This is the psak din and halachic ruling written by one of the most senior poskim in the Litvish American world. This is written after he went through all the details, and ruled very clearly that she has a obligation to separate from her new husband and needs a get from the first one.
It's k'dai to note, that Rav Elyashiv respected him, and relied on him on many subjects.
He seems to be paskening that Tamar must not only immediately separate from her new guy, but that they are forbidden to get married even after she gets a Get from Aharon.
ReplyDeleteNo he's not - he doesn't say a word about that.
ReplyDeleteDoes anybody know if R' Cohen שליט"א has retired from being a Shul Rav? In the new Badei HaShulchan his address is in Lakewood and not in Flatbush!
ReplyDeleteרבי פייוול, מה לך אצל גיטין כלך לך אצל נדה ו מקוואות
ReplyDeleteKind of frustrating to read proclamations without supplying the reasoning behind them.
ReplyDeleteIsn't that pashut? Asur lbaal asur lboel
ReplyDeletehow many times do the reasons have to be repeated? Everybody is saying the same thing. The psychiatric report was a sham and even if true it does not justify the heter. What is it that you don't understand?
ReplyDeleteThere is no need for any expertise to know that this heter is nonsense. It is helpful when rabbonim who are recognized as major talmidei chachom publicly state that it is nonsense.
ReplyDeleteOuch
ReplyDeleteYou mean as opposed to the well-reasoned, detailed teshuvos provided by the mattirim?
ReplyDeleteThe answer has finally arrived to:
ReplyDelete"the [Sunday, January 10, 2016 ~ 29 Teves 5776] 4:30 p.m. meeting [At Rav Aron Schechter's house in Brooklyn] concerning Tamar's 'heter' ...
Received word Monday morning that the meeting was viewed as productive
Was told I would received details later."
RaP: It's been one week since the momentous meeting!
RaP: And two days later, on 2 Shevat 5776 ~ January 12, 2016, Rav Feivel Cohen, now in Lakewood NJ, has issued the final and most definitive P'sak on this long drawn out sordid matter, couched in VERY "friendly" terms, but making it very clear that the so-called "Heter of 'Kiddushei Ta'us" is totally worthless and better be stopped and rescinded pronto!
RaP: What was "productive" about it?
RaP: That they found a way to destroy the Heter by using a key Posek like Rav Feivel Cohen SHLIT"A who was once the Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin under Rav Yitzchok Hutner ZT"L as he (Rav Feivel Cohen) IS a Talmid Muvhak of Rav Hutner and says so openly, and he (Rav Feivel Cohen) authored the Sefer Daas Kohen before he produced his magnum opus Badei HaShulchan, and who was VERY close to Rav Elyashiv ZT"L and who Rav Elyashiv supposedlky said would be the next Posek HaDor, to say it as it is! Very clever indeed and impossible to knock off!
RaP: How long is "later"?
RaP: Two days!! From the time of the meeting to the time this P'sak was issued took 48 hours! Mazel Tov! Gezogt, Geshribben, un Gedrukt, un yetst Mefursam un Me'muz Dos Mekabel Zein, Gleich! Mazel Tov, Mazel Tov, Mazel Tov!!!
Yasher Koach Rav Feivel Cohen, SHLIT"A:
Rav Feivel Cohen is a Velt's Gaon and sits on various Batei Din concerning ALL of Shulchan Oruch and Shas, there is not a thing he does not know in Halacha!
ReplyDeleteBarry, are you even familiar with Rav Feivel Cohen's Sefarim in Halacha known as the Badei HaShulchan? that are used all over the world by SERIOUS Talmidei Chachamim and people are often surprised that the Mechaber is alive and that he is an American Posek still available and not some far off long gone Acharon or even Rishon.
ReplyDeleteHe's also a Chaim Berliner! ;-)
ReplyDeleteWho was present at this meeting? What took two days to write the psak, and anpther week to publish it? What's the hush hush about this whole thing till now. Kindly fill in the mystery surrounding this. How and why would this psak be any different than what we heard till now. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteAbout a year ago, Rav Feivel Cohen moved from Brooklyn to Lakewood where he has a son who has a small Kollel, although Rav Feivel Cohen does not Daven there.
ReplyDeleteRav Feivel Cohen's shull in Brooklyn (Khal Tomchei Torah) is still affectionately known as "Rav Feivel Cohen's Shull" and he has visited there on Yomim Tovim, as his oldest son Rav Binyomin Cohen is now also a Rov of a Shull in Brooklyn affiliated with Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin.
In Lakewood Rav Feivel Cohen has become a popular Posek and is much sought out for his brilliant Lomdus and Bekius and for Piskei Halacha. Although he does tend to be Machmir many times but he is a big Baal Rachmonus and Baal Chesed who goes out of his way to help the simplest Jews and is compassionate to true Geirei Tzedek. He has time for everyone, but his schedule is mostly taken up with preparing and writing more new volumes of his ever growing magnum opus, the Badei HaShulchan that now covers many areas of Halacha and not just Hilchos Nidda that he originally specialized in. He is a very special human being who hates Machlokes and is big on Kovod Habriyos as one can see from the way he addressed this letter to Tamar "Shetichyi ~ may she live [long]" and the others as "Achim ~ brothers". His Middos Tovos and Anivus are GREATER than his brilliant Kishrones and clear Zikaron. He is an Anav, and Tzadik Gamur on top of being a Velt's Gaon and Posek Amiti!! We, all of Klal Yisroel, are very fortunate to have him in our midst!!!
It is RaP's conjecture that this psak was a result of the meeting. Have not heard anybody else state it. The hush hush is because it is felt that there is a need to get more signatures to the letter that was produced and that any publicity regarding its contents will be counterproductive at this point.
ReplyDeleteehud, the dilemma for Rav Aron Schechter is clear, he cannot go head to head in public against his colleague on the American Moetzes, it complicated, once you can demolish one member of the Moetzes (R Shmule Kaminetzky) it is very easy to demolish another (R Aron Schechter) since "war" is funny that way, bullets fly in both directions and the laws of unintended (and intended) consequences can and do result in casualties on all sides! R Aron Schechter is vulnerable in many ways, he is now old and weak, he is controversial as we know, and he has been confronted by R Shmuel Kaminetsky in the past over many things, so if he (R Aron Schechter) comes out with a full force frontal blunt attack on R Shmuel Kaminetsy people will just dismiss it as Nergius, Nekama or worse.
ReplyDeleteSo this was the best route and highly ingenious and it has been used before, to rely on Rav Feivel Cohen as a Posek who would easily Pasken the obvious that this Heter is worthless when he (Rav Feivel Cohen) has no Negius and is not an enemy of R Shmuel Kaminetsky. In fact if anything Rav Feivel Cohen has always been a rival with Rav Aron Schechter and at one time Rav Feivel Cohen was the Rosh Yeshiva of Chaim and was pushed out, or bought out, or what ever the term is when two Roshei Yeshiva have a Chilukei Dei'os and split up (divorce!) and Rav Feivel Cohen left with top Talmidim to set up a new yeshiva that was known as Nachalas HaLevi'im together with Rav Pinchas Kahn. They were not FUNDRAISERS like Rav Aron Schechter is, so their yeshiva eventually ran out of money and shut down, with Rav Feivel Cohen going on to become a Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva of Brooklyn and Rav Pinchas Kahn going on the replace Rav Yaakov Perlow as Rosh Yeshiva of the Beuers Yeshiva in Washington Heights. After that rav Pinchas Kahn was recalled to be Rosh YEshiva in Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin to fill the slot of the absentee Rav Yonoson David who had moved to head the Pachad Yitzchok Yeshiva in Har Nof, while Rav Feivel Cohen then became the long time Rov of Khal Tomchei Torah and went on to start writing his Magnum Opus, the Badei HaShuchan that he is still writing to this day and putting out new volumes pretty frequently.
Due to age and health rav Feivel Cohen decided a year or tow ago to relocate to Lakewood where he has slowly but surely been making his mark. For many Summers Rav Feivel Cohen would live in Yerushalayim in recent years and became very close to Rav Elyashiv who praised him greatly.
Note, that this Pesak by Rav Feivel Cohen will not endear him to the Kotlers who have been mostly siding with the Kaminetskys since they have their own Pekel and history of marital controversies of a Heter Mei'ah Rabbanim for Malkiel Kotler and the Get of Rav Aron Kotler's daughter from Rav Dov Schwartzman ZT"L -- and note that Rav Dov Schwartzman was the co-founder of the Philadelphia Yeshiva with Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky (he was replaced by Rav Elya Svei after he divorced Rav Aron Kotler's daughter and remarried and moved to Eretz Yisroel and opened the Bais HaTalmud Yeshiva with Rav Hutner and then they had a Machlokes as well and Rav Hutner went to found his own Yeshiva Pachad Yistchok in Yerushalayim) that was not such a Poshuta thing and still is not.
