Introduction to new book on the Jewish understanding of marriage and gender issues

When I started this work I thought it would be relatively easy. After all Jews are known for good and stable marriages. However it soon became apparent that there is a significant gap between common understanding and traditional sources. In addition there have been changes. Not only in the general society but also within our community and in halacha. A further problem is that as Rav Lichtenstein has pointed out, there is not simply one unique Torah or Jewish model of marriage. In addition the various models have evolved through the ages. Consequently I have focused on showing the essential building blocks, the components, that are highly regarded by Judaism – rather than a final finished model of marriage. In this regard it is important to know that my Rosh haYeshiva – Rabbi Friefeld told me not to read anything about marriage before I got married, but rather rely on him to inform me what I needed to know prior to the wedding. His actual advise was “Don’t do anything that is disgusting” There are multiple models of marriage to be found. Rabbi Akiva an ignorant shepherd who became one of the leading Sages as the result of falling in love. But he spent his much of his married life separate from his wife in the study hall. Yakov also fell in love with Rachel but she betrayed him to prevent her sister from being shamed. Yitzchok had an arranged marriage. According to the Netziv his wife viewed him with such awe that they could not have a normal conversation. Rava had a horrible marriage and didn’t want to get divorced because of financial reasons. Abraham and Sarah seemed to have a good marriage and remained affectionate even after death according to the gemora. However it seems that G-d was so concerned for their domestic tranquility, that He misled Avraham about what Sarah said about him. Rav Meir apparently brought about his wife’s suicide. At the other extreme Ben Azzai never married and there is the familiar story of Rav Aryeh Levine who tells his wife’s doctor “her foot is hurting us”. In addition both the  Rambam’s son and the Chasam Sofer’s son indicate that marriage is inherently incompatible with spiritual greatness or being a successful leader.  Aside from not physically or verbally abusing one’s wife there doesn’t seem to be clear advice given. Lying is not only permitted but seems recommended to maintain peace. Additionally, there are clearly negative statements regarding women in general as well as a number of positive ones. None of this fits in smoothly with the modern concepts of women or marriage. Halacha clearly is oriented to the male. Thus the male marries the woman and only he has the right to divorce. I present the sources as is with no attempts at apologetics or political correctness. The assumption is that Torah is from G-d and it doesn’t change because of the latest intellectual or social fad. I do present Rav Moshe’s tshuva about the feminist movement. In an enlightening secular book “All or nothing Marriage” the changing nature of marriage is described. Initially marriage was primarily a pragmatic institution both for the man and woman and their children and the welfare of society. Apparently as the result of the industrial Revolution and the improvement of society there was a gradual change in the 1800’s to Romantic love as the basis for marriage. This  standard has been changed in recent years to self-fulfillment. Thus marriage and divorce happen now not because of love but rather whether there are feelings of having a fulfilling relationship. “I can do better with a different spouse that helps me bring out my best”  All three models are supported by traditional sources. In addition the validity of the concept of having a predestined spouse (bashert) is also discussed as are the issues of adultery, pleasure and gender and other related topics. I cite traditional sources and generally ignore academic or non-Jewish sources. While some will voice disappointment at the lack of clear guidelines, the reality is that each marriage is unique and most be tailored to fit that couple. Some will prefer a marriage of the husband as king and master while others prefer a more equal relationship. The Pele Yoetz even seems to recommend having a bad marriage as an opportunity for spiritual and personal growth.  What is clear is that there is no assumption that you will marry based primarily on falling madly in love with some one predestined and that this leads to years of bliss and tranquility and good with the love undiminished. People change over time and the spouse you marry will transform many times during the marriage as will you. It is best according to Rav Wolbe to focus on commitment to the other as well as sensitivity to each other’s needs, to have basic principles and to receive advice and guidance from others. As a great tzadik once told me, “my wife is a saintly woman but sometimes she gets on my nerves.” Disagreements are an inherent part of any relationship and should not be viewed as proof of failure. It is more important to disagree in a sensitive way than to pretend everything is perfect. Similarly while disagreements should be expected, physical and verbal abuse is not acceptable. It is also important to realize that not every rabbi or therapist will be helpful and in some cases will make things worse. This is also true for advice from family and friends. As noted below Rav Yakov Kaminetsky claimed ignorance of dealing with marriage problems. Rav Moshe Feinstein had the practice of going to his apartment for lunch every day, where is wife prepared the single hot meal he got during the day. Once while he was eating lunch, he got an urgent phone call from a couple who were having a major fight. He stopped eating to try and resolve the problem. All the time he was on the phone, his wife was urging him to hang up and eat his meal. Finally at the end he resolved the issue and hung up the phone but there was no time to finish his meal before returning to the yeshiva. The young men who accompanied him as him asked. “Why was the domestic tranquility of the couple on the phone more important than his own? He answered that on the phone two people were fighting but in regarding his wife it was only one person.”  There was a certain rosh yeshiva who had a very bad marriage and went to Rav Moshe for advice. Rav Moshe told him not to get divorced. This continued for five years and it got so bad he ended divorcing her. He told friends that he had lost 5 years because he listened to Rav Moshe.

