Rav Sternbuch: Avoid Marriage if it causes Adultery

When I was a bachor in yeshiva we advised not to go the chupah of Conservative or Reform weddings to avoid providing valid witnesses

Rav Sternbuch(2:625): Question: A Baal Teshuva who parents married without chupah or Kiddushin – it is desirable for him to encourage them to get married according to the halacha? Answer: It is clear that living together without chupah and Kiddushin is a degradation and blemish to the family and to encourage them get halachically married would save them from halachic prohibitions. However contemporary irreligious couples have totally rejected any commitment to mitzvos and they swap wives and commit other types of severe sins. If his parents are of this type then there is absolutely no mitzva to have them married according to the halacha. This is especially true according to their son that they don’t have a good marriage. Thus it is questionable whether marriage is a good idea since there is a real possibility that they will separate without writing a Get. Therefore if they were halachically married this would result in their transgressing the prohibition of adultery. Thus the benefits of marriage would actually cause a loss because it would cause them to sin. Therefore whether an irreligious couple should marry according to the halacha is dependent on the quality of their relationship. If it is clear that they have a solid relationship – even if they don’t keep the laws of nidah – then it might be permissible for their son to encourage them to get married according to the halacha. Because they will be living together anyway so at least this will save them from the blemish to their family of not being halachically married. However in the case before us there is a strong concern that if they get married according to the halacha it will lead to the more severe problem of adultery. In such a case there is absolutely no mitzva for them to marry properly. In fact the opposite is true because it will lead them to transgress severe prohibitions. Therefore with the irreligious there are many times that it is better for them to live together without a Jewish marriage – because if they would have chupah and Kiddushin it would lead to producing mamzerim or sofek mamzerim. The halachic rule that most intercourse is with the husband would not apply to those who are licentious as we see concerning a Sotah. This is the view of the Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 4:15). Therefore before encouraging them to have a halachic wedding – their relationship needs to be investigated thoroughly. Each case needs to determine whether it is to their benefit to be married and thus that which leads to minimize sin should be done. Consequently it is a good idea to consult with the local rabbi who knows their circumstances well. You should know that in prior generations the non-observant would degenerate by means of reading secular books that involved nonsense or heresy etc. This would lead to rejecting the observance of mitzvos and they would descend to various degrees of impurity – according to their sins.

However when it came to getting married they were careful to do it within the framework of halacha and therefore the majority came to the beis din that was concerned with marriage and divorce. However today the secular are that way - not because of intellectual concerns - but simply from lust. Their basic desire is to have a totally unrestricted life for the sole purse of pleasure. Thus they live like wild animals with mocking authority, lacking any moral restraint or limits with focus entirely on pleasure and parties. And this attitude applies also to their wives where moral conduct or commitment is lacking – so each one simple does what gives them pleasure. Therefore one should be careful to avoid Kiddushin for those who are likely to be involved in adultery. On the other hand in our day when these hedonistic people hit bottom and they see that their life is totally worthless they are likely to think about repenting and find a purpose in their life. This is in contrast with previous generations who were ideological heretics that they would be loyal to their heresy and would not repent even at the gates of Hell. The bottom line is that it is impossible for us to make a general rule but each case needs to be examined separately. G‑d should return them and all Jews with complete repentance. In practice a number of gedolim in Israel have expressed concerns that they might totally reject halacha after the wedding such as on some kibbutzim where they swap wives. They have suggested that perhaps it is better to mislead them into thinking they have had a halachic marriage – by the use of invalid witnesses and by omitting G‑d’s name from the berachos – in order that they not have a problem of adultery. They simple don’t understand the significance of Kiddushin i.e., a life of sanctification. I discuss this in greater detail elsewhere. It is also a good idea that important rabbis should not be involved in these cases to avoid implying that marriage in these cases is permitted.

Baal Shem Tov: A man should love his wife just as he does his tefilin

update: added ...R Silberstein
Baal Shem Tov (Tzavas Ribash 123:2): A man should love his wife in the same manner that he loves his tefilin – that is solely because the tefilin are an instrument for fulfilling G-d's commandments. He should not think about her as a desirable physical being. This is explained by the following. A man who wants to travel to the market and he can only travel there by riding a horse - should his need for the horse cause him to love the horse? Is there any greater nonsense to think such a thought? Similarly in this world a man needs a wife in order to fulfill the service of G-d in order to be able to merit the future world. And if he neglects his service of G-d in order to think about her – is there any greater nonsense than that? Rather he should view her as physically repulsive. Therefore if he sees a beautiful woman he should realize that the white components of her body come from the father's semen while the red components are from the mother's blood which is repulsive and if he places such on food – the food would be disgusting. In fact he should realized that whatever beauty that her father contributed is in fact from the higher Father i.e., G d in the World of Love. And the beauty contributed by the mother is an extension of the supernal Mother in the World of Awe. These supernal aspects are his wife's true beauty. Therefore it is best to always be attached in love and fear to G d alone. And if he can bring himself to despise this sin he will be able to despise all sin. That is because from her was man created and a man has 365 component parts that correspond to 365 negative commandments and this nullifies all of them. Furthermore the Baal Shem Tov asked why does the desire for a woman arouse such strong lust? That is because woman is the source of man A man is born with inherent pleasure in eating and other physical things. And thus all pleasures are from the original drop – and therefore there is an inherent desire in man for physical pleasures and that which is mundane – it is much better to attach one self to G-d than to lowly physicality.

