In order to fully appreciate the corruption of the halachic process involved in the Tamar Epstein case - it is important to understand that it started out as a normal shalom bayis case.
1) As noted before there is nothing in Tamar's diary description of Aharon that indicates any inherent mental health problem - and surely nothing serious enough to warrant annulling the marriage because nobody could stand living with him (Rav Moshe Feinstein's requirement).
2) In addition to Tamar we have the Baltimore Beis Din - the only beis din authorized to deal with the case - they also viewed it as a run of the mill "she wants out of the marriage case."
Beis din can categorize a case as being one of four levels of dysfunction 1) nothing serious but one party wants out and the other doesn't 2) One or both party is irritating or abusive to the other - but nothing that counselling and good will can't fix 3) One party has serious problems such as being physically abusive or suffers from mental health or physical issues which make the marriage very unpleasant. In such a case the beis din can order the husband to give a divorce. 4) the existence of a pre-existing condition that was not known to the spouse which makes marriage impossible for most people such as severe mental illness. It is not fixable and as soon as the spouse found out about it - left the marriage. This is the basis for annulment of the marriage because it was a mistake - according to the rulings of Rav Moshe Feinstein.
For 5 years Tamar Epstein demanded a Get to end her marriage to Aharon Friedman. She became the number 1 Agnua. She was featured in the media including the NY Times. She appeared with Rav Herschel Schecter in a video about the problems of Agunas. She was supported strongly by ORA with public demonstrations against Aharon and his family. A campaign was mounted to have Aharon fired from his job. And finally her lawyer admits transferring $60, 000 to Mendel Epstein to take care of Aharon. Subsequently Aharon was physically attacked by several men as he returned his daughter to Tamar's family home.
However during these many rallies, interviews etc - there was never any mention made that Aharon was deeply flawed mentally or physically. For 5 years there was no mention that this was an example of kiddushei ta'os (a mistaken marriage) and that therefore no Get was needed. Why did Tamar and her supporters waste all this time and energy - if they could have simply pulled the plug with an annulment?
It is important to remember that during all this time - Tamar was strongly supported by the Kaminetsky's. Her father was the yeshiva doctor and one of its strongest supporters. There was no effort that was spared to obtain a Get for her. This included letters from Reb Shmuel against Aharon demanding that he give a Get. This included support of ORA's demonstrations to force a Get - even though the only authorized beis din said a Get should not be forced or pressured. Rav Herschel Schacter even wrote a letter saying he bowed to the authority of Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky in Tamar's case. In short the Kaminetsky's marshaled all the forces in Heaven and Hell to obtain a Get. But there was one exception - there was never a mention of an annulment.
The following is a letter I received from a reliable source regarding the view of the Kaminetsky's for 5 years as they battled for a Get for Tamar.
Both parties agreed to have the Baltimore Beis Din adjudicate the case under binding arbitration. The Baltimore Beis Din held three sessions on the case with the participation of both parties. The Baltimore Beis Din refused to order that a get be given.
Rabbi Sholom Kamenetsky testified (by phone) at one of the sessions held by the Baltimore Beis Din. He argued that the marriage was over and that the beis din should not try to encourage reconciliation because Tamar had no feelings towards Aharon to make the marriage work. He argued that there were basic issues between them and that the two were incompatible. Upon questioning, he acknowledged that he had previously told Aharon that he thought the marriage could and should be saved. However, he said that after talking further to Tamar he believed the marriage couldn't be saved because she had no feelings for the marriage from her perspective.
When the Beis Din asked whether the marriage could be saved if Tamar would try to make it work, he said he couldn't tell.At no point did Rabbi Kamenetsky even make the claim that there was some underlying physical or mental issue regarding Aharon such that Aharon was not marriageable.
Suddenly after 5 years of battle, Tamar and the Kaminetsky's changed tactics and used those of Senator Aiken regarding the ending of the Vietnam War. When America was hopelessly mired in a losing war in Vietnam - one which they could not afford to lose but had no way of winning - Senator Aiken proposed that the US simply declare that it had won the war and withdraw its troops.
That the Kaminetsky's followed this approach can be seen when Tamar suddenly announced - after 5 years of a war of attrition against Aharon - that she was free of the marriage. That she didn't need a Get. The Kaminetskys not only approved of this approach they were the driving force behind it. They drew up a suggested psak and solicited poskim to agree - without actually investigating the case - that the marriage was annulled as a mistaken marriage.
One of the logical problems of mekach taut as a strategy is that almost every marriage that ends is a result of a breakdown in the marriage. So anyone who wants a divorce/get can simply say they wouldn't have entered into the marriage had they known....
ReplyDeleteIsn't time to help Aharon to get the required 'hetter of mea rabonim' to remarry in the circumstances that he now finds himself.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the insightful analysis you share in the various posts including where the B.D will tell a husband to give a get. As someone unqualified to comment on these matters , I sometimes get the feeling that the problem is with the system than with people.
