Tuesday, July 18, 2023

Rav Shlomo Wolbe: Importance of sexual satisfaction - and not just focusing on doing a mitzva

update: added the Steipler Whatever is done has to be with mutual consent - Nedarim 20b, Shulchan Aruch 240:3, 

Rambam(Hilchos De'os 5:4): ...Neither of them should be drunk or uninterested or depressed nor should either of them be sleeping. The man should not force the woman against her wishes but whatever is done should be with mutual desire and with joy. ...

Steipler (Igros Kodesh #2):  [...]  The details of sexual intercourse of the mitzva of conjugal obligations are explained in the Siddur of Rav Yaakov Emden in the section of the laws of Shabbos night. It should be studied carefully because these are actual halachic obligations. Because according to the Torah it is prohibited to have intercourse in circumstances where the woman is not interested and therefore it is necessary to get her interested with intimate activities such as hugging and kissing until she is sexually aroused and desires intercourse. Because if this is not done first – it is like placing her before a lion who mauls and eats as is explained in Pesachim (49). [It is a terrible sin to deprive her of her sexual rights even if he is doing it for the sake of piety and asceticism. Taking what belongs to his wife can not be the basis of piety by theft and treating her as a slave]. Furthermore to have sexual intercourse against her will results in having children who are sinners and rejecters of Torah – they are call bnei anusa (children of rape).

A husband who grabs and has intercourse immediately without preliminary intimacy and then separates immediate after ejaculation and leaves her, might think that he is acting like a highly spiritual angel. But in actual truth he has not lowered his lust at all even though he definitely has placated his desires for the time being since he has in fact obtained full pleasure from this intercourse. In contrast his wife felt no pleasures at all from this abrupt sexual act. In fact she has been hurt and shamed and the tears she sheds in private will not go unanswered. That is because our Sages(Bava Metzia)  tell us that the Gate of Tears has not been closed. They say that a man should be very careful with his wife's honor because she readily cries. There is no question that such a brutal act arouses Divine judgment against him.


Furthermore he does not merit to have Divine help either in spiritual or material issues. And this that he mistakenly thinks he becomes a highly spiritual person by trying to be insensitive to his wife in sexual matters – this is a worthless fantasy and a lie. That is because from sins and transgression one becomes blemished and spiritually impure – not elevated.
[...]

Igros Kodesh (#4):  Question: How to avoid emission of sperm while asleep at night when his wife is a nida and also during the time when she is permitted to him? Answer: I am forced to answer even though it is very difficult to clarify the matter in a written reply. From his letter I got the impression that he needs guidance in the broader topic of what is the nature of married life. Marital relations need to be such that he is sexually satisfied even during the time when he needs to separate from his wife because of nida. Thus we are not talking about the number of times of intercourse but rather the quality of the sexual relationship.

Young men, especially those who are serious about spiritual development, think that sanctifying oneself during sexual intercourse can only mean that one needs to minimize lust and sexual feelings as much as possible. But this is a complete mistake as can be seen from the enlightening comments of Rashi (Nida 17a). Also please look at the Rokeach (Jerusalem edition page 27a) who cites Nedarim (20b) that everything that a man wants to do with his wife he can do in order that he won’t have any interest in other women. 

We see clearly that sexual relations need to be so satisfying until all other women are in his eyes as hens and he absolutely no desire to even look at them. This is also implied by the statement of Chazal concerning the reward for those husband who prolong physical contact with their wives after intercourse is finished. Thus we see the need for intercourse to be intense and satisfying – and not done merely to fulfill one's obligation and similar extrinsic matters. And therefore if a person is concerned for the quality of intercourse itself, I am sure that he will be so satiated and satisfied that lust will not be a problem even during the period of nida. 

Aside from this, he needs to strengthen his Torah study. That means not merely study with a book but to train his thoughts to be involved with thoughts of Torah study. For example before he leaves his house or yeshiva to organize Torah issues to think about until he reaches his destination and that he shouldn’t be empty of Torah even when he is walking in the street. 

And regarding not looking at women – there is the advice of the Gra that one should pray before leaving to go into the street – that G-d should guard him from all aspects of sin including sinful thoughts until he reaches his destination (See Orchos Chaim #135 at the end of the Gra’s Siddur). 

