update: added comment about violation of Shulchan Aruch with their continued silence
This is the first response to my request for a defense other than that Rav Kaminetsky is a gadol.
This is the first response to my request for a defense other than that Rav Kaminetsky is a gadol.
His response is that that besides Rav Kaminetsky being a gadol - he knows that I don't know what happened even though he admits he doesn't know what happened. But how does he know that - if he doesn't know what happened and he doesn't know whether I know what happened?! So this is the standard defense- Rav Kaminetsky is a gadol and you have no right or competence to deal with this issue. Only gedolim can deal with the issue - hidden from the eyes and ears of the masses. Sad!
Please enough with the gadol defense. The facts are clear and well documented on this blog. There must be one person who is competent to respond intelligently.
update:
Our well-meaning yungerman, apparently has missed an explicit halacha in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah (YD 242:10) that a rabbi is not allowed to permit something that people perceive as being prohibited. Period. However there happens to be a leniency formulated by the Shach (s.v 17), IF the rabbi provides a clear rationalization for his ruling.
ש"ך יורה דעה סימן רמב, ס"ק יז
שאסור לחכם כו' - נראה דהיינו דוקא אם מתיר בסתם... אבל אם
אומר לשואל טעם בדבר ומראה לו פנים, או שמביא ראיות מתוך הספר מותר. עכ"ל.
Hence, the rabbi(s) involved in this alleged היתר are either halachically prohibited from making such pronouncements (as per the Shulchan Aruch), or they are duty bound to explain the basis for their leniency (as per the Shach).
The public is waiting to hear the defense of this unusual ruling. The burden to explain such a ruling lies on those who made it. Until they do so, the ruling is allowed to be criticized. In fact, it MUST be criticized, since this is part and parcel of the halachic process.
Did RNG or anybody else involved in this alleged היתר do so? Not to my knowledge.
update:
Our well-meaning yungerman, apparently has missed an explicit halacha in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah (YD 242:10) that a rabbi is not allowed to permit something that people perceive as being prohibited. Period. However there happens to be a leniency formulated by the Shach (s.v 17), IF the rabbi provides a clear rationalization for his ruling.
ש"ך יורה דעה סימן רמב, ס"ק יז
שאסור לחכם כו' - נראה דהיינו דוקא אם מתיר בסתם... אבל אם
אומר לשואל טעם בדבר ומראה לו פנים, או שמביא ראיות מתוך הספר מותר. עכ"ל.
Hence, the rabbi(s) involved in this alleged היתר are either halachically prohibited from making such pronouncements (as per the Shulchan Aruch), or they are duty bound to explain the basis for their leniency (as per the Shach).
The public is waiting to hear the defense of this unusual ruling. The burden to explain such a ruling lies on those who made it. Until they do so, the ruling is allowed to be criticized. In fact, it MUST be criticized, since this is part and parcel of the halachic process.
Did RNG or anybody else involved in this alleged היתר do so? Not to my knowledge.
========================================================
Please excuse my writing skills I'm just a simple yungerman Idon't really write but this is something that touches my heart so I will try to express myself as best as I can .
Disclaimer I am not a talmid of rsk and I have never met rng.
You want a supporter to back the heter of rsk and rng . I can't do you know why? because I'm not involved in the case I wasn't in the room and neither were you so while I cant back it you cannot bash it Oh and most importantly I'm not a gadol. You want a supporter to back it How can anyone back something they are not involved in. Thats the simple answer .
The fact that we do know is reb shmuel Kaminetsky is around 90 yrs old has spent his entire life involved in torah and is moser nefesh daily for the sake of Klall yisroel. Reb nota greenblat spent his entire life involved in gittin and is respected by most gedolim in America as a top if not the top in inyanei gittiin in america.
So your going to say that the facts that we do know or think we know are mind boggling, don't add up at all to the heter. It does not make a difference to me.That does not mean I follow blindly and I don't ask or express interest and understanding I do And i also don't understand how they got to that heter but i trust that they are not corrupt based on their history.
