Deterioration and halacha

 It is a clear halacha that even if a parent or talmid chachom deteriorates he is still to be treated with kavod.

But what if it is a spouse who deveopd mental issues or dementia or diabetes or Parkinson's disease after decades of marriage. Is Divorce advisable?

What if this occurs after a couple become engaged or it is discovered  that there was a serious health condition that they had concealed

In a normal situation where there is something intolerable so we say it is just tough accept this as your burden or get a divorce. Chazal say even if you don't like your wife's cooking it is grounds for divorce

I have only found a discussion regarding the husband taking care of a sick wife and this is because of the kesuba. What about the wife taking care of a senile husband?

"The husband must defray all medical expenses in case of his wife's illness. If she suffers from a disease which may be prolonged for many years, although legally he may pay her the amount fixed in her ketubah and give her a bill of divorce, such action is regarded as inhuman, and he is urged to provide all that is necessary for her cure (Ket. 51a; "Yad," l.c. xiv. 17; "Maggid Mishneh," ad loc.; Eben ha-'Ezer, 79; "Be'er Heṭeb," § 5; comp. "Pitḥe Teshubah" to 78, 1, concerning a case where sickness follows a fault of her own)."

Rambam (Marriage 14:17) When a woman becomes ill, her husband is obligated to provid medical treatment for her until she recovers. If the husband sees that her illness is prolonged, and he will be forced to spend much money treating her, he may tell her: "Here is the money due you by virtue of your ketubah. Either pay for your treatment from this money, or I will divorce you and pay you what is due you and abandon you." Although he is given this prerogative, it is not ethical to act in this manner. [As mentioned by the Maggid Mishneh and the Kessef Mishneh, there are authorities who maintain that there is an explicit prohibition preventing a husband from divorcing a wife who is too ill to care for herself. The later authorities, however, follow the Rambam's view. In the Ashkenazic community, there is a question if the Rambam's ruling applies in the present age, after the ban of Rabbenu Gershom, which prevents divorcing a woman against her will. (See the Chelkat Mechokek 79:3, which quotes an opinion that states that as long as the husband is prepared to meet all the financial obligations of the divorce, he has the prerogative to divorce a woman against her will, even when she is ill.)]

Kesubos (51a) IF SHE SUSTAINED AN INJURY IT IS HIS DUTY TO PROVIDE FOR HER MEDICAL TREATMENT, BUT IF HE SAID, HERE IS HER LETTER OF DIVORCE AND HER KETHUBAH, LET HER HEAL HERSELF’, HE IS ALLOWED [TO ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH HIS DESIRE].

Shulchan Aruch (EH 79:3) If a woman contracts a lasting disease, he is able to say to her that the  ketuba  can be assumed if she heals herself or the  ketuba  can be absolved and give her the  ketuba , but this is not proper behavior because it is not  derech eretz . 

Tradition - not Talmudic derivation- is source of halachos

Doros Rishonim (4:13): The Rambam’s words which are focused on the general principles of the nature of Tradition and the interpretation of the verses (drashos) indicate that the drashos and the format of the drashos as well as the given and take of the gemora regarding the drashos don’t constitute proof that the halacha under discussion is a Torah halacha. The proof whether a halacha is a Torah halacha can only be determined within the context of the discussion in the gemora. If analysis indicates that it is a Torah law then we conclude that the tradition is that this a Torah law. However if the analysis shows us that this is a rabbinic law then we can not conclude the contrary  from the fact that the gemora is describing it as being learnt from a drasha of Torah verse. That is because the Tradition is foundation of everything. Therefore in this case the drasha and limud is only serving as an asmachta (memory device). Thus the status of a halacha as being from the Torah is not determined by how it is seems to be derived - but rather that is what our Tradition says. Thus if  our Tradition says a halacha is rabbinic – it is rabbinic even though there are many interpretations from Torah verse. The form of apparent deriviation does not add or subtract from the status established by Tradition that it is rabbinic.

Doros Rishonim (Chapter 11): Concerning all the dershos, they are only to provide support for a halacha which is known by Tradition and the derasha is simply to show that there is nothing which is not alluded to by the Torah. They are also used to support a halacha which has been decided from concepts found in the Mishna or from a Tradition transmitted by their teachers or because of logical reasoning based on the concepts of the Torah [but the derasha is not the source of the halacha].