So we are seeing new groundbreaking here and Rav Feivel Cohen's name gets thrust into the center of things, Let's see where all this leads....but at least Rav Feivel Cohen has now probably put the FINAL NAIL in the Kamainetsky-Greenblatt so-called "heter"!
See above. Yes, he is a Chaim Berliner but one who was pushed out by Rav Aron Schechter a long time ago, and Rav Feivel is man enough not to hold a public grudge and to pretend that "nothing happened"! Grow up!
ReplyDeleteNo offense to Barry but he isn't about the logic aND reasons. I keep on saying that those in the RSK of TE camps are there because of their feelings. If the teshuva had more reasoning built in there would be another objection.
ReplyDeleteDick Morris...
ReplyDeleteWe are not a Pope religion, and don't follow proclamations, only reasons, unless Rav Feivel Cohen is your personal rav.
ReplyDeleteReb Moshe's teshuvos are not well-reasoned and detailed?
ReplyDeleteBarry you are missing an elementary point. The burden of proof and reasoning is on those who permitted Tamar to remarry. I don't recall you expressing criticism when Rav Greenblatt proclaimed she could remarry without a Get and simply said that gedolim had permitted it
ReplyDeleteHe is a huge Talmud Chacham and mechaber of highly used and enlightening seforim, however the claim that he is a senior posek is absolutely not true. There are many names that come to ind way before his. I don't think anyone in Brooklyn ever saw him as the senior posek when he lived here. Also, his tendency to be machmir almost everywhere there is a machlokes is why RMF refused to give his sefer on Nidda a haskama.
ReplyDelete????
ReplyDeleteAre you joking?
Why are you actively trying to simplify this issue as an argument over whether one can follow RMFs psak or not.
Have you not followed along enough to know that is not the issue?
The issue is that it was applied incorrectly being that the guy isn't crazy.
The matirim have written at length stating their reasons. Whether one agrees or disagrees is their prerogative. But this letter does not state any reasons.
ReplyDeleteWhere are the letter from Rabbi Greenblatt and Rabbi Feurst who were the mattirim? The detailed letter from R Shalom Kaminetsky was a proposal for a heter but it was not a psak.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your reply.
ReplyDelete"Rav Feivel Cohen's shull in Brooklyn (Khal Tomchei Torah) is still affectionately known as "Rav Feivel Cohen's Shull" and he has visited there on Yomim Tovim, as his oldest son Rav Binyomin Cohen is now also a Rov of a new Shull in Brooklyn affiliated with Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin."
I read through this paragraph a few times, but still cannot work out what you mean when you say "as his oldest son..." How is the Seifa a reason for the Reisha - either the Reisha DeReisha (!Rav Feivel Cohen's shull in Brooklyn (Khal Tomchei Torah) is still affectionately known as "Rav Feivel Cohen's Shull") or the Seifa DeReisha ("and he has visited there on Yomim Tovim")? וצע"ג.
Also,
(1) למעשה where does he daven now?
(2) Who is the new Rav of קהל תומכי תורה?
I have something else to say, but I don't want to be עובר on לפני עור and אבק לשון הרע...
I missed the post on when R' Moshe popped out of the grave to rule on this case. When was that?
ReplyDeleteBecause by now everybody seems to know what happened here and what's going on. ......except for those who choose not to. ...
ReplyDeleteHe says that the same issur of eishes ish is on him as would be on anyone else. And it follows that the din is asur lbaal asur lboel like it would be for anyone else. I agree with Moe Ginsburg and yybt. He seems to be saying that the new guy has no special status by virtue of the fact that a rabbi told him he could marry her.
ReplyDeleteWhere do you see anywhere that he went through all the details. It is reasonable to say that he based his letter on Reb Elyashiv Ztl who held that even if the facts are true you can't use the reason of Mekach Taois. Without any knowledge of this situation he could have written this letter. Knowing Reb Feivel a little bit it is uncharacteristic for him to pasken a shaila without meeting both sides. So I would go with the assumption that to him the facts didn't make a difference there is no room for a heter Which is not what DE would prefer to be the case and therefore his statement about going through all the details... since then there is room to say if he did see all the facts and was asked if not for Reb Elyashivas position that today you cant use Mekach Taois would this fit the bill of Reb Moshes heter. we don't know the answer to that question as R' Feivel doesn't mention the heter at all in his letter.
ReplyDeleteThe Rav who gave me Rav Feivel's letter said that Rav Feivel had gone through all lthe details. So your conjecture is simple conjecture and wrong. Again the absurdity of using the "psychiatric report" is obvious to everyone except a few diehard flatworlders - as Rav Sternbuch pointed out. The "heter" is so ridiculous it doesn't require great efforts to dismiss it. This is not a dispute in halacha but a disagreement whether wishful thinking and fraud can be the basis of allowing a married woman to remarry without a Get if it is done by major rabbis. It is clear what the answer to that is.
ReplyDeleteWhy didn't R' Feivel mention the heter at all in his letter? He is very thought out and if he wanted to say the heter was no good he would have done that. Why the obvious omission that you felt you had to include? Maybe he felt that he didn't have enough information to pasken the shailah but never the less he holds she is an eishes ish so he wrote the letter the way he did. For you to put what someone told you R' Feivel did and make that assumption that he holds the Heter is wrong is misleading at best and disrespectful to R' Feivel as if he doesn't know how to say what he really wants to say.
ReplyDeleteThe issur to the bo'el may not be in effect in a case hwere they were under the impression that she is mutter. R' Cohen is stating that she is an eishes ish, but that does not mean that he would hold that the issur to the bo'el would apply.
ReplyDeletenonsense!
ReplyDeleteIt's sad to see when someone has a over inflated sense of self.
ReplyDeleteYou talk like a lamdan, and I'm sure you hold that way as well.
But your diyukim stench of עמי הארצות
The reason are out there already. See RAF and Rabbi Landesmans letters.
ReplyDeleteYou could state you're point without criticism of Barry.
ReplyDeleteI believe most people here see that he is earnest and sincere. Just way off the mark.
Perhaps you could edit your comment without outright naming Barry?
If you knew Reb Feivel you would say the same as i did nothing to do with blind. Don't add opinions that are not stated anywhere in the letter. It serves this blog to say he went through all the information and rejects the Heter. This is not necessarily the case. The letter from R Shmuel Aurbach was clear as to his objection of the Heter. R' Feivel doesn't address it at all.
ReplyDeleteNo "Mefaresh" I am only being MEFARESH!
ReplyDeleteWhy?
ReplyDeleteSimple ....Because he doesn't even see a shred of Heter
which needs a ruling just foolish silliness by country bumpkins ,He obviously feels that there is simply no case to rule on ,nor a leg to stand on just like the tens of Poskim who already stated this ,therefore in order not to give credibility at all to the corrupt Memphis Philly ,Chicago ORA Gang he just restated the simple truth that she must separate ....and Now.
Yes, I hear what you are saying. But it seems to me that איסור זה הוא גם עליו means that he's no different from anyone else. It would be nice if someone could ask him for clarification of this point.
ReplyDeleteWill answer this first as that will explain the rest:
ReplyDelete"(2) Who is the new Rav of קהל תומכי תורה?"
RaP: The new Rov of Khal Tomchei Torah is Rav Sholom Plutchok, who is a Maggid Shiur in his father's Derech Chaim Yeshiva in Boro Park during the week. On Yomim Noraim Rav Plutchok also Davens at his Father's Yeshiva with his Talmidim there, so he has agreed that when rav Feivel Cohen is visiting Brooklyn on Yomim NOraim for example, that Rav Feivel Cohen can Bekavod Rav still sit in as the Rov Emeritus and give Droshas and lead the Davening.
As for the next question:
"(1) למעשה where does he daven now?"
RaP: About one year ago Rav Feivel Cohen relocated his home to a new house in Lakewood, New Jersey, and ANYONE can get his address and phone number from someone if they need to it is not a secret, it is in some new development and nearby there is a Shull there where he Davens as a private citizen but he is not the Rov there. He refuses to be the Rov of a Shull in Lakewood, having retired from the Rabbanus, and now wishes to continue to research and write his Badei HaShulchan Seforim on as much of Shulchan Oruch as is he will get to and can cover, and he gladly Paskens Shaylos. He is a becoming popular in the Lakewood community as a Posek and speaker, and his views and Pesakim are sought out by the American Agudas Yisroel people. Rav Feivel Cohen is not keen on politics and he has not been an official member of the Agudas Yisroel, he even disagress with some of their positions and says so openly (not sure what he holds nowadays) but anyone can find out by asking him or asking any one of his Choshuva sons who all head Yeshivos except for one who is a Balebos living in Lakewood as well, anyone is free to contact him or any of his sons and ask him.
