Thursday, August 25, 2016

From Joe Orlow - A Fraudulent Beth Din makes mamzerim

The fraudulent Feinstein Bais Din has now given the impression to the Torah World that Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky is worthy to be the Greatest Gadol in America. The truth is different. Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky a a Shoteh and a Rasha and Rabbi Dovid Feinstein is fitting to be put in Nidui for covering up for Rabbi Kamenetsky's sins.

The crux of the matter is how Halacha is decided. In this case, the Halacha was "Pore'ach Min Ha'Avir", it sprouted out of thin air. We find this decisionmaking process at the crossing of the Red Sea. The horse claimed: "I did nothing wrong. I relied on the driver who gave me directions." The driver claimed: "I did nothing wrong. The horse galloped on its own into battle. I was dragged along into chasing Bnai Yisrael."

What happens, according to the Medrash? The driver is put on the horse and together they are both tossed into the sea.

Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky told me that if I want, I can rely on Rabbi Nota Greenblatt in regard to the Heter for Tamar Epstein to marry Adam without a Get from her husband Aharon Friedman. Rabbi Greenblatt says he performed the marriage of Tamar to Adam by relying on the Gadolim, an apparent reference to Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky. There you have it: "Sus V'Rachvo".

The effect of all this is to corrode the Kedusha of the Jewish Nation. And it leads to absurdities. Rabbi Hillel David told me that he sat on the Feinstein Bais Din and that the Bais Din ruled that Tamar is married to Aharon. Are Tamar's future progeny to be Mamzer in Manhattan but not in Memphis?

Worse than this is that some young Torah Scholars in America are becoming jaded. They think -- consciously or not -- that the Agudath Israel is a corrupt organization. The Moetzes Gadolai Hatorah is corrupt. Their attitude becomes: "Ah! But what can you do?"

What can you do? You can shriek from the rooftops! The Jewish People may be splitting into two Nations that can't marry into each other. We'll survive. But can we survive with a Rabbinate that is cynical and steeped in hopelessness?

The outrage against the Avlah of the Feinstein Bais Din is pent up, but I'm told from a reliable source that the outrage is there. I say that when outrage is repressed, the capacity to become outraged becomes blunted and stunted.

If we don't stand up and protest now, the situation will only deteriorate until we are left barren without anyone who will even listen to our cries.

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Discussion of Marital Intimacy


Question: I have become Orthodox recently and before then had a free sexual life. What is the Torah law about sexuality? What may I do, what is forbidden?
Thank you,

Sexuality is an obligation of the Torah, not just rabbinical law. Rashi, and such is indicated in the gemora, requires a couple to sleep together all of the time without clothes, unless the woman is a Nida, (period) of course. So important is this in the eyes of the gemora, that it seriously discusses if someone may sleep with his wife when she is a nida by wearing clothes. That is, the intimacy of sleeping together is part of one's obligation, and perhaps clothes will remind them not to have touching sex. However, the gemora decides this is forbidden. When the woman is not a Nida surely it is obligatory to sleep with her without clothes every night. Nonetheless, today we don't find people doing this. There is, to my knowledge, no support for today's custom, and I have discussed this with senior experts, and they had no Talmud source, either. Thus, the appropriate thing, according to Rashi and the Talmud, is for a Jewish couple to sleep together every night without clothes. The Zohar also insists that people be together without clothes, although it does not mention they must do this every night. Thus, I cannot say that people who don't do the above are sinners, because this may not be the custom in many communities. However, one who does it is surely praiseworthy, as this is the opinion of the Talmud and Rashi, and there is, to my knowledge, no disagreement on this in the Talmud or earlier sages.

Sexual activity that is not intercourse is surely permitted during the day, and should be encouraged, as it strengthens the marriage. If one does these two things, sleeping together every night without clothes, and foreplay during the day without shame, without making a circus, probably, one will be satisfied. If not, however, one should never leave his lusts hanging loose, because to do so is quite dangerous. Very pious people have sinned because they didn't fear their lusts. So, when there is a true lust, and there is no vain emission of seed, anything goes. If there is a chance of emission of seed, this is probably also permitted in case of a severe lust, or in the case of someone, as you mention, who is a BT and can't just get up and walk away from his appetites. Technically speaking, when one engages in foreplay, etc., and by accident there is emission of seed, it is probably okay. Of course, masturbation is wrong, and any deliberate emission of seed is wrong.