Love for wife is qualitatively  no different than that of  fellow man

Rav Yitzchok Silberstein (Chashukei Chemed Yoma 2a): Question: It says in Yevamos 62b) that one who loves his lives as himself and honors her more than himself....will have peace in his tent. The Rambam (Hilchos Ishus 15:19) writes that the Sages commanded that a man should honor his wife more than himself and love her as much as himself. But this requires an explanation as to why they gave such a command since we already are commanded to love our fellow man and a person's wife is obviously included in this Torah command? Answer: I asked this question to my brother -in-law Rav Chaim Konievsky and he replied that it was because there are times when a person is not obligated to show love from the Torah command of "love your fellow as yourself." For example it says in Nida (16b), Rav Shimon bar Yochai said there are 4 things that Gd hates and I don't like. 1) A person who suddenly enters into his house and surely into the house of another person [because person they are involved in intimate matters - Rashi]. The Maharasha writes, "G-d hates them because these are matters of pritzus (immorality) but regarding himself Rav Shimon just says I don't love them. That is because it is possible that these things are not pritzus that would justify violating the prohibition of hating another." Consequently in such a case if the wife suddenly enters into the house then at that moment there is no obligation to love his wife from the aspect of the Torah law of "love your fellow as yourself." However in regard to the command that is derived from "you will have peace in your tent"- there is still an obligation to love her. Furthermore there is a question regarding what the halachais when a wife sins. There is no longer an obligation to love her from "love your fellow" - in fact the opposite is true and there is an obligation to hate her. Is this rabbinic command "of peace in your tent" still applicable? It would seem that even if there is no mitzva to love her there is still a mitzva to honor her. That is because the obligation to honor her is because of gratitude because she raises the children and saves him from sin. This gratitude is still obligatory even if she sins. Therefore it is correct to honor her and to buy her appropriate clothing - even though she sins. Rav Shmuel Arvah gives an additional answer why there is a special verse to love his wife. It is based on the Maharsha (Shabbos 31a) which explains the answer of Hillel to the goy who wanted to learn the entire Torah while standing on one foot and Hillel replied that what is hateful to you do do to your fellow. The question is why he worded in a negative way that he should be good to his fellow as he is to himself? He answers that the Maharsha says that the verse of "loving your fellow as yourself" only applies to negative commands such as not taking revenge. However not to the positive commands of the Torah to do good to others. That is because your life always comes first. Consequently we can say from the obligation of loving your fellow as yourself - there is no obligation to be good to your wife as to yourself. However from the obligation to honor your wife - there is an obligation to honor [sic] her as yourself.
====================
Orchos Tzadikim (Shaar 5 – Love): The love of women should be in the following manner. He should think that she is saving him from sin, and keeping him distant from adultery and through her he is fulfilling the mitzva of having children, and she raises his children, and she works for him the entire day, and she prepares food and other needs of the household. Because of her activities he is free to learn Torah and to be involved in other mitzvos. She is helping him to serve G d.

Kedushas Levi (Bereishis 224:67): And Yitzchok brought her into his mother’s tent and she became his wife and he loved her. What was the reason that the Torah tells us that Yitzchok loved Rivkah? A possible answer is based on the fact that there are two types of love a man has for a woman. The first type is the physical lust that a man has for a woman because he wants to satisfy his desires. Because this type of love is solely concerned with what he wants, it is actually not love for the woman at all but entirely love of himself. The second type is the love which is not concerned with satisfying his physical lusts but rather is because she is an instrument that enables him to fulfill the commands of his Creator – thus he loves her just as he loves the other mitzvos. This is called love of his wife. That is the meaning of “And Yitzchok loved her.” He had no thoughts regarding physical lust but only loved her because she enabled him to fulfill the mitzvos of G d.

Pele Yoetz (Love between husband and wife) : It is obligatory that there be strong love between husband and wife. We will begin with the love of the man for his wife because there is an explicit gemora (62a), A man is obligated [sic] to love his wife as himself and to honor her more them himself. Nevertheless he is not permitted to allow this love to interfere with his love of G d. Avos (1:5) already warned, Do not speak too much unnecessary chatter with a woman. This mishna says the warning was directed to speaking with one’s wife because anyone who does so causes evil to himself and it diminishes his involvement in Torah and in the end will inherit Gehinom. Our Sages also said (Bava Metzia 59a), One who follows the advice of his wife falls into Gehinom. Because of these concerns every intelligent man was use commonsense in evaluating the proper approach. As it says (Sanhedrin 107b), The left hand pushes away and the right hand brings close. However the primary love is that concerning the soul. Therefore the husband has the obligation to chastise his wife with pleasant words and to guide her in the ways of modesty and to keep her from gossip, anger, cursing, mentioning G d’s name in vain and other halachos found in the Orders of Nashim and Nezikin. He should caution her regarding the details of mitzvos – in particular those concerning prayer, berachos for food and observing Shabbos, etc. How pleasant it is for him to teacher her ethical ideas and to tell her words of the Sages in all matters that are relevant to her and their seriousness. For then her heart will tremble and she will be even more careful of these things than a man.

Aruch L’Ner (Kerisus 28a): ...This that the Beis Shmuel says that a man should honor his wife – we do not find that this means an obligation. In fact in Yevamos (62a) and in Sanhedrin (76b) it says that if a man honors his wife more than himself... the verse You shall know that there is peace in your tent is applied. This language implies that it is only a act of piety (midos chasidus) to not be insistent on one’s honor against her. In fact according to the straight law she is obligated to honor him more than he honors her.

Yad Rama (Sanhedrin 76b): The braissa says that if a man loves his wife as himself – that means that he should have mercy on her as he is merciful to himself but more than himself is not relevant. That is because love is something which is in the heart and a person is not able to love another more than he loves himself. However regarding honor that is something for which it is possible that he can honor her more than himself with clothing which is nicer than what he gets for himself.

Ibn Ezra (Mishlei 5:19): Tishge – mistaken, If a person is constantly obsessed with love with wife and surely if it is a another woman (as they say in Avos (1:5), “With your wife they say and surely this prohibition applies to other men’s wives.”). That is because a person who is involved a lot with the love of his wife and he is constantly talking with her – more than is appropriate – he is mistaken. That is because love of a woman takes a man away from serving G d.

Orchos Tzadikim (Shaar 5 – Love): The love of women should be in the following manner. He should think that she is saving him from sin, and keeping him distant from adultery and through her he is fulfilling the mitzva of having children, and she raises his children, and she works for him the entire day, and she prepares food and other needs of the household. Because of her activities he is free to learn Torah and to be involved in other mitzvos. She is helping him to serve G d.

Be’er Mayim Chaim (Parshas Vayetzei 30:26): Give me my wives and my children for which I worked for you… It would seem that his work was done only for the women and not for the children. Therefore he should have said, “Give me the women for which I worked for you…”. In fact it is well known what our Sages (Bereishis Rabba 70:18) say regarding (Bereishis 29:21), “Give me my wife so I can have intercourse with her. But even the coarsest person doesn’t speak that way. But rather Yaakov was simply saying he wanted his wife in order to have children.” That is because Yaakov had total control over his bad impulses and he had no lust or desire other then to do things for the sake of G-d to fulfill the mitzva of having children. Therefore just as a man is not embarrassed to say to his friend to give him tefilin to put on – in the same way Yaakov was not embarrassed to say to give him his wife in order to fulfill through her the divine mitzva of procreation. That is why it says here that Lavan should give him his wives and his children for which he had worked – that is because all his work was only for the sake of the children which his wives had produced.