Furthermore he should learn with joy and not worry or fear at all. That is because worry and fear just arouse the mind and nocturnal emssions –G-d forbid. And with G-d’s help if he conducts himself as I have described, he will see success.

121 comments :

  1. What better way to bring traffic to a blog then to write about this topic....
    Not undermining the importance of the subject, but i am not sure i agree on discussing it on such a wide public forum.......
    But kudos for keeping it classy and Toradic.
    Besides, the answer can differ from person to person since everyone is on a different spiritual level.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You are obviously new to this blog. This blog is all about subjects such as this. I'm happy for and jealous of people like you who don't know about the evil out there that this blog addresses. It seems that at least someone has to maintain such a blog, but whether to participate is each person's personal decision. Many people are visiting now only to follow the TE saga. When that's over בע"ה בקרוב the "page views in the last seven days" will go back down to its regular numbers.

    By the way, your post from the other week was excellent and expressed many of my own feelings. On average, the critics are ignorant of the often amazing mentchlichkeit shown by some of the people being attacked here. In an instant they engage in open-mouth policy. It's only those who've seen the mentchlichkeit who have to struggle through the process of coming to terms with the fact that the attacks, or at least the core of the attacks, are justified.

    ReplyDelete
  3. As one who has dealt for years with broken marriages, I would rate this topic number one. The children from broken marriages would agree. And the sages of the Mishneh tell us that the attitude of the parents during intimacy causes the level of soul in the children for good or bad. So an unhappy intimacy can destroy children's spiritual and human level.
    I looked up the Rokeach that Rav Wolbe mentions and I believe I had previously marked Rokeach page 27 in my volume on the topic of Teshuva paragraph 14. He writes, "And after she goes to Mikva the husband should make her rejoice and hug her and kiss her and sanctify himself in the intimacy [meaning] he should not speak dirty words and not see in her something shameful. Rather he should rejoice with their intimacy and with all kinds of hugging to fulfill his desires and her desires in order that he not think about another woman but only think about his wife because she is the wife of his loins and he must show her acts of desire and love. END QUOTE.
    I tell husbands that there is a basic conflict in the laws of marriage. It says "All that a man wants to do with his wife let him do it" and it says he should not be like a rooster running after a hen. This means that a man with no special desires can be as holy as he wants, as long as she is happy because it says "And he must make his wife rejoice" in intimacy. But if a man has an interest in doing something special, let him do it with his wife otherwise the yester hora will tell him to do with another woman. Don't mess with your desires. They don't run away, they just get worse. Somebody asked me about doing X which is really X but he told me he had a stronger desire for zilch than he had for his wife. I told him, if you don't do it with your wife, you never know where you can do it. You are in real danger if you are not going to satisfy yourself. For such people it says, "All that a man wants to do with his wife let him do it."

    ReplyDelete
  4. You seem to be a relative newcomer here. So, in that vein, you might want to think before you type.

    1) I protest your gratuitous assertion that RDE exists to garner hits on his blog.
    2) Your criticism is in fact with Rav Wolbe זצ״ל for publishing this teshuva.

    I see no reason for your comment.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Which sefer is Igros Kodesh? Is it available in seforim stores? Thank You

    ReplyDelete
  6. והיינו דכתיב לכה נרוה דודים עד הבקר נתעלסה באהבים

    ReplyDelete
  7. "everything that a man wants to do with his wife he can do in order that he won’t have any interest in other women."
    With or without her consent?

    ReplyDelete
  8. obviously with her consent - see Nedarim 20b

    ReplyDelete
  9. If only RDE would stick to such posts and desist from the AF/TE case, it would be a tiferes and kiddush shem Shomayim!

    ReplyDelete
  10. If only there was no need to be involved in the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt heter, I would rather spend my time on other issues.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sure. And allow the hoodlums to do whatever they want without fear of being exposed? No thanks. If not for Rabbi Eidenson, the CBD would have gotten away scott-free with their shenanigans. He was the only one to have the drive to expose them and to highlight their manifest misdeeds. He has done likewise in the Tamar Epstein case and numerous others. I may not always agree with him, but I sure as heck would prefer that he stick to doing what he does and keep our holy encampment holy instead of allowing it to be hijacked by evil posers.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Excellent piece. What are your issues that you are reacting to this post in this way???

    ReplyDelete
  13. And leave the issue only addressed by those you agree with and loudmouths seeking media attention with their public protests??