Now, not sure what the confusion is about his oldest son Rav Binyomin Cohen, who has written Seforim known as Chelkas Binyomin also on Halacha, who is also a Rosh Kollel at Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin and about a year ago became teh founding Rov of a new Shull for Yungeleit and Balebatim in Flatbush in the Avenue M area of Flatbush, Brooklyn on Shabbosos.
Rav Feivel Cohen's son in law is Rav Aron Kaufman the Rosh Yeshiva of the Waterbury Yeshiva and he lives in Brooklyn on Shabbos, so it is not unusual for Rav Feivel Cohen and his wife to come to Brooklyn to visit their son who is a Rosh Kollel and their daughter who is married to a Rosh Yeshiva that still live in Flatbush and to see their children and grandchildren that makes Rebbetzin Cohen very happy! The story was she was not so keen on moving to Lakewood but in the end they moved all the same and now Rav Feivel Cohen is becoming very popular as a Posek there too, in fact he is becoming more popular in Lakewood with the huge Oilam HaTorah there than he ever was in Flatbush which has been changing over the last few years.
(Why not ask why the Lakewood Bais Hora'ah and Rabbanim connected with and controlled by BMG has never said anything about this whole Tamar situation and it has to be an newcomer like Rav Feivel Cohen who finally is man enough to speak up?!)
Rav Binyomin Cohen is the son in law of the famous Gevir Ruby Schron who is close with the Mirrer Yeshiva in Brooklyn. Rav Feivel Cohen and Ruby Schron have great respect for each other, and could very well be that with this Pesak it is one Gevir (Ruby Schron) who is now de facto opposing the positions of those Gevirim such as the Glicks and the Kleinmans and Dodelsons probably who support Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky in this instance and the Glicks are also related to to Tamar Friedman through marriage as well as this Blog has reported, but all this latter stuff is in the shadows that no one really knows what is really going on!
Hope this answers your questions!
At the end of the day, the only rav who calls a spade a spade is rav yechesckel Roth, short of that protecting the kavod of feinstein and Kaminetsky will bring catastrophe onto the Jewish ppl
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have something really distracting you maybe you want to tell us what it is? You don't seem to be able to think in a straight line . you seem to be pro Heter no matter who opposes it or what damning evidence comes to light ,what is bothering youare you by any chance related to the case?
ReplyDeletehow about this can you put forward some threshold and when that is reached your going to finally accept that a travesty has been done?.Say when every white beard from sea to shining sea comes out against this heter? we're not holding far from that we're almost there ,the only hurdle of getting every religious Jew to sign is pretty much the redundancy it's clear like the day and why waste peoples time to get those signatures .
She, TE knew that she lied, and even if she had been told that in spite of her lies it's still a valid Heter, she had been advised of RNG's retreat - the Baal haMatir, as well as by the World of Poskim. In spite of all that, they both are still living in sin together. R' SFC does take measures to indicate that to separate of current paramour, is the obligation of each and both. There is no mention of what the future steps would be, for the time being. Probably to make it more simple, not to sidewind issues.
ReplyDeleteWhy hasn't rabbi bluth voiced an opinion, it seems to me that all talmidei feinstein are on the fence
ReplyDeleteExcept in cases of nisuin / gitten, where we can't have differing psakim if someone (M / F) can marry someone else (M / F). There is no personal rav in such cases (except for AF (the second) and TE/F, who adopted a per$onal rav a thousand miles away, whom they probably never met, till . . .
ReplyDeleteAndwhere is the (supposed) psychological evaluations?
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, many rabbonim (charedi and MO) have no problem doing bhuppah veKiddushin for couples who were 'together' while previously married.
ReplyDeleteOne of the requirements of BD is *Lo soguru mipnei ish*, and the Moetzes
ReplyDeleteclearly lacks that. It seems that each Posek has a Kupo shel shrotsim in their past, some more
some less. The Strong man Bullies keep a list in their arsenal cached away
in Banks, as Weapons of Mass Destruction against the other to silence them
le'eis metsoi. R' AF that already came out in a full blown Mecho'eh with a Psak,
has been blackmailed to Retract from his Psak and has been Neutralized R'L'.
Furthermore, he also was urged to direct and LIMIT the General Public
from expressing their voices against this Chilull HaShem as follows, 1) UNLESS
he is a Posek, and 2) even then only as a disagreement but NOT as to *PROTEST*.
This enables the K's the option to NEUTRALIZE and even silence them when they
only can. There are also many grudges amongst the RY's against each other
historically in their past, personal and financial not to mention possible
Hasoges Gvul, of Turf invasions and/or Competitions forming new Institutions. It
becomes so complicated and intertwined, that many M... members have a Gun
holding to each others head in a hierarchical manner as in The Story of Chad
Gadyo, and there is the potential of the Kinah veSinah ingredient getting into
the mix. Having all this, the rule of the Jungle prevails. If two rivals have
crossed each others path in the PAST, doesn't yet make them clean of Negius in
the PRESENT, while working in concert against a common opponent. Leaving R' AF
secluded to fend for himself, paralyzes the Moetses in order to rule
effectively, leaving a vacuum to kick in of *Bemakom she'ein ish* leading to
total bankruptcy.
If the masses should gather as a unit and follow Rav Shternbuch's advice,
this will eventually put them out of business by leaving solely the K's against
the whole World, especially if you dry them out of funds and moral
support.
In the letter of the above expressed ruling if you will, it does mention
for the couple to separate immediately, one step at a time, and does not direct
what future steps to take. This is a Psak along with a Protest by a Posek,
making the Heter Botel.
What is this - palginon dibura? Splitting hairs that don't. ....
ReplyDeleteWhat is this r pluchok's relation to the manhattan beach pluchok?
ReplyDeleteTRANSLATION OF LETTER FROM RAV FEIVEL COHEN (comments in parenthesis added by RaP):
ReplyDelete"Rabbi Shraga Feivel Cohen
Author of books Badei HaShulchan
With the Help of Heaven
2 Shevat 5776
Dear(est) Brothers may you live long
With this writing/letter I am making known my opinion/ruling (da'as) that the lady/(woman) Mrs. Tamar Friedman, may she live, is married to Mr. Aharon Friedman, may he live, as described above (i.e. as she is named/called in this letter and that she is Mrs. Friedman), and the laws/her status (according to Jewish Law) is like any other (Jewish) married woman who is forbidden (to marry or cohabit with any other man -- because that is what adultery is in Jewish Law according to the Torah) as any other Jewish woman who is (a legally married Jewish woman) to a Jewish man/her husband, and if she is cohabiting/living with another man then this prohibition applies to him (her paramour/second husband) as well (so that he too is forbidden to her) and they (she and her paramour/second husband) are (therefore) obligated to separate from each other (and stop cohabiting together by living in sin in violation of Jewish Law), and such (shameful) things should not be allowed among the (the people of) Israel/(Jewish People), and it will (therefore) be pleasant/good for those who will listen (to me and this ruling) and the blessings of Goodness (a Cohen's Blessings!) will come upon them (as a result of abiding by this ruling)
(Signed) Shraga Feivel Cohen"
A worthy example for you to follow.
ReplyDeleteI heard similar language from Rabbi Greenblatt when I called him and asked him whether a community eruv which has the food component located in a synagogue that is kept off limits to several people is kosher. He said such an eruv is passul. I described the situation but waited until he gave his answer before I told him it was the eruv built by his son for the Kollel in Las Vegas that had flouted the halachos of excommunication stated in the seruv on the rabbi of the Young Israel. He said he would check and I should call him a week later. When I called he said "the rabbis there said it is ok". i asked him "which rabbis?" He answered "the Kollel". I said these were the "rabbis" who violated the seruv issued by Bais Din! I asked how the "rabbis" could say it was ok when the widow was still not able to enter the shul? He said "they are Bnei Torah, I have to believe them when they say it is ok". He had no explanation for their "ok".
ReplyDeleteThis is the trusting, naive person the Kaminetzkys knew they could go to and get what their friend Epstein wanted.
There are 2 schools of thought with the Anti Heter camps and the reasoning for one doesn't work for both. One is that no matter what there is no room for a heter which is a position I can respect.The other one is that there is room for a Heter but in this case it doesn't apply. with the latter unless someone saw all the information I don't think that they have a right to oppose it without seeing all the information (which no one has seen) This blog has been very selective in only posting information that fits their agenda and therefor my position of opposition. I would rather give the rabbonim the benefit of the doubt that have all the information that the heter is based on information that only they have. R' Feivel is a very intelligent and respected Talmid Chochom and if it is true that he saw all the information and felt it was wrong would have made mention of it in his letter which he didn't. Being a close confidant of R' Elyashiv ZTL who held that you can't use mekach taois in this day and age it would be a fair assumption that R' Feivel went with the psak of R' Elyashiv Ztl and did not want to get involved in the question if this heter is appropriate or not.