ReplyDeleteThe Torah guides us so many instructions so that a Din Torah should be fair, impartial, honest, objective, righteous and should not even contain the slightest bit of even seemingly impropriety. if you have a negius, or seemiingly negius, you must recluse your self as vihyisen nekiyim. We have an additional stringency in procuring a Get, not to mingle and meddle in such affairs, unless you are an expert with experience, that is shimush. Theoretical knowledge does not count. What we have here in front of us, a Shoshvin, that also had the father of the Tova'at as a mekurev lemalchus in so many ways and would not be fit and appropriate as a Dayan or an an arbitrator to meddle into this specific affair one way or another. Indeed, him/them did not take over the case officially as zab"la or as part of the Beis Din. The language of "lo yehei esek imohem" includes no input of any kind whatsoever in any minor way. What happened here is a "machnis odom peirosov bemo"tz ( bemore tzedek) shelo derech gagos vekarfifos", coming in from the back doors, rooftops etc., making it a din Merumeh. Drafting up a Psak Din and putting down a tray of fixed instructions with no way of verifying nameless witnesses to sign as is, leaving no leeway for any input for the signor, is nore than meddling ve'esek imohem. It is in fact like a yipui koach, proxy with power of attorney being Judge, Jury and executioner having it signed lehavdil by a Shabbos goy, leaving nothing other than just to declare functioning as a "kema'asse kof bealma" to pass it on. Where is the independence of shikul hadaas, gomir VESOVIR, daas noite if any, chakiros udrishos, shtei baalei dinim omdim lefonov. It smells of re'ach 'Lo sa'ane al riv' if once a godol has cast the fixed outcome of the Psak Din. Of course the Dayan/Dayanim have the choice to refuse to sign, but those that ARE willing have absolutely no input one way or another. Where is the massa umatan to be melaben the Din for a kosher psak? Therefore, it is biased from the beginning to the end. It is inappropriate and unbecoming for a Godol to act in such a manner making it seem AS IF impartial. You cannot fool all the people all the time, and ein eitzo ve'ein tvuno neged Hashem! Ana, chizru bachem.
ReplyDeleteI posit that the problem is NOT with the system (halacha). The problem is with the people who twist and distort for their own ends.
ReplyDeleteNot really, the because the most important feature of a mekach ta'ut is that the condition was present at the time of the transaction, not "if I would have known it would end in divorce I wouldn't have done it."
ReplyDeleteThe system is how the halacha is put into practice, not the halacha per se. R Daniel ( I cannot find it now ) described situations where the BD felt that the husband was acting fairly within his rights and when the husband was just extorting money and not interested in the marriage - and they would deal with the case differently in each situation. Imho I just hear and see confusion, a sign that the system is not working
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2013/12/withholding-get-between-leverage-and.html
ReplyDeleteI bought some real estate last year. This year i found out its a defective property.
ReplyDeleteCan i claim 'mekach tav' cause i now found out its in a flood plain? Or is this part of due diligence i should have done when i bought the property. (Note: the government recently changed the flood plain maps, just as the kaminetzkys, greenblat and others are trying to change the definition of 'had i known'.)
thanks- I reread today's post and there you state the 4 levels of disfunction.
ReplyDeleteI am not following your mashal exactly, but if the seller knowingly misrepresented it as not being in a flood plain, one would have grounds for a mekach ta'ut claim. Again, the Choshen Mishpat nitty-gritty is not the point here, just that the decisive factor is not whether the person was dissapointed with how things turned out, but whether there was a significant defect at the time of the transaction.
ReplyDeleteNo, you cannot. It is buyer beware, it is your responsibilty to hire an engineer to survey the plain. Same applies with mekach taut, it must have been a hidden fault in order to qualify for that. Had I known doesn't yet make it a fault that has been sitting there from adam. By the way, anyone, who were the three dayanim that annuled Tamar's marriage? Maybe we can find a sircha amongst one of them and annul the annulment, and back to square one? And this alleged marriage to Mr. Fleischer, was that a level plainfield?
ReplyDeleteSince this fault has been be'ein, even if the layman does not notice, and even if the seller says al menat she'ein baze mekach taut, it is buyers responsibilty to have it sweeped by an engineer. This is common practice of buyers in Real Estate. By kidushin, if she has a hidden deffect and krovim had not been aware, all he needs is to prove that it has been there before marriage. That is the classical mekach Taut, otherwise we say the husband was aware but was moichel. That is my beef with T.F., they claim that for 5 years, no one noticed this newly discovered grave fault, and now claim it was there all along. Bopkes. Sell it for the birds. You should also check with your local Rabbi first whether he agrees with the above.
ReplyDeleteAre you claiming aharon 'covered up' a defect?
ReplyDeleteIn my property, the flood plain maps were changed by an outsider, much as compatibility was changed by an outsider (as mrs e / f / x never claimed a defect in her notes, her court actions, her (baltimore) bet din actions.)