    ReplyDelete
  14. You are correct. I apologize for the judgmental aspect of my comment. I was thinking a lot about it over Shabbos.
    It was incorrect for me to pass judgement the way I did.
    R Daniel, please be mochel the negative aspect of my comment. Truth is, a lot of binei Torah can learn from it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. R David,
    I want to publicly ask for your mechila for the way I have judged you in my previous comments. I was too quick to assume I understood your intentions. My lack of daas and lack of life experience caused me to error in my judgment of you. I was zoche to spend Shabbos with someone who knows a lot about your askanas in previous issues among Klal Yisrael.
    Please be mochel me for thinking you had any other intent but the kavod of Hashem in your fight for the truth and justice.
    Sincerely,
    a PA resident

    ReplyDelete
  16. Exactly my point. There is no such need. You have been yotzei even the most remotely conceivable chiyuv mecha'ah l'mehadrin. Move on.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 2) Your criticism is in fact with Rav Wolbe זצ״ל for publishing this teshuva.

    Unless it was published by his heirs, or is distributed privately

    ReplyDelete
  18. Puzzling. When did you get anointed to be the counterweight to that discussion? And, if you don't want it brought up, why bring it up yourself in an unrelated post? סיג לחכמה שתיקה. Please, be a חכם.

    ReplyDelete
  19. אבל קרא הם דברי מרשעת לא אשתו

    ReplyDelete
  20. Beautifully said. A Kanoiy like the proverbial housewife, not like the proverbial cat.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer says “If only RDE would stick to such posts and desist from the AF/TE case, it would be a tiferes and kiddush shem Shomayim!”

    I quote:

    You shall faithfully observe My commandments: I am the Lord. You shall not profane My holy name, that I may be sanctified in the midst of the Israelite people—I the Lord who sanctify you, I who brought you out of the land of Egypt to be your God, I the Lord. (Leviticus 22:31-33)

    The Kamentsky-Greenblatt heter is RDE’s focus, not AF/TE. Why? Kamentsky-Greenblatt are leading rabbis doing public acts that may bring, Heaven forbid, to Jews committing adultery. Rabbi Greenblatt performed an Orthodox marriage ceremony to Tamar with her husband alive, well and free not giving her a get. AF/TE are individuals. RDE is after the leading rabbis and feminists that may lead, Heaven forbid, to immorality. Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer would like RDE to shut up. Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer should shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "It ain't over till it is over" and until that time there is need to protest to remove this impediment to kedusha

    ReplyDelete
  23. Chutspan echad! Vechi kach osim libnei levay? You know better than Rashkebehag HoRav Shternbuch Shlit"A. It is rather you and what you say, that we dislike.

    ReplyDelete
  24. You hit the nail on its head.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Because due to all my many years of being indoctrinated with "tznius, tznius, tznius" my instinctive reaction to such topics is 'its not tznius'....
    But the more I learn to use my own sechel - in conjunction with Torah values- I have come to realize that sometimes the 'tznius' is misplaced, and not actually applied properly.
    It's a real life struggle too many frum women have after their years of schooling

    ReplyDelete
  26. I disagree with your assumption of no. 2.
    My reaction was to the public publication of his tshuva. Not the actual tshuva for whoever it was written for.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Exactly. Thanks you

    ReplyDelete
  28. "On average, the critics are ignorant of the often amazing mentchlichkeit shown by some of the people being attacked here. In an instant they engage in open-mouth policy. It's only those who've seen the mentchlichkeit who have to struggle through the process of coming to terms with the fact that the attacks, or at least the core of the attacks, are justified."

    Exactly!
    This has been the cause of my struggle. Acctaually KNOWING, seeing and expe the mentchlickeit of the E's and the K's....

    ReplyDelete
  29. Philly Woman,
    A great honor when somebody with your courage says a good word for me. So thank you very much,
    Dovid

    ReplyDelete
  30. Because you set the wheels turning. It is now in the hands of an appropriate authority.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The same could have been said in the 1950s-1960s when many Orthodox shuls removed their mechitzos and joined Conservative Judaism. Move on, Orthodoxy was a lost cause, right?

    ReplyDelete
  32. If RDE goes to sleep on the subject and therefore there will be no more tumult than it will be back to business as usual if you know what I mean

    ReplyDelete
  33. What appropriate authority?