Kashering by renaming. What is Jewish Psychotherapy?

 Update: I carefully read this post for the first time after receiving a strong protest by a frum therapist. I agree with his objection so I decided I needed to add a preface. The problem of accepting ideas simply because they are from Psychology and thus assumed to be tested and true - is in fact a real problem which is why I published this There are many ideas which are not tested, not true and are in conflict with Torah values. BUT there are also many valuable ideas and techniques. It isn't a choice between totally accepting Psychology or totally rejecting. There is a need for thoughtful vetting of ideas and techniques by people knowledgable in both Torah and Psychology. There is also a need to focus on evidence based Psychology. There is a lot in Psychology - just as there is in medicine - which seems to make sense but doesn't actually work or can be harmful. 

We also need to recognized that there is also a corresponding problem of frum people mechanically applying Torah ideas - without a sensitivity and concern as to whether these ideas are appropriate for the situation or people and whether they help or harm spiritual growth.

============================================
Guest post

May University Academic Psychology be imported en bloc into Judaism?

Does Hashkaffah have to be consistent with itself, or may incompatible ideologies be homogenized?

How are treif ideas introduced into the Haredi community?

If you take ideas from anywhere and just rename them, 'Psychology', they automatically become acceptable.

'Psychiatric diagnosis' 

Denigrating, labeling and degrading another Jew, an action previously called ‘lashon hara’, ‘motsi shem ra’, ‘onoas devarim’, ‘mitkabed bklon chaveiro’ and ‘yalbin pnei chaveiro berabim’, is now acceptable if it is renamed 'psychiatric diagnosis'. This is what they publicly did to the husband of the agunah. He has grounds for lodging a complaint.

Even if this ‘psychiatric diagnosis’ is valid, which I doubt, it may only be applied 1) to a patient and 2) confidentially. In this case, it is public slander.

I doubt the validity of the DSM5, the categories therein, and the application of these stigmatizing labels.

The names of the non-existent illnesses in the DSM5 are merely derogatory epithets.

Just rename these ideas, 'Psychology' or ‘Psychiatry’, they automatically become acceptable.

Practices which previously were forbidden by Torah, for example, onoas devarim, obscene speech or shaming, all of a sudden become permitted by renaming them ‘psychotherapy’.

‘Psychotherapy’ is really ‘Just Talking’, and does not have any special status which permits violating Hallachah.

Psychologists and psychiatrists are admired for the mere fact of being 'psychologists' or ‘psychiatrists’ and will be invited to speak at a shul. Speakers will be invited to tell us "the secrets of marriage", "how to handle stress", "’how to’ … many other things", parenting, relationships, education and "the meaning of life" and so, deviously they introduce Christian existentialism, mechanical behaviourism, carnal Freudianism, deterministic neuroscience and Eastern meditation into our culture.

Freud has been elevated from the anti - religious person he really was (he wrote, "Religion is the universal obsessive neurosis of mankind") into a 'ground breaking medical pioneer'.

Psychoanalysis has been elevated from the pornography it really is into a 'respectable medical treatment'. Any harmful practice to another person becomes acceptable just by calling it ‘doing chesed’ or ‘therapy’.

Besides the current topical agunah/eishes ish/mekach taut case, there is another questionable heter from psychology which needs to be examined.

When women are allowed to have abortions or contraception, "in order to protect the "'mental health of the mother'" (rodef?), we have to question the vague, capricious, subjective term, "mental health of the mother".

Is the term, "the mental health of the mother" really an authentic illness and serious enough to warrant an abortion?

Some religious women may go through a doubtful "post natal depression" in order to get a heter for contraception...

I think the general practice appears to be meikel because we fear the risk of suicide.

Kids may try obtaining abusable, stimulant drugs through the questionable illnesses of ADD\ADHD and learning "disorders".

Shyness in a woman is regarded as being Tzniyus and is a very precious Jewish value. However, in the American value system, shyness is regarded as an "illness", "Social Anxiety", to be treated with tranquillizers.

In fact there must be many examples of the misuse of psychological conditions and behaviours, renamed as "illnesses", to make permitted the otherwise forbidden.

On the other side of the coin, there must be many examples of renaming bad practices as "therapy" to make permitted the otherwise forbidden.

What about electric shocking people against their will? Usually this would be assault, striking a person, but renaming this as "therapy" makes it permitted.

The Aseret HaDibrot forbids kidnapping. "Lo Tignov", Although this refers to one stealing a person for resale and being chayav mita, lesser degrees of confining people against their will are also forbidden, and involuntary psychiatric hospitalization may be a loophole through which this is done. Of particular danger are young girls, with anorexia nervosa, who are removed from their frum home environments and placed in very suspect circumstances where bad things and bad influences happen.