'Weak': DOJ fraud charges against SPLC use an unusual legal theory

 https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/05/02/southern-poverty-law-center-indictment-fraud-case/89732727007/

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche alleged at an April 21 news conference that the Southern Poverty Law Center, a decades-old Alabama nonprofit dedicated to dismantling white supremacy, defrauded donors by using their money to pay informants within white supremacist groups.

"Paying informants to then dismantle the organization seems like something that people would expect to be one of the tactics that are used, so that seems like a very weak case to me," Amy Markopoulos, a former federal prosecutor who spent years in the DOJ's fraud section, told USA TODAY.

In a statement to USA TODAY, DOJ spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre said the grand jury that indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on 11 counts only heard a portion of the evidence, and the government remains confident in its case.

Those counts accuse SPLC of seeking donations to "dismantle" violent extremist groups, without telling donors that some of the donations – more than $3 million over nine years – would be used to pay high-level leaders of such groups to be informants.

After yearslong fight, agunah wins get as court seizes American husband’s Israel assets

 https://www.ynetnews.com/jewish-world/article/bkfzrdvcwl

After 3 years of stalled proceedings in US, liens on husband’s assets in Israel and mounting sanctions force breakthrough, pushing him to appear in rabbinical court and grant long-awaited divorce

L., who had been denied a religious divorce for three years, received her long-awaited get in recent days after heavy financial sanctions were imposed on her recalcitrant husband, who lives abroad but owns property in Israel.

The couple, who lived together for more than a decade in the United States, separated in 2023. Since then, L. had tried unsuccessfully to obtain a get. Despite proceedings she pursued in rabbinical courts in the U.S., and despite a ruling requiring the husband to grant the get, he continued to refuse, declaring he would never give it.

“Once again, we have seen the enormous leverage financial sanctions can provide against men who refuse to grant a get, even when they do not live in Israel,” Cohen said. “Thankfully, L. received the long-awaited get thanks to the dedicated cooperation of the Agunot Department and the Haifa Rabbinical Court, and she can now continue her life as a free woman. We will continue working for the freedom and independence of every chained woman in Israel and abroad.”

Iran War

Iran War

Astronaut

Top UK cop: Jews facing greatest ever threat; Starmer mulls banning some anti-Israel protests

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/top-uk-cop-british-jews-facing-greatest-ever-threat-amid-epidemic-of-antisemitism/?utm_source=The+Daily+Edition&utm_campaign=daily-edition-2026-05-02&utm_medium=email

“If you overlay three things now — hate crime, terrorism and hostile state activity — you add all that together, that combined effect with that building of ideology online, that is really dangerous and troubling,” said Mark Rowley, head of London’s Metropolitan Police.

“And Jewish communities feel that and you can see that in how they talk, how it’s making them change their lives. That’s an ­appalling state of affairs,” he said.

He told The Times that British Jews are on the “hate” list of every racist and extremist group.

On Thursday, the UK increased its security alert level to “severe” — the second highest — in part because of the attack in Golders Green, as well as the threat from Islamist extremism and the far-right.

Trump’s allies float a specious theory about treaties

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/05/01/trump-nato-withdrawal-defended-by-president-allies/

Another dubious attempt to justify aggrandizing power in the executive branch.

 Supporters of the unitary executive theory argue that the vesting of executive power in the president means a presidential monopoly of all power connected in any way to executive duties. John Yoo, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley, brings to his advocacy of the unitary executive theory learning that is proportionate to his tenacity. He says:

Yoo says leaving NATO “would certainly be a foreign-policy disaster.” But his theory insists that the Constitution relegates Congress to the role of spectator at the disaster. When a theory drags its adherents into such an intellectual cul-de-sac, the theory should be relegated to the ranks of ideas that need to be reconsidered.

Chillul HaShem: Root Causes

 Tefillah request, for refuah of: Shimon Ben Masha & Lea Bas Freeda  

בס"ד

ליל פסח שני,

LevinAt11 radio broadcast Apr. 30, '26/ Pesach Sheni, 

 תכנית ראדיו רב יהודה לעוין שליט"א, כ"ט לעומר, פרשת אמור, תשפו

Main Theme: Chillul HaShem: Root Causes

Topics:

1-56: Chillul HaShem and Kiddush HaShem;

56-60: Integration of females into IDF is  discouraging male National Religious soldiers; some "manpower crisis!" (https://vinnews.com/2026/04/29/religious-zionist-rabbis-warn-if-tank-corps-has-females-yeshiva-students-wont-serve-there/ )

If they really wanted to draft all the Chareidim -- they wouldn't be doing this.  Apparently, their actual goal is to foment a panic - even a panic for good reasons.  Why? In order to exploit the panic for something else... perhaps for "Chareidi"-Aksun cooperation in passing Marriage De-definition in E"Y, R"L - a specter which is a genuine fear given the upcoming elections.