There is a discussion in the Talmud and poskim about a woman who cannot become pregnant. What should she do? One opinion (I don't say we accept this opinion as halacha) is that she should practice coitus interruptus. A senior posek asked, "Why not just stop having intercourse?" He answered, "Not having intercourse is surely a sin. Therefore, we maintain the marriage according to that Talmudic opinion by spilling the seed, even if we could avoid the spilling of the seed by ceasing intercourse." I mention this, not to provide halacha, which must come from an actual rabbi who hears all of the particulars of the problem, but to mention this idea, for whatever it is worth, that marriage must be sustained. Probably, zera livatolo that comes about from foreplay, etc., inadvertently, is not sinful. If a person does something knowing that there is a good chance of zera livatolo, we should avoid doing so. However, if we are talking about people with real lusts who must satisfy them, I would not dare forbid it. I might rely upon two things, one, the opinion of Tosfose Rid that zera livatolo is mainly forbidden when one intends to prevent procreation, but not if done for one's sexual pleasures. Secondly, I would rely upon Tosfose in Baitso, 36b, that we pasken according to Reb Shimon, that דבר שאינו מתכוין מותר באופן שאפשר, אפילו על פי המועט,  שלא יצא תקלה ממעשיו. Thus, when there is even a small possibility that no emission of seed will occur, if it is a very big shaas hadechak, I would permit it. For other people, however, I would not permit this.

This is a very big problem with people who suddenly find themselves Orthodox and facing NIDA proscriptions. I was once in a Beth Din watching senior rabbis sweat out the warnings of a BT that he could not last. He didn't.

If somebody would ask me how to proceed in NIDA proscriptions for newly religious people, I would be very careful about making them fail. Of course, this is extremely serious halacha, and I mention it here only to provide some background for our situation.

I also mention that the kind of things I write here are based upon decades of working with very sick religious people, some of them who got very sick in sexual matters because of their accepting certain mistaken beliefs, that sex is bad, etc. We do our best to make a poorly written GET kosher, or to permit a woman to remarry when her husband is lost. One of the reasons for this is that if we don't permit it, we are not sure how she will behave.

The Hungarian rabbonim were very strict about shaving beards. They considered it almost a cardinal sin, because a Jew must look like a Jew. However, when the government forbade bearded Jews from marrying, one very senior rebbe permitted shaving. He explained that he did not want bastards brought into the world by frustrated Orthodox or Hassidic bachelors. Whoever rules in a way to make people boil in their lust has done a very serious thing, especially if there are clear sources to be lenient.
Rabbeinu Tam suggests that as one becomes old and is prepared for the other world, he slows down from wordly pleasures, such as sex, at least more than he used to. There are certain s people who may not have much sexual needs in their natures. On the other hand, some people have frightening desires. Most young people surely must engage in sex, with their spouses, because if not, they may, Rabbi Yehuda the Pious says, do it with others. We find among Kabbalists, who were like angels, that they sought to refrain from wordly pleasures in eating and sex, and did only what was obligatory. This does not apply to the vast majority of people, even rabbis. Nonetheless, many people believe that sex is sinful, and this idea is based on ignorance. In one of my Hebrew books, I wrote a lengthy responsa on this. It was based upon a case where a woman with a few children demanded a divorce because her husband, who was not yet thirty, was still not a "person" because he enjoyed sex. This is hideous ignorance, and it destroys marriages, and turns people into finding sex other ways.

Several senior codifiers, including Rambam and Shulchan Aruch, contradict themselves in this matter. In one place they say to do anything, and in another place adjure us to approach sublime levels. It is no contradiction. All of us must realize that we are not hedonists, nor do we want to be hedonists. We want to be spiritual, holy, and removed from anything that could drag us to sin, such as powerful sexual appetites. Therefore, we don't go around encouraging hedonism and certain similar behaviors. However, for one who has a real need for such, it is permitted, and not only permitted, but obligatory, lest he do something terrible. Incidentally, there are many Orthodox women with AIDS because their husbands were not satisfied in the house. There is one MIKVEH in New York City known as homo-central, populated by Orthodox mikveh goers. This has always existed and always will. Therefore, we must deal with our desires according to the Torah and halacha, and not according to some fantasy made up by people against the Talmud, Zohar, and codifiers. (Incidentally, never, ever, allow your child to hang around the MIKVEH.)
The proper thing is to find an equilibrium, and not to become a hedonist. Surely, we don't want to be hungry and go around all day like a bomb ready to be blown up. Each person must find the proper menu for sex, and that menu itself may change as the person develops and ages.