So you want to say they made a mistake, maybe but again who am I Did i spend my life involved in torah involved in gittin no i did not and neither did you or anybody who writes in the comment section of your blog it means its not up to me or you to say that they made a mistake.
So your going to say a lot of Gedolim are against it and strongly disagree some even very strongly . That still does not give you the right in any way to make machahs or have a blog that get people to bash gedolei yisroel
.
In short this is not something for us to deal with. We have gedolim who deal with this Behind close doors. If you feel they are not doing enough then we ask them to do more . What does it help by posting ? any toeles? So now more bochurim in yeshivah coffe rooms and older men in the mikvah can hock details cause loshan harah rechilus people to loose emunas chachomim . How can you think this is the right mehalech . In my humble opinion the only think this blog on this story did was cause harm to klall yisroel.
Are you questioning the Gemara's story about Yochanan Kohain Gadol?
ReplyDeleteRemember, this Heter is but the culmination of the Kaminetsky family 7 year fight against the Aharon Friedman and his family, including being Mevayaish them in public, attempted kidnapping or murder fake seiruv etc. And all this was done by a "gadol" in defiance of the Bais Din involved. He declared himself above Din seven years ago and almost no one objected, so why are you surprised now by the Heter
My dear speaking from the heart. Shnei Gedoilei haDor have spoken, of this nevolo beYisrael and urged us all to protest and protest more and again. These kivyachol katle kanyes cannot even polish their shoes. Yes, and they know what's going on and understand quite well. This not a mistake as you wish it had, it is fake fraud and phoney from the beginning, RNG even admitted so, but couldn't care enough to do something about it, and therefore now it became a yodim es riboinom umischavnim limrod bo.Unbelievable as it is, but here it is. Experienced for almost nine decades, you still cannot be keGONEV DA'AS ELYON. If they claim they didn't know, they sure know by now, don't you think so? Talking about your gedoilim, ze hagodol koton nihye. Sorry to burst your bubble, you don't know, i don't know, he doesn't know, but shnei gedoilei hador for sure know, and they let us in on it, and directed us what to do.
ReplyDeleteYou say
ReplyDelete" We have gedolim who deal with this Behind close doors. If you feel they are not doing enough then we ask them to do more."
They have been asked for seven years to do something and they did nothing. NO ONE.
Yungerman, I doubt you are old enough to know about this but there are interesting parallels between what R. Shlomo Goren did and what is happening now with the Tamar Epstein "heter. http://www.kvetchingeditor.com/2012/05/heres-to-you-rabbi-goren.html
ReplyDeleteTwenty years ago I was present when "Rabbi" Barry Freundel publicly declared in his "Orthodox" synagogue that there is no prohibition on intermarriage with gentiles in the Torah. He told everyone in the shul that לֹא תִתְחַתֵּן בָּם
ReplyDeleteapplied only to the seven nations of Caanan.
Barry Freundel was a great scholar. He was on the board of the Rabbinical Council of America. How dare I, a mere layman, tell people that his interpretation of the Torah was apikorsus?!
To the people of Kesher Israel and others in the Modern Orthodox realm, up until about a year ago, Barry Freundel was THE Gadol. While Rav Shmuel is nowhere near the disgusting level of Freundel, it does not take a scholar to see that a report written by an anonymous therapist who never examined the subject cannot be used for the "heter". From what I know of Rabbi Greenblatt the only reason he accepted the diagnosis as fact was because it was given to him by a scion of the Kaminetzky family. But as I illustrate, when you see the tarfus in front of you, it doesn't matter how many choshuv hechsherim are on it.
A superbly hilarious posting, although it's no joke.
ReplyDeleteWhile not exactly eloquent, it does bring up one point that is important:
ReplyDeleteMaybe, just maybe, there is a piece of information which NO ONE else has that the Rabbonim involved DO have, and they do not intend on sharing it.Maybe this piece of information will silence the doubters, but for some reason, they won't disclose it.