Good Shabbos,

Rabbi Noson Shmuel Leiter,

Executive Director,

Help Rescue Our Children

845.642.1679

Direct: 771.215.8892

Israeli Helpline: 03.721.3337

torahjewsfordecency@gmail.com

Tomim Tih'yeh [countering "New-Age" infiltration]: 

Tomim1679@gmail.com

Presentations on New-Age dangers: 605-313-6831 ext. 2

Heard weekly on New Jersey's WSNR Radio 620AM, co-hosting the renowned Levin At Eleven program, every Thursday evening, 11pm to midnight (ET).

~~~~~~ ~~~~~~   ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~  

A letter of interest, thematic to the aforementioned topic of the Parsha:

26 L'Omer, 11 Iyyar, 5786

"LeMa'anchah - For Your Sake"

{In the merit of a speedy recovery for Leah bas Freeda}

Letter / Parshas Emor 5786

Anyone keeping an open, realistic eye on current events recognizes that things don't seem to be going in a very positive direction for Jews - not in terms of physical safety, nor in terms of our spiritual wellbeing, although there are some hopeful developments regarding the latter (for one fascinating example, see Rabbi Ze'ev Smason here:  https://stljewishlight.org/opinion/commentary/becoming-an-oct-8th-jew-remembering-who-we-are/ ).

Well, "the Parsha comes to the rescue" - for those who are interested.

This week's Parsha, Emor (22:32), contains the prohibition against Chillul HaShem (desecration of The Divine Name), followed by the positive commandment - and the Divine Promise (see Seforno) - of Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of The Divine Name).  These two foundational mitzvos provide Klal Yisroel with the keys out of our ever-expanding predicaments - and out of Galus altogether.

The premier role that  dedication to the Honor of Heaven (Kovod Shomayim) plays in being saved from our tribulations, and from Exile altogether, is repeatedly emphasized in the supplications and psukim we recite in Tachanun, especially on Mondays and Thursdays (e.g. Yirmuyahu 14:7, Tehillim 79:9). There, as elsewhere, we repeatedly beseech HaShem to save us for the sake of His Name.

So how do our actions and attitudes comport with our requests?

Do we live our lives in a manner that reflects a genuine concern over Kovod Shomayim?  Or do we invoke Kovod Shomayim when we're up against the self-inflicted consequences of trampling it?  Or is Kovod Shomayim so off-the-radar for us that it's frequent mention doesn't even register altogether?  Or do we opt to delude ourselves into thinking that we care about it - pursuant to redefining Kovod Shomayim as that which comports with our comfort level?

For most of us, there is an impressive degree of improvement potential.  The good news is that, b'Chasdei HaShem, we have many opportunities to improve our Kovod Shomayim track-record - for those of us who are authentically interested.

Central to these aforementioned mitzvos is the readiness to make sacrifices to fulfill the Will of HaShem. 

Being a dedicated Jew often requires sacrifices, or, more accurately, what appear to be sacrifices.

Prior to our first Redemption, from Egypt, HaShem exhorted Moshe Rabbeinu: You're not leaving Egypt alive until you slaughter their object of worship (Avoda Zorah) - namely, the Korban Pesach (the Pascal lamb, an animal prominent in the Egyptian pantheon) - "in their faces" (Shmos Rabbah, Parshas Bo, 16:3).

We would serve ourselves well by preparing ourselves to properly utilize similar tests - to more genuinely merit the Final Redemption as well.  It's not an entitlement (not that anything really is).

We've just passed the halfway point of Sefiras HaOmer. The very aliyah in which these aforementioned mitzvos appear (Shlishi) corresponds to that halfway point (Day 26, the beginning of the second half).  Perhaps this correspondence can be taken as an allusion to improve ourselves in regard to lessons central to the Sefirah period, preparing us for Mattan Torah on Shavuos.

One lesson, relating to Kovod Shomayim, may be the importance of respecting those who employ the aforementioned quality of mesiras nefesh to transmit Torah with its full authenticity -  shunning the distortion of Torah - Ziyuf HaTorah (being the greatest threat to Judaism, Mishnas Reb Aharon, 1:2:3:6) that so often accompanies venues offering what appears to be Torah-based guidance.  Such venues often tell people what they want to hear - instead of what they really need to hear.

The latter, more populist providers tend to attract far more respect than they earn.  The former articulators of Torah often earn far more respect than they generally receive.

By ignoring the latter in favor of the former we perform a disservice to ourselves and families, disgrace the Torah and it's most authentic representatives, and project the image that Emes (Truth) doesn't really matter - itself a terrible Chillul HaShem. And all this is perpetrated in the name of Kovod HaTorah, to boot.

