Today (14 Iyar, 5786) celebrates the Daf Yomi completion of Menachot, the tractate which contains a detailed passage (29a-31b) how to write a Torah scroll. R. Yitzchak Abadi [who just ascended to the Heavenly Academy this past Chanukah] is remembered for his novel and well-meaning proposal to reduce the cost of this mitzvah by way of the silk screen process. The reason Rabbi Abadi's proposal failed (be-mechilat Kevod Torato) is documented by Rabbi J. David Bleich in a 25-page treatise at Survey of Recent Halakhic Periodical Literature: Silk Screened Torah Scrolls - Tradition Online . However, R. Moshe Sternbuch, Teshuvot ve-Hanhagot, V, no. 301, adds one further consideration (measuring a mere half-page), and one that is also relevant to rejecting Saul Lieberman's approach to the agunah problem [an approach which is incompatible with Orthodox Judaism, as I explained in my previous column at Daas Torah - Issues of Jewish Identity: Reb Moshe's 40th Yartzeit and the Agunah Problem Rav Shalom C. Spira ].
Rabbi Sternbuch [whose responsum is available at שו"ת תשובות והנהגות - ח"ה - שטרנבוך, משה (page 235 of 387) ] writes that when a solo practitioner proposes a leniency without consulting the recognized halakhic authorities of the time, it demands a macha'ah charifah (sharp protest). To that effect, he quotes R. Velvel Soloveitchik as advising under such circumstances that an announcement to forbid be rendered without even entering into reasoned argumentation. What is true [as identified by Rabbi Sternbuch] for invalidating silk screen scrolls is even more true for rejecting frivolous invocation of kiddushei ta'ut as the purported solution to the agunah problem. This is because, in an emergency situation of human dignity, one can actually use an invalid Sefer Torah, as R. Ovadiah Yosef, Teshuvot Yechaveh Da'at, VI, no. 56 rules with respect to the Yemenite Sefer Torah. He explains that the Yemenite scroll is invalid, but until the Yemenite synagogues are persuaded to purchase valid scrolls, a Jew who happens to be called to an aliyah in a Yemenite Shul can recite the blessing in good conscience because of darkhei shalom.
Actually, Yechaveh Da'at does not explain the reasoning of why darkhei shalom should override the transgression of a berakhah le-vatalah, but I would contend that the answer can be deciphered from another responsum by the same author in Teshuvot Yabi'a Omer, VIII, Yoreh De'ah no. 32. In the latter case, a ba'alat teshuvah found a shiddukh with a Charedi gentleman, and they married. She neglected to tell her groom that [prior to her repentance] she aborted a fetus. Hence, when the bride and groom were finally blessed with a baby boy, the naive-and-gullible groom-turned-father planned a pidyon ha-ben. The wife now runs crying to Yabi'a Omer that the whole pidyon ha-ben is a sham, yet she anticipates that if she discloses the truth to her husband, he will demand a get. Fortuitously, Yabi'a Omer answers that she need not say anything. He proves at length that human dignity overrides the prohibition against a berakhah le-vatalah, such that especially here [where the wife is merely being passive by maintaining her silence] she is not transgressing by letting her husband recite two berakhot le-vatalah. [Interestingly, Yabi'a Omer omits any discussion of the additional ethical problem that the wife is standing by idly as her husband wastes his money. Perhaps we can fill the lacuna by positing that the emotional aggravation that the husband is being spared by his blissful ignorance is worth more than the cost of the vacuous pidyon ha-ben.] Ergo, we can now transpose this lomdut to the responsum in Yechaveh Da'at to understand why human dignity allows recitation of a berakhah le-vatalah over an invalid Sefer Torah.
By contradistinction, human dignity can never allow stealing a wife from an innocent husband [as per Shulchan Arukh Yoreh De'ah 157:1 that adultery is forbidden even under force majeure]. Indeed, a recent development in Eretz Yisrael [reported at Legal Warning Issued to Channel 12 Reporter After Viral Video of Yeshiva Bochurim Sparks Public Backlash | Matzav.com] seems to indicate that a person who feels he has been insulted can send a lawyer's letter to request an apology. If the apology is hypothetically not offered, there can hypothetically be a defamation lawsuit in Beth Din, pursuant to what R. Mordechai Djavaheri writes on page 7 of his practice bechinah at YUTorah Online [although hopefully a diplomatic resolution can be found to avoid any need to employ Beth Din]. Thus, [while not the specific subject of either the aforementioned news article or the aforementioned practice bechinah,] legal relief is now available for innocent husbands who are wrongly harassed by disciples of Saul Lieberman, the disciples of Saul Lieberman thereby violating Exodus 20:14. As we now approach the holiday of Shavu'ot, when we joyfully reaccept the entire Torah [including Exodus 20:14, which coincidentally will even be publicly read on Shavu'ot], let us recommit ourselves to the sanctity of Jewish marriage as a matter of halakhic conscience. [And see also R. Aryeh A. Frimer on the historical imperative for Jews to courageously refuse the pressure to reform even in a so-called she'at ha-dechak generation. Final section of his article here: Microsoft Word - Frimer . He argues this regarding aliyot for ladies, but a fortiori the historical imperative applies to maintaining the sanctity of Jewish marriage. ]
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.