Viktor Frankl's Logotherapy. The only psychotherapy acceptable to Judaism?

In certain circles over the past 40 years, Viktor Frankl's has been promoted as, the only psychotherapy acceptable to Judaism!

Probably the reason Frankl's therapy is so popular in religious, especially kiruv, (and missionary) circles is his use of expressions like 'Religion', 'Values', 'Free Will' and 'Responsibility' as solutions. These are presented as opposed to deterministic Freudianism and mechanical behaviourism, and therefore appear to be an improvement. However these attempts to elevate psychology by "adding Spiritual Values" doesn't work.

Here we will show that Viktor Frankl's psychotherapy is the opposite of what it is advertised as. It is actually deviously introducing non-Jewish values and undermining Torah!

Both Logotherapy and Existentialism, which have been popularized, are actually alien to Judaism and we have been misled.

Viktor Frankl, prescribes 'Meaning' as a reason for becoming religious, and as the cure for mental illness.

Problems of living or whatever, are addressed by Frankl's followers with, "You need, Rx prescription, "Meaning in Life".

When someone is told, "You need to get 'Meaning In Life'" does that mean that 'Meaning In Life' is a commodity which you can "get"?

Actually, it's impossible to "get "'Meaning' in Life.""

It's impossible to get "'Meaning' in Life", because 'Meaning' is an abstract noun and does not denote any concrete thing.

What do Existentialists refer to when they talk about ‘Meaning’?

Let's search for the origins.

In the writings of the existentialist psychiatrist, Viktor Frankl, he recommends "Meaning in Life" as a cure out of despair or alienation or mental illness, and yet Frankl does not say what that "Meaning" is! He certainly does not specify "Torah and Mitzvot"! "Meaning" can be anything, and is subjectively unique to the individual.

In the case of Sartre the French, "atheist existentialist", "Meaning" could stand for, or refer to, exercising his freedom and creativity in literature, or fighting in the French Resistance, out of having suffered the "meaninglessness of life". Once again Sartre also holds that, "Meaning" can be anything, and is subjectively unique to the individual.

For Jewish existentialist Martin Buber "Meaning" appears to be found in the "Encounter" between "I and Thou".

For German existentialist, Martin Heidegger, speaking in 1933, "The Führer alone is the present and future German reality and its law."

Let's go to the first existentialist in order for us to grasp the origin of the concept.

In the case of Søren Kierkegaard, the founder of Existentialism, as a Christian, Jesuit priest, "Meaning" seems to refer to, turning to the Lord out of the sickness of Original Sin. This seems to be the prototype of "Meaning" from Existentialism's creator.

From here by induction we may generalize out what Existentialists refer to by "Meaning".

Existentialist "Meaning" refers to "turn to X out of Y".

"X" = existential "Meaning."

Where "X" means any subjective meaning you want the variable to be.

However "X" has a quasi religious orientation, like "turn to the Lord", although atheist existentialists have given a non-theistic meaning to "X" like 'creativity' or 'patriotism' or 'French freedom'. Sartre described Existentialism as "theology without a god".

The variable, "Y" could be any negative state you'd like it to be e.g. 'nothingness', 'despair', 'mental illness', 'original sin', 'alienation', 'meaninglessness' etc.

"Turn" is of a therapeutic or quasi 'religious conversion' nature.

Existentialists tell us, "turn to X out of Y!"

An underlying principle behind the use of Viktor Frankl is the double agenda of therapy as religious conversion.' i.e. "Meaning In Life" as a cure, being the reason for becoming religious. This is not seeing 'Religion' as Truth, or the Essence of Creation, but rather pragmatically, 'Religion' as "therapy" or crutch.

Just to add a sad digression; If he had lived in his time, how would Karl Marx have understood Viktor Frankl's therapy?

"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."

— Karl Marx.

It's because we have perspectives like Viktor Frankl's that we get responses like Karl Marx's.

Yidden,

We've been fooled!

By the way! Was Viktor Frankl really the spiritual, existential psychiatrist that propaganda makes him out to be? No! Who was Viktor Frankl?

Viktor Frankl was an extreme, institutional, organic psychiatrist who prescribed drugs, practiced shock treatment and carried out lobotomies! Surely many of these practices are excessive and violent and may be hallachicly questionable, but are allowed to slip through under the guise of "medical treatment"!

A further concern to Torah observant Jews is Jungian Psychology.

Is Jungian Psychology a gateway to cults?

Jung's concept of the collective unconscious led him to incorporate Eastern and Western religions. Are patients undergoing such therapy likely to be introduced to Eastern and other Religions?

Jung is embraced, because he also incorporated 'Religion' into his psychology. Once again 'Religion' and 'Therapy' is the program.

May we generalize this to an abuse of psychotherapy, the influence or conversion of the patient to the therapist's religion, or the opposite, the "dereligionization" of the patient to atheism? It must be noted that many patients are involuntary patients or coerced into therapy and do not have the choice of therapist with appropriate value systems and treatments.

