Profile Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Thursday, December 31, 2015

My comments on my brother's blog about Rabbis Kaminetsky and Greenblatt


My brother wrote on his blog daattorah.blogspot.com: As everyone knows, the storm resulting from the phony heter to Tamar Epstein has been going on for a while.  R Shalom Kaminetsky's campaign to manipulate Rav Greenblatt to declare the marriage invalid worked only for a while. However a wide range of major rabbis - including Rav Chaim Kaminetsky - have condemned this heter and declared Tamar as still being married to her first husband and thus committing adultery with her 2nd husband. It has clearly been publicly declared by these rabbis that persuading a psychiatrist to write an invalid report - is a a major danger to the Orthodox community and the institution of marriage.

The question is why the issue has not been settled with a retraction of the heter by Rabbi Greenblatt and a rejection of the heter by Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky and his son? Why is the issue dragging on? Why isn't an ultimatum being given to the above - to either comply or be publicly denounced?

The answer unfortunately is not a pretty one. Because if a ultimatum was delivered to the above rabbis - there is a good possibility that they would not comply. After all they have "Daas Torah" or as Rav Greenblatt says "I followed the Shulchan Aruch" and it doesn't matter to him whether the facts are true or not. He views the heter as being independent of how it was obtained and that only thing that matters is that he issued a  psak that Tamar can remarry. Similarly Rav Kaminetsky sees no reason to condemn the heter because was issued by a "bar samcha" Rav Greenblatt and so it doesn't matter if the basis is a pack of lies. In short neither cares whether the heter was obtained through falsely proclaiming that Aharon Friedman  suffers from extreme incurable mental illness that disqualifies him from ever being able to marry.

Thus the real answer why there is no ultimatum is because we have a serious problem here of codependency. What is ultimately preventing the resolution - and the reason that the Moetzes Gedolei Torah will never get involved - is the issue of the priority of  our rabbinic leaders. While Torah and halacha are truly important but there is a greater concern for these rabbis. They view that the system itself is in danger if major gedolim are declared to be in open rebellion against the Torah. These rabbis will never do anything that is perceived as an attack on gedolim. They believe that  faith in gedolim (and daas Torah) is more important to preserve than faith in G-d and Torah! Or rather that faith in G-d and Torah must be through faith in the gedolim.

Unfortunately, by publicly declaring that the heter is false and that a major breach in Torah has occurred - they can't conceal from the public that the agents of this breach are in fact gedolim. The longer they hesitate the greater is the loss of faith in gedolim and the greater the cynicism is amongst the masses - including the yeshivos and seminaries. 

In short, since they have gone public with the existence of a major breach - they can not avoid following that to its logical conclusion. But they lack nerve and don't want to be perceived as the ones who destroyed the public status of revered gedolim - Rav Greenblatt and Rav Kaminetsky. End of my brother's comments.

I have two small comments. One is that among the letters published by major rabbis there were clear attacks on the lies and the anti-halacha content of the heter to Tamar. Whether these attacks should be followed by stronger ones is delicate, because some of the letters cannot be written any stronger. If you call somebody a liar and remote from Halacha, what is the next thing to say? And if you want to put him in cherem, why didn't you do this immediately when you realized that his entire HETER is a lie and remote from halacha?

Number two is a personal thought. I learned and spoke frequently with HaGaon Reb Aharon Kotler and the Gaon Reb Moshe Feinstein. One thing I noticed was that very few if any of the many people who were able to speak to them did so. Reb Moshe was frequently queried about halacha, but to just speak to him and learn more that I didn't see in Monsey where I used to talk to him when he came frequently to visit his daughter with his rebbetsin. And after a while, I realized that I had nothing to do with the new world of Torah. I spent the next few years pestering any gadol who came my way, but the way  things were developing didn't interest me. 