ReplyDeleteAs I sated earlier I have no problem with R' Feivel holding what he does. My issue is how his letter is being hijacked for self serving purposes. If R' Feivel was against the Heter per say he would have made mention of it in his letter. He didn't so we don't have to take DE word that he went through all the facts and drew his conclusion from that. His letter is very calculated and precise in what he wanted to convey and what not.
ReplyDeleteIF reality matched what Shalom Kaminetsky wrote to Rabbi Greenblatt then a heter might be acceptable. But this was a case of GIGO, garbage in - garbage out.
ReplyDeleteYou have a conjecture - I have facts.
ReplyDeleteBest response yet!
ReplyDeleteThey are brothers.
ReplyDeleteForgot about others?
ReplyDeleteNote, that this Pesak by Rav Feivel Cohen will not endear him to the Kotlers who have been mostly, by default and by their silence, siding with the Kaminetskys since..
ReplyDeleteI've heard that it's deeper than that. Supposedly RMK asked the Lakewood poskim to stay out. (We wouldn't have a reason to say that he intimidated them - would we?
There is the claim out there that this is part of the package of the Dodelsohn chillul Hashem that RSK supported.
He obviously is aPHILLYated
ReplyDeleteMaybe he felt that he didn't have enough information to pasken the shailah but never the less he holds she is an eishes ish so he wrote the letter the way he did.
ReplyDeleteHow dare you speak with such disrespect about Rav Feivel Cohen?!
If Rav Cohen wanted to state a halachic opinion - which differs from Rav Moshe's psak - then he would write that very clearly. He would not go and mention peoples names. He would not publicly state that she is a married woman (committing adultery!) and not mention that she has Rav Moshe to rely upon, if that were the case. It is quite obvious to any person willing to be rational, that Rav Cohen's clear understanding is that there is no "heter" according to any legitimate posssek. Period.
If you have any questions, go and ask Rav Cohen. Unless, of course, some people are fearful of the truth. In that case, you can approach Rav Cohen and ask him to deal with this tremendous confusion and hurt.
Very interesting since I don't know anyone, who thinks that mekach taus never applies all the gedoley hachronim dealt with it , frankly if you learn kiddushin it's all there . the question is obviously application.
ReplyDeleteI would take issue with what you call the anti-Heter camp on two counts it's not a camp it's all religious Jews wall-to-wall hasn't been one rabbi who came out in support and those known to support the deny it. pretty weak .
and they're not anti-Heter from a halachic stand point , they are simply calling foul, and despite what RSK might claim there are no little gritty details, or's anybody can claim that there are are details out there which no one is aware of .
well I don't believe the k's are aware of all issues either for that matter . Pertinent issues is what counts. This brilliant shtick of claiming that there are more facts is as old as the gemara "yesh li eidim bemedinas Hayam"sorry it didn't fly then it doesn't fly now ,nice try.
frankly I find it quite arrogant from the k's not even trying to back up their position in any what way they feel they don't need to justify themselves to us mere mortals , even if your claim is true that this site won't carry any counterclaims there are many venues for them to justify themselves they haven't taken the effort . Arrogant.
You and your ilk seem to be grappling for straws finding tiny issues to deal with .even if this Heter is justified you would still have an uphill battle to justify all the shenanigans, lies, dishonesty, roll up your sleeves and get to work
Let's break it down: R' Feivel Cohen wrote a letter saying that Tamar is an אשת איש. You have an assumption that if he was opposed to the Heter because he disagreed with the application of mekach ta'os, he would have mentioned it. You also have an assumption that if he disagrees with the concept of mekach ta'os, he would not mention it. Please explain the logic behind these two paradoxical assumptions.
ReplyDeleteDear Rabbi Mefaresh, Thanks for the kind words, but I am not insulted. The bottom line is that to issue a proclamation without reasoning simply doesn't carry any weight. It is like putting up a pashkevil in Meah Shearim. I am sure Rav Feivel could write a reasoned teshuva, but he has not, at this point. Therefore it remains eidus sh'ee atah yachol lahazima.
ReplyDeleteIt is simply not fair to the Kamenetzkys and Rav Greenblatt and whoever else was involved not to give them something they could respond to, and defend.
Looked into that angle, it seems they don't see any connection to RMF to the point that it has nothing to do with them(slightly different flavour of ambivalence then say the K' s I must say the innocent sort not the guilty)
ReplyDeleteBarry at this point the halachic issues have been repeatedly presented - there is no need to mention them. It is enough for a rabbi to say - "Regarding the Epstein case I hold that it is adultery" and everyone (except for you) - including the Kaminetskys and Rav Greenblatt - understand exactly what the issue is.
ReplyDeleteIf you had a single rav saying "I don't know what you are talking about" - then you might have a legitimate claim.
As I said before - your assertion are more relevant to Rav Greenblatt's refusal to disclose information - which I don't recall you protested.
Of course it carries weight. He carries weight because it was proclaimed by a very very prominent Posek. Who btw has no discernible horse in the race.
ReplyDeletethe p'sak basically says that the ' heter' is not a solution for the problem , but it
ReplyDeletedoes not contribute to a finding a solution to the problem
Forgot about others?
ReplyDeleteThanks for the brevity. Do you have a short explanation of what it is you're trying say?
not
ReplyDelete(i.e. as she is named/called in this letter and that she is Mrs. Friedman)
but
(as of the above date 2 Shevat 5776 - January 12, 2016 )
"Rabbi Shraga Feivel Cohen
ReplyDeleteAuthor of books (on all areas of Jewish Law/Shulchan Aruch/Halacha known as
the) Badei HaShulchan
With the Help of Heaven
2 Shevat 5776
Dear(est) Brothers may you live long
With this writing/letter I am making known my
opinion/ruling (da'as) that the lady/(woman) Mrs. Tamar Friedman, may she live,
is married to Mr. Aharon Friedman, may he live, as described above (i.e. as she
is named/called in this letter and that she is Mrs. Friedman), and the laws/her
status (according to Jewish Law) is like any other (Jewish) married woman who
is forbidden (to marry or cohabit with any other man -- because that is what
adultery is in Jewish Law according to the Torah)”
Excellent. Rabbi
Cohen’s opinion is that lady/(woman) Mrs. Tamar Friedman, may she live, is
married to Mr. Aharon Friedman, may he live, and the laws/her status (according
to Jewish Law) is like any other (Jewish) married woman who is forbidden (to
marry or cohabit with any other man.
What more could we want? Are there rabbis with a different opinion? I
now want to look for Rabbi Shraga Feivel Cohen’s books. I would like to know the latest thinking of
radical feminists on the matter.
The solution to the problem is for the wife to agree to more liberal visitation rights for the husband and receive a Get.
ReplyDeleteThat's pathetic, RNG keeps on incoming the name of RMF
ReplyDeleteיש מחלוקת אחרונים בענין "בועל שני", דהיינו במקרה שאשת איש זינתה עם אחר ונאסרה משום כך על בעלה, ואז זינתה האשה עם בועל שני, וכעת רוצה להתחתן עם הבועל השני, האם היא אסורה לו מחמץ הדין של אחד לבעל ואחד לבועל.
ReplyDeleteChazaka al Talmid Chochom, she'eino yotse mitachas yodo, dovor she'eino metukan.
ReplyDeleteReally? I have not seen that in any of RNG's teshuva's or letter's on this issue. Can you please post RNG's letter's where he mentions this? Thank you.
ReplyDeleteThat point is far far less prevalent and problematic in chareidi rabbinic circles.
ReplyDeleteI actually have had numerous conversations in the past with R' Feivel and he is a very thought out person that's why I am raising the issue of him not mentioning the heter at all in his letter. I am not arguing if he holds of the heter the Issue I have is making assumptions about the facts in this case and using them to further someones agenda that the heter is flawed when R' Feivel just holds like R' Elyashiv ZTL that this day and age you can't apply the concept of mekach taois even if the facts in this case would justify it.
ReplyDeleteNathan of Gaza:
ReplyDeleteGet it into your head since you keep repeating this. Tamar's heter has as much to do with RMF (and his family and talmidim) as it has to do with Rav Ovadya Yosef, Rav Yosef Karo , Abaye , Rava and Hillel. It has absolutely nothing to do with them.
The mum is non existent , as is the heter.
Is it so far fetched to hear that R' Feivel doesn't want to get into the nitty gritty of this case if there was a mekach taois or not since he doesn't hold that Mekach taois can be applied today under any circumstance as R' Elyashiv ZTL held and told R' Feivel. So he makes a statement that she is an eishes ish. That doesn't make the facts in this case wrong as RDE would want you to believe.