Yidden, We've been fooled!

Partial Excerpt from Abuse Book - Dr. Baruch Shulem

From Professional Clinician to Obligated Jew

Why?

This book is a partial fulfillment of a religious, emotional, and professional obligation that was forced upon me years ago by my clients who suffered from child abuse. I can’t remember one of them ever saying to me “you have to …” but their pain and questions were enough of a reprimand that I took upon myself to do more than just “talk.”

This book is more than ‘just about talk therapy and helping individuals;’ it is about advocacy, namely the pursuit of influencing outcomes that directly affect people’s lives. My clients were challenging my deeply held beliefs in Torah and Torah communities. Both in their eyes and in my own mind, I became the representative of the Orthodox Jewish community that had not adequately answered their cry for help. They were not only abused, but also abandoned by the community that makes up a significant part of the Orthodox ‘self. It is as if there is – beyond the pain of abuse – a psychological punishment of “Karet".

No secular therapist could understand this unique facet of the Jewish self: how the individual is indivisible from his or her community. The secular therapist would counsel the individual to be strong, independent, overcome, forget and maybe even forgive. But for us ‘Karet’ is too meaningful and too overwhelming to “go on with life.” There is no life after “Karet”, be it just psychological or heaven forbid otherwise.

This kind of ‘Karet’ inadvertently begins long before the abuse. It begins with the absence of a vocabulary of abuse. The source of this lacuna seems to be the belief that the Torah community and the Torah personality do not do these ‘things'.

They – the other groups be they religious, ethnic, or national - might do it, so why “open your mouth to the devil?” If you don’t talk about ‘it’ it doesn’t exist. Why voluntarily bring even the subject into our homes or schools? This approach is grounded also in a unique religious perspective, that in reality speech and actions are indivisible. In other words, talking facilitates doing. [this is page 1 of 10 page essay]

How to explain child abuse by Orthodox Jews - to secular therapists?

I was asked to give a speech at a major conference on the issue of child abuse in the Orthodox community. The conference is being held for secular  psychotherapists who deal with this issue daily. It will be in a month

I was not asked to speak as a therapist but rather as an Orthodox Jew. This is an interesting and important challenge since these therapists have a significant number of Orthodox patients and clearly would like a better understanding of the dynamics of this issue. Many of the therapists are Jewish but very few are observant. A number of them come from Orthodox backgrounds - but are now secular.

I would appreciate suggestions and insights which you think might be important to get across to an audience that will be polite  but not  sympathetic to the dynamics of the Orthodox community. What would you say if you had this opportunity?

===============

I'd also like to report  the fact that my books on abuse are selling in Jewish books stores without significant opposition - contrary to everyone's prediction.. Eichler's of Flatbush just told me that it is selling well and that they just reordered. The world has changed - but still has a way to go.

English Translation of Rav Moshe Sternbuch's protest against heter for Tamar Epstein to remarry without a Get

Rav Moshe Sternbuch

Protest against heter for Tamar Epstein to remarry without a Get

This is in regards to the recently publicized psak of one of the gedolim (an American rosh yeshiva) together with an American posek. The psak freed a woman from marriage without a Get despite the fact that she had lived with her first husband for an extended period of time and she had born a daughter from him. But now a therapist claims that the husband suffers from mental illness that had existed prior to their marriage. Therefore these two rabbis paskened that they had determined that the marriage was a mistake (mekach ta'os) and that therefore the woman was free to marry immediately without needing a Get. And in fact they [the posek] officiated at a wedding for her without her receiving a Get.

And I saw the teshuva that "freed" her. I hate to say this but the teshuva is total nonsense. Taking the approach of this teshuva it is possible to destroy the whole framework of halachic marriage. For example, if a spouse is found to have cancer – something which begins to develop a long time before it is discovered by the doctors – it would be possible according to the logic of this teshuva to declare that the marriage is a mistake (mekach ta'os) and thus never existed. Similarly there are thousands of other cases of problems that develop prior to marriage but are only discovered after marriage.

In fact in many cases of divorce, the wife brings a therapist's opinion to beis din, that the husband suffers from mental illness that was a pre-existing condition. Therefore according to the view of these two rabbis there would be no need for a Get (G-d forbid!) in those cases! Such an approach is destructive to Judaism and uproots the basic laws governing Jewish marriage. And this that they claim that they are merely basing themselves on the views of Rav Moshe Feinstein – that is total nonsense. The present case is not comparable to Rav Moshe's cases. But this is not the place to go into the details.

When a certain Religious Zionistic rabbi declared the he had found a heter for  a person who had the status of a mamzer to marry, the Minchas Yitzchok (Dayan Weiss) gathered the people together and they sat on the ground and tore their clothing as a sign of mourning. It is explained in Kiddushin (13a) that when a married woman is declared to be free of her married status against the halacha, G-d becomes very angry and brings about punishment which is greater than that of the Generation of the Flood. To the degree that even the fish in the sea are destroyed.