Then I got interested in Gittin and ended up talking to the Gaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l. Actually, we had made in Monsey a Beth Din to make Gittin for Russians who had no Rov there, and it was done under Rav Elyashev, because who could pasken those shaalose? Finally I went to Israel and spoke to the Gaon at length about a new topic he was concerned with, the Get Law of New York State. I went into him with a list of questions and when it was over I asked him for his name for my Beth Din and he gave it. The years spent with Reb Aharon and Reb Moshe prepared me. And then I found out that some major Torah authorities who did not pester every Gadol they could were making invalid and forced Gittin. 

The last few years I have been fighting furiously with these "gedolim" and what is happening now is not news to me at all. Rabbis who are Rosh Yeshivas or Rosh Kollelim or dayanim who did not study intensely under true Gedolim invented the term Gadol to mean them, not the real Gedolim. So what do we expect?

Number three which should be number one but I had to prepare the ground, was the following episode. In Monsey a video store once opened in the main shopping district. I went to the Magid of Jerusalem Rav Schwadron after he had spoken somewhere and told him. He ignored me completely, actually professionally, because he was a disciple of Rav Lapian who could speak six hours straight and keep the audience. I repeated myself, and he kept the frozen face that said I didn't exist. Then I raised my voice, and said, "Rebbe! Hashchoso!" He was waiting for that. He was a master mashgiach and they specialized in teaching by "putting you in the sack." 

Suddenly, he came alive, his eyes flashing, his hands moving professionally until he pointed at my face and said, "A Yeshiva is hashchoso!" I felt myself falling, falling, falling. A still voice said to me, "Just be quiet. He said this in public. Now he must explain this." And I just stood there. When Rav Schwadron saw how he had stunned me with his comment he laughed and said in Yiddish "that shut his mouth" which sounds much nicer in the Yiddish that he used. (We had bantered just before this and he owed me one.) Then he starting explaining. He talked about the present system and how it produces frustration. At any rate, if we keep it simple, the Yeshiva system is producing problems, and why this is is a long discussion. But by realizing that a Yeshiva is hashchoso, I concentrated in my family and teaching everyone that times had changed and we have to do things in the old fashioned matter, to the best of our ability, because what goes on today is a problem.

Later on, at my son's wedding I met a major Gadol and told him my various complaints about the system. When I told him about "A Yeshiva is hashchoso" he became enthused. I was shocked. I asked my son about this and he said, "Tatee, he always talks like that."

Tamar's Heter: Protecting Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky is more important than protecting the Torah



from my brother Rabbi Dr. Daniel Eidensohn on his blog daattorah.blogspot.com. My comments will follow on a second post. Dovid Eidensohn.

Thursday, December 31, 2015

Tamar's Heter: Protecting Rav Shmuel Kaminetsy is more important than protecting the Torah

As everyone knows, the storm resulting from the phony heter to Tamar Epstein has been going on for a while.  R Shalom Kaminetsky's campaign to manipulate Rav Greenblatt to declare the marriage invalid worked only for a while. However a wide range of major rabbis - including Rav Chaim Kaminetsky - have condemned this heter and declared Tamar as still being married to her first husband and thus committing adultery with her 2nd husband. It has clearly been publicly declared by these rabbis that persuading a psychiatrist to write an invalid report - is a a major danger to the Orthodox community and the institution of marriage.

The question is why the issue has not been settled with a retraction of the heter by Rabbi Greenblatt and a rejection of the heter by Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky and his son? Why is the issue dragging on? Why isn't an ultimatum being given to the above - to either comply or be publicly denounced?

The answer unfortunately is not a pretty one. Because if a ultimatum was delivered to the above rabbis - there is a good possibility that they would not comply. After all they have "Daas Torah" or as Rav Greenblatt says "I followed the Shulchan Aruch" and it doesn't matter to him whether the facts are true or not. He views the heter as being independent of how it was obtained and that only thing that matters is that he issued a  psak that Tamar can remarry. Similarly Rav Kaminetsky sees no reason to condemn the heter because was issued by a "bar samcha" Rav Greenblatt and so it doesn't matter if the basis is a pack of lies. In short neither cares whether the heter was obtained through falsely proclaiming that Aharon Friedman  suffers from extreme incurable mental illness that disqualifies him from ever being able to marry.