ReplyDelete"Very interesting since I don't know anyone, who thinks that mekach taus never applies" R' Elyashiv Ztl held like that and told that to R' Feivel for one.
ReplyDelete"there are no little gritty details, or anybody can claim that there are are details out there which no one is aware of"
Have you seen the psychiatrists reports on AF? When you read them let me know what you think. The Moderator claims they are lies and made up stories. That's his opinion which hes entitled to. He posted Tamars notes post those reports as well and let the people decide.
"frankly I find it quite arrogant from the k's not even trying to back up their position in any what way they feel they don't need to justify themselves to us mere mortals , even if your claim is true that this site won't carry any counterclaims there are many venues for them to justify themselves they haven't taken the effort . Arrogant."
I don't think that not responding to an anonymous blogger is arrogant. Anyone that is involved in this story knows the position of the K's that when this all started in good faith a lot of information that was given in confidence and was leaked forged and altered, at that point the position taken was that they will not give anymore info to anyone but was willing to go to R' Dovid Feinstein and give it to him. He will have the final say and if he says it's wrong they would abide by that. I don't think that is called a "brilliant shtick"
Let me understand if there is a machlokis of two talmeide chachomim there is a Chazaka as you stated - but one is right and one is wrong? The answer is Eilu Veilu divrei ....... That is a radical change in your position very impressive.
ReplyDeleteAnd so?
ReplyDeleteI don't see where you have contributed to finding a solution to the problem.
Very creative interpretation of the facts.
ReplyDelete1) The Kaminetskys were told over and over again by poskim that there was no basis for a heter - and yet they continued searching until the found Rav Greenblatt and Rav Feurst. That is called a concern for truth right?
2) What are the facts that you claim were distorted from the original position of the Kaminetskys? The truth is that their original position consisted of lies and distortions.
3) The Kaminetskys didn't simply refused to explain their psak to an anonymous blogger. They refused to explain it to major rabbis and poskim. You are ignoring these rabbis and poskim in your rerwriting of history.
4) If they were so concerned with the integrity of halacha - they would have gone to Rav Dovid Feinstein in the first place instead of going on an Internation posek shopping expedition.
You can fool yourself all the time and perhaps some others part of the time but you can't fool all the people all of the time.
Finally how does your theory that Rav Feivel isn't against the heter fit with Rav Miller's words or perhaps you want to claim that Rav Miller isn't against the heter?!
and you sound like a person with no negios
ReplyDeleteRav Cohen lives and davens at PRV off pine st in Lakewood a semi retirement community
ReplyDeleteI actually have had numerous conversations in the past with R' Feivel and he is a very thought out person that's why I am raising the issue of him not mentioning the heter at all in his letter.
ReplyDeleteYou are more than just raising the supposed "issue."
1) You are claiming that he is misleading.
2) You are accusing him of being dishonest.
3) You are accusing Rav Cohen of calling people who follow Rav Moshe's psakim adulterers. That is a most disgusting accusation.
If it is true that you've spoken to Rav Cohen, then why don't you call him up instead of making up stories? Why not just verify?
You are simply grasping for straws in order to somehow legitimize the adultery.
-----
The very simple answer as to why he doesn't mention the "heter" is twofold.
1) Who took responsibility for the "heter?" Everyone is throwing it on the next person. There is no clear "heter" to refer to.
2) The clear reasoning Rav Shternbauch gave fore not giving credence to this sort of hocus pocus "heter."
An what is RSM point? even I didn't question what R' Feivel wrote.Does R' Feivel need confirmation that he's telling the truth? "Honesty" where are you now?
ReplyDeleteI'm so happy this machlokes in halochah is moving from mud slinging to a respectful discourse. Let's face it RSK a ry for decades is a yiras shayim of at least the basic level. Just like he does not turn lights on on shabbos . he won't be matir a eshes ish leshuk with out believing she is muttar . so even if we disagree with his reasoning vehmanantly . there is no mokom for anything except a risspectfull discourse
ReplyDeleteShlomo'le coming through again. Attention seeking, power crazed guy. I'm sure Rabbi Eidensohn is not gonna post this. He's proven himself again as just another Miller bully. What a nut!
ReplyDelete1) They went to RNG first, no one has ever named anyone that was approached by the kamentskys for a heter that told them over and over again. After RNG wrote his heter at that point he wasn't going to pasken alone so other rabbonim were asked some said yes some said no. What is wrong with that?Do you need 100% agreement?
ReplyDelete2)The letter from R Sholom K to RNG was altered.
3) The Kamenetskys didn't pasken and as such did not have to explain the psak RNG paskened.
4) They did speak to R' Dovid and he said that RNG was a bar samche. Why would they go to R' Dovid and why would R' Dovid get involved if all party's weren't in agreement to follow what he said?
Who's rav miller, I've never heard or seen his signature before, is he related to the famous rav avigdor miller
ReplyDeleteThe solution is that she allows her child's dad some normal visitation and gets a get and moves on
ReplyDeleteלשיטתך. Why doesn't he mention his Rebbi and Posek Hador HAGRISH regarding his general opposition to mekach taus?
ReplyDeleteעיקר חסר מן הספר.
That you don't ask.
Your trying so hard to grasp at straws, it's painfully obvious.
Your not Rav Chaim that you can be medayek from that which wasn't said. Because even your conjecture is off base.
Ta'anu loi bechitim, veHoidu lezecher kodsho!
ReplyDeleteU said...
" He didn't so we don't have to take DE word that *he went through all the facts* and drew his conclusion from that. "
And I said...
that he *DID* go through ALL the facts! How do we know that R FSC *DID* go through *ALL* the facts. Because of CHAZAKA ... It is the job of a Posek to go through ALL the facts thoroughly before he can decide on a PSAK. Less than that, is a Talmid shelo higia leHoiro'o, and negligent at best.
Why did he not Post his shakle vetarya, because it had been gone over with the gedoilei haPoskim that count, and known to everybody. Chad veCholok. What leitsonei haDor filibuster around, is Divrei Bela.
I have heard from several poskim that they went to before Rav Greenblatt. They don't want to be named by I know and that is enough to say your fictionalized version is nonsense.
ReplyDeleteYou haven't explained how Rav Miller fits into you theory that Rav Feivel Cohen is not against the heter. Rav Miller is against the heter. He says he agrees with what Rav Feivel said - therefore it is obvious that Rav Feivel is against the heter!
How manyposkim refused to sign on to the 'hetter' vs two or three that did (two of whom refuse to publicly admit they signed on.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, did RNG publicly (in writing, or otherwise) publicly admit (other than being 'mesader kiddushin', but even that, he did not do publicly.)
where is the discourse taking place? Nobody has gotten a cogent response from the Kaminetskys who claim they had nothing to do with the heter.
ReplyDeleteRav Greenblatt is not involved in discourse. He simply says he relied on Rav Shmuel
All RSM says is he agrees that she is an Eishes Ish married to AF and what R Feivel wrote is true. I do not see any value in him signing another letter. Did the Kamentskys claim R' Feivels letter is a forgery? Does R' Feivel need RSM haskamah that what he wrote is true? Looks more like warmongering from RSM kids that they are making him look like a fool running around signing everyone's letters more then anything else. I did not say that R' Feivel isn't against the Heter I said that your slant on it that he went through all the facts and determined that the heter is worthless is conjecture on your part. If anything he doesn't agree of applying a heter under any circumstances even if it all the facts in this case are true. That is different then saying that the information is false or wrong and therefore you cant apply the heter as you are claiming.
ReplyDeleteYou also avoided 2, 3 and 4.
ReplyDeleteI will try to do this again not sure "Meyer Peomim" but if your that slow I will.
ReplyDeleteRav Feivel Cohen Shlita did not mention anything about the heter in his letter unlike all the other rabonim that wrote letters previously. He is not a dummy and very thought out. R Elyashiv ZTL whom R' Feivel was very close to holds that today no matter what you can not apply the heter of mekach Taois.Since he avoids saying the heter is not a good one but states that she is an eishes ish what is so difficult to accept that he paskened based on the psak of R' Elyashiv and not on the validity of the heter? The reason is because that would not fit in well with your demonizing of the kamentskys.
Sure.
ReplyDeleteYou weren't around, but I have been commenting on this blog for close to 9 years, from the time it started so not surprising you are having selective amnesia. Rav Aron Schechter only has himself 100% to blame for cornering himself, as this blog has at one time had the unenviable job of making the macha'as against Rav Aron's support for Michael Hersh in the Isaac Hersh kidnapping fiasco, and on that issue Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky was on the right side of the coin as he spoke up publicly against kidnapping your own kids and in support of Isaac Hersh --> "others".