ספר אורח לחיים - פרשת אחרי 

כמו המניח תפילין כוונת המעשה הנחה של תפילין הוא טפל לכוונת מצות תפילין לקשר עצמו במוחין עם השי"ת לקבל עליו עול מלכותו ומצותיו, כן הוא ממש בכוונת מצות פרו ורבו לקיים מצות בוראו בדחילו ורחימו הם י"ה, והתקשרות גופא בגופא, כמו כל הנבראים הם טפל לקיום המצות עשה של פרו ורבו:

שולחן ערוך (או"ח סימן רלא:א): אם אי אפשר לו ללמוד בלא שינת הצהרים, יישן. הגה: וכשניעור משנתו א"צ לברך אלהי נשמה (ב"י); וי"א שיקרא קודם שיישן: ויהי נועם (תהילים צ, יז) (כל בו); ובלבד שלא יאריך בה, שאסור לישן ביום יותר משינת הסוס שהוא שתין נשמי, ואף בזה המעט לא תהא כוונתו להנאת גופו, אלא להחזיק גופו לעבודת השי"ת; וכן בכל מה שיהנה בעולם הזה, לא יכוין להנאתו, אלא לעבודת הבורא יתברך, כדכתיב: בכל דרכיך דעהו (משלי ג, ו) ואמרו חכמים: כל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים, שאפילו דברים של רשות, כגון האכילה והשתיה וההליכה והישיבה והקימה והתשמיש והשיחה וכל צרכי גופך, יהיו כולם לעבודת בוראך, או לדבר הגורם עבודתו, שאפילו היה צמא ורעב, אם אכל ושתה להנאתו אינו משובח, אלא יתכוין שיאכל וישתה כפי חיותו, לעבוד את בוראו; וכן אפילו לישב בסוד ישרים, ולעמוד במקום צדיקים, ולילך בעצת תמימים, אם עשה להנאת עצמו והשלים חפצו ותאותו, אינו משובח אלא א"כ עשה לשם שמים; וכן בשכיבה, א"צ לומר שבזמן שיכול לעסוק בתורה ובמצות לא יתגרה בשינה לענג עצמו, אלא אפילו בזמן שהוא יגע וצריך לישן כדי לנוח מיגיעתו, אם עשה להנאת גופו אינו משובח, אלא יתכוין לתת שינה לעיניו ולגופו מנוחה לצורך הבריאות שלא תטרף דעתו בתורה מחמת מניעת השינה; וכן בתשמיש האמורה בתורה, אם עשה להשלים תאותו או להנאת גופו ה"ז מגונה, ואפי' אם נתכוין כדי שיהיו לו בנים שישמשו אותו וימלאו מקומו אינו משובח, אלא יתכוין שיהיו לו בנים לעבודת בוראו או שיתכוין לקיים מצות עונה כאדם הפורע חובו; וכן בשיחה, אפי' לספר בדברי חכמה צריך שתהיה כונתו לעבודת הבורא או לדבר המביא לעבודתו. כללו של דבר, חייב אדם לשום עיניו ולבו על דרכיו ולשקול כל מעשיו במאזני שכלו, וכשרואה דבר שיביא לידי עבודת הבורא יתברך יעשהו, ואם לאו לא יעשהו; ומי שנוהג כן, עובד את בוראו תמיד. 

It is on pages 68-69 #123.2 in the Kehot edition. This is a from the Menashe Freedman edition 1934 also found on Hebrew Books

 

This is the Chabad version

Republicans Oversell Archer’s Testimony About Hunter and Joe Biden

 https://www.factcheck.org/2023/08/republicans-oversell-archers-testimony-about-hunter-and-joe-biden/

“In other words,” Archer was asked, “it’s not that Hunter Biden was influencing U.S. policy. It’s that Hunter Biden was falsely giving the Burisma executives the impression that he had any influence over U.S. policy?”

“I think that’s fair,” Archer said.

Wife beating: Can a son call the police to stop his father?

I received an important question. Since to me the answer is obvious - but at the same time it is clear that halachic thinking obscures the obvious - I would like to present it to my readers.

Question: A man is beating his wife on a regular basis. Is their son permitted to call the police? The question then not only is mesira, and causing damage more than prescribed by the Torah, as well as chilul hashem when this becomes public knowledge - but also whether he violates the command to honor his father. The questioner - after much investigation had found a possible solution. According to the Rambam a person can not allow himself to be beaten. The questioner noted that apparently the wife is being mochel the beating and since she has no right to do so - she is committing a sin. Therefore in order to save the mother from sin - he is allowed to call the police.

Answer: In my humble opinion, the suggested solution is not a solution. The wife is not being mochel the beatings. The husband beats her because he wants to - not because she is giving him permission!

The obvious answer is that stopping someone from beating another is not only permitted but obligatory. The real question for the son is whether he should stop his father - either physically, getting community resources to shame the father for wife beating - or whether he can simply call the police. If the beatings are not life-threatening I would suggest that an organization such as Shalom Task Force should be contacted for help. If they can intervene with proper counseling to stop the beatings and improve the relationship I think that is preferable. Similarly if the rav or neighbors can intervene to put the husband on notice to stop the beatings I think that is preferable to calling the police.

However if the beatings are serious and especially if there is no time to try and organize anything - then the police is the first response. Saving his father from sinning is the highest level of honoring his father. Saving his mother is obviously honoring his mother

The real issue though is what will be the consequences to the marriage of calling the police. If his father demands a divorce or simply abandons her making her an aguna - it is likely that his mother would prefer being hit occasionally.

There was a case in Jerusalem of an elderly man who was being beaten regularly by his son who lived with him - a case of elder abuse. The neighbors called the police when they learned about it. The son was arrested and thrown in jail. The father said, "I am all alone now. My son took care of me. He did the shopping and cooking and provided me with companionship. Now I have no one and I can't take care of myself and will need to be put in a nursing home. I would rather be beaten regularly than be put in a nursing home."

Thus the real question is not whether the halacha permits calling the police - but what action can best improve the current unacceptable condition. However if the beatings are life threatening - even a sofek of pikuach nefesh - there is absolutely no question that the police need to be called to stop the beatings.

Rav Moshe Sternbuch: Use of DNA to free an Aguna whose husband is missing

Rav Sternbuch (Teshuvos v'Hanhagos 6:257): I was asked regarding a man who was apparently killed but the body was in such poor condition that it was only identifiable by a DNA test on body tissues - which involves comparisons of genetic material to his parents or his descendants. It is known that the DNA of relatives produce similar results which are distinguished from DNA results of non relatives. The odds against a mistaken identification is much greater than 1/10,000.  It is accepted today that the DNA provides a certain scientific test of identity of tissue. The question then is the halachic status of this test. Can a woman remarry on the basis that this test has established that her husband has died?

I saw the psak said in the name of Rav Wosner and Rav Karelitz that validates the use of DNA testing - but only as a sign of identity (simon beinoni) - but not an absolute proof. Consequently it would be prohibited for the wife to remarry based solely on the results of the DNA test and it would not justify mourning for her husband's death as this might lead to the possibility that that fact itself would enable her to remarry.

I am in fact astonished at their conclusion - why don't they regard DNA as an reliable proof of identity? The Beis Shmuel (17:72) defines a reliable proof (simon muvhak) as one that has a chance of error that is less then one in a thousand. So surely in the case of DNA which the scientists have refined the test so that the results are not in doubt at all. In fact over a period of time the accuracy of the results has been repeatedly replicated all over the world so that the possiblity of error is less then 1 in 10,000 that the sample is not from a parent or a descendant. Consequently it is obvious that the DNA test is even greater than a simon muvhak.