Thus the real answer why there is no ultimatum is because we have a serious problem here of codependency. What is ultimately preventing the resolution - and the reason that the Moetzes Gedolei Torah will never get involved - is the issue of the priority of  our rabbinic leaders. While Torah and halacha are truly important but there is a greater concern for these rabbis. They view that the system itself is in danger if major gedolim are declared to be in open rebellion against the Torah. These rabbis will never do anything that is perceived as an attack on gedolim. Thy believe that  faith in gedolim (and daas Torah) is more important to preserve than faith in G-d and Torah! Or rather that faith in G-d and Torah must be through faith in the gedolim.

Unfortunately, by publicly declaring that the heter is false and that a major breach in Torah has occurred - they can't conceal from the public that the agents of this breach are in fact gedolim. The longer they hesitate the greater is the loss of faith in gedolim and the greater the cynicism is amongst the masses - including the yeshivos and seminaries. 

In short, since they have gone public with the existence of a major breach - they can not avoid following that to its logical conclusion. But they lack nerve and don't want to be perceived as the ones who destroyed the public status of revered gedolim - Rav Greenblatt and Rav Kaminetsky.

Consequently there is great pressure to try and save the reputation of these gedolim by putting pressure on Aharon Friedman. It is widely viewed by these rabbis that almost all goals will be accomplished if he is sacrificed by forcing him to give a get and receive nothing in return.

Let me make it absolutely clear. Aharon Friedman will never back down. He will not sacrifice his reputation or his relationship with his daughter in order to allow Rav Kaminetsky and Rav Greenblatt to save face and not be held accountable for their sins. Aharon Friedman is not going to be the scapegoat that allows the rabbis to avoid the horrible task of destroying the reputation and legacy of Rav Kaminetsky and Rav Greenblatt - if they won't back down and condemn the phony heter.

Monday, December 28, 2015

Another women freed without a GET - Gedaliah Schwartz - Some more mamzerim


Someone sent me a copy of a letter from the Chicago Beth Din signed by Rabbi Gedoliah Schwartz dated September 22, 2004. This is also listed in the letter as the seventh day of Tishrei, 5765. So, three days before Yom Kippur, when people are probably ready to give a GET at least lichumro to save from making even possible mamzerim, we have a new approach to mamzeruth, Make them and blame it on something that nobody ever heard of. The excuse in this letter is "It is quite evident that this marriage is not halachically valid. This is due to the fact that there was no consumation of the marriage and there is evidence to that effect." Translation, since Rabbi Gedaliah Schwartz has determined that there was never Biah, the marriage never took place. That is what he says, and he once told me this orally. I then asked him how he knew that there was no Biah. He told me the doctor said so. I asked him how the doctor would know if there was a Biah that did not tear anything, such as anal intercourse or neshika, just a touch. No answer.

But the real problem with this "pesak" is that the Shulchan Aruch clearly states that Kiddushin comes about for three reasons: The husband gives his wife a ring or something of value, the common type of kiddushin, and a Kiddushin made with a special document of the couple agreeing to marry, or, a third way, Biah. But the first two approaches are completely valid without Biah. But maybe Rabbi Schwartz never got to that section of the Shulchan Aruch. So let me quote it to him.

Even Hoezer chapter 26 paragraph 4: A woman is married in three ways, with a value of silver [such as a ring, the common way of marrying] or a document or biah." The Shulchan Aruch says that one who marries with Biah is given a beating, but the marriage is still valid. But GS tells a couple married like all marriages with something of value that they are not married because somehow he decided that they had no Biah, something that I challenge him to prove, if he knows the laws of Biah. But since he doesn't know the laws of marriage, why should he know the laws of Biah?

I recall some years ago that a major Rov told me about a couple that went to Rabbi G. Schwartz for a GET and he told them there was no need.  I asked him why no GET was needed and he told me because there was no Biah.

I just want to add that the seforim of the poskim are full of men going to a woman and giving her some money and telling her that she is married to him. Nobody ever said that the marriage is no good because there was no Biah even though in nearly all of this questions there was nothing more than a quick giving of a ring or similar value. But Rabbi Schwartz would make it easy on all of those people and just tell them that if there is no Biah they don't need a GET. If that is different than what the great rabbis of all generations paskened, it just goes to prove that GS has a different Torah than the one Moshe brought down from Sinai.