Other "others" was when Rav Aron made the blunder of supporting Tropper, and it was this blog, taking its lead from Rav Moshe Shternbuch, that led the way making the macha'as against what Tropper was doing, yet Rav Aron still clings to supporting Tropper as well, as you can see here:
That is exactly what he did, he said she is an eishes ish nothing more nothing less no diyukim no lomdis pushut pshat in the letter, which is what R' Elyashiv held. It is amazing how all the Heter bashes cant even entertain the idea that its remotely possible that R' Feivel is going with R' Elyashivs psak and not discussing the merits of the heter or its flaws.
ReplyDeleteIf you hold that Tamar being an Eishes Ish automatically renders her forever forbidden to both men involved, then of course anyone who says that she is an Eishes Ish is automatically forbidding her to both men. But one who claims that this is a case of אונס because Tamar acted upon a Psak given to her by a reliable Posek, would permit her to either man (to the new one obviously only after a Get) despite her being an Eishes Ish. So citing Poskim who call her an Eishes Ish is no proof of what they hold vis-a-vis the איסור לבעל ולבועל - you would need to ask them if it is an אונס or not.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the source for your novel alternative explanation?
ReplyDeleteConjecture? Or you know from reliable sources? Name the sources.
Time to put it out there. If you're correct you have a chiyuv to clear some very Choshive Rabbonim names.
Email me at mefaresh@gmail.com
Thank you - I feel very informed!
ReplyDeleteOkay.
ReplyDeleteSorry to say, but I'm calling you out as a שקרן. You've been lurking here for several weeks, and have regularly commented on what has being reported, and now you have the חוצפה to say "I've never heard or seen his signature before". Go back to Gaza, and peddle your lies and זלזול חכמים there.
ReplyDeletethe beis din should be the one to decide what's in the best interest of the child
ReplyDeleteTo have the name honesty at least one sentence you write should be honest. you make 3 statements 1) 2) 3) not one of them make any sense and even if they did you probably meant to reply to someone else because I don't even think Knopler could have made up such bubba maeises. I never discussed what he holds or doesn't hold.
ReplyDelete"You are accusing Rav Cohen of calling people who follow Rav Moshe's psakim adulterers."
I don't know what world your living in but this blog is full of, people accusing a lady who got a heter based on R' Moshes psak ( right or wrong) of adultery. It just happens to be that you don't know R' Elyashivs psak and it has no reflection on R' Moshes psak. So on that note I think you should maybe crawl back into your hole and leave this story to be dealt with by those that at least know the facts.
They went to RNG first,
ReplyDeleteThis is untrue. I know of two poskim they approached, and I have heard from solid sources that there were quite a few more. [Don't bother asking me to name names. I won't.]
R' Feivel goes out of his way to state his very clear position in this letter, and publicize it, and you claim the letter is being hijacked? Are you drunk?
ReplyDeletegood point rav miller will sign anything that will get his psak from being egnored to noticed even jumping on to rav fc cotails
ReplyDeleteR' Dovid already told R NG (I stand corrected - not R SK jr), that he wouldn't do it as noted on this blog. SOS, please anyone that recalls, kindly post it. ty
ReplyDelete*Yagati motsosi ta'amin*
Honesty Dad • 2 months ago
1)צא ורה שר' נטע הלך לבקר בשבוע שעבר, ולא הסכים איתו כלל וכלל ואמר לו שאין שום יתד (חוץ מהעיתון) לסמוך עליו
2) Dad Honesty • 2 months ago
אמת, אבל ג"כ לא מחה נגד ההיתר, רק אמר* שהוא עצמו לא היה *מתירה
3) Honesty Yehoshua • 2 months ago
Through the grapevine. I only mentioned this fact after people were falsely claiming that RD does not disagree with this "heter." Please notice that even "dad" doesn't deny this.
ROFL! Dear mr. Honesty, if you want to be honest on this, kindly let us in To your Grapevine. Yovo baal haShor veya'amid al shoro. Ulmitsva godol yechoshev
Why he still insists, is to confront him in public Korach's tayne lekanter, "omru loi, Moshe, zu assuro oy muteres? Im tomar assuro Mekach Taus mi hitir leovicho?
R' Dovid is not interested in machlokes. You asked his chavas Da'as, paskened you, and have a great day.
It is a waste of time since you prefer your conjecture to facts
ReplyDeletethey are not going to debate with rabbis/bloggers they would explain themselves to rav dovid feinstein if rdf would want to get envolved, and trouthfully here in the us of a although colleagues of rsk can argue with him he does not have to have a disscourse with anyone of them as he has his set of facts and can pasken as he sees fit. ofcourse that does not apply to sholam k as he has always been questionable and even many phili tamidim will concede he does not really know how to learn however when it comes to rav shmuel many many bnei torah belive he is the last word in halochoh.
ReplyDeleteIn what way has Flatbush been changing over the last few years?
ReplyDeleteNo need to reply. I understood on your wink, faster than you think. Just reRead slowly, he mentions nothing because there is no need to regurgitate. Putting your philosophies aside it is his PSAK having *all things* considered. R' SFC is considered and accepted as a top Gunner and a Sharpshooter. I rest my case and have a Great day!
ReplyDeleteIsraelReader,
ReplyDeleteThere is a reason why "lo nacham Elokim derech Eretz Plishtim" :-)
No. His Brand name is all over the place, even on BEER bottles with a Golden Label. Just scroll back a lil and you will see he signed again and again and again, until he counts like a whole minyan. :-)
ReplyDeleteAnd Reb Dovid replied to RNG for his inquiry. it's final!
ReplyDeleteRav Shternbuch requested to be MOICHE again and again, and louder, even he signed it again. Just to make it clear, this not a disagreement, it is a full blown PROTEST BIMLO MUVAN HAMILA.
ReplyDeleteBut the wife ran away from the beis din in mid-proceedings. So she needs to go back to beis din, accept beis din's decision on visitation, then get a Get and the entire issue is basically solved.
ReplyDeletePlease don't call me out, ur embarrassing me, although rav miller is doing a great job himself
ReplyDeleteWow, quick transition from being happy about respectful discourse to Mudslinging.
ReplyDeleteמסכים. But what if they continued to live together even after every rov and his uncle has come out to say the היתר is nonsense?
ReplyDeleteJust to fulfill the verse of והייתם נקיים מה' ומישראל, to prove that "Nathan of Gaza" is lying when he pretends not to know who Rav Shlomo Miller is, I looked up some of Nathan's "gems of wisdom", which are on record. I'll let the public decide if my allegations are true.
ReplyDeleteThree months ago:
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2015/10/tamar-epsteinrav-shlomo-miller-alleged_28.html
"This union is here to stay, And miller should stay at bay"
"It a halachick question, and rav Greenblatt is as qualified as rav miller"
"Lol, such idiotism from the rabbi who bans everything, from the kosher switch to the shabes and yomtov mode on stoves. Looks to me like everyone else who hasn't written a letter views tamars marriage as kosher. Miller and gestetner vs all the gedolei yisroel".
Three weeks ago:
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2015/12/rav-shlomo-miller-strongly-denies.html
"Wow, so we have another rabbi coming out against the hetter, so far we
have miller and miller and miller and miller, and then if u ad miller u
have a minyan
Eidenshon and miller get a life, the war has been lost, back to the kosher switch, and other important issues"
Is it at all plausible that he would publicly sign against the heter if he held that proper protocol was used in reaching the Psak?
ReplyDeleteIf this would possibly fit R Moshe's criteria, do you entertain the thought that he would write that letter?
Does he hold that other poskim can't disagree with him?
Is he unaware that the allegations here is that there was a serious misrepresentation of the facts?
I think the answer is obvious that he feels this was a breach in halachic protocol and required a public statement which he did in an Aidel as possible manner.
Wow, quick transition from being happy about respectful discourse to Mudslinging.
ReplyDeleteWell I guess the positive angle is that he has a minyan where ever he is
ReplyDeleteNow I remember thank you for jogging my memory, as u may now I suffered from head trauma some time ago
ReplyDeletehaving *all things* considered .................. by you, a lot of hot air with no substance.
ReplyDeleteOr maybe you don't have a good answer so you claim waste of time.
ReplyDeletenot exactly.
ReplyDeletesame for cohen / giyoret, and cohen / gerusha. that's why I'm surprised DT had a few posts on it. its too common, but impermissible.
I don't disagree with you that he thinks its a breach of halachic protocol but I am questioning the anti heters that they are sure that his letter is saying the facts in heter are wrong and that's why shes an ashes ish I am saying there is nothing indicating that. He is following R' Elyashiv ZTL that held there is no room for a heter in this day and age. Even if this case mirrored R' Moshe's case you can not apply it any longer. (and no he is not saying that reb moshe was wrong)
ReplyDeleteThat depends. If the original Rav still maintains that he is correct, and he is their Rav, then לכאורה they are allowed to continue living together - במקומו של ר"א היו כורתין עצים כו'... Unless the Heter was based on misinformation, and the woman was complicit...