It is important, therefore that it be publicized that the heter of these rabbis for her to remarry is totally worthless and has no basis. Consequently she is still married to the first husband in every respect and therefore any children born from her relation to the second husband are clearly mamzerim. I have no peace of mind because I have not heard protests against this false heter - which is against G-d's honor and His Torah.

I heard from the Brisker Rav that when there is a serious problem that it be  dealt with by  issuing a categorical prohibition without giving detailed explanations. That is because if a reason for the objections are given, then it is possible for someone to argue and say they are wrong. Therefore also in this case, I am not coming forth except to encourage he who protests the heter and sanctifies G-d's name.  His reward is exceedingly great.

A personal Elul message for Dr. Schlesinger - "Have you no shame?"

A personal note to my obsessive reader Dr. Michael Schlesinger,

I want to note that your obsession with hurting your former wife and your children - is a disgrace not only for a human being and a father -  but especially as a Jew.  Our Sages say because mercy and kindness are inherently part of the nature of a Jew - that someone who lacks these qualities - is suspected of not being a Jew. Are you really Jewish?

As has been noted many times, divorce is painful and degrading - but that is no justification for your efforts to erase Beth contact with her children. It is clear from the police and court documents that despite Beth being an excellent mother - you and your associates have succeeded in taking custody away from her in a manner that would have brought shame and universal condemnation in any normal Western democracy. Unfortunately Vienna - especially the Jewish community - is an embarrassment to humanity and Torah values.

Your blocking of visitation as well as your attempt to punish Beth by arbitrarily cancelling court ordered visits is beyond disgusting. Your insistence on an arrangement that requires Beth to pay an unnecessary and burdensome transfer fee - can only be described as characteristic of Sedom - the most negative description given by our Sages for twisted, gratuitous behavior.

.

You have succeeded in not only severely disrupting Beth life - for no positive gain for your self - but your actions have the strong potential for causing your children permanent psychological damage. It is clear that they have already produced developmental delays.

I recently posted a number of comments by someone who signed herself "Beth". While I have no way of ascertaining the identity of the correspondent - I am sure that you either have or will be taking legal action against Beth because of it. You are one of my most devoted readers - because of your hatred and desire to destroy Beth. Sick!!!!

Our Sages talk about the dangers of "hatred in the heart" which poisons and rots all positive aspects of a person. That is what you are manifesting and you will reap the consequences if you don't wake up now to reality - including the psychological and spiritual

Michael - it is time for you to stop and think about what you are doing with your life. Do you have any concerns that are greater than hurting and showing hatred for Beth and your children? Do you really think that after 120 years your cathartic violence will be praised? Will your children thank you when they become adults - for hurting the one person that they love and crippling them psychologically? Or will you end up as a bitter old man who is shunned by everyone and dies without friends or family? Why is the purpose of your life to hate - and not to love?

We are in the month of Elul It is time for you to stop and reflect on who you are and where you are going in life. G-d put you here on Earth for something more praiseworthy than destroying the life and happiness of others. It is not too late to repent and start over with the sole guiding principle - "What is in the best interest of my children?"

 I would suggest that you and Beth go to an independent child psychologist and jointly work out a constructive program. I would also strongly recommend that you see an independent therapist and be evaluated as to how you can get your life together. The results should be shared with the court - which for some reason has failed to have you properly assessed.

I would also suggest strongly that you apologize to Beth and your children and devote your considerable talents to helping others - not hurting them. It is not too late - but at some point the damage you are causing will not be reversible. Wake up now!

Sexual Misconduct of Rabbi/Therapist by Dr. Klafter

Guest Post by Dr. Nachum Klafter:
[see related Dr. Klafter's critique of Rav Zilberstein's proposal for same gender therapist-client

Nachum Klafter, M.D., is Director of Psychotherapy Training at the University of Cincinnati Psychiatry Residency Training Program.  Dr. Klafter received his M.D. from the State University of New York at Buffalo.  He completed his specialty training in psychiatry at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia, where he also served as Chief Resident.  Dr. Klafter maintains a private practice in psychoanalytic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis.  He is the Vice President of the Cincinnati Hebrew Day School Board.  He is an active member of the Nefesh International network of Orthodox Jewish Mental Health Professionals.  Dr. Klafter’s interest in child advocacy stems from his experiences as a psychotherapist and psychoanalyst, through which he has learned in intimate detail the tragic, long-term impact of child sexual abuse on its victims.  He resides in Cincinnati, Ohio with his wife and four daughters- He also contributed a chapter to my sefer Child and Domestic Abuse Volume I

Sexual Misconduct and the Question of Rehabilitation [v3]

Tamar Epstein: Translation of protest by R Shlomo Miller, R E B Wachtfogel, R Moshe Green and R Yechiel Tauber

This is concerning the uproar regarding the case of Tamar Epstein the wife of Aharon Friedman. He has refused to give her a Get for many years because of unresolved issues regarding custody of their daughter.  The facts of the case of been investigated and established by Rav Aharon Feldman. 