Sunday, December 27, 2015

SHOULD RSK GO TO REB DOVID FEINSTEIN?


Somebody called me yesterday and told me that Rabbi Shmuel Kaminetsky has agreed to submit his permission for Tamar to remarry without a GET to Rav Dovid Feinstein. He asked me why I did not support this. I told him that  the only Rov who permits these things in the first place was Reb Moshe Feinstein, and he made a strong condition: If the husband would give a GET, even with strong conditions, he does not permit the woman to remarry without a GET. Thus, if Reb Dovid permitted Tamar to remarry without a GET even though the husband Aharon would give a GET if certain custody rights could be restored, Reb Dovid Feinstein thus disagrees with his own father Reb Moshe! And I should accept this?

But let us say that Reb Dovid, in a theoretical case, did not disagree with his father. Let us assume that he disagreed, not with his father, but with all of the rabbis such as Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Suriel Rosenberg, the leading poskim on Gittin in Israel. If so, at best we have a SOFEK DIORAYSO a doubt in a Torah law which we must be stringent and rule that she is forbidden to remarry.

Also, I would like to know if Reb Dovid is going to take the enormous amount of time necessary to study psychology and to discuss the matters with the various people who are supposed to have said that Aharon is mentally damaged and can never be a husband, something that Tamar never said until the Kaminentsky reshoim taught it to her. Those few rabbis who did take the time to study these things think that Kaminetskies invented a pure lie. Now, if Reb Dovid says it is not a lie, but many prominent rabbis said it was a lie, we now have a question if Reb Dovid is a greater expert in lies than all of these Rosh Yeshivas.

But let us keep it simple. If Reb Shmuel wants to go to Reb Dovid, why does he not go? It is a free country. And the answer is, that Reb Shmuel has complete faith in his "gadol" capacity to say whatever he wants about anything, despite  his Torah knowledge, that I know personally to be  limited. Reb Shmuel does not have the backing of a single known posek! And yet he still encouraged Tamar to remarry without a GET and have a child that everyone else considers a mamzer, as the great rabbis wrote clearly in their protests at the remarriage of Tamar.

The answer to Reb Shmuel is this: You made up something that is accepted by great rabbis as a pure lie without any backing form a great posek, only yourself or some other feminist rabbi such as _____. And when the world erupted at this, you want to find a fig leaf and ask Reb Dovid. 

But the fig leaf won't help you. You destroyed Tamar. Her baby will be a mamzer. And you will be a greater disgrace. And yet, you don't care. You are so sick that you think  you are smarter than all of the great rabbis who tore your HETER to shreds.

And what is the next step? Probably to put you and your dear son in Cherem, to kick them out of the Philly Yeshiva, and to deal with RNG as well.

Sunday, December 20, 2015

How To Fix the Tamar Mess?
taken from my comments on my brother's blog

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

The above article [in my brother's blog written by a Cons rabbi]  contains: "In its recent article, the Forward quoted Rabbi Aharon Feldman of Baltimore’s Ner Israel Yeshiva as calling for the former agunah (whose original marriage, and therefore whose status as an agunah, he deems to remain intact) to leave her new husband. Rabbi Feldman declares any future children born to the Fleischers to be mamzerim — “bastards”— themselves forever debarred from marriage to “legitimate” Jews. Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn similarly is quoted as describing the dissolution of Ms. Epstein’s first marriage as “a sad joke based on a clear corruption and misuse of halachic principles,” and declaring Ms. Epstein an “adulteress.”

I want to clarify something. Technically, Ms. Epstein is an "adulteress." But she only followed, like a good Jewish woman, the teachings of her rebbes, the Kaminetskys. Her father was a pious man who was greatly admired by everyone but when he died her father became the Kaminetskies. They, and they alone, are responsible for her being an "adulteress" and if she has a child, all of the rabbis have declared it would be a "Mamzer." The "mamzer maker" will be the Kaminetskies. Now this is a very important fact. Let me explain.