    Considering that this is not an official beis din but a "meeting" and considering that they have not even asked that Aharon Friedman testify, and I haven't heard that they are going to have psychologists come and testify regarding the "report' - there is no reason to belief that a resolution of the matter is certain. Until it is clear that this matter will actually be resolved by parties who have firmly committed themselves to provide a solution - nothing has changed.

    This as apparently as difficult for you to grasp as why so many important rabbis are convinced that the "heter" is a fraud. But it is obvous to the rest of us.

    ReplyDelete
  34. והלא דברים ק״ו ומה לחם סתרים ינעם, לחמו בלחמי לא כ״ש

    ReplyDelete
  35. You have mobilized many rabbis to rule the heter is invalid. You have ensured that any children that TE may have in the absence of a get will find it impossible to marry b'kahal. You have compelled the mattirim to submit to arbitration - which will not satisfy the ossrim regardless. There is no further solution that you need or must aim to accomplish. At this point, it is sheer bloodthirstiness.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I ask again, RDE shlita, is this your will? Because if you want me to shut up, just let me know and I will go off silently into the sunset. If it is not your will, can you please clarify as much again? Some commenters seem to continue to be of the opinion that I should cease and desist...

    ReplyDelete
  37. I will comment on this in the post that bears my visage. I will continue this conversation, if necessary, there.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I think you are making an important contribution to the discussion and I appreciate you taking the time and effort to express your views - especially in the face of hostile comments.
    No I have no desire for you to shut up - some have the same opinion about me.

    ReplyDelete
  39. tut tut - such nasty things you say.

    It is not bloodthirstiness - I just want to make sure that the matter gets taken care of. At present there is no guarantee because no one has officially taken responsiblity for resolving it. Or did I miss Rav Dovid Feinstein's news conference where he outlined what he is planning on doing?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Why does he have to let anyone know except the ba'alei davar?

    ReplyDelete
  41. as I have noted he hasn't let Aharon Friedman know what he is doing

    ReplyDelete
  42. AF is not a ba'al davar. TE and her new husband, RNG and RSKx2 are the ba'alei davar.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Leviticus 22:32 “You shall not profane My holy name, that I may be sanctified in the midst of the Israelite people—I the Lord who sanctify you” is the solemn warning against chillul hashem and the positive injunction of Kiddush hashem.

    Soncino says: “Any unworthy action which reflects discredit upon Judaism since Judaism is blamed for it--is regarded as profanation of the Divine Name. Cf. Aboth, V, 9, and IV, 4.”

    The Greenblatt-Kamenistky heter is an unworthy action which reflects discredit upon Judaism.

    Surely you agree, Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer ?

    I quote “An enemy dissembles with his speech, Inwardly he harbors deceit. Though he be fair-spoken do not trust him, For seven abominations are in his mind. His hatred may be concealed by dissimulation, But his evil will be exposed to public view. He who digs a pit will fall in it, And whoever rolls a stone, it will roll back on him. A lying tongue hates those crushed by it; Smooth speech throws one down.” (Proverbs 26:24-28)

    Tamar and Aaron are Individuals fighting. I don’t see chillul hashem involved.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "TE and her new husband" ?
    aka *Paramour*, nothing new!

    ReplyDelete
  45. Really? AF loses his status as a husband by a renegade court, and the status of his marriage is suddenly not his business?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer says “AF is not a ba'al davar. TE and her new husband, RNG and RSKx2 are the ba'alei davar.” I agree.

    The feminists dug a pit intended for AF to fall into. They also rolled a stone intended to crush AF.

    (internet 2012):

    “Supporters of Tamar Epstein, whose ex-husband, Aharon Friedman, refuses to give her a religious divorce, have been pressuring Friedman's boss, U.S. Rep. Dave Camp, R-Michigan, to fire Friedman. They have protested in front of Camp's office, signed a petition at change.org, started a website (freetamar.org) and in February, bombarded Camp's official congressional Facebook page. But Susan Aranoff, director of Agunah International, which supports Jewish women seeking divorces, said social media has little effect because many husbands still are resistant after all the bullets have been fired."

    RNG and RSKx2 joined the feminists. They intended AF to divorce TE. Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer is right “AF is not a ba'al davar. TE and her new husband, RNG and RSKx2 are the ba'alei davar.”