Please tell me if the above is clear and if you have more questions.
Return to Top

Dovid Eidensohn
What Must a Spouse Do?
Dear Rabbi,
Does a spouse have an obligation to have sex? What is the degree of obligation? What if one person doesn't like what the other person wants?

Dear A,
An Orthodox Jew has sex only with one's own marital partner. Considering the flame of biology, especially in younger people, but active in older people also, this presents a problem. Since your spouse can only have sex with you, and if you refuse, the person has a problem, what should we do?

Rabbi Yehuda the Pious, one of the great Kabbalists, Talmudists and saints of all time, who lived about 800 years ago in Europe, warns us never to ignore our biological needs, and to achieve them with our partner. Otherwise, he warns, we, even pious people, are in danger. This idea is seconded by the great Radvaz, the senior rabbi in the world in the time of Rabbi Joseph Karo of Tsefas, some 500 years ago.
Therefore, the Talmud tells us that a partner must try to accomodate one the other, so the biology does not become obsessed with something that cannot be achieved within the sanctity of marriage. Such biology can be lit like a candle at the wrong time,as the Talmud teaches.

There are, however, two aspects to this. One, let us say that one person, usually the woman, is raised to think that sex is materialistic or worse, and therefore she, out of idealism, wants to minimize sex. We can tell her, as people such as me do tell her, to have sex, as she is mistaken with her idealism. This is easy.

What happens, however, when the husband wants something the wife does not like, not at all? If the wife satisfies her husband, she may become anguished herself. This is a very serious problem. Thus, in general, we can advise people to forget about the tsiniyuse or modesty when it comes to saving a spouse from the evil inclination. However, if by so doing one loses self-respect, we have a great problem.

It is easy to say, hey, maintain your self-respect. It is also not so easy to tell the woman what to do when her husband gives her a disease he picked up with another woman. We have to know that the evil inclination is stronger than most people, and when someone has a problem, it doesn't go away. We therefore encourage people to satisfy their spouse, to make sure that nothing goes outside the home.

Years ago, when I first began working with sexual problems in the community, I found more than I was able to assimilate. I remember the nurse who told me something and tried to restrain her mirth when I had no idea what she was talking about. Those of us who are not there in the emergency rooms just don't know what is going on out there. Those who are active, as I was in my younger years, with child molesters, etc., know that what the Rambam says, that no Jewish community ever existed where there was no adultery, is true today as it always was. I spoke to the Brisker Rov's son, Reb Refoel zt"l, the senior expert on community matters in Jerusalem, and he laughed at me when I presented my limited understanding of just how bad things are. From time to time I think I have reached the end, and then, some therapist or expert laughs at me, and tells me the next stage. You would never believe it, never.

Take it from me. Don't mess around with that yetser Horo. A senior rabbi has said, "Take off the makeup when  you go in the street, but don't be modest in the home."

A lengthy responsa on this is available in my Hebrew work, "Teshuvos Bayis Ne'Emon, Laws of Ribbis. It is about monetary law, or usury, but there is on lengthy responsa to a woman who wanted to be too modest, without, of course, mentioning any names.
Dovid Eidensohn

Sunday, August 21, 2016

Joe Orlow talks to Shmuel Kaminetsky about Tamar

I called Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky yesterday. I said I had a Halachic question. I told him that I am working to separate Tamar Epstein and Adam.

I asked him what is the Halacha. Am I doing the right thing or the wrong thing?

He said he didn't know. He said there are Rabbis on both sides.

I asked him that if I stopped trying to separate Tamar and Adam, which Rabbis could I rely on.

He told me I could rely on "the Rabbi in Memphis."

I tried also to bring up with him the Feinstein Bais Din.

I asked him who could Posken for me if I was doing the right thing or wrong thing in trying to separate Tamar and Adam. I asked him if his son, Reb Shalom, could decide this question.

He seemed to indicate "yes". So I left a message for Rabbi Shalom Kamenetsky asking him to tell me if I'm doing the right thing or wrong thing.

It is self evident now why Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn calls Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky a Shoteh and a Rasha. It is self evident why  Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn says Rabbi Dovid Feinstein is fitting to be put in Niduy.

It is amazing that Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky had no difficulty wading into the divorce process of Tamar and Aharon projecting himself as the pre-eminent Torah authority in America. But now he tells me he doesn't know the Halacha. Is that not foolish behavior of the highest order?