Perhaps the basis for not relying on this test is because the results are not visible to the naked eye but require a complicated scientific process to evaluate the results and therefore it can not be taken as definite proof? Nevertheless it would seem that even though scientists are not to be trusted since the greatest scientists believe that man is descended from apes and therefore their opinions have no inherent validity - but in the case of DNA where there is an objective basis in the observable results there is justification for relying on their reasoning. Furthermore there is absolutely no disagreement amongst scientists that the test is accurately describing reality. Therefore it is obvious that we can rely on their testimony in this case.

In conclusion: Concerning the halacha - it would seem that it is possible to rely on the results of DNA tests to allow  the wife to remarry.  However it would seem that one should wait 12 months since this provides another basis for permitting her to remarry - i.e, that the memory of the husband is fading which is reasonable evidence that he has died. (The Achronim discuss how long a period is needed  and it seems that in modern times that after 12 months it is considered that the memory fades). So after 12 months two major rabbis should give her permission to remarry based on the DNA test. And G-d should save us from errors.

A British madrich asks: What are gedolim? Can they answer all questions? Did Daas Torah originate with Chassidim?

update: April 16, 2015 response from A Prager Daas Torah and Gedolim - a stereotypic chareidi response

update - reply to David - see below

I recently received the following letter and thought it would be of general interest. The letter writer gave permission to publish his thought provoking questions as a guest post. I also thought it interesting in light of a recent discussion I had regarding the non-normative approach to learning and halacha of the Chazon Ish.

 Dear Rabbi Eidensohn,

I am an 18 year old madrich for Ezra in London. In two weeks time (parshas shmini here) a group of us are doing a shabbaton away for year 10 and I came across your book- which is an incredible eye-opener- whilst trying to prepare for a chabura that I need to give them over Shabbos, could I use your book and the sources you present for it?

Can I also ask you some questions?

I would like to give one on the topic of Gedolim and have read the sources that you bring on the topic (pages 275-286) but I still don't feel I have clarity on the issue. The Baal haTanya and Rav Hirsch are obviously against our attitude of addressing all our problems (secular, political...) towards Gedolim today, but do the other sources disagree (except the Igros Moshe)?

Is our concept of "Gedolei hador" a new thing? And is our understanding of "daas Torah" influenced by chasidim?

What do you personally think of the "gedolim culture" today? And are they able to answer us about everything?

Lastly, do you have a written up 'shiur' on the topic that you could send me, as it would provide a solid structure?

Your book is really incredible and thank you very much for giving an email address that I can contact. I appreciate that this is a busy time, feel free to reply/answer my question as you wish.

Good moed,

Gavriel Cohn

==============================================

I just received a letter from someone who is member of a well known family of Talmidei chachomim that is clearly part of the establishment - but as he indicates he has the same questions. He gave me permission to post his letter. My  comments are placed after his letter.

Maybe I am naïve, but I struggle with this question and how so many take the extreme opposite views on it.  Neither direction makes sense.  To ask a Talmid Chochom how to fix your washing machine is absurdity.  To minimize the intellect and fund of knowledge of a Talmid Chochom is equally unacceptable.

All that makes sense to me is that certain questions require “Daas Torah”, and these fall within the confines of halacha and those matters that impinge on halacha.  These can involve politics as well as countless others.  There are those that are strictly mundane matters, , and these require only the guidance of someone who possesses the needed information.  I have zero skills in mechanics, so do not offer me to repair your appliances.  Now, just how many rabbonim (call them Gedolim, Talmidei Chachomim, or whatever title suits them) have the expertise to give advice and guidance on poilitics?  Perhaps R’ Meir Shapiro did, so his government service was useful and competent.  How many are good for advising couples with marital problems?  A few might, most do not possess the background or skills.  We could go on and on with the list.  The blind seeking of “Daas Torah”, as well as the rampant and irresponsible offering of advice is nauseating.  Eliminating the concept of “Daas Torah” in matters where Torah direction is needed is equally foolish.

There are those Gedolei Yisroel who became knowledgeable about. A well known example was Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach ZT”L who studied electricity for many hundreds of hours until he became a responsible expert on questions of >.  Watching others “talk through their hats” is disappointing, as they are the ones who ruin it for others

update - reply to David's comment 4/14/15

The remark about my credibility bounced back. I did not make a statement to be “credible”. I shared an opinion, which I believe to be rational, and not stuck in the quicksand of the extremes.

I strongly disagree about the comment that one should always go to rabbonim with marital problems. Virtually all therapists I know who work with couples can attest to their clientele as having a majority history of having been incompetently advised by a Rov (includes Poskim, dayanim, Roshei Yeshivos, Roshei Kollel, and Chosson Teachers). Perhaps they can have a role as first responders, but they need to either get trained, or learn to refer to professionals.

There is much Torah guidance to be offered by Talmidei Chachomim on how to live. They should be offering this to talmidim throughout their formative years of chinuch. When problems occur, the same skills it takes to understand a difficult Rashbo or Reb Chaim are not useful to resolve an interpersonal problem. I am familiar with some gedolim who just “had the knack” for giving guidance. Others try and fail.

The respirator remark was imbecilic. The Rov has the halacha knowledge. He needs to work with the medical information. No one expects him to become a doctor. But to intervene blindly is irresponsible. One exception – if the koach of the Rov is through Ruach Hakodesh. That supersedes all. But do you really know that he is delivering divrei nevuah? Is the Rov truly permitted to claim that his direction is expressly, divinely dictated?

Who is dismissive about asking a Rov an electricity shailoh? We have been privileged to have had a Gadol, R’ Shlomo Zalman ZT”L, who paved the way for poskim to deal with electricity based on knowledge, not conjecture. Word is that the Chazon Ish also invested time with experts in the field, leading to his position that completing a circuit was “boneh”, not previously recognized by the contemporary poskim.

How many teshuvos from Reb Moshe Feinstein ZT”L relied on scientific information brought to him on a myriad of subjects (Rav Eidensohn should have the expertise to share a round figure). It is great to know halacha, but the facts on the ground must be addressed.

.==========================================

My reply

One of the interesting characteristics of a successful Orthodox Jew - is knowing that statements are made on many different levels and are not to be taken as literally true. Similarly a mature Orthodox Jew needs to know that sometimes he must challenge - either publicly or privately - certain official pronouncements. 

Child abuse is clearly such an issue. The same happened in marriage where the true gedolim had to protest not only the idea of a rosh yeshiva deciding who a bachur married but also to protest that the Shulchan Aruch had been thrown out by certain frum rabbis. 