The proper solution that everyone wants is for the three rabbis involved in this to tell Tamar it was a mistake and that she must leave her husband, at least long enough to settle with a GET and avoid mamzeruth. Since these three rabbis are busy inventing the Torah, they will have no trouble doing this. But what will they tell Tamar? Will they tell her that they made a mistake? And now that she may be pregnant, what will she say? How will she feel? And how will her mother feel? If the three rabbis do this, what will people think about them? That is why it will probably never happen. And one mamzer after the other will be born. 

I merely want to point out the pain involved for RSK to admit to Tamar that he was wrong, which basically means that he is not the Gadol perfect rabbi he thought he was, and I don't see that happening so fast. I surely hope and pray that I am completely wrong.

There is another factor here. You have two ninety year old rabbis who are getting a lot of pressure. We have to pray for them to stay healthy until they take the terrible step of admitting their mistake to Tamar, which is really a heroic deed. They are the only ones who can fix this, and for that, they must be healthy enough to be alive!

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

EMERGENCY - US GOVT MAY WANT ALL WOMEN TO REGISTER FOR MILITARY DRAFT AND SERVE GOVT OTHER WAYS

EMERGENCY - WE ASK ANYONE WITH YIRAS SHOMAYIM TO PLEASE GO TO OUR NEW BLOG ABOUT STOPPING THE DRAFT OF WOMEN IN AMERICA. GEDOLIM IN ISRAEL CONSIDER THIS יהרג ואל יעבור.


Tuesday, December 8, 2015


Free Telephone Conference
 Thur Dec 10 9 PM
dial 641-715-3580 then code 884800#

Our latest telephone discussion is about:
We want to point out the great difficulty in creating rules for paskening. Today  the world is much different than it used to be. Once every city  had a recognized Rov and  Beth Din that ruled for everybody but not today. We will point out various Torah sources that are designed to clarify כללי הורארה but in today's world there is confusion. This session does not claim to clarify all the confusion, but to point out various aspects of הוראה that should be understood by someone interesting in the rules of paskening.

Tamar Remarries Based upon HaGaon Reb Moshe: A Mistake                                                                       

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn/845-578-1917/eidensohnd@gmail.com/Chanukah 5776