There is a "rav" [R Nota Greenblatt] who has given Tamar a heter to remarry without a Get. He  said the marriage was annulled retroactively because of the principle of mekach ta'os (mistaken acquistion). The reason for the mekach ta'os he claims is that the husband (Aharon) suffers from the personality disorders of Paranoid Personality Disorder (PPD_ and Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD).

However this explanation is not adequate justification for annulling the marriage - since it is obvious that there are many people who have such personality disorders and yet are still able to have a successful marriage. In fact I asked two psychotherapists about this and they both said that these personality disorders are not mental illness but are simply personality traits. Thus there is absolutely no justification to declare the marriage annulled because of mekach ta'os. Furthermore the Beis Din of Baltimore - which is the only beis din that has been authorized by both side and they both appeared before it - has said that there is no sign of mental illness in the husband.

And if as a result of this "psak", reckless and irresponsible rabbis permit other woman to remarry it would mean that there will never be a need for a Get again. That is because the wife will simply claim that she has discovered that her husband has a serious personality problem and that she would have never agreed to marry him if she had known about it before the marriage. As a result of this mistaken reasoning - G-d forbid- it will result in multiplying the number of mamzerim in the Jewish people.

 Besides the above objections to the heter, it is a fact that they remained living together for an extended period of time and she never claimed that her marriage was a mistake -mekach ta'os. And in addition even after the therapist wrote that her husband had these "incurable" personality disorders - she remained living with him for a period of 4 months. Given these facts it is obvious that even if in fact that her husband has this defect of mental illness  (but as we noted before it is not a defect that justifies annulling the marriage ) it is clear that she was able to accept him as a husband and therefore the marriage can not be considered inherently mistaken (mekach ta'os).

Today it is widespread that reckless and irresponsible people who want to resolve every case of aguna by simply saying that the marriage is a mistaken marriage (mekach ta'os). As a result of such an approach the Torah (G-d forbid!) will be deserted and no one will be concerned with the truth as to what the halacha really is. It will be sufficient for these people that they can find some sort of rabbi who will declare that they are free from their marriage and it doesn't concern them whether the rabbi is following the halacha or not.

Today when  the Jewish people is in mortal danger from the sword of the Arabs, we need to ask what sin has brought about these types of afflictions? I am not a prophet  or even the son of a prophet and I don't have esoteric knowledge - but I do know something about the words of our Sages. The sword comes to the world because of those who rebel against the Torah and distort its teaching against the halacha. There is no greater rebellion and distortion of the Torah than to say that it is permitted for a married woman to marry someone else without first receiving a Get from her husband.

In summary, this married woman Tamar Epstein is prohibited to her second husband because she married him without first obtaining a Get from her first husband. Consequently all children she has from her second husband are mamzerim and can not marry other Jews.

Signed in anguish because of the terrible destruction and the public chilul haShem

Rav Shlomo Miller
Rav E B. Wachtfogel
Rav Moshe Green
Rav Yechiel Tauber

Pioneering Orthodox sex therapist accused of harassment

 https://forward.com/news/485421/bat-sheva-marcus-jofa-sexual-harassment/?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_4067165

Multiple claims of harassment have emerged against a pioneering figure of women’s empowerment from former employees of the organization she helped found.

Bat Sheva Marcus, a renowned sex therapist who was the president of the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance, was accused in scathing Facebook posts this week by a former executive director of the group who said Marcus bullied her, made sexually inappropriate comments and, unsolicited, once gave her a sex toy.

Is reality all in the mind or is it objective?

One of the issues I am working on now is the Jewish view about attitude  towards reality. One view is that there is such a thing as  objective reality and that one must know about this reality. One must understand the facts, one needs a clear evaluation of one's talents and a critical review of whether they are beling applied in a way to bring about change. There is a need for feedback and consultation with others as to how effective one is interacting with the world. One needs to learn new skills or make changes in behavior or attitude. This is the view of the Ramban

On the other hand others claim that reality ultimately doesn't matter but all that matters is your feeling or beliefs as to whether they are positive or negative i.e., It all depends on what is going on in your mind.. If you have bitachon you will be happy and wealthy and if you don't you will be an unhappy failure. If you believe everything is wonderful and G-d will provide whatever you need than there is really no need to get a job or see a Rav or therapist about improving your communication skills or stopping harmful behavior. You just need to focus on the quality of your thoughts. Positive thoughts attract blessing and negative thoughts create the reverse. This has a direct counterpart in the non-Jewish world i.e., The Secret. This is the view of Chovas HaLevavos

The following is an example of the "all in your mind" school.

From "Its all in Your Mind" by Sara Yosef page 26 She is Rav Ovadia Yosef's daughter in law - married to Rav Avrahm Yosef.