That is not to say this is not problematic. It is.
1. Bloggers will continue to bash the heter and call it into question issues of adultery and honesty in the process.
2. Doubters will lose their emunas chachomim due to what seems to be a very questionable heter.
3. Liberal organizations will have a grand time pointing to this heter and try to reproduce it.
4. Agunos whose husbands are, l'kol hadayos, being simply disgusting and making their lives miserable, will wonder why they can't have access to this heter as well.
5. Children from this marriage will be called into question.
Maybe these Rabbonim are willing to live with all of the above.
It is insane to demand this to be done behind closed doors. A halachik novelty requires a teshuva, and we the hamon am have a right to demand it.
ReplyDeleteWhat about Hefker Beis Din Hefker? Rashi in Gitten (around daf 7, I think) comments that since kidushin is "al Das Moshe v'Yisroel" Beis Din (Yisroel) can simply annul the kidushin as not being "al das Yisroel.
ReplyDeleteThe Meraglim were at one point all holy as well.
ReplyDeleteAgain, bravo! “Please
ReplyDeleteenough with the gadol defense. The facts are clear and well documented on this
blog.”
I quote: “You
shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land
of Egypt. You shall not ill-treat any widow or orphan. If you do mistreat them,
I will heed their outcry as soon as they cry out to Me, and My anger shall
blaze forth and I will put you to the sword, and your own wives shall become
widows and your children orphans.” (Exodus 22:20-23).
The Malbim says: “Rabbi Yishmael says “You shall not
ill-treat any widow or orphan” only as an example. Indeed, all weak and oppressed like widow and
orphan [You shall not ill-treat].”
The radical feminists pushed the pendulum to the extreme that
the husband is the weak and oppressed. The wife ill-treats the husband for no
good reason.
I quote: “Why, everyone who uses proverbs applies to you the
proverb “Like mother, like daughter.” You are the daughter of your mother, who rejected
her husband and children. And you are the sister of your sisters, who rejected
their husbands and children; for you are daughters of a Hittite mother and an
Amorite father” (Ezekiel 16:44-45).
The Malbim explains that Ezekiel is giving a parable of a debauchery
mother-daughter.
Interesting, in Ezekiel’s parable, the wicked
mother-daughter reject their husbands and children. This implies that a woman rejecting her
husband and children for no good reason is debauchery.
this is an approach which the Conservative Movement claims to use exclusively.
ReplyDeletemaybe we live in parallel universes and somewhere every possibility is true.
ReplyDeleteIf what you are saying is true - it is strange that the Kaminetsky's and Rav Greenblatt didn't say such a thing to the rabbis - including Rav Feldman. If they did say it obviously no one believed them.
Our well-meaning yungerman, apparently has missed an explicit halacha in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah (YD 242:10) that a rabbi is not allowed to permit something that people perceive as being prohibited. Period. However there happens to be a leniency formulated by the Shach (s.v 17), IF the rabbi provides a clear rationalization for his ruling.
ReplyDeleteש"ך יורה דעה סימן רמב, ס"ק יז
שאסור לחכם כו' - נראה דהיינו דוקא אם מתיר בסתם... אבל אם
אומר לשואל טעם בדבר ומראה לו פנים, או שמביא ראיות מתוך הספר מותר. עכ"ל.
Hence, the rabbi(s) involved in this alleged היתר are either halachically prohibited from making such pronouncements (as per the Shulchan Aruch), or they are duty bound to explain the basis for their leniency (as per the Shach).
The public is waiting to hear the defense of this unusual ruling. The burden to explain such a ruling lies on those who made it. Until they do so, the ruling is allowed to be criticized. In fact, it MUST be criticized, since this is part and parcel of the halachic process.
Did RNG or anybody else involved in this alleged היתר do so? Not to my knowledge.
RSK (both) and RNG knew what they were getting into when they took on this case. (They are not fools to have taken this case and not expect to escape a public backlash.)
ReplyDeleteThus, any public criticism is to be expected.