Monday, August 8, 2016

Questions from Joe Orlow and Yoni Benamou and answers by Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Torah Questions by Yoni Benamou and Joe Orlow

 Answers by Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn


I am a Jewish male almost eighteen years of age. Is it wrong for me to be unmarried at this age, even if I turn eighteen? I can get married now, but without proper funds I cannot support a family. Am I a sinner?
Answer to Question One:
The Shulchan Aruch in the beginning of Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer tells of the mitzvah of marrying at the age of seventeen or eighteen. See Even Hoezer 1:3 in Otsar HaPoskim.  Eighteen according to one opinion means when the eighteenth year begins, and it begins at the conclusion of the seventeenth year. That is, on the seventeenth year birthday begins the eighteenth year. But the full eighteen years do not happen until a year passes from the seventeenth birthday and there is the eighteenth year birthday, when the person achieves a full eighteen years. But the sin of not marrying begins at the beginning of the eighteenth year at the seventeenth birthday when the person had a full seventeen years. That is the time to marry according to this opinion.
Another opinion says that eighteen in the Shulchan Aruch means not the beginning of the eighteenth year after the full seventeen year birthday, but it means the final and full eighteen years, that happens at the beginning of the nineteenth year.
 In earlier generations, a man who refused marriage was taken to the Beth Din and pressured to marry. See Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer I:3 that this pressure began at the age of twenty. However, the Shulchan Aruch says that this pressure only applies to one who “does not want to marry.” This person is a sinner. But one who is actively seeking a shidduch is not pressured.
Also one who is busy learning Torah and is afraid that if he marries he will have to go to work and not learn, is also not pressured. As long as he does not have sinful thoughts, he is allowed to continue his learning. However, if this goes on for a very long time there could be problems. See Even Hoezer I:3 and Otsar HaPoskim there number 22. See also Even Hoezer I:4 and Otsar Haposkim on the subject if a learner who refuses marriage is completely free of marriage or should be told to marry.

I recall years ago when I learned in Yeshiva and there was a boy a great masmid, always learning. He was also tall and good looking. But he didn’t marry and was getting along in years. I went over to him and said, “Look, you are a deeply pious person and want to keep the Torah. If you had married, you would probably have had children by now. Is this lack of children not considered by you a Hefsed merubo a “great loss” that permits people to be lenient in some manners? He soon married.

Why do the "Gadolim" I speak with not express sympathy for the struggle that unlearned people have when they witness what appears to be a huge breach of Halacha? Even an Av Bais Din told me he is in pain at the apparent transgression in the case of permitting Tamar Epstein to remarry.

Why do these "Gadolim" not express  embarrassment for issuing a ruling that smacks of pandering, even if they justify the pandering by saying they must uphold the illusion that "Gadolim" are perfect, or justify it because they must keep the money flowing to their Yeshivas?

What does it mean when "Gadolim" rule in such a way that others will sin based on the ruling and thus ruling in a way that is a Chillul Hashem? Practically speaking, do those who act this way have a Chelek in Olam Haba or is a lifetime of Torah and Mitzvos squandered by one misstep?

Why did the "Gadolim" stumble here? Or have they been playing fast and loose with the rules for years and just got caught here?

The "Gadolim" are acting silly. They say that the couple is forbidden and in the same breath say the couple can rely on Rabbi Greenblatt to stay together. Are the "Gadolim" insane?

From Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Joe, thank you for your five questions. Let us take a look at them. We label them as questiontwo A, question two B, then C then D then E.

Question Two – A group of questions by Joe Orlow about “Gedolim”

Why do the "Gadolim" I speak with not express sympathy for the struggle that unlearned people have when they witness what appears to be a huge breach of Halacha? Even an Av Bais Din told me he is in pain at the apparent transgression in the case of permitting Tamar Epstein to remarry.