Tamar’s marriage is rooted in the teaching of HaGaon HaGaon Reb Moshe Feinstein to permit a woman to remarry who is an Agunah who cannot get a GET from her husband who has a terrible blemish. I believe that relying on this pesak of HaGaon Reb Moshe is completely wrong, as I will explain.
First of all, HaGaon Reb Moshe states clearly that his Heter only applies when the husband absolutely refuses a GET, such as the case when the husband fled and can’t be located. Tamar was not in such a situation. Her husband Aharon clearly told me that he would certainly consider giving a GET. See Igeres Moshe I:80 at end, “We permit this if it is impossible to get a GET.” Also, see beginning of EH I:80 “When it is impossible to get a GET” and the end of the teshuva there.
It is incredible to me that so many people have commented on this issue and yet it is not clearly established that HaGaon Reb Moshe would never have permitted Tamar to remarry without a GET. If Rabbi Greenblat is a disciple of HaGaon Reb Moshe does he not feel responsible to study the teshuvose of HaGaon Reb Moshe that limit remarriage to a case where there cannot be a GET and Tamar is not such a case?
But there is more proof that Tamar should not remarry based upon HaGaon Reb Moshe’s teshuva.
In his teshuva in EH I:79:1 HaGaon Reb Moshe says that “This question has been discussed thoroughly by the earlier rabbis and the latter ones. And some forbade her remarrying without a GET, and some say that technically she could be permitted to remarry but they were not ready to permit it, and some said it is forbidden by the rabbis but permitted by the Torah.” HaGaon Reb Moshe then proceeds to permit it in certain very serious problems. But he makes it clear that he has no source to permit it, other than his own findings.
HaGaon Reb Moshe  quotes there two major poskim who disagree with him, and would forbid a woman to remarry even if she is a pure Agunah and no GET is possible. These Gedolim are Bais HaLevi, the Rov of Brisk and the father of Reb Chaim Brisker Soloveitchik, and the Kavno Rov. These were great Gedolim, accepted by all Torah Jews as “final word” Gedolim who were the greatest rabbis in the world. HaGaon Reb Moshe is most likely not as great as they were, and they lived before him some generations. If so, we have a situation where three rabbis pasken, two forbid it and one permits it. Do we permit it or do we forbid it? Since the majority forbid it, how can we rely on the minority, in this case, HaGaon Reb Moshe, and permit a woman to remarry without a GET? (See Choshen Mishpot 25:3)
In fact, there are at least double the amount of great rabbis who forbid the woman to remarry even if she is a complete Agunah with no hope of a GET. The Gaon Rav Henkin who was the Gadol in America before HaGaon Reb Moshe, disagreed with HaGaon Reb Moshe, and he produced a Noda Biyehuda II:80, one of the greatest of the poskim who also absolutely forbids a woman to remarry without a GET, even if the husband fled the Agunah, and even if the husband converted to a non-Jewish religion before he married her. If so, we have now four opinions against HaGaon Reb Moshe. This should militate against Tamar remarrying based only upon the opinion of HaGaon Reb Moshe.
Note that Rav Henkin brings the teshuva from Noda Biyehuda, but HaGaon Reb Moshe did not bring it, meaning, that he did not know this teshuva. If HaGaon Reb Moshe did not know the teshuva, and indeed, did not have a single person who agrees with him to permit the woman to remarry, relying on HaGaon Reb Moshe is a serious problem, not only because he is badly outnumbered. Because if a Rov even a major posek rules against earlier authorities or other authorities, and he knows about them, and he has proofs against them, then we may allow his ruling to stand, because perhaps he has proofs that the earlier rabbis erred. But if HaGaon Reb Moshe did not mention the Noda Biyehuda, which probably means he did not know about it, we cannot rely on HaGaon Reb Moshe, because we say “If he had seen the teshuva of Noda Biyehuda he perhaps would have rescinded his own decision.”
See Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpot 25:2 end of Ramo there. We follow the opinion of a latter authority because we assume that the latter rabbi saw the opinion of the early rabbi or rabbis and rejected it because he had proofs that it was wrong. But if the latter rabbi never saw the teshuva of the early rabbi or rabbis, we say that if the latter rabbi had seen the teaching of the early rabbi maybe he would have agreed and changed his own decision. And therefore, we cannot rely on the latter rabbi.