    “He who digs a pit will fall in it, And whoever rolls a stone, it will roll back on him.” (Proverbs 26:27). RNG and RSKx2 and feminists are in big trouble, they fell into a pit and a stone crushed them, while AF is not a ba'al davar.

    ReplyDelete
  47. How is AF any less a baal davar than TE is?

    ReplyDelete
  48. The diyun is on whether AF's marriage should be annulled on claims that he is a crazy person who is unfit for marriage and he is not a baal davar? Please!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Why is he a ba'al davar? He is not being called unfit for marriage, just someone that TE would never have married had she known about certain traits ahead of time.

    ReplyDelete
  50. The diyun is whether she is or is not an eishes ish. As he has not given a get, he is not the issue. The heter is the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  51. "His status as husband?" He lost that a long time ago. He can, however, gain it back very easily by marrying someone else.

    ReplyDelete
  52. but the elephant in the room is that his alleged psychological health is the basis of the heter. It is absurd to claim that the dayanim have no need to speak with him and that the validity of the heter can be determined without him.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Incredible! Perhaps it is time for you to read through Reb Moshe's teshuvos on the subject.

    It is not enough to establish that a woman would not have married this particular person - because she could have done better. It has to be established that most women would not put up with the condition AND that as soon as she realized the condition she left. She failed on both points. The personality disorders he is accused of having are not such that the majority of women would not put up with them - and she did not leave until 4 months after she supposedly learned he had them.

    So he is being declared unfit for most women to marry. That is a point made repeated here. He and his future have been falsely trashed in order to justify the heter

    With this type of ignorance or denial I am starting to understand why strong evidence doesn't influence your understanding of the situation.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Wait...so you're acknowledging that his marriage was annulled based on mekach taus? And you're also saying that he's not a baal davar?

    Am I wrong, or are you playing two sides of this discussion ? If I am wrong, please explain why. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  55. How, pray tell? Because you say so? With all due respect, you can't change halacha at will because it fits your agenda. The fact remains that until there's a get, AF is the (ONLY) legitimate spouse of T. Any and all dealings with the status of HIS wife is his concern.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Whether she is or is not an eishes ish is highly dependent on*him*.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Whether those alleged traits of his are in fact his traits is highly dependent on determining *his* traits.

    ReplyDelete
  58. A status as husband can only be lost by his death or his giving a divorce.

    ReplyDelete
  59. B'mechilah, the Haifa case repudiates most of your assertions in this comment.

    ReplyDelete
  60. The dayanim cannot determine that in any event. They are not mental health professionals. They need to determine the validity of the assessments that were presented as original grounds for the heter.

    ReplyDelete
  61. we have been through this before - no it doesn't

    ReplyDelete
  62. So if the mental health professional is anonymous like the one who "assessed" Aharon Friedman, how can their "assessment" be considered valid? Perhaps the "professional" is known to be incompetent if his/her name were revealed?

    ReplyDelete
  63. But if it turns out their assessment of a mental health professional report was mistaken, the ground falls out from under their psak and their psak turns out to be mistaken.

    ReplyDelete
  64. We have indeed, and I continue to contend that it does.

    I am not saying it validates this specific heter. It validates the principles of the heter, not the application of the principles.

    ReplyDelete
  65. By ascertaining the ne'emanus of the psychologists and psychiatrists who served as the underlying basis of the heter.

    ReplyDelete
  66. In support to your opinion, of course Aron is to be observed whether he is *Meshuga of toit* bimlo muven hamila. You don't need to be a psychologist to see such.

    ReplyDelete
  67. YGB is looking for ne'emanus. Wasn't the psych a yere shamayim that assessed Aron in absentia of which he can and should loose his/her license?

    ReplyDelete
  68. ROFL! So then what is this meeting all about?

    ReplyDelete
  69. Gerald, I tend to agree with most of your comments. However in the case of RYGB, perhaps our goal should not exactly be to shut him up.

    The fact that RYGB continues to participate on this blog, even though he clearly views it as hostile territory, should make us pause to think. Perhaps an important goal on this blog should be to help RYGB (and other frum men like him) to deprogram themselves from the false, toxic, and anti-Torah feminist mentality that has infected large sectors of Western society?