ReplyDeleteShlomo good point . I was just like scratching my Head to figure out why RSM has now written for the third time about this
ReplyDeleteHu I did not hear about this what did rav ng ask rav Dovid and what did he reply?
ReplyDeleteEhud, can you please be clear what Rav Dovid said?
ReplyDeleteTroubling where you get your facts about Sholom. I think he knows pretty well how to learn. I have seen and heard him, actually both of them in action, but the problem is here that they cross a red line, a very serious one with dire ramifications inore than one respect (troubling that it is still going) and it is very troubling that not too many people are out there to stop it....
ReplyDeleteIs this your first encounter with sarcasm?
ReplyDeleteI'm thrilled we seem to be making slow but steady progress with you. first of all thanks for reviewing all my points it helps your comprehension I'm sure and I can detect that the points you did not take issue with are possibly sinking in ,reb daas Torah answered most of your "difficult "question you had concerning my post he left me only one which I need to clarify. R elyashev is not in the position to place an expiration date on any Halacha, no matter how great he might have been, his opposition was to the implementation of such a ruling possibly for haskafic reasons we may never find out because I don't think he explained himself as many times he ruled without giving an explanation . Basically his position was it's not a good idea .it's hard to fathom that the furor raised by rabbis worldwide would've been raised if this ruling would've followed RMF guidelines properly. frankly I doubt if he himself would he be alive today would've came out strongly if this would've been done with proper process , hence this has absolutely nothing to do with Halacha per se , but rather good old-fashioned corruption
ReplyDeleteTo have the name honesty at least one sentence you write should be honest. you make 3 statements 1) 2) 3) not one of them make any sense
ReplyDeleteHey, dear buddy, please make up your mind. Is it "dishonest" or it does "not make any sense?" When you have no answer to clear and substantive arguments, you resort to personal attacks. OK. You should know that you can simply admit to the truth. It will be a lot simpler.
I don't know what world your living in but this blog is full of, people accusing a lady who got a heter based on R' Moshes psak ( right or wrong) of adultery.
No. Every possaik that wrote a letter clearly rejects the "heter" as not meeting Rav Moshe's criteria. Period.
It just happens to be that you don't know R' Elyashivs psak and it has no reflection on R' Moshes psak.
LOL Kleinman prophecy?
So on that note I think you should maybe crawl back into your hole and leave this story to be dealt with by those that at least know the facts.
LOL ... or by those who are willing to deal with the actual facts.
Good luck
Nathan of Gaza you are a liar and have no business being in here as it is obvious you have an agenda and falsify and lie
ReplyDeleteSorry Goldie but while Reb Shmuel was a manhig and Rosh Yeshiva he was not a Posek. I challenge you to find me any major Psak Halacha he issued
ReplyDeleteCan someone please fill in the blanks for me. A meeting took place by Rabbi Belsky and they signed and issued a siruv against Aron Friedman. Rabbi belsky was present as was Wolmark and Mendel Epstien. Who else was present and who signed the siruv? Please help me. Thank you
ReplyDeletewhen it comes to rav shmuel many many bnei torah belive he is the last word in halochoh.
ReplyDeleteNope. Same with Rabbi Belsky. They are both not regarded as the last word in halochoh. Far from it!
After all the machaos and proclamations against the heter they still haven't reversed themselves. Perhaps they are waiting for things to quiet down so that they can back out with less embarrassment.
ReplyDeleteAre you sure she ran away from Bais din and not him? Is he willing to go back to the Baltimore Bais din? If he is, then why would rabbi greenblatt write a heter without consulting the Bais din before deciding that AF is crazy? Did she allege that the Bais fin is corrupt or was bribed?
ReplyDeleteRSK himself says he didnt pasken anything.
ReplyDeleteAnd it's known among Rabbonim that RSK is not considered a top tier Posek. Especially for eishis ish
That is a horrible comment.
ReplyDeleteHorrible. Do Teshuva quickly.
After all this public outrage - how can they back down with less embarrassment? Are they simply going to tell Tamar and not acknowledge the retraction?
ReplyDeleteyes she left Beis Din and not him. No she did not claim that the beis din is corrupt or bribed. Rav Greenblatt did not bother checking any facts in the case as Rav Herschel Schacter notes and would not have given the heter if he had taken the trouble to learn the facts.
ReplyDeletenope!
ReplyDeleteThank you.
ReplyDeleteThe surname is not an halacha issue.
They had a year or so to contemplate their position BEFORE the ruckus started, unless the only reason they will think of retracting is public opinion then making a tumult is a good thing
ReplyDeleteThere are more than enough statements by gedolei olam indicating that the psak is wrong. I don't believe they actually still hold from their psak. However, they may be desperately searching for some way to back out with minimal bizoyon. Eventually, the storm might pass and then they could reverse it somewhat out of the limelight. The world isn't going to focus on this forever and if they already know the psak is wrong, they may have basically reversed it quietly by telling Tamar to separate without letting the olam being informed and simply wait for it to pass from public consciousness.
ReplyDeleteWhich part was novel? I don't think that this blog is the place to get anyone's name cleared. Knophler for one is known to be an "alleged" (so i don't get sued by him :) gangster, forger and unterveltnick that is the source for much of the information that has been relied on in this blog and by others. The truth in this case doesn't matter even when you agree with the anti's if its not how they want to present the story your out to lunch. Let alone when you hit them between the eyeball with actual facts you get a response like "It is a waste of time since you prefer your conjecture to facts"
ReplyDeleteThe one thing I have been looking for in the conversation is let the facts speak for themselves don't post letters from people and write your own opinion as if that is what happened IE: the letter from R; Feivel he doesn't say anything that anyone posted I don't know if he is saying like I am but the possibility exists. Why cant anyone accept that as a possibility? I agree with your point about R' Elyashiv and I think R' Feivel does know why he held what he did and that is why I threw out the position I did. (he was involved in a similar story a number of years ago)
ReplyDeleteI don't claim to know all the facts or even a small portion of them. However most of the issues that are raised by the anti's if someone would stop to ask the people that know on both sides will get a different picture of the actual facts. I am not saying that if you heard the real story you will change your mind and say the Heter is valid but you will see how corrupt the public aspect of the debate has become.
I don't think your in a position to make the statement you did about corruption without hearing the real facts not the blog version.
however when it comes to rav shmuel many many bnei torah belive he is the last word in halochoh.
ReplyDelete!!!!
What have you been smoking and where did you get it?
Not good enough. "Vihyisem nekiyim', they must make the order of separation public, so as not to mislead others that everything is peachy keen.
ReplyDeleteUm which rabbonim ? Are u making this up as u go?
ReplyDeleteWere did rav belsky come in here? P.s
ReplyDeleteThe problem here is rsk set of facts are different than most in this case. I think if we assume the facts are true than we don't have to look further than rmf for a psak . there many other cases besides rav Moshe teshuva that we can leard from
Not everyone write teshuvos. Rav forchhiemer who gets more questions in a day than most poskim get in a year. Asks rav Shmuel's every shverer shailay that comes his way
ReplyDeleteHere is some substance for you. I already asked you once no need to reply, and decline to repeat meiayer peomim. Short of being verbose, you are very naive my friend, please excuse my French. You have no clue of what it takes and goes into a Psak. Try to spice it with some sugar.
ReplyDeleteSholam is a baal kishrom otzum. So was Einstein neither of them can learn a sugyah from top to bottom because that takes skills and work and seyato dishmayu that neither of them have . don't be fooled by the beard and frak or the ability to through around March mekomos and tzdodim and eiluyishe chaps
ReplyDeleteHere is an excerpt of what transpired on Nov 23, 2015 on this blog. If Dad and Honesty care to be honest, let them have you in on what transpired on that Visit of RNG to R'Dovid
ReplyDeleteNov 23, 2015 ... Honesty. צא ורה שר' נטע הלך לבקר בשבוע שעבר, ולא הסכים איתו כלל וכלל ואמר לו שאין שום יתד (חוץ מהעיתון) לסמוך עליו ...
Honesty Dad • 2 months ago
1)צא ורה שר' נטע הלך לבקר בשבוע שעבר, ולא הסכים איתו כלל וכלל ואמר לו שאין שום יתד (חוץ מהעיתון) לסמוך עליו
2) Dad Honesty • 2 months ago
אמת, אבל ג"כ לא מחה נגד ההיתר, רק אמר* שהוא עצמו לא היה *מתירה
3) Honesty Yehoshua • 2 months ago
Through the grapevine. I only mentioned this fact after people were falsely claiming that RD does not disagree with this "heter." Please notice that even "dad" doesn't deny this.