Thus, when HaGaon Reb Moshe does not quote the Noda Biyehuda he greatly weakens his own ability to be relied upon, because maybe if he had read the teshuva he would have agreed with it. But there is another reason why this weakens HaGaon Reb Moshe’s pesak. See Nesivose there Choshen Mishpot 25:2 in Nesivose #20: He brings the Alshich that if the Moharik argues with a Tosfose we don’t say that the law is as the latter authority, because Tosfose was a greater sage than the Moharik. If so, HaGaon Reb Moshe was not on the level of the Noda Biyehuda, who was one of the very greatest authorities accepted by all Israel. I heard this from HaGaon Reb Yaacov Kaminetsky, that the Noda Biyehuda and the Chasam Sofer are different than other poskim in that with other poskim if a rabbi today has proofs that their leniency is wrong, he can be stringent. But if the Noda Biyehuda and the Chasam Sofer rule to be lenient, even if somebody today would disagree with it or have a strong question on it, he could be lenient, because all of Jewry accepted the authority of these two. If so, Noda Biyehuda is surely greater than HaGaon Reb Moshe, and we don’t follow HaGaon Reb Moshe against the Noda Biyehuda.
In truth, I am not sure that HaGaon Reb Moshe could be considered greater than the Kovno Rov who was a major Gadol HaDor accepted by everyone. HaGaon Reb Moshe was not accepted by everyone and had many great battles about his pesokim. I am also not sure that HaGaon Reb Moshe would be considered greater than Rav Henkin, but perhaps they were equals. But if they were equals, we cannot rule leniently that HaGaon Reb Moshe was right and Reb Henkin wrong, because it is at least a doubt of a Torah sin. Thus, HaGaon Reb Moshe is lenient, but the Noda Biyehuda, Bais HaLevi, Kovna Rov and Rav Henkin are stringent. So we have a problem of a Torah law and how can we be lenient with one rabbi against four especially if at least one of those rabbis was far greater than HaGaon Reb Moshe? And probably the Kovneh Rov and Bais HaLevi were greater than HaGaon Reb Moshe.
The Mahari ben Leib (IV:19:3)says that in his time (that of the Bais Yosef who perhaps was his disciple) if a majority of rabbis permitted a woman to marry or remarry and a minority forbade it, that we are stringent and forbid the woman to remarry. This is perhaps based upon a Tosfose in Kesubose 2a סד"ה שאם היה לו . A doubt in halacha is normally resolved leniently. But this may not apply to a doubt about a husband and wife who may, if we are lenient and permit them to live together, “will live together and sin all of their married life.”
If so, surely we cannot rely upon HaGaon Reb Moshe in defiance of the majority of great rabbis, because even if they permitted it and HaGaon Reb Moshe was one rabbi who forbade it, we should be stringent as the Mahari ben Leib says. Surely when the majority of rabbis forbids the woman to remarry we may not follow the minority and permit Tamar to remarry. And surely, even though HaGaon Reb Moshe did not know it, when we know that the Noda Biyehuda strongly disagrees with HaGaon Reb Moshe, we would pasken like the Noda Biyehuda and forbid the woman to remarry.
Thus, we cannot rely on HaGaon Reb Moshe to permit Tamar to remarry, for all of the above reasons.
There is, however, another reason. I once had a problem that a woman needed a GET, but the husband while amenable to give a GET, refused to allow a rabbi into his office. There is a teshuva from HaGaon Reb Moshe permitting this GET. I asked a rabbi who was a prominent GET maker if he would make the GET. He said he will perform the GET and then give the woman and husband a paper that they are divorced in accord with the opinion of HaGaon Reb Moshe, but he will not agree to it. I was upset at this and called HaGaon Reb Moshe. His gabei heard the problem and said, “Just because it says in the teshuva sefer to do it, do we do it?” I was so stunned I just hung up. I called up HaGaon Rav Avigder Miller and he told me that HaGaon Reb Moshe wrote teshuvose for a certain time when it was appropriate but later on changed and did not do those great leniencies.
Rav Margolin of Ezras Torah told me the same thing about Rav Henkin, that we have no teshuvose from him because he felt that his teshuvose were written for a time that required certain leniencies but he did not want them done later one when the world become frumer.
If so, it is highly possible that these teshuvose of HaGaon Reb Moshe written against the opinion of the great rabbis of Israel in earlier generations are also the product of a different time and HaGaon Reb Moshe in his later years would not want to do them any more. For all of the above reasons and more, Tamar has no right to rely on HaGaon Reb Moshe to remarry.

If Tamar has a child with her new “husband” it is a mamzer, as many rabbis have written.

Friday, December 4, 2015

Audio on Rabbis Who Make Mamzerim and Present Problems of Yeshivas and the Torah Community

click below 

Audio Problems of Rabbis and Yeshivas that Produce Mamzerim



Audio is on our website at www.torahtimes.com .

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Free Telephone Conference Thursday night Dec 3 at 9 PM with Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

TOPIC - Major Rabbis who Make Mamzerim and Defy the Shulchan Aruch

Rabbi Eidensohn's blog is torahhalacha.blogspot.com  with almost 150 posts on the laws of marriage and family in Even Hoezer. Last month over 5300 page views.

Also a website  www.torahtimes.com features texts and audio on similar topics.

Videos are found at torahmarriage.blogspot.com mainly on Rabbi Eidensohn's studying under Gedolim Reb Aharon Kotler and Rav Moshe Feinstein both zt"l. . 

Rabbi Eidensohn can be reached at 845-578-1917 and eidensohnd@gmail.com  .