"If a family is not doing well financially, the wife ought to consider whether in her mind she questions he husband's abilities as a provider. Does she think of him unsuccessful, or unable to earn a living? Does she feel that he allows others to take advantage of him, or that he is unwilling to work hard? Without realizing it, she projects her thoughts to her surroundings. Ultimately, these thoughts and beliefs become realtiy. The moment she changes her negative attitudes toward her husband, and instead strives to think positive thoughts about him such as, "He's earning a nice living; he's really quite talented" - that family will begin to see Hashem's blessing in their labors. The family's economic situation will change for the better. Our belief is the key to producing change in our day to day living."

"For her I weep" - mourning Shira Banki : A postscript

Reb Daniel,

I am including this background note regarding my Jerusalem Post article about the murder of Shira Banki at the Gay Pride Parade. Please feel free to share it.

When Shira Banki was murdered by Yishai Schlissel I perceived an ambivalent response from the frum community here in ארץ ישראל and online. I was disturbed by an apparent lack of outrage, empathy, sadness or despair. While the frum community was not to blame for her murder - there was no incitement -  I believe we were at fault for our uncertain reaction. After numerous orthodox publications declined my oped, I decided to publish in the Jerusalem Post to express my sorrow and to encourage mourning her unjustified murder. After publication, a רבי I admire admonished me for publishing criticism of the frum community in a secular newspaper and I accept his rebuke. My intention was to inspire members of our broader community and not to disparage us on a public stage.

As a postscript to my article, when I went to be מנחם אבל her family, Shira's father was grateful for my consolation but adamant that his family wanted more than just my tears. In that context I could not share with him how I oppose the parade and at the same time mourn his daughter's horrific fate. To me, it is clear that one can be opposed to the parade and still horrified and saddened by her murder. I believe mourning Shira's death and visiting her family are natural responses to the tragedy and wonder why few in our community felt the same. As I heard afterward in the name of Rav Moshe Shapiro, "when one is killed שלא כדין it is רציחה and the דין of נחום אבלים applies." Hers was a remarkable murder under remarkable circumstances that should not have been met with silence.

To be clear, how to relate publicly to the LGBT community is a complex topic and I am in no position to endorse an opinion on the matter. Still, when an unjustified murder occurs publicly in the name of הלכה, I do believe that responding with compassion is appropriate, respectable and ultimately, a קדוש השם.

כתיבה וחתימה טובה,

Mendel

=================================================

 Jerusalem Post

For her I weep

By MENDEL HOROWITZ

The author is a rabbi and family therapist in Jerusalem, where he maintains a private practice working with adults and children.

08/10/2015 

There was no announcement about young Shira’s funeral in my neighborhood, no acknowledgment of her talents gone lost.

If a sixteen-year-old Jewish girl was murdered under any other circumstances than Shira Banki was in Jerusalem last week, our reaction as a community would have been different. That her ideological killing was met by ambivalence and not simply sorrow, so soon after Tisha Be’av, reflects how unfocused we have become. Shira’s unspeakable homicide should be met with tears and not with commentary. Her death should be mourned and not disregarded or explained.

There was no announcement about young Shira’s funeral in my neighborhood, no acknowledgment of her talents gone lost. At best I sensed disinterest. At worst I heard rationale. For some, the context of young Shira’s murder became cause for ignoring it. Others seized the opportunity to assign her community blame. Missing was our lamentation. Absent was our despair. There should be no uncertainty about young Shira’s assassination, no ambiguity about her Jewish blood spilled. “All her friends have betrayed her,” said Isaiah. Disregarding young Shira’s execution is akin to condoning her death.

As Jews we are accustomed to crying. The tragedies of history familiarize us all to pain. But there is more than oppression in our hardship, more than persecution in our fate. Survival has demanded our caution. Vigilance has contributed to our alarm. Exile, it seems, has looted our affections, robbed us of our sensibility and goodwill.

Alongside our grief lies confusion. Alongside our anguish looms mistrust. Not reacting to Shira’s murder indicates cowardice, not daring. Not recoiling from her death reveals weakness, not strength.

Satan must be laughing. In our zeal to uphold morals we have neglected ethics. In our defense of principles we have abandoned ideals. When a murdered Jew evokes anything but sadness we have strayed. When compassionate ones are apathetic we have blundered.

There is a time for debate and a time for weeping. A time for protest and a time for distress. Pretending Shira’s murder did not happen will not bring decency to Jerusalem. Dishonoring Shira’s slaughter with interpretation should not make anyone feel proud.

The scandal of Shira’s death is how predictably it exposed our vulnerability, how intolerably righteous was the indignation it, in some, aroused. Instead of human kindness, an unnatural detachment prevailed that was defensive and offensive both. Anticipating bigotry, some placed their self-justifying agenda first by insisting the community was not liable for a madman.

Others terribly suggested – with words or intentional silence – the anomalous evil was not worth bemoaning. While none proposed its permissibility, few people I know were outraged. Few unambiguously shed tears. Condolences were cursory and scarce.