    ReplyDelete
  70. וכן הוא אומר שומר פיו ולשונו שומר מצרות נפשו וכן הוא אומר גם אויל מחריש חכם יחשב אוטם שפתיו נבון וכן הוא אומר חושך אמריו יודע דעת יקר רוח איש תבונה וכן הוא אומר וכן הוא אומר פיה פתחה בחכמה ותורת חסד על לשונה . Not sure who it applies to. Use פסוקים as necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  71. כדי שישמעו וייראו ולא יזידון עוד.....

    In all fairness. The פסק seems to me (עם הארץ) a bit out there, but I am not a פוסק. If this פסק is correct, I would assume that half the guys out there don't need to bother giving a get. But hey, I wasn't there, don't know what happened, and I am not a פוסק. Anyone have any idea what הגאון ר׳ דוד פיינשטיין paskened ?

    Oh btw, could the first husband be תובע the כסף קידושין back ? If he was never married, the ring belongs to him !!! If I were him, I would take her to בית דין that paskened מקח טעות for the value of the ring, perhaps all the מזונות he paid throughout the marriage. What do you guys think ?

    ReplyDelete
  72. He can always give a get if that bothers him...

    ReplyDelete
  73. True - if he suddenly died, the issue would be resolved...

    ReplyDelete
  74. So if I decide you're not married anymore, and the matter of your marriage isn't your concern, don't complain! You can always give a get if that bothers you...

    ReplyDelete
  75. Not so. R' Sholom K's letter states that he is a person who is unfit for marriage, as I recall, and states as well that he is meshugga. On this basis, he wishes to annul the fellow's marriage. AF is a baal davar b/c it is his marriage because of a supposed (very serious) defect in him. The idea that he is not party to this matter in every way is laughable.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Presumably their identity etc. will be revealed to RDF.

    ReplyDelete
  77. You have it right. I don't see why it concerns AF. If he feels he is still married, he may act accordingly. It is like a question of tarfus, etc. He is the "cheftza".

    ReplyDelete
  78. Your view is not shared by those gedolim who are currently actively working on resolving the issue

    ReplyDelete
  79. Do you fail to see that the mental health professional report in this case that the posek relied upon has subsequently turned out to be mistaken?

    ReplyDelete
  80. Philly Woman,
    You learned "tseniuse, tseniuse" and the boys learned "Gadol, gadol" and what happened? Some kept tseniuse and some became talmidei Chachomim, but some people got the wrong chinuch. If we can't talk about boys not being gedolim, and we can't talk about women dressing the way they want to dress maybe to impress their husbands, does that mean we can talk about the opposite? If I say these things, it is not because I invented them. I heard this from the top. As one major person told me, the key is to make children happy. Did anyone ever hear that? (Besides the one I heard it from, Reb Moshe Feinstein said basically the same thing.) We have a world of teachers who are trained to say certain things even though they are not the whole story. And when people finally understand this, they may be bitter.
    But we have to remember the world as I, a 73 year old, remember it. I was once in a class and the teacher began talking about great tsaddikim from past generations. I raised my hand and said, "I am greater than that famous tsaddik." Everybody looked at me, waiting for the punch line, because I deal with punch lines. I concluded, "I wear a yarmulke."
    The Rov of the class nodded his head. I was right. If today somebody wears a yarmulke, he has nothing to be ashamed about.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Yes, I fail to see that. Only I wouldn't call it a 'failure'...

    ReplyDelete
  82. לזה כוונת מתחילה?

    ReplyDelete
  83. Politically IncorrectFebruary 17, 2016 at 8:08 AM

    And Bechhofer continues to argue as of he's on solid ground!

    ReplyDelete
  84. כי נפת תטופנה שפתי זרה וחלק משמן חכה . ואחריתה מרה כלענה חדה כחרב פיות .ולעומת זה אשת חיל עטרת בעלה מי ימצא, רבות בנות עשו חיל ואת עלית על כולנה. ודאי הנאתה שלמה ואינו מרה, אלא מתוקה מדבש ונופת צופים מתוק לנפש ומרפא לעצם.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer says “By ascertaining the ne'emanus of the psychologists and psychiatrists who served as the underlying basis of the heter.”