Similarly  a father who gives up responsiblity for his child's chinuch and stands by while a child is systematically destroyed is another example

So yes it is true that gedolim need to be respected - but one also needs which gadol to ask which question and when to disagree with destructive pronouncements. 

"Aguna" - What happens to celebrity media star liars when the truth comes out?

What happens when a young lady - who never experienced fame before or even was much noticed- becomes an international celebrity? Everywhere she goes - she is suddenly the center of attention. 

What happens when a young lady decides to  manufacturer some real whoppers - that her husband is a rapist, that he beats her, starves her and her children, that he sexual abused the children, that she was held a slave by his family and files a multi million dollar RICO suit against them? You get the picture.

What happens when a young lady is not only given serious attention by the news media - but she becomes a super star as the symbol of oppressed women everywhere - especially Orthodox Jewish ones?

What happens when the young lady not only gets attention and adulation - but also makes more money then she ever dreamed of by falsely proclaiming she is the victim of the most feared oppressor - the frum, Chareidi Jewish male?

What happens when this young lady starts manipulating the secular legal system to not only get big bucks, but to impoverish her husband, and get full custody of the kids - as well as to permanently ruin his reputation?

What happens when this young lady's lies extend beyond false allegations of rape and slavery - but she attacks the halachic system as unjust and is used by others as a battering ram against Shulchan Aruch? 

What happens when she creates a chilul hashem by falsely proclaiming her husband was an agent of the oppressive Jewish religion - that she has piously observed - despite the tortures it has caused her?

What happens when she is revealed as a liar by the rulings of the secular court that give custody to her husband because they don't believe what she is saying? What happens when the secular media slinks away to avoid the stench of her lies and doesn't return her calls anymore? What happens when her devoted followers realize they have been had? What happens when her children learn of the shameful attempt of their mother to destroy their father? How does a person who conducted a vicious campaign of slander and character assassination - live with herself - when people cross to the other side of the street to avoid her? How does a person do teshuva for such evil behavior?

These are interesting and important questions but they are not theoretical and the answer is coming soon.

Update: Where the Satanic Abuse Ring Panic is going: Therapists say - go back to America or switch to Mizrachi schools!

This is an update on my posting  2 weeks ago - Satanic child abuse: Is there a ring in Sanhedria Murchevet? - about Rav Berkowitz' speech to the Sanhedria Murchevet neighborhood about the possibility of a Satanic or sadistic or missionary abuse ring. As I have repeated noted that despite repeated allegations of such child abuse rings  there is no evidence - in America or Israel or anywhere else - that these abuse rings are more than a product of fearful imagination.

My original post has received over 4200 hits. My posting on Scribd of Rav Berkowitz' speech has received over 20,000 views. Apparently by people who don't want to look at blogs and have received the link to my Scribd posting by email. Anyway you look at  it the numbers indicate that people are seriously concerned about the issue.

Recently I was told that my postings against the hysteria produced by the conspiracy theorists  - are being rejected because of claims that I have been paid $150,000 to support the Satanist in their conspiracy against frum Jews! After all - anybody who disagrees with Rav Berkowitz obviously is either crazy, an apikorus or a Satanist himself or was paid off  - right?

Furthermore I have been told that there are therapists (most who are not trained in the field of child abuse) who have been giving therapy to the children  of parents who suspect abuse. They have told the parents that the children have definitely been abused by a child abuse ring.

Equally troubling is that these therapists are telling these parents that the children can only be safe if the family moves back to America or that the children are taken out of chareidi schools and put into Mizrachi schools!

Finally I have told of many rabbis who have studied the evidence and firmly reject the conspiracy theory and the idea that there is an abuse ring operating in Jerusalem. However they have not put this in writing and are only telling people who ask for their views. The claim is that public letters will not change those who already believe in the existence of abuse rings.

Mendel Epstein - Gittin by torture trial: An urgent request for as many people as possible to attend the trial

update reply to lawyer's comment below:Sunday March 8

Gut Voch Rav Eidensohn,

If you can kindly post a response to the lawyer who said that it is not recognizable as to which side we appear for. Kindly tell him that aside from the fact that our support would be evident, since we would be sitting on the side of the prosecution, I know for a fact that it does indeed make a difference.

Thanking you again,
Yossi

===========================

I received the following information and urgent request from R' Yossi Frankel who has been attending the trial in Trenton. As my many posts show - this trial is very important in attacking the corruption that exists dealing with Gittin. Not only is there lynch mob justice, but women have been duped into thinking they can simply pay big bucks for a Get. They fail to realize that the Get is invalid and that children from other marriages will be mamzerim or at least sofek mamzerim.  Halacha has been presented as the independent domain of certain rabbis and for the right amount of money - Torah can be twisted into any shape desired. Please show by your presence that you want uncorrupted Torah and rabbis.

 Dear Rabbi Eidensohn,

I have been trying to get people to show up by the Epstein trials in Trenton. I ask you to post a request on your blog urging people to muster up every effort to show up. It is important for people to show up in show of support. In particular to impress upon the jury the urgency of the situation. Epstein's supporters have beefed up their show of support. We heard from law enforcement people and lawyers that a large community presence supporting the victims shows the jury that this the Jewish community is very concerned about stopping this lynch mob justice.

Epstein's supporters are well aware of the importance of supporters attending and they are making an effort to swing the case in their favor. In fact there were more people who showed up in support for Epstein than those who showed up for the victims. They had 14 people here. We had 4. Therefore we urge all those who can attend even minimally, to do so.

This case is important for another reason. If the court makes a deal with Epstein to turn in others involved in this scheme then the corruption in the area of gittin and dinai Torah will be significantly reduced.

Court info:

•  U.S. Federal District Court 402 East State Street #2020, Trenton, NJ 08608
• Courtroom 5E,
• Judge Wolfson
•  Court is generally from 9:30-1:00To resume next on Monday, 9:30
• Parking near courthouse for 10.00

Traveling expenses to be reimbursed by those requesting it.

Any questions? You can email me (R' Yossi Frankel) or preferably call me at 848-299-8267

update ==========just received the following letter from a lawyer=============
 Rabbi Eidensohn,

The main issue I have with the post is that it ignores a seemingly obvious point – there is no way for the jury to know who you support when you attend a trial as a spectator.  Members of the public are not allowed to speak at all during the trial, and certainly not in the presence of the jury.  This isn’t like a baseball game where you can vocally cheer for your team or wear your teams’ colors.  I am sure if someone from the general public was “declaring” their position in the court, for example by bringing a sign, they would be quickly thrown out and perhaps cited for contempt.  Indeed, if frum people were to show up in larger numbers it is far more likely that the jury would assume they are supporters of Epstein because they look and are dressed exactly like Epstein. 

