Yehuda adds that our case  is different from that of kelayim. That is because the unaware person is not sinning just once but he will continue to sin for a long time. Consequently he asserts that even the Rosh would agree that it is necessary to inform the husband [....] Due to the various factors mentioned it is certain that there is no need to inform either the wife or the husband that they are prohibited because of adultery - because it won't result in their divorce. In addition there is the factor of human dignity. Furthermore one can say that even according to the Rambam in this case he would not require informing them since he doesn't witness that they are having prohibited relations and also it is possible that they won't be having sexual relations as is mentioned by Rav Pe'alim and other achronim agree with him.

Rav Wosner also has a tshuva on this subject and relies on Divrei Chaim not to tell husband and even if he does tell the husband they don't have to get divorced unless the husband believes him.

Rav Wosner (Shevet Halevi 8:287.1): Concerning a baal teshuva who unfortunately had a relationship with a married woman. Is there an obligation for the baal teshuva to tell the husband who is an observant Jew in order for him to separate from her since she is prohibited to him? I can’t go into detail in this matters but we typically follow the view of the Divrei Chaim (O.C. #35) who permits hims to turn a blind eye. According to this principle, even if he tells the husband, the husband is not obligated to divorce her unless the husband believes the testimony as is stated in Shuchan Aruch (E.H. 115:7). Consequently as long as he doesn’t believe her she is permitted to him according to the halacha. In such a case where he is not going to believe the testimony, it is permitted for the person not to inform the husband. Look at the Divrei Chaim itself.

Even Yisroel 8 85 Report Adultery

An Appeal to President Vladimir Putin to Try to Chill Out by Rabbi Shalom C. Spira

 President Vladimir Putin has hijacked the democratic machinery of the Russian government, invaded Ukraine and suspended the nuclear arms control pact with the United States, as reported at <https://hamodia.com/2023/02/21/putin-suspends-start-nuclear-pact/>. As such, it seems as though we are faced with a development where "the Holy One, Blessed Be He, will arrange for a king with difficult decrees like Haman, and the Jewish People will repent and be improved" (Sanhedrin 97b).

      To that effect, I suggested earlier this year at <http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2023/01/a-reiterated-plea-to-russia-to-stop.html> that praying in a synagogue with a formidable partition is an effective way to send a message to President Putin to pursue peace. Interestingly, an allusion to this thesis can be gleaned from the sobering tractate currently being studied in the Daf Yomi. The Gemara, Nazir 4b, relates how Shimon ha-Tzaddik was consulted by a gentleman became seized by his evil inclination when he saw his reflection in the water, the remedy for which was for the latter to become a nazirite. Remarkably, the seemingly innocuous experience of the gentleman beholding his own face was enough to disturb his spiritual harmony. How much more so, then, is it reasonable to assume that if a gentleman would see a lady's face (which is biblically prohibited pursuant to Deut. 23:10 as elucidated by the Gemara, Avodah Zarah 20a-b), he would certainly be unable to pray, such that a properly constructed synagogue partition ought to protect worshippers from such a misadventure.

      Indeed, a prayer service that follows this standard has recently been publicized at  <https://www.yiddishvideos.com/post/hachnosas-sefer-torah-%D7%94%D7%9B%D7%A0%D7%A1%D7%AA-%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A8-%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94-%D7%91%D7%A7%D7%94%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%AA-%D7%A4%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%97%D7%9D-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%A9-%D7%94%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%91%D7%94-%D7%9E%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%9F-%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A8-%D7%A9-%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%AA%D7%A8-%D7%A9>. It is the inauguration of a Torah scroll on the eve of Shavu'ot, consistent with Sfat Emet's opinion that this is the preferred timing for such an event. [See R. Yisrael David Harfenes, Teshuvot Mekadesh Yisrael (Shavu'ot), no. 55, final paragraph, available online at <https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=59547&st=&pgnum=341>.] Especially well choreographed is the song la'asot nachat ru'ach at 28:35 into the recording, with the flute audibly playing solo in the background, inspirationally reminiscent of the Rejoicing of the Water Drawing [as per the Mishnah, Sukkah 50a, that the event was named for the flute featured prominently in its orchestra], the latter event representing a halakhic source for the obligation to construct a separate ladies' gallery in the synagogue [dutifully obeyed on this videotape].  