Answer Two A – There was a huge eruption of Gedolim in Israel, America and Canada over the Tamar Epstein scandal. Who was responsible for it? Shalom Kaminetsky, Shmuel Kaminetsky, and Noto Greenblatt. I don’t know how many people think that they are still Gedolim. On my blog, I call all of them Mamzer Makers. If Tamar ever has a baby from Adam almost all rabbonim and Gedolim in the world will consider the baby a definite mamzer diroayso. So who are the “gedolim” that you refer to who don’t express sympathy for a huge breach of Halacha?
In truth, it is not so simple that these three are the whole problem regarding Tamar. Shmuel Kaminetsky went to David Feinstein who proclaimed that a Beth Din he would make would adjudicate the situation of Shmuel Kaminetsky and his granting Tamar the right to remarry without a GET. We are all waiting and waiting for that Beth Din to adjudicate and nothing happened. Finally, I called up Hillel David and asked him how the Beth Din could be silent when a woman is married to somebody not her husband and if she has a baby it is a mamzer. He replied that the Beth Din was only made as a service to help Shmuel Kaminetsky. It had nothing to do with the rest of us. If I wanted to know what the Beth Din held, I would have to ask Shmuel Kaminetsky.
I realized that this Beth Din is simply an excuse to save Shmuel Kaminetsky as a “gadol” for the Agudah. I blamed in my blog David Feinstein as an evil person and wrote that he is worthy of being put in Cherem. Hillel David and the other Dayan are about the same level. But people realize what happened and there is, especially on my brother’s blog every day, a severe accounting for what Feinstein did.

Question Two B - Why do these "Gadolim" not express embarrassment for issuing a ruling that smacks of pandering, even if they justify the pandering by saying they must uphold the illusion that "Gadolim" are perfect, or justify it because they must keep the money flowing to their Yeshivas? End question 2b.

Answer Two B: The two ninety year old rabbis S Kaminetsky and N Greenblatt may believe what they want. They are not Gedolim and are known to invent halacha. When Tamar first became interested in marrying without a GET I called N Greenblatt and asked him how he could perform a marriage on a woman who is married to somebody else and has no GET. He replied that Gedolim approved of it. That is a bald lie. There are no Gedolim who approved it. The permission to marry without a GET was a process of lies rooted in Shalom Kaminetsky and his father, who fooled N Greenblatt to make the marriage ceremony. Greenblatt and the two Kaminetskies are not people who know what it is to be embarrassed even when they make mamzerim. Next question.

Another Answer Two B. I believe this is included in answer One. The majority of gedolim were furious with Greenblatt, and the two Kaminetskies. And when David Feinstein got involved, there were many negative comnments about his “beth din.” End answer Two B.

Question 2 C - What does it mean when "Gadolim" rule in such a way that others will sin based on the ruling and thus ruling in a way that is a Chillul Hashem? Practically speaking, do those who act this way have a Chelek in Olam Haba or is a lifetime of Torah and Mitzvos squandered by one misstep? End question 2 C.

Answer question 2C: Again, the two Kaminetskies are not gedolim, they are only great in being wicked and falsifying the Torah. Everybody knows this. The Brisker Rov in Israel wrote a letter that Shmuel Kaminetsky is forbidden to teach Torah. He is a real rosho.

Question 2 D - Why did the "Gadolim" stumble here? Or have they been playing fast and loose with the rules for years and just got caught here?

Ansswer 2 D. No Gedolim stumbled. Some very wicked and ignorant people stumbled, and they were savaged by rabbis from around the world who pointed out that their permission for Tamar to remarry without a GET was based upon plain lies and ridiculous inventions.

Question 2 E - The "Gadolim" are acting silly. They say that the couple is forbidden and in the same breath say the couple can rely on Rabbi Greenblatt to stay together. Are the "Gadolim" insane?

Answer 2E – These like Kaminetsky and Greenblatt are not acting silly and they are not insane. They are full fledged wicked people who violate the Torah and make mamzerim. David Feinstein helps S Kaminetsky and he will answer for this terrible sin. He is not silly and he is not insane. But he backs a mamzer maker and so he is wicked. And he probably had political reasons to fulfill his wickedness, such as the need for the Agudah to maintain the fiction that Kaminetsky is a Gadol. But he is a great sinner, not a Gadol. And David Feinstein belongs in the same garbage can as Sammy.

Wednesday, August 3, 2016

Feinstein Beth Din makes a mess of adjudicating Shmuel Kaminetsky.

Top article from Joe Orlow bottom is from Dovid Eidensohn.

Rabbi Dovid Feinstein had a private Bais Din that gave a ruling to Rabbi
Shmuel Kamenetsky. The Bais Din ruled that Tamar Epstein is married to
Aharon Friedman.

Despite this ruling, Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky had not publicly stated that
Tamar should separate from the man that she married in a ceremony performed
by Rabbi Nota Greenblatt.

I learned that a prominent Rav had asked Rabbi Dovid Feinstein to issue a
letter stating Tamar should separate from her second husband. Rabbi
Feinstein agreed to write the letter.