4) Here is some more:
Dad ehud • 2 months ago
Ehud יקירי, אין שלום ולא יהיה שלום, המתירים לא יחזרו מפסקם, שהרי יש יתד לסמוך עליו, וא"א לומר שטעו בשיקול הדעת, ולכך הרבנים השפויים החליטו שאין למחות נגד פסק זה אעפ"י שהם עצמם לא היה מתירים, צא וראה שר' דוד פיינשטיין אינו אומר לא איסור ולא היתר, והאוסרים לא יתירו גם מה שהתיר באגרות משה, והמחלוקת היא אותו חילוקי דעות שחלקו על ר'משה בחייו, ולכן אין כאן חדשות כלל, וכל אחד יעמוד על משמרתו
ROFL! Dear Mr. Honesty, if you want to be honest on this, kindly let us in To your Grapevine. Yovo baal haShor veya'amid al shoro. Ulmitsva godol yechoshev
Why he still insists, is to confront him in public Korach's tayne lekanter, "omru loi, Moshe, zu assuro oy muteres? Im tomar assuro Mekach Taus mi hitir leovicho?
R' Dovid is not interested in machlokes. You asked his chavas Da'as, paskened you, and have a great day.
I think that I have a fair sense of humor, and can usually detect sarcasm. However in this case, Nathan crossed many red lines, which proved that he's just a troll.
ReplyDeleteעפרא לפומיה
If you think that his comment was justified, then I'll make a mental note to myself as to how seriously I should take your own comments. Birds of a feather flock together. Or as חז"ל phrased it: לא לחינם הלך העורב אצל הזרזיר
Kindly read my response to Goldie.
ReplyDeleteLechol man deboie lemeida R' Dovid Feinsteins opinion in reply to RNG about Mekach taus, listen to the discussion of Dad and Honesty behind the Grapevines. If you cannot extract the wine, ask them to please whisper a little louder.
ReplyDeleteNov 23, 2015 on this Blog a brief discussion whispering between two opponents mesiach lefi tumom!
... Honesty. צא ורה שר' נטע הלך לבקר בשבוע שעבר, ולא הסכים איתו כלל וכלל ואמר לו שאין שום יתד (חוץ מהעיתון) לסמוך עליו ...
Honesty to Dad • 2 months ago
1)צא ורה שר' נטע הלך לבקר בשבוע שעבר, ולא הסכים איתו כלל וכלל ואמר לו שאין שום יתד (חוץ מהעיתון) לסמוך עליו
2) Dad Honesty • 2 months ago
אמת, אבל ג"כ לא מחה נגד ההיתר, רק אמר* שהוא עצמו לא היה *מתירה
3) Honesty Yehoshua • 2 months ago
Through the grapevine. I only mentioned this fact after people were falsely claiming that RD does not disagree with this "heter." Please notice that even "dad" doesn't deny this.
4) Here is some more:
Dad ehud • 2 months ago
Ehud יקירי, אין שלום ולא יהיה שלום, המתירים לא יחזרו מפסקם, שהרי יש יתד לסמוך עליו, וא"א לומר שטעו בשיקול הדעת, ולכך הרבנים השפויים החליטו שאין למחות נגד פסק זה אעפ"י שהם עצמם לא היה מתירים, צא וראה שר' דוד פיינשטיין אינו אומר לא איסור ולא היתר, והאוסרים לא יתירו גם מה שהתיר באגרות משה, והמחלוקת היא אותו חילוקי דעות שחלקו על ר'משה בחייו, ולכן אין כאן חדשות כלל, וכל אחד יעמוד על משמרתו
*************************************************
ROFL! Dear Mr. Honesty, if you want to be honest on this, kindly let us in To your Grapevine. Yovo baal haShor veya'amid al shoro. Ulmitsva godol yechoshev
Why RSK still insists, is to confront him in public Korach's tayne lekanter, "omru loi, Moshe, zu assuro oy muteres? Im tomar assuro Mekach Taus mi hitir leovicho?
R' Dovid is not interested in machlokes. You asked his chavas Da'as, paskened you, "רק אמר* שהוא עצמו לא היה *מתירה"
and have a great day.
כל מי שאינו לא חיגר
ReplyDeleteולא סומא ולא פיסח ועושה עצמו כאחד מהם, אינו מת מן הזקנה עד
שיהיה כאחד מהם
[פאה פ"ח, מ"ט]
To name Rabbonim would be out of line.
ReplyDeleteAnd no I don't make it up as I go.
I actually used to ask RSK shaalos. Thus my interest in this story.
However, I realized I was ignorant. And in speaking with some gedolei Torah and poskim, I have been told that he is not considered a top tier Posek
No one said he's not learned. Just not one of the top.
Rav Yisroel Belsy is sick and has not been seen in public for a month or more and they have had a Kinnus Tefila for him, while Wolmark and Epstein have been sentenced to long jail terms, in spite of being rabbis with pull.
ReplyDeleteWhile Aron Friedman has managed to stay afloat and not just that but he has the support of the full spectrum of major league Poskim from Israel (Rav Mosh Shternbuch) to America (Rav Feivel Cohen), as well as virtually most other Ehrliche Rabbonim. So what is your question about really?
Yehudah and Dovid HaMelech both owned up to doing the wrong thing and we revere them for that teshuvah. Are we now incapable of that if we are important people?
ReplyDeleteHuh gufa, please clarify that line what you wrote to her.....
ReplyDeleteAnd he had no duty to investigate independently?
ReplyDeleteMy brother just called up Rav Greenblatt and asked him the assertion made by Rav Herschel Schachter were true that he told Rav Greenblatt 1) there were problems with the validity of the psychiatric report 2) that beis din was already involved and that Rav Greenblatt replied that if he had known that he wouldn't have paskened.
ReplyDeleteRav Greenblatt's replied that he remembered speaking with Rav Schachter but he doesn't remember what the conversation was about
That's why Rabbi F looks like what he looks like! Outside the small insular BMG crowd he is laughed at.
ReplyDeletehim not her
ReplyDeleteThat would be the right thing to do but if they have no inclination to do that because of the publicity, I don't believe they would leave them in sin in order to protect their own kavod. They would privately tell them to separate and keep quiet and the news would eventually leak out.
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/01/jewish-press-defends-mendel-epstein.html#disqus_thread
ReplyDeleteIt's all in there. This was a discussion amongst two meforshim mesiach lefi tumom ish voish tachas gafnoi about RNG's visit to R Dovid over this Mekach taus issue, and I overheard. You can do the same, and even ask them [ R' Dad and R' Honesty] right here on the blog e.g. 'Hey, boie ani lemeida'. No need of Vehameilits beinoisom.
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/01/jewish-press-defends-mendel-epstein.html#disqus_thread
Rav Dovid said he would not be matir aha but he would not be matir in many cases his father was matir according to close confidants .
ReplyDeleteYou're entitled to your opinion as long as you're aware of the assumptions you're basing yourself on. Your Pshat is not far-fetched, but has no basis.
ReplyDeleteThat I think can be interpreted as stonewalling.
ReplyDeleteAnd that RHS account can be taken as accurate
I believe that only applies in a case where money is made, not in our case when the goal is a noble one
ReplyDeleteI sound incredulous at the sight of someone twisting himself like a pretzel in the hope of salvaging the construct of his Judaism.
ReplyDeleteDid anyone else hear that she is pregnant and that's why they can't retract the heter?
ReplyDeleteBecause that would mean that they made a mamzer lchol hadayos.
Since when is sarcasm necessarily humorous?
ReplyDeleteI am perfectly satisfied to allow my comments to stand or fall on their own merits. Your opinion of me or them is of zero concern to me.
Ehud, can you please be clear ...?
ReplyDeleteIf you have been reading here for any period of time, you should know the answer to that one.
when rav dovid wants to take positions he takes them i.e. bugs in the nyc water system, eiruv in brooklyn etc. in this case it has not officially come to rav dovid for many reasons mostly because rav dovid does not want to be put in a position to pasken according to the psak of his father when he himself would not use that heter even in the cases when rav moshe zt"l was matir. hence the answer " i would not be matir" rav dovid did not say its assur or u should not be matir because rav dovid knows that depending on the metzius rav moshe was matir in many many cases that he would not be matir himself. so in till we have a letter from rav dovid we will go by what we know he said " rav nota is a bar samcha"
ReplyDeleteWheew did you hear that.
ReplyDeleteI think he's throwing darts to see if any will stick so he can say bingo.
ReplyDeleteIt actually does have basis..... R' Feivel was the shliach the last time this situation happened from R' Elyashiv so he knows what he held and in his chochmadikah way conveyed those sentiments in his letter without mentioning the Heter at all.
ReplyDelete