The circumstances of Shira’s life need not be affirmed to justify bewailing her death. Her attitudes and behavior can be questioned. Her motives can be even denounced. Grieving, however, should be unfettered by opinion, unbound by the dispassion of thought.

Tears can fall with no reason. Sobbing can happen with no remark. The event behind her homicide may be regrettable but being numb to Shira’s slaying is something worse. A sister lay bloodied in our city. A daughter fell butchered in His name.

Tolerance is the call of our times and its demand is complicated to heed or to deny.

The divine image seems more varied than we knew.

Apologies may be gratuitous for what was said before her murder but introspection is needed for what came to mind after Shira died. To imagine Shira’s death was warranted is shameless. To ignore young Shira’s death is no less a sentiment of conceit. “Detestable are the proud of heart,” said Solomon. Exile is a time of reflection, humility, doubt. In our hurry to be right we may have wronged. In our rush to not condone we have condemned.

Like orphans without fathers we know how it feels to be frightened. Like widows without husbands we know how it feels to be alone. To be forsaken is to be endowed no security. To be rejected is to be afforded no hope. Banishment is cruel. With abandonment comes unrest and uncertainty. With confusion comes fear and disgust. Like countless victims before her Shira is a casualty of exile, of the disaster that arises from instability and hate. But not everything is controversial, not everything unclear. Shira deserves regard because she did not deserve her fortune. Shira deserves our notice, if not for how she lived then for how she died. As on Tisha Be’av our trust is in our yielding. As on Tisha Be’av our prayer is in our cry.

Rabbeinu Yonah: Make peace with therapist or police?

In a previous post regarding finding source for counseling or therapy to produce shalom bayis in a marriage, the clearest statement seems to be from Rabbeinu Yonah. However after reading it several times I don't think he was talking about what we would call therapy. I think he is describing policeman who can talk as well as they can shoot. In general there seems to be no concern for developing the psychological or emotional relationships within marriage - but simply removing hate and discord in the marriage. The fact that Taanis (22a) talks about clowns making peace - reinforces my point.

Rabbeinu Yonah (Igros Teshuva  #8): The Jewish people are obligated to chose specific men whose task it is to make peace between a man and his wife and between a man and his fellow. These men need to be given the power to force and pressure people concerning peace. These designated men must all be cheerful people who know how to placate and to mollify others and thus make peace. They should not be angry or vicious as it say in Mishlei (15:18) , The angry man stirs up a quarrel. It also says in Mishlei (15:1), The soft answer turns away anger. It says in the Talmud [Taanis 22a] concerning certain people who make peace, We are jesters and we make peace. The Sages said about these men that made peace with joy and a good heart that they were promised that they would get Olam HaBah


Why do you need a source for shalom bayis being therapy?

I think it is obvious. The way you respond to strife in marriage reflects what you think marriage is. What you perceive as malfunction in the relationship tells you what marriage is and what this particular marriage is not accomplishing. The apparent Torah description indicates it is simply a type of alliance for the mutual benefit of both parties and society. However modern understanding is that it is the necessary relationship for emotional and psychological needs and therefore a marriage where both sides fulfill their halachic obligations but isn't fulfilling and emotionally satisfying as well as lacking in love - needs to be fixed or ended. Therefore if all the sources dealing with strife in marriage focus on ending conflict - police actions - then there is no concern for love, affection or psychological issues. Consequently one could conclude these issues are not required by the Torah.

Of course one can say that even though they are not the Torah understand are still relevant. That is because the current conceptualization is ais l'asos - that since we are strongly influenced by the non-Jewish culture we need to have love (Hollywood style), fulfillment etc etc - then it would seem to be fine to now be concerned with them. It is simply a pragmatic reality for our times. It doesn't matter on a practical level what happened in the past. We are simply existing in a transient blip in history and we do what we do for the current needs for the members of our society - not what our ancestors 500 years ago did.

However the corollary of viewing this as a transient emergency measure is that we need to be aware of the ideal - when conditions change. Therefore when we get more control and isolate ourselves from the surrounding cultural atmosphere we should be returning to the Torah understanding - the relationship devoid of emotion and psychological fulfillment. Thus the information is for the future - for knowing the ideal so we can return to it.

But there is another approach as to why this question is important. This is the view which is expressed by Rav Tzadok. He holds that the Torah view evolves or progresses for the better. He says we do in fact learn and incorporate ideas from the goyim. Rav Tzadok notes our job is to sanctify these innovations. Therefore the ideal is looking forward and disgarding the past references which are no longer appropriate or allowed. According to this view if a husband insists on following the view of Chazal and Rishonim in this area - he is seriously derelict in his duty. Similarly a wife can't view herself as a baby machine whose job description is described entirely by behavioral requirements and she doesn't need to show love and affection. In other words you can't go back and you fail miserably in Avoda HaShem by trying.

In short this question is a major probe into the essence of what marriage is and what it needs to accomplish.