My second issue is that the facts are simply not true.  There is no massive showing of support for Epstein.  Other than opening statements, the courtroom has not been packed at all.  Epstein does have some family that regularly attends, but that is not at all unusual.  Additionally, the impact of the audience is very overstated.  The prosecution has been working on their case for quite some time, and in my opinion their case is going very well.

Shulem Deen: Truthseeker who had too many unanswered questions or an apikorus skillful in deceptively leaving out most of the important details needed to understand who he is

Dovid Din

update - added video of Shulem expressing his anger at religion and the need to be free of it

Update - added comment of Midas HaDeen

"Shulem Deen has a fascinating story to tell, and he tells it with exquisite sensitivity. All Who Go Do Not Return gives us not only an insider's glimpse into a shrouded world few outsiders get to see, but also a movingly told narrative of one man's struggle toward intellectual integrity. The setting may be the world of Hasidic Judaism, but the drama and the insights are universal."
—Rebecca Newberger Goldstein, author of 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction  

I first need to state some facts up front. 

1) I have now read all of Shulem Deen's well written book about how he went from being a pious  chasid to an apikorus. My initial impression just got reinforced as he went into more detail later in the book 2) I knew his parents from Yeshiva Shor Yoshuv - in particular his father Dovid Din 3) This book is different than others written by formerly frum people. The author comes across as genuinely likable, upset that he lost his faith and so far not explicitly advocating that others follow him in his path. 4) The main reason why I am writing this post is because of the strange reaction I got from Prof. Shaul Magid a former student of Shulem's father - who wrote a review of the book in Tablet Magazine.

My concern is to understand why this book was written. What was Shuleem Deen's motivation in describing his loss of faith and describing in great detail the words and acts of his friends and family - even when they don't come across as very positive? It is presented as someone who asked questions in a world where questions are forbidden. While that contains some truth - you need to realize that is not where he comes from but where he deliberately placed himself. 

His parents are both baalei teshuva - former hippies - who were very good at dealing with questions. His father in particular was very well educated in the secular sense and was involved in kiruv of all sorts - in particular answering questions dealing with faith. In addition his parents had a large number of contacts with top notch kiruv experts who deal with all sorts of questions. So far there is no evidence in the book that Shulem took the trouble of going to these people to get answers. Why not? 

In short - Shulem Deen took it upon himself to move into the world of Square Chassidim who strongly believe in simple - non intellectual - faith. He wasn't born into that world and he clearly did not belong there. He says he did it because they didn't require an  entrance exam! And yet when boxed into a non-thinking world where he didn't belong - proclaims that he left because he couldn't get answers to his questions!

One other point - there is the underlying theme that in fact there are no answers for his questions. because they are so devastatingly powerful. Basically if one doesn't have simple faith - then there is no faith because there are no honest rational answers to his questions. This is simply not true. 

This is a reflection of my basic concern - he is setting up straw men, avoiding presenting the full story - because he in fact has an agenda. He is presenting himself as doing what any truly honest man would do when faced with the questions and the anemic answers - giving up a phony religion. In sum he implies that, only someone who accepts that faith means believing something that make no sense - can truly be religious.

My last point for now is how he depicts his relationship with his father. As noted before his father was very intelligent and involved in asking questions and kiruv of those who had questions. He was very articulate. However there is no indication that he ever engaged his father in a serious discussion - even when given the opportunity. While it is true that his father died when he 14 - there were ample opportunities because there were many people who his parents knew that are experts in dealing with questions. The book so far only indicates a single individual that he discussed his questions with - why? Why didn't his father prepare him to be able to deal with questions? It seems that in fact his path is a reaction against his father - though he doesn't spell it out. Is there more to the story than he is telling us? What in fact was his relationship with his father and is his heresy the result of his relationship with his father?

I remember learning the Maharal together with Dovid Din with Rabbi Yosef Rabinowitz. The Maharal strongly states the importance of asking questions and not silencing them. And yet Shulem Deen ended up with a type of chassidim who live very closed isolated lives - that think the opposite of many other frum Jews - including his father. His failure to be able to live a closed intellectually barren form of Yiddishkeit led him to reject Yiddishkeit - why?
 ==========================
This video indicates that Shulem Deen didn't regretfully leave the religious world but in fact is celebrating his freedom from a repressive religion and culture - which he hopes to save others from.



=====================================

update by an commentator Midas HaDeen

I just read the post on Shulem Deen.  I did not read the book, and I know nothing personal of him or his parents.  But the subject is actually very relevant to all of us.  Questions about faith.  We are obligated to address this matter, as it is a pillar of our very existence.  We reaffirm this with recitation of kriyas shema daily.  We are the עם הנבחר, and have a special relationship with our Creator.

Our emunoh involves several aspects.  If we are conscious of them, we can pursue being “people of faith”.  If not, we are groping in the blind.  For starters, we are born into emunoh.  Dovid Hamelech A”H notes, מבטן אמי קלי אתה, drawing attention to the faith that existed at birth.  If we further recognize the drosho of Rav Simlai that the fetus studies the entire Torah in the womb prior to birth.  On top of that all, we enjoy our earliest years being exposed to values of Torah and kedusha.  This emunoh is labeled in sforim as אמונה מתוך קבלה.  It is that faith into which we were bred and born.

We then engage in exploration of our own, wondering, questioning, investigating, studying.  If we are fortunate to have the proper direction, rebbes, talmidei chachomim, healthy resources, we receive the guidance and direction to develop אמונה מתוך חקירה.  The sforim explain why neither of these two alone is adequate.  But both together can be quite powerful.  Either alone is balanced on a pointy base, and there is great risk that even minor breezes can topple it.

The best, the most frum, the most erudite and learned, of the holiest stock of yichus and upbringing require both of these foundations to achieve the level of an “עובד ה'”.  They bear the same obligation to recite the 13 Ani Maamins every day, and cannot point to their choice “frum” levush as the badge of faith.  It requires constant effort and maintenance.  Yes, questions, exploration, not completely taken for granted.  This is explained at great length in many great works that address hashkofoh, including Chovas Halevavos, Moreh Nevuchim, Tanya, Nefesh Hachayim, Maharal, etc.

The baal teshuvah begins the entry to a frum lifestyle with a handicap.  He/she starts with only אמונה מתוך חקירה, having missed the privilege of הורתו ולידתו בקדושה.  The complete faith of this individual is founded on only personal exploration, with the requisite limitations that result from this.  There is a very different basis for living as a Yid, with questions about the same basics that FFB’s take for granted.  The stereotypical baal teshuvah who asks questions about everything is seeking to compensate for the background that is lacking.