      The Gemara, Yoma 69a, relates how Shimon ha-Tzaddik interceded with Alexander the Great to refrain from destroying the Temple by the former greeting the latter while attired in the special robe of the High Priest. Apparently, his unique vestments impressed upon the emperor that the Temple service should inspire a global superpower to refrain from violence. While we do not have a High Priest or Temple anymore [until the messianic era], we do have a Torah scroll, which is "the reliable witness to all humanity" (Rambam, Hilkhot Sefer Torah 10:11; Shulchan Arukh Yoreh De'ah 282:1). Hence, President Putin should watch this video – filled with Jews taking care not to trample one another while dancing with the Torah scroll – and be inspired to reach a peaceful resolution to his conflict with Ukraine. [And see the Gemara, Megillah 11a, which elucidates Leviticus 26:44 as a guarantee that the Jewish People will survive all the global superpowers of history, whether it be Haman, Alexander or any future regime.] 

Rabbi Spira works as the Editor of Manuscripts and Grants at the Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research [a Pavillion of the Jewish General Hospital] in Montreal, Canada.             

Trump Supporters Plan Rally Despite Fears of Protest 'Trap'

 https://www.newsweek.com/trump-supporters-plan-rally-despite-fears-protest-trap-1789003

While Trump called for protests in his Truth Social post, some other social media users have spoken about a potential protest and if it could be a "trap" that would lead to further arrests of the former president's supporters.

Astrogy and magic -Rambam

 Rambam (Letter on Astrology): I know of course that it is possible to search and find isolated opinions of some sages in the Talmud and Medrashim whose views contradict what I have said ... These statements should not trouble you because one doesn’t simply discard a clearly established halacha and revert back to the initial analysis. Similarly it is not appropriate to discard a well validated principle and simply rely on a minority opinion of the sages instead. That is because the sage is not infallible and might have erred by overlooking some important facts or hints when he stated his views. Alternatively he might have stated his view only concerning a unique situation that had been presented to him and he had not meant to state a general principle. This caution is illustrated by the fact that many verses of the Torah are not meant to be taken literally - as has been clearly established by impeccable proofs. Therefore they are explained in a way that makes sense rather than taken literally. The general rule is that a person should never easily toss aside his well considered views.. His eyes should look unflinchingly forward and not backwards..

Rambam (Hilchos Avodas Kokavim 11:16): Magic and techniques of divination are all false and deceptive and they were used to convince people that idol worship is valid. Jews who are very wise and intelligent should not be involved in this nonsense and not even to think that they might work… Whoever believes in the validity of these type of things and entertains the thought that they might be true but that he can’t use them only because the Torah prohibited them is foolish and naïve like the women and children who don’t have sophisticated minds. Wise men with straight minds know with absolute proofs that all these that the Torah prohibited are not things of intelligence but are utter nonsense that only fools pay attention to them. That is why the Torah prohibited all this nonsense be tamim with your G-d .

Chris Christie: ‘The circus continues’ on Trump calling for protests over potential arrest

 https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3907418-chris-christie-the-circus-continues-on-trump-calling-for-protests-over-potential-arrest/

“I don’t think there’s many Americans who don’t believe that Donald Trump had an affair with Stormy Daniels, and that don’t believe that he paid her money at the end of the campaign to keep it quiet. So I don’t think that the American people probably see this as a huge crime,” Christie said.

