May Tamar Remarry Her First Husband? A Message for Rabbis Greenblatt and Kaminetsky

By Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn/845-578-1917/eidensohnd@gmail.com  8/11/2015

My brother’s daattorah.blogspot.com revealed letters from Senior Rabbis Moshe Shternbuch, Aharon Feldman and Leibish Landesman opposing Rabbi Greenblatt’s marrying Tamir Epstein Friedman to a strange man while she was still married to Aharon Friedman. The Senior rabbis  ruled that her children from the second man would be mamzerim. I surely agree with this and have been saying this for weeks, even though until now I was the only one saying it publicly on my blog torahhalacha.blogspot.com in America and my brother the only one saying it publicly in Israel . I will also mention that my brother 1) guessed what the reasoning of Rabbi Greenblatt was before any of the facts dribbled out and 2) showed that the reasoning has nothing to do with halacha. And finally he received proofs that he was right on both points.

As I publish this post on my blog and send it to my mailing list I am aware that soon new voices will be added to the above list of Senior rabbis who disagree with Rabbi Greenblatt.  At that point, people will undoubtedly realize that Tamar Epstein Freidman married out of wedlock and that her children will be mamzerim from the second husband.

This has led to a question: The Rashbo in 1189 says that if a Beth Din erred and told a married woman that she may remarry without a GET, she may return to her first husband because she is ONUSE, a forced person, and did not sin willingly. If so, perhaps in Tamar’s case she is also to be considered ONUSE and technically would be permitted to return to her husband Aharon.  Tamar was told by Rabbis Greenblatt and Kaminetsky that she could remarry without a GET. Is this the same as the Beth Din in the Rashbo’s case that permitted the woman to remarry?

I responded as follows: First of all, the situation with Tamar was without a Beth Din. No Beth Din received the couple, in this case, Aharon and Tamar, to hear both of them out and decide whether a GET was needed. A Beth Din must hear both sides equally, as stated in Choshen Mishpot 17:1,7. It is inferred from a posuk in the Torah בצדק תשפוט עמיתך in Rambam Sanhedrin 21:1. Radvaz there brings a Sifro that it is a lav לא תלך רגיל בעמך. Also, see Rambam רמב"ם סנהדרין כ' יב' כל המטה משפט אחד מישראל עובר בלאו אחד שנאמר לא תעשו עול כמשפט עכ"ל

Did Rabbi Greenblatt have three people who listened to Aharon and Tamar? And when he paskened without proper Beth Din proceedings, did he not violate the Torah? Rambam says that a Beth Din that does not follow proper procedure by treating both sides equally has violated a mitsvas Eseh בצדק תשפוט עמיתך San21:1. But Rambam says a bit earlier there (20:12) that the sin is worse than that, not an ESEH but a LAV -   כל המטה משפט אחד מישראל עובר בלאו אחד שנאמר לא תעשו עול במשפט. The solution to this contradiction is that if the Beth Din did not damage anyone but simply did not follow proper Beth Din proceedings, it sins only with an ESEH, a positive command. But if it sins by damaging somebody, it sins with a negative command a LAV which is worse.  Obviously, taking somebody’s wife away without proper judicial procedures is the greatest twisting of justice and Rabbi Greenblatt sinned with the positive and negative command of a rabbi who judges people and twists the judgment. He also caused damage to Tamar in the worst way of turning her into an adulteress and her new children to be mamzerim.

More to the point: Did Rabbi Greenblatt even talk to Aharon? Did he talk to Tamar himself or did he rely on others who were clearly on the side of Tamar and accept their opinions? This is not an act of a Beth Din. It is not even the act of a single Rov. It is the act of a Rov who heard one side, believed in them, and destroyed the life of a woman Tamar, who is now consigned to the status of adulteress, and the  present child of Tamar who will grow up with a mother who is a sinner, and  a public sinner at that. Because this story will be public knowledge. And if Tamar has a child from the second husband, it will be a mamzer. And if Rabbi Greenblatt disagrees, ask him if he will marry his children to the mamzer. If he says he will marry them he is a liar or a meshugeneh and maybe both.