    I see a parallel to daf hayomi:

    Gittin 64:

    “If the husband says [that he gave it to the depository] to divorce with, and the depository says [it was given] to divorce with, and the wife says, He gave it to me but it has been lost, R. Johanan says: This is a statement bearing on forbidden relationships, and a statement bearing on a forbidden relationship must be substantiated by not less than two witnesses. But why so? Why not believe the depository? Is he able to produce the Get that we should believe him? Then let us believe the husband, in accordance with what R. Hiyya b. Abin said in the name of R. Johanan: If a husband says, I have divorced my wife, his word can be taken? Does he here say, I have divorced her? [He appointed an agent to hand it over to her.] Then let us say that the presumption is that the agent carries out his commission, since R. Isaac has said: If a man says to his agent, Go and betroth for me any woman you please, and the agent dies, the man is forbidden to marry any woman in the world [Lest she should be of a prohibited degree of consanguinity with the woman whom the agent betrothed, v. Nazir 12a.], because the presumption is that the agent carries out his commission? That is so where [it has the effect of making the law] more stringent, but not where [it makes it] more lenient [As here.]. Then let us believe the woman herself, in accordance with R. Hamnuna; for R. Hamnuna said: If a woman says to her husband, You have divorced me, her word is taken, since the presumption is that a woman would not have the impudence to say this in the face of her husband [if it were not true]? That is so where she has no confirmation; but where she has some confirmation,1 she certainly would not shrink from doing so.”



    We believe the husband that he divorced the wife (which the wife denies), since it’s in his power to do so. We don’t believe the wife who claims she is divorced (which the husband denies) unless she brings some confirmation. Surely, we don’t believe a word of the heter.

    ReplyDelete
  86. "And therefore if a person is concerned for the quality of intercourse
    itself, I am sure that he will be so satiated and satisfied that lust
    will not be a problem even during the period of nida."


    This sentence is probably the main point of this post, and I would agree heartily if we were only talking about the "textbook case" of Hilchot Nida, i.e., 12 days assura/18 days mutteret or something like that. What happens to months after birth or other difficulties? (I still remember my wife laughing at me after the birth of our first daughter 35 years ago when I quoted the Gemara to her which said that she could start 'counting' when the baby was a week old.)


    Again, there is nothing to disagree with in Rav Wolbe's statement, but is it really the whole answer?

    ReplyDelete
  87. RYGB stated "As he (AF) has not given a get, he is not the issue." The thought that perhaps Mr. AF suffered severe injustices, abuses, and violations of his halachic rights at the hands of his wife and her "agunah" feminist supporters, simply never occurs to Mr. YGB or his BDA/ORA/MO/OO fellow travelers.

    The treatment of Mr. AF by the "agunah" feminists is a textbook case where a decent, halacha observant Jewish father was deprived of his child who was removed to another state, he was sued in archaos in violation of halacha, he was subjected to a vicious public campaign of grotesque slander, lies, and false "seiruvim", he was subjected to physical assault, and he continues to be banned from synagogues without any halachic justification, all for simply daring to stand up for his G-d given halachic rights.

    At the same time his eishes eish wife lives publicly with her boyfriend with no sanctions whatsoever against them while she is publicly worshipped and idolized as an alleged victim.

    Your response please, Mr. Bechhofer?

    ReplyDelete
  88. Good luck. He's convinced that he's greater than all the poskim from the past 500 years. No way you are going to convince him otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  89. he has no response. He is only marbitz glollim and is here to Break the Guiness Book of records in his ticker counter. He can't take the heat but he wants to remain in the kitchen and he always asks for his Tsumi = pacifier from the host moderator: do you want me to leave or else... strashes the genz = threatens the geese. With all the shtussim and nonsense he musters up aka ipcha mistavra, does anyone really care. He now can back quietly into the sunset.

    ReplyDelete
  90. What a fascinating take on Jewish marriage! Here's a quick aggregate of your perspective (based on your comments):

    1) "the perils of divorce"...but only for the husband
    2) "archaos is [appropriate]"...although it is currently notoriously biased towards women, and against Halacha on numerous counts
    3) And now, you "don't see why" declaring a marriage null and void concerns the husband.

    I said this several months ago: it is clear that you are part of the problem, rabbi. You think you are doing women a favor by eroding any rights a man might have in a marriage.

    Instead, you are emboldening women to destroy their own lives. You've tried to massage divorce into as painless a process as possible ... but only for the women. And then you wonder why your חכמות aren't really resolving anything.