So, ask yourself, which leaders actually lead, and which follow in the guise of leading (כפני הכלב)?  Who is alerting Klal Yisroel to the non-"Politically-Correct" Torah imperatives we need to hear most?  And who (as HoRav S. R. Hirsch ZY"A observed) is grandstanding where courage is least needed?

We get the leadership we earn.  If we incentivize feel-good "lead"-ership, that's what we'll get.  We find such critique in Nach: leadership failing to alert the tzibbur to what they need to hear.  However, many people automatically dismiss critique of whomever they chose as their leaders.  Do we feel that the critiques in the Neviyim don't apply to us?  Do we feel that Yechezkel, in his devastating criticism of Jewish leadership prior to the Final Redemption (in Perek 34), was too "negative" or "extreme" to take seriously?

When we close the Shmoneh Esrei with the Tefillah "Asei LeMa'an Sh'mecha," we ought to ask ourselves: what are we willing to sacrifice for Kovod Shomayim?  Perhaps we ought train ourselves to step outside of our comfort zone to sacrifice something for a vital Kovod Shomayim need, even if it's small.

Good Shabbos,

Boruch Levy

------- Forwarded message ---------

From: Davidzon Radio <>

Date: Fri, May 1, 2026

Subject: Levin 04-30-2026

 Levin 04-30-2026_HQ.mp3

davidzonradio.com

(718) 303-8000

Ship Ukraine says carries stolen grain will not offload in Israel after diplomatic row

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/ship-ukraine-says-carries-stolen-grain-will-not-offload-in-israel-after-diplomatic-row/

A shipment of grain that Ukraine says was stolen by Russia will not be unloaded in Israel, an Israeli official told The Times of Israel on Thursday, after several days of back-and-forth between Kyiv and Jerusalem over the fate of the controversial cargo vessel.

According to the official, the decision to not offload the ship was made by Israeli importer Zenziper, not by government officials. Kyiv praised the move as a “welcome development.”

Traders have told Reuters that it is impossible to track the origin of wheat once it is mixed.

Silk Screen Scrolls vs. the Agunah Smoke Screen by Rav Shalom C. Spira

 Today (14 Iyar, 5786) celebrates the Daf Yomi completion of Menachot, the tractate which contains a detailed passage (29a-31b) how to write a Torah scroll. R. Yitzchak Abadi [who just ascended to the Heavenly Academy this past Chanukah] is remembered for his novel and well-meaning proposal to reduce the cost of this mitzvah by way of the silk screen process. The reason Rabbi Abadi's proposal failed (be-mechilat Kevod Torato) is documented by Rabbi J. David Bleich in a 25-page treatise at Survey of Recent Halakhic Periodical Literature: Silk Screened Torah Scrolls - Tradition Online . However, R. Moshe Sternbuch, Teshuvot ve-Hanhagot, V, no.  301, adds one further consideration (measuring a mere half-page), and one that is also relevant to rejecting Saul Lieberman's approach to the agunah problem [an approach which is incompatible with Orthodox Judaism, as I explained in my previous column at Daas Torah - Issues of Jewish Identity: Reb Moshe's 40th Yartzeit and the Agunah Problem                    Rav Shalom C. Spira ].

    Rabbi Sternbuch [whose responsum is available at שו"ת תשובות והנהגות - ח"ה - שטרנבוך, משה (page 235 of 387) ] writes that when a solo practitioner proposes a leniency without consulting the recognized halakhic authorities of the time, it demands a macha'ah charifah (sharp protest). To that effect, he quotes R. Velvel Soloveitchik as advising under such circumstances that an announcement to forbid be rendered without even entering into reasoned argumentation. 

    What is true [as identified by Rabbi Sternbuch] for invalidating silk screen scrolls is even more true for rejecting frivolous invocation of kiddushei ta'ut as the purported solution to the agunah problem. This is because, in an emergency situation of human dignity, one can actually use an invalid Sefer Torah, as R. Ovadiah Yosef, Teshuvot Yechaveh Da'at, VI, no. 56 rules with respect to the Yemenite Sefer Torah. He explains that the Yemenite scroll is invalid, but until the Yemenite synagogues are persuaded to purchase valid scrolls, a Jew who happens to be called to an aliyah in a Yemenite Shul can recite the blessing in good conscience because of darkhei shalom.