I don’t know Shulem Deen, nor his family, nor his life experience.  I can feel sorry for his missing out on a guiding light of mesorah which many of us are fortunate to have.  His efforts to seek truth are not missed by me, a mortal observer, and I do not question whether there is some reward in “yeneh velt” for that.  However, I do feel quite strongly that his failure to find the embracing warmth of קבלת עול מלכות שמים  in his pursuits is not a model for others.  Making this into a book to show others is not, in my opinion, wise or constructive.  It may be his defense to assuage his guilt, where he points to a system that failed to “answer his questions”.  I do not defend the “system” either.  It seems to have been ill equipped to provide answers that would meet the needs of the missing mesorah.  Perhaps far more serious is the observation that the present level of יראת שמים as should be expected from the average Yid, in which there is an appropriate level of דע מה למעלה ממך עין רואה ואוזן שומעת וכל מעשיך בספר נכתבים  is insufficient.  This is obvious when one examines the desperate need for filters on computers and phones, as well as the “history” discovered by computer technicians on the hard drives of the most observant of חסידים ואנשי מעשה.  As a community, we are not offering enough for the FFB.  This is apparent in the struggles of some mainstream FFB’s, and in the foibles and follies that occasionally get publicized of “frum baalei aveiroh”.  If it is not enough for those who are born into a completely “frum” lifestyle, it is inconceivable that it will suffice for the incoming baal teshuvah who is missing that background.

No, I will probably not write a book about deficiencies of the frum community.  Another dirt throwing book is neither needed, nor welcome.  The books to write and the direction change that we sorely need are about the abundance of wealth that exists in being close to HKB”H.  It is the אהבת תורה  that must be instilled in our children.  It is about the precious privilege of being able to daven and perform mitzvos.  It is about the all encompassing life of mitzvos that give us the ability to connect with HKB”H in every single facet of our lives.  It is about the enjoyment and gratitude that we can have in our everyday lives, knowing that HKB”H is the force behind every event, who granted us the greatest gift of all existence, מתן תורה.

Internet Filtering: The false sense of security

There has been much discussion in the Orthodox world regarding the Internet and its dangers. Internet is high on everyone's list of dangerous technology

For those who need the Internet there has been grudging rabbinic permission granted - but only if is is properly filtered. The assumption is that the average religious Jew does not have the ability to withstand the temptations of pornography and heresy and well as bitul Torah or Internet addiction.

The Boro Park residence where I am staying of course has the latest and strongest filtering program. Therefore it came as no surprise when I discovered that my email and a number of other programs no longer worked. 

What did surprise me was the simple activation of a free VPN program removed all blockages -  both for my computer and my Android tablet. VPN programs are widely used either for security when using public wifi networks or for creating a false IP address in the country of your choice. The latter is useful when using Internet sites that only work in the USA.

I have not checked whether VPN removes every type of filtering. So far I have only tried it on perhaps the most popular one. I tried two different free VPN programs - and they both worked.

According to this article in PC World - what I accidentally discovered is in fact a well known realty - except to the computer illiterate older generations.

I am also not advocating removing filtering. My purpose is simply to warn parents and spouses as well as schools - that they have a false sense of security when they use filtered Internet services.

Schlesinger Twins: Rebbetzn Rosenberg told the London community about Dr. Schlesinger's cruel and vindictive behavior regarding his children

On Sunday evening 14th of December Rebbetzin Miriam Rosenberg from Bnei Brak addressed a group of women from the Chareidi community in London to highlight child custody issues. She used the tragic case of the Schlesinger twins in Vienna to illustrate her points.

Many of the women who attended, have friends and family in Vienna, and proceeded to make contact their Austrian connections soon afterwards. The general feedback has been that the Chareidi community in Austria are also convinced that it was corruption in the judiciary which led to the injustice of the children being removed from their mother’s care (there can be no other rational explanation for the judge's behavior).

Furthermore, the community in Vienna, from independent sources, informed them that the weekly visitation has been put on hold due to the person doing the handover being unavailable. As such, the mother’s visitation has effectively been reduced to every alternate Sunday until further notice. The father, Dr. Schlesinger, can still allow the weekly visits to continue, if he wishes, under the handover supervision of Chief Rabbi Eisenberg (which has been kindly offered repeatedly), but every such request has been declined by Dr. Schlesinger.

Rav Moshe Feinstein: Medical screening and Bitachon

 update see Wikipedia - vaccine controversies

In a recent post regarding Dor Yeshorim - the question was raised about Reb Moshe Feinstein's true views on medical screening and its relationship to bitachon and about whether there is a generally agreed upon Torah view of the subject. The Bais HaVaad Institute recently published a series of articles that is relevant to this question. Part I  Part II   Part III

 Part I In Parshas Shoftim after prohibiting sorcery, the Torah instructs, “Tomim tihiyeh im Hashem Elokecha”, “You shall be wholehearted with Hashem your G-d”. The sages in the Sifri interpret the verse not to conjecture about the future. The Shulchan Aruch (YD 179:1) rules, “One should not consult star gazers or cast lots [about the future]”. The Rem’a and Sha’ch explain that while these practices do not fall under the prohibition of sorcery, they are nonetheless not advisable because of the precept of “Tomim tihiyeh”, to be faithful to Hashem. [...]

According to Rabbi Gestetner’s view, “Tomim tihiye” is very limited, and may not apply to health screenings and genetic testing at all. As he explained, only practices similar to fortune telling are prohibited. Arguably, the results of a health screening or genetic test point to facts that are in the present, not the future. This is comparable to leaving a glass at the edge of a table. I cannot say that the glass is destined to fall off and break, but its position certainly puts it at greater risk than the other glasses. Likewise, test results showing hypertension or indicating a genetic mutation do not prophesize a future event, rather it indicates a present level of risk. For this reason, health screenings and genetic testing may not be included in “Tomim tihiyeh” because they are quite different than star gazing or psychic readings. 

 Part II Rashi, in his commentary on Parshas Shoftim explains the mitzvah of “tomim tihiyeh”, “Walk before Hashem with wholeness, hope for Him, and do not speculate about the future. Rather, all that comes upon you accept with wholeness (uncomplicatedness) and then Hashem with be with you”. Based on Rashi’s comments Rabbi Moshe Feinstein understood that “tomim tihiyeh” is a general instruction to place our faith in Hashem when confronting the unknown.

An example of this, is Rabbi Feinstein’s comments in Igros Moshe (1, 90) about a couple dating excessively to make sure it is ‘the right one’. He wrote, “One should not be overly smart {with regards to shidduchim}. Therefore, one could marry the woman that finds favor in his eyes in her appearance and family, and has a good reputation about her mitzvah observance, and assume that she is the one destined to him from heaven. He does not need to excessively tryout if they are compatible because it will not help, as the verse says “tomim tihiyeh im Hashem”, you shall be faithful with Hashem”. Clearly, Rabbi Feinstein is taking tomim tihiyeh beyond fortunetellers and astrologers. 