    With such leadership, you'll lead the entire herd over the cliff. Much as TE (and her unborn baby) were painted into an impossible corner by her rabbinic 'friends'.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Mr. Bechhofer, is it correct that you consider all the letters posted on this blog from prominent, non-feminist, non-ORA poskim to be "at the forefront of the muck-raking", and to be a "source of obfuscation and confusion"?
    https://www.facebook.com/rabbiygb/posts/554868581259612

    ReplyDelete
  92. במחכ"ת, כבר אין עם מי לדבר. כ"ט

    ReplyDelete
  93. You can laugh as much as you want, you haven't given me any reason to change my opinion. I don't think you need or want further elaboration, but please don't hesitate to call me if you do. 845-481-0613.

    ReplyDelete
  94. I wouldn't mind some elaboration. I don't see where you've explained why he is not a baal davar in the dissolution of his own marriage on claims that he is crazy. You have stated it as a fact, but you have not explained your reasoning.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I'd love some further elaboration. For the life of me, I cannot figure out how AF of all people wouldn't be a baal davar. So much of the discussion revolves around his mental health that it makes zero sense not to have a conversation with him to determine whether perhaps some or much or all of what was alleged about him was true or false.

    ReplyDelete
  96. You finally figured it out. This is just entertainment for me. Relax לקיים מה שנאמר יראת ה׳ תוסיף ימים ושנות רשעים תקצורנה ועיין ביאור הגר״א ותבין

    ReplyDelete
  97. If I were a leader, your concerns would be legitimate. ;-) As is, I am a high school rebbe and you need not fear my positions will significantly influence anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  98. I will respond on the old page from December.

    ReplyDelete
  99. But are you not a Dayan on the BDA that hears gittin cases?

    ReplyDelete
  100. In some ways, yes. But in general, I find it liberating, mostly in a good way.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Politically IncorrectFebruary 18, 2016 at 10:01 AM

    Thus, YGB's logic ends right here......while being recalcitrant to boot. .....

    ReplyDelete
  102. I must digress a moment and be brutally honest:
    I find your slippery evasiveness to be quite nauseating. Whenever it suits you, you respond to טפל and ignore the עיקר.
    Perhaps this is an outgrowth of being so 'up' on internet discussions, or perhaps this is the kind of dialog suited for high school kids.
    In any event, too often you don't abide by that basic Yiddishism: רעד צו דער זאך.

    ReplyDelete
  103. When were you anything less than brutally honest? ;-)

    Why don't you call me? I chatted for 83 minutes the other day with one of the blog's commmenters. I am happy to chat with you as well. That commenter didn't identify himself over the phone in any other way than his DT pseudonym and you are welcome to do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Politically IncorrectFebruary 19, 2016 at 2:14 AM

    They may influence your students, how about that? ;-]

    As the Alter of Slabodka would say "when you open your mouth and talk, for those moments you become your listener's/listeners mentor".... They may influence anyone who hears you out or reads your articles. ...

    And then, if you are part of the RCA, your influence is indeed magnanimous. ..to those who are its listeners. ....

    ReplyDelete
  105. You are also welcome to call. No need to identify yourself further than "PI from DT".

    ReplyDelete
  106. It's a gemora in Bava Basra, I believe perek 8 or 9, about the ring. Regarding the food there is the famous Tosafos Yeshanim in Sotah that says Avrohom Avinu pulled this trick to get people to bentch, but it would seem absurd to charge after years have passed. It may also be related to the Rambam- Raavad about a maid who breaks dishes that since it's not normal to charge for it we assume there is automatic forgiveness.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Not a part of the RCA.

    If my students were to become aware of the positions taken on this blog by individuals like yourself, they would renounce Judaism.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Rabbi Eidensohn,
    Please remove this inappropriate post. I would prefer to not report it to blogger as adult content. Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  109. Boost your sex life.  With sex enhancer  products and drugs  get full pleasure  order today and be a better sexual partner  world wide. Order and purchases  
    On offer
    Virgra  men power enhancer
     Women  Birth. Spacing.  Young looking drugs
    Sperm.  Pleasuriser. 200mg
    Super  bumper  vibrator.  Machines
    Virginal. Loop. Vibrator  
    Vacuum  penis. Erector.  
    PCB  elastic condom  protect

    For order supplies and sexual counseling  contact  sexual health practitioner on mail.  Harrendavison@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.