Does the ex husband (AF) have a cause of action (a case) in bet din against RSK / RNG, for 'pitzuyim' / damages for embarrassment and or to see the psak /heter againsthim?
ReplyDeleteAssuming an appropriate bet din will take on the case.
New just in
ReplyDeleteRabbi tzvi Gartner signed on the hetter
Where are you getting this alleged info from?
ReplyDeleteI really don't know where you are coming from. Eddie asked a general question about the definition of mekach ta'ut, and I answered it. Neither his question nor my answer have to do with this case.
ReplyDeleteIs that the one from the IBD in the Meisels case?
ReplyDeleteA real good source , someone very close to him, I'm also hearing that rav Asher Weiss although he didn't sign on the hetter is backing rav gartner
ReplyDeleteHe is making it up. If there was a heter that Ziggy was happy with, he would surly post the actual document instead of making unprovable, and unsubstantiated claims about signatories. He also would have no need to go on with the nonsense about running away or accepting not to keep Hasham's commandments.
ReplyDeleteOh, please. I don't believe that for a second.
ReplyDeleteOne thing for sure
ReplyDeleteThe great world renowned REB Moshe Feinstein ZTZA"L Is most definitely turning over in his Kever and distressed to no end At this GROSS Crooked Deliberate misrepresentation & Misuse of HIS Psak he issued only ONCE Or Twice in his over Eighty years of his renowned Rabbinical psakim and it was a genuine a mekach taus
,We must stop this real MOMZEROUS CASE! in the making.
There offspring must be tagged and publicize as real momzerim and shunned by klall yisroel worldwide.
.
R eidensohn, while not directly relevant, the story that marvin schick relates involving himself and r elyashiv may have bearing on this topic http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/730974/Dr_Marvin_Schick/Marvin_Schick_-_From_Satmar_to_SKA_to:_Jewish_Education_in_North_America_Across_the_Orthodox_Spectrum_and_Beyond! It starts around minute 35:30
ReplyDelete$ome local rabbi$ will agree.
ReplyDeleteI was told that he was involved
ReplyDeleteyes
ReplyDeleteWhy is he being shy about his heter and involvement? Why doesn't he publicize his psak?
ReplyDeleteWas it theoretical - as in the Tzfas case with Rav Goldberg - or was it conclusive?
The 3 signatures were as follows
ReplyDeleteהרב שלום קמינצקי
הרב צבי גרטנר
הרב גבריאל שטרן
I just thought of another point that may have been used in the hetter that since Tamar herself may be exceptionally 'sensitive' person and expects her husband to be a 'poodle', therefore, even if Aharon is otherwise perfectly normal [probably is] but from her point it is a MEKACH TAUS.
ReplyDeleteThe 5 years were needed to establish that indeed she is truly incapable to compromise with her husband even to a minimal extent [for her own sake] which is the ultimate proof about her personality.
1. Why ex husband. Either he has never been one or he he is still the (only) husband
ReplyDelete2. Which bais-din would risk handling such case?
1. I mean civil ex.
ReplyDelete2. My point exactly.
The confusion about who is involved in this is because people go to a rabbi and cry that a woman is an Agunah and he agrees to look into what could be done. At that point, somebody may assume that he agrees with the supplicant and wants to write that she is free to remarry without a GET. Or somebody may lie and tell people that such and such a rabbi agrees that she should be freed. The word gets around and at that point people have their methods of clarifying if it is true or not, but these are usually not perfect methods.
ReplyDeleteA prominent Rov who talked at length with Rabbi Gartner and heard his side of this claims that he believes Rabbi Gartner had nothing to do with the Tamir Epstein leaving her husband. But none of this is proof. There are also rabbis who will say that there is a possible reliance on X to free the woman but he never paskened that way. But such a statement has wings.
The Torah requires two witnesses to convict a person. When you convict somebody because you heard something you may or not be right. It is a delicate and dangerous business. But some evil people have been unmasked by those who are stubborn and probably people have been maligned by mistaken zealots.
Important note
ReplyDeleteat times When a Get which is given and disputed there is a Cherem By Rabenu Tam to needlessly tongue mongering and find faults, But not in this case ,because supposedly no get is needed! (So say the three false Prophets)
So the tongue mongering/questioning will never cease !
but will always continue!
These "rabbis" ought to be excommunicated.
Rabbi Kaminetsky is causing embarrassment to his Yeshiva and all past Talmidim.
True Shanda
Reb Yackov is being Shamed in the next world!
"Ubikihalam Al Taichad Kvoidee."
lol
ReplyDeleteIf true, no wonder they're afraid to publicize their "heter."
It seems that Rav Shachter was initially following RSK, which considering his status as a Gadol, is fine. However, he removed himself from the case and as no involvement in the annulment.
ReplyDeleteProof please. Allegations and rumors mean nothing. Please provide some form of proof.
ReplyDelete