    Actually, Yechaveh Da'at does not explain the reasoning of why darkhei shalom should override the transgression of a berakhah le-vatalah, but I would contend that the answer can be deciphered from another responsum by the same author in Teshuvot Yabi'a Omer, VIII, Yoreh De'ah no. 32. In the latter case, a ba'alat teshuvah found a shiddukh with a Charedi gentleman, and they married. She neglected to tell her groom that [prior to her repentance] she aborted a fetus. Hence, when the bride and groom were finally blessed with a baby boy, the naive-and-gullible groom-turned-father planned a pidyon ha-ben. The wife now runs crying to Yabi'a Omer that the whole pidyon ha-ben is a sham, yet she anticipates that if she discloses the truth to her husband, he will demand a get. Fortuitously, Yabi'a Omer answers that she need not say anything. He proves at length that human dignity overrides the prohibition against a berakhah le-vatalah, such that especially here [where the wife is merely being passive by maintaining her silence] she is not transgressing by letting her husband recite two berakhot le-vatalah. [Interestingly, Yabi'a Omer omits any discussion of the additional ethical problem that the wife is standing by idly as her husband wastes his money. Perhaps we can fill the lacuna by positing that the emotional aggravation that the husband is being spared by his blissful ignorance is worth more than the cost of the vacuous pidyon ha-ben.] Ergo, we can now transpose this lomdut to the responsum in Yechaveh Da'at to understand why human dignity allows recitation of a berakhah le-vatalah over an invalid Sefer Torah.

    By contradistinction, human dignity can never allow stealing a wife from an innocent husband [as per Shulchan Arukh Yoreh De'ah 157:1 that adultery is forbidden even under force majeure]. Indeed, a recent development in Eretz Yisrael [reported at Legal Warning Issued to Channel 12 Reporter After Viral Video of Yeshiva Bochurim Sparks Public Backlash | Matzav.com] seems to indicate that a person who feels he has been insulted can send a lawyer's letter to request an apology. If the apology is hypothetically not offered, there can hypothetically be a defamation lawsuit in Beth Din, pursuant to what R. Mordechai Djavaheri writes on page 7 of his practice bechinah at YUTorah Online [although hopefully a diplomatic resolution can be found to avoid any need to employ Beth Din]. Thus, [while not the specific subject of either the aforementioned news article or the aforementioned practice bechinah,] legal relief is now available for innocent husbands who are wrongly harassed by disciples of Saul Lieberman, the disciples of Saul Lieberman thereby violating Exodus 20:14. As we now approach the holiday of Shavu'ot, when we joyfully reaccept the entire Torah [including Exodus 20:14, which coincidentally will even be publicly read on Shavu'ot], let us recommit ourselves to the sanctity of Jewish marriage as a matter of halakhic conscience. [And see also R. Aryeh A. Frimer on the historical imperative for Jews to courageously refuse the pressure to reform even in a so-called she'at ha-dechak generation. Final section of his article here: Microsoft Word - Frimer . He argues this regarding aliyot for ladies, but a fortiori the historical imperative applies to maintaining the sanctity of Jewish marriage. ]

Rabbi Spira works as the Editor of Manuscripts and Grants at the Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research [a Pavillion of the Jewish General Hospital] in Montreal, Canada.

The YOLO Presidency? The Atlantic reports Trump aims to be one of history's 'great men'

Public rejects Trump’s ballroom by wide margin

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/04/30/washington-post-poll-trump-ballroom/

Americans reject President Donald Trump’s planned White House ballroom by a 2-to-1 margin, according to a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll, and they appear largely unmoved by the intensified calls from the president and his allies in Congress to allow the project to go forward.

The president’s planned 250-foot arch and a Treasury Department plan to put Trump’s signature on paper money are also unpopular.

Fifty-six percent of Americans oppose Trump’s decision to tear down the White House’s East Wing to make way for his planned ballroom, funded by about $400 million in private donations, while 28 percent support the project. That is the same division found in an October poll. Reactions are split among partisan lines; about two-thirds of Republicans support the project, while 61 percent of independents and 87 percent of Democrats oppose it.

“It’s astonishing what’s going on,” said Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tennessee), who has criticized the ballroom and arch projects, as well as Trump’s efforts to brand his name across the government. “He has no respect for anybody, any memory, any history. It’s all about him.”