Thus, this miscarriage of justice that Rabbi Greenblatt performed is not an act of a Beth Din, it is not the act of a single judge, because it violates the entire system of justice that requires equality between the two sides. It is Rabbi Greenblatt’s invention and reliance on others because he was too lazy to check things out himself. I called up Rabbi Greenblatt and told him that he married off a married woman. He told me that Gedolim approved of what he did. I told him that even Gedolim cannot violate the Torah and quoted a Chazon Ish and he hung up on me.  Now, it is interesting just who these Gedolim were. Rabbi Shalom Kaminetsky? Because Rabbi Shmuel Kaminetsky signed a letter before Tamar married that he did not support her remarrying without a GET.  I know nobody who considers Rabbi Shalom Kaminetsky a posek.

So who is the Gadol that Rabbi Greenblatt trusted?

But let us leave this sordid mess of Rabbi Greenblatt behind and return to the Rashbo that is the source of the Ramo in EH 17:58. A Beth Din tells a woman to remarry because it made a mistake, the woman is considered ONUS or a forced person and is not a sinner so she may return to her first husband. The Rashbo is talking about a case where a  woman is engaged to a man. The man came to the home of the woman and asked the father to let the woman he wants to marry come to the table with everyone else. The father said he would not allow her to come to the table with everyone else until the husband  gave her a ring which is known in that community as an act of marriage, a Kiddushin. The husband gave the ring in front of many people who were in the room. Afterwards the woman married somebody else and had children from him. The first man who gave her the ring appeared. He brought proof that he gave her a ring and there were witnesses who saw it. He established that she was married to him when she married the second man and the children of the second man would be mamzerim. The Rashbo was asked about this.

The Rashbo says that the rule in this is that if the woman goes to a Beth Din that clearly establishes to her that she is permitted to remarry, she is ANUSO and may return to her first husband. But  if it is a situation where she did not have a clear statement that the Torah permitted her to remarry, and she did not check out things properly, her children are mamzerim.

When a senior dayan  heard Tamar Epstein Freidman claiming that she did not need a GET and planned to marry another man not her husband, he went to Israel and asked the shaalo in a major Beth Din.  The Beth Din stated clearly that a GET was required. Subsequently, the Rosh Beth Din wrote up his opinion and it will be printed very soon as I understand.  When Dayanim in Israel heard that an American rabbi was about to remarry a woman without a GET, they came to our American Senior Dayan and asked him how such a thing could be? The senior Dayan came back to America and informed the family that many rabbis disagree with those who permit her to remarry.  Now, when the family and the Tamar heard this, were they ANUS to listen to Rabbi Greenblatt, who never saw Aharon, never spoke to him, and maybe never talked to Tamar until he married her to the stranger? Of course, Tamar  knew clearly that the issue was one where prominent rabbis disagreed with Rabbi Greenblatt. Therefore, she was not ANUSE to follow Rabbi Greenblatt.  Again, the senior Dayan told me that he personally informed Tamar and her family of the great opposition of rabbis to what they were doing.

Therefore, Tamar is not Anuse and she must leave her husband and her “new” husband, and the child from the new husband is a mamzer.

Now I turn to the prominent rabbis who permitted Tamar to do this, Rabbis Greenblatt, Shmuel and Shalom Kaminetsky: Please realize that the whole world is up in arms against you. I get phone calls from people who want to publicly protest your taking a woman who has no father and is a yesoma and help her become an adulteress and have mamzerim for children. SHAME ON YOU. As I send these words out on my mailing list and blog, I know that in a few days, other prominent rabbis will be signing and sending their protests at what you did. If you admit your error, and get Tamar to leave her new “husband” and get a GET from her real husband, people will say that this shows the high quality of rabbis who admitted a terrible mistake. But if you continue to back her living in sin, the anger at you will grow. I hope you will think a bit about what I am saying. If there is anything I can do to help you in this matter, please contact me at Dovid Eidensohn 845-578-1917/eidensohnd@gmail.com . Until I hear what I want to hear from you, I will continue to blast you again and again, and if a child is born to Tamar, I will publicize that it is a mamzer.

I hope and pray that in the merit of ninety years of serving the Torah you will not end your lives with this growing storm. Think of  your Yeshiva and your vast community of those who are inspired by you.  Please. Nobody has come forward to agree with Rabbi Greenblatt,  but I know of many rabbis who have stated that he is completely wrong.

I cannot imagine how the Philly Yeshiva will stand the growing fury of an entire Orthodox community even the Modern Orthodox other than a few known Torah inventors who are not prominent except for their inventions.

Make up your mind, now, because time is running out.

Shalom,

Dovid Eidensohn