Trump’s Claim of Tuesday ‘Arrest’ Is Highly Unlikely

 https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trumps-claim-of-tuesday-arrest-is-highly-unlikely/

Trump being Trump, his social-media post calling for “PROTEST” is irresponsible. To be sure, it is completely legal — calling for protest is classic political speech protected by the First Amendment. As a matter of law, he did not call for violence and could not be deemed legally liable if his most rabid supporters interpret “PROTEST” as encouragement to riot. As a matter of common sense, though, it is shameful for Trump to speak this way after his fiery Ellipse speech was followed by a riot at the Capitol.

Maria Bartiromo breaks down the justice system double-standard with Rep James Comer, Sen Tom Cotton, and more

 https://www.foxnews.com/media/maria-bartiromo-breaks-down-justice-system-double-standard-rep-james-comer-sen-tom-cotton

JOHN RATCLIFFE: Well, it's clearly a political prosecution, and that's underscored by the fact, Maria, that you have in Melvyn Bragg, the D.A. involved here, someone who on his very first day in office said we will not prosecute armed robberies in this office. And now he's saying we will prosecute a misdemeanor offense against the opposition political party who happens to be a presidential candidate, former President of the United States, despite the fact that the statute of limitations has clearly run on that misdemeanor and the fact that other state and federal prosecutors have passed on that. So. But my take on it, Maria, is this is just the latest in sort of the evolution of of what the Democrats, as they have shifted from a party, from Democrats to progressives, which is really kind of a mix of socialists and communists who don't like the American justice system. It's a continuation of an assault on that justice system and tearing down all of the pillars that make that system work so well. So just to remind your viewers, when the Mueller investigation was going, the first of the pillars to go was the bedrock principle of a presumption of innocence. Remember, Donald Trump didn't have that presumption. He had to conclusively prove his innocence. Then quickly, it shifted in the Ukraine impeachment to the suspension of the principle of due process of law. And Donald Trump became the first president never to be allowed to have legal representation throughout the House proceedings. More recently, with Mar a Lago, the next principle to go was equal protection under the law. And we saw that when the same statute was applied between Trump and Biden. Regarding classified documents, Trump's home was raided. Biden's lawyers were allowed to just casually turn over documents whenever they want. So this latest sort of tortured prosecution that is in the offing this week by by the day in New York is just sort of the latest assault on the American justice system by the Democratic Party. 

Fox Host Desperately Tries to Connect the Dots Between Biden and Trump Investigations

 https://www.thedailybeast.com/maria-bartiromo-desperately-tries-to-connect-the-dots-between-biden-investigation-and-trump-indictment?ref=scroll

Rep. James Comer (R-KY) seems eager to believe a potential decision by the Manhattan District Attorney to indict Donald Trump has something to do with his quest to unearth documents tangentially related to Joe Biden’s family.

Comer appeared on Maria Baritromo’s Sunday Morning Futures, where Bartiromo led her one-person crusade on tying a House GOP memo detailing a payment made to Beau Biden’s widow Hallie to a potential indictment of Trump next week. She initially tried to play it straight, asking if Comer had a comment on a Trump indictment, before Comer helped launch right into it.

In hush money probe, Trump’s lawyer is anything but quiet

 https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3905897-in-hush-money-probe-trumps-lawyer-is-anything-but-quiet/

But Andrew Weissmann, a former prosecutor who served as one of the lead attorneys on the Mueller investigation, said the claim is itself problematic. 

“That is an admission he paid $ (which he had been denying) and the $ was not for legal fees (the cover story). Because the NY criminal case reportedly focuses on the crime of making false business records — his ‘defense’ is an confession,” Weissmann wrote on Twitter.

Turmoil in Israel, trepidation in Palestine

 https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/3/10/turmoil-in-israel-trepidation-in?traffic_source=KeepReading

Soon after the fascists and fanatics took the reins of power in Israel and began transforming the Jewish state into an autocratic state bordering on a theocracy, secular and liberal forces took to the streets. It was a desperate attempt to stop the new government from fast-tracking legislation that curtails the powers of the judiciary and subordinates the country’s Supreme Court to the whims of the ruling coalition’s slim majority in parliament.