In 1977, after the Entebbe hijacking and rescue, some Yeshiva students wrote to Rabbi Feinstein asking him how this miracle could happen through Jewish soldiers that do not keep the Torah. Rabbi Feinstein dismissed their question by stating simply that we do not understand the ways of Hashem and we should not involve ourselves in these types of analysis as the verse says “tomim tihiyeh im Hashem”. Here too, Rabbi Feinstein invoked “tomim tihiyeh” as a general instruction to place our faith simply in the hands of Hashem.

Although Rabbi Feinstein extolled faith and simplicity, in his classic work on the Talmud, Dibros Moshe (Bava Metzia, siman 31, he’orah 18), he fully acknowledged a person’s right to be wise and far-sighted about personal matters. The Talmud in Bava Metzia (23b) states that in certain situations a Torah scholar may say a white lie to avoid embarrassment. Rabbi Feinstein observes that in these scenarios the probability of the embarrassment actually happening is very far-fetched according to normal halachic standards. He therefore arrived at a fascinating conclusion, the halachic concepts of majority and chazaka were only intended to make halachic determinations and are not necessarily an instruction in making personal decisions. Therefore, because avoiding embarrassment is not a halachic decision but a personal one, it is acceptable to be concerned even about a minute possibility and therefore it is permitted to tell untruths to avoid this possibility. 

Rabbi Feinstein seems to be balancing these opposing concepts in his discussion about genetic testing for tay-sachs before marriage (Igros Moshe EH 4:10). First he writes, since the probability of both spouses being carriers is minute it may be included in the precept of “tomim tihiyeh” according to Rashi, which instructs us not to delve into the future. However, he then writes, since the test is easily available and if an inflicted child is born it is devastating, the public should be educated about their options. 

Part III  How do halachic sources view preventative measures like health screenings or genetic testing? Are they included in our obligation to heal, or are they a form of speculation that the Torah instructs us not to concern ourselves with?

In the previous post we highlighted factors like probability of occurrence, severity, and the reliability of the treatment or testing as important variables in balancing faith and responsibility. In this post we will continue to develop these concepts, and their application to health screenings and genetic testing. 

The famed Rabbi Shlomo Luria (1500’s) wrote, despite the sages’ general disfavor with unreliable practices, an ill person is not expected to rely on faith alone. Therefore, he may seek a sorcerer or astrologer to heal. Rabbi Luria, However, does strongly discourage a well person from such behavior based on the Mitzvah of “tomim tihiyeh”. 

This assertion can be embellished with the comments of the Maharal of Prague (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Hatemimus). The Maharal explains that faith in Hashem is referred to as temimus, or wholeness, because it is a straight and sensible path. For this reason, seeking astrologers or sorcerers is discouraged because it deviates from a straight and logical approach to life. With this in mind we can gain a better appreciation for Rabbi Luria’s position. The Mitzvah of “tomim tihiyeh” is instructing us to be sensible. Logic dictates that a well person should not be concerned with far-fetched or whimsical possibilities, rather he should place his faith in the Master of the World. Therefore, because sorcery and astrology are far-fetched and whimsical, they should be avoided. That said, if a person is ill and desperate, it is reasonable to seek all possible options, even if they are not reliable (see Maharal Be’er Sheva p.30 in standard edition).

In this light we can understand a conversation of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein about cancer screening from the late 1970s (Mesores Moshe p.293). Apparently, a doctor was urging an ostensibly well person to undergo excessive (lit. strange) and possibly dangerous tests. The patient asked Rabbi Feinstein his opinion on the matter. Based on “tomim tihiyeh”, Rabbi Feinstein asserted that if there are no symptoms present, there is no reason to seek medical attention because it is not part of our normal responsibility to follow “derech hateva”, or the natural ways of the world.

It seems that Rabbi Feinstein had halachic concerns with the testing because it was far more excessive than the normative standards of the time. Additionally, the tests carried health risks, and were possibly inconclusive. In a similar vein, Rabbi Dovid Feinstein permits pregnant women to go for routine ultrasounds, because it is the common standard of care. Therefore, there is no concern of “tomim tihiyeh”. Apparently, the issue of “tomim tihiyeh” is only when the testing is considered excessive compared to the standard medical practice of the times.[...]

Saving individuals from punishment by blogging about their faults or How to have enemies suffer Divine punishment instead of you.

Berachos (55b) states that when a person becomes sick - he should keep it a secret for the first day. That is in order to not give Satan an excuse to harm him - by giving himself the status of a sick person. [See the Marhasha]  On the other hand if the sickness does not go away and he is in fact a sick person the gemora suggests a different strategy to bring about a cure. Instead of keeping his weakened state a secret to protect against Satan - the gemora says he should now publicize his misfortune. Rashi says that the sickness is viewed in the first place as punishment from G-d (see Shabbos 55a). Their are two reason for now publicizing one's misfortune. The first is obvious - so that his friends will pray for him. The second is not obvious - that his enemies will be happy to see him suffering. And it is known that one should not rejoice at the suffering of an enemy (Mishlei 24:17-18) Therefore  G-d will get angry at his enemy for being happy about his suffering and will take it away from the sick person and give the sickness to the enemy (Ibn Ezra and Malbim Mishlei 24:18).

It is interesting to note that this gemora clearly indicates that one should be concerned about suffering coming apparently independent of G-d - from bad luck and Satan. [Don't open your mouth to Satan]. The best way to deal with suffering from those sources is to simply conceal the misfortune and hope that it goes away quickly. There is no mention of repentance or that the sickness is a punishment from G-d except in Rashi.

The second strategy - when a person realizes he is a sick person and his suffering is not transient  - also doesn't involve repentance. Rather it is to reveal to the public that he is sick - and hope that his weakened state and misfortune will elicit laughter from an enemy. That laughter will cause G-d to stop punishing him and to punish his enemy.

Based on the gemora, I know people who do not want it publicized that they have serious aliments such as cancer. But I am not aware of anyone who is hoping to elicit a cruel rejoicing in his enemy so that the illness will be transferred to this enemy. However why is there is no mention of repentance when this is such an important issue mentioned elsewhere (Berachos 5a, Shabbos 55a, Yoma 86a, Rambam Hilchos Taanis 1:1-3, Ramban Shaar HaGemul 120:6)? Perhaps this is dealing with sickness which he knows is not the result of sin. (Ramban Shaar HaGemul 118, Berachos 5a, Shabbos 55a, Yerushalmi Shabbos 14:3, Kesubos 19a).

Is anybody aware of similar cases where the cause of  suffering (i.e., sin) is not dealt with directly by repenting but it is hoped that it can simply be transferred to someone else? [Scapegoat] Again we are dealing with a passive aggressive approach to enemies. Destroy them by showing them your weakness and failures so that they will rejoice. 

Perhaps this can be used is a justification for bloggers exposing the problems of the community so that the community will not suffer but rather those bloggers or readers who rejoice seeing the problems of others.