I called a Rav who is close to Rabbi Feinstein to find out the status of
the letter from Rabbi Feinstein. In the course of the conversation, this
Rav told me that Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky had told Tamar to separate from
her second husband.

I called Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky and asked him to confirm that he had told
Tamar to separate from her second husband. He told me, "I never told anyone
to separate." That is an exact quote.

I called up a Rav who had sat on the Bais Din with Rabbi Feinstein that
issued the ruling to Rabbi Kamenetsky. I told him that Rabbi Kamenetsky
told me that he did not tell anyone to separate. The Rav indicated to me
that he felt that if Rabbi Kamenetsky did tell Tamar to separate, that she
would listen to Rabbi Kamenetsky. I furthermore told the Rav that Rabbi
Feinstein had been asked to write a letter telling Tamar to separate.

I asked that the Bais Din should tell Rabbi Kamenetsky to tell Tamar to
separate. I went on. I asked that the Bais Din make a direct statement
telling Tamar to separate from her second husband.

This Rav, who sat on this Bais Din, in the nicest way made it clear that
none of this would be happening.

I said that that I had been told that the great scholars of the generation
are responsible for the generation. Rabbi Eidensohn had taught me that just
hours before I had this discussion with the Rav.

I spelled it out, leaving nothing to the imagination. I said that every
time the couple has relations that the Aveira is on the great scholars of
the generation (who fail to act and tell the couple to separate on the
outside possibility that the couple will listen and separate.)

There seemed to be nothing more to add. The Rav thanked me. I returned the
thanks. And hung up. END Joe Orlow's article.
David Eidensohn - Reply to Joseph
Add these words to the excellent text:
The gemora in Shabbos 54b says that one who has influence to prevent
somebody from sinning and does not stop the sinning is punished as if he
had committed those sins. That is, there are people who can prevent their
families from sinning but not the general public. There are people who have
some influence in the general public. There are those who can influence the
entire world. A person who can stop the sin of a few people but no more and
does not do that is punished as a sinner with the sins of a few people. But
one who can influence many people to stop sinning and does not, is punished
with the sins of many people.

Thus, a senior group of rabbinic scholars headed by Dovid Feinstein that does nothing to stop Tamar from sinning with Adam, is punished for all of Tamar's sins, but also, all women who learn from this to commit the sin created by the Kaminetsky element have their
sins placed upon those who could have stopped Kaminetsky and the other
mamzer makers. It is obvious that the Feinstein Beth Din was only an excuse
to restore Shmuel Kaminetsky as the great senior rabbi of Agudas Israel,
and did nothing to stop Tamar's sins. People realize this and know that
great rabbis are only interested in politics, not the sins of the
multitude. Thus Feinstein and his Beth Din have a sin of Chilul HaShem, and
the sins of people who act like Tamar throughout the world are on his
shoulders, and the members of his Beth Din. End Dovid Eidensohn

Tuesday, August 2, 2016

Confirmation that Shmuel Kaminetsky never told Tamar to separate from Adam

This has appeared in a recent post where things were longer and more detailed, without saying who learned of this. At this point I add that Joe Orlow from Silver Springs, MD, is the one who spoke to Shmuel Kaminetsky. We mentioned earlier that this is a disgrace that neither David Feinstein or Shmuel Kaminetsky have openly spoken to Tamar and Adam Fleischer to separate. And if they refused, there should be great pressure placed on them. But none of this was done. Our post today confirms this.

From Joe Orlow

I spoke to a person close to Reb Dovid Feinstein who told me that RSK had told Tamar Epstein and Adam Flesicher to separate. I didn't think that was true and I said that I would call RSK and ask him.

I called RSK and I told him that I heard that RSK had told Tamar Epstein and Adam Fleischer to separate. And I said that I was calling to confirm. He replied, "I never told anyone to separate."

Shmuel Kaminetsky and David Feinstein - More Bad News


We hope later to provide more detail. But at this point it seems that somebody close to Reb Dovid Feinstein told somebody close to me, that Reb Shmuel Kaminetsky told Adam Fleischer to separate from Tamar Epstein Friedman. 

My friend heard this and called up Rabbi Shmuel Kaminetsky and was told "I never told anybody to separate." 

Recall if you do our previous post that a major Torah authority asked Reb Dovid Feinstein to release a letter stating that Tamar and Adam should separate, and Reb Dovid agreed to do that. Now such a letter is not forthcoming, but we do have Shmuel Kaminetsky openly saying that "I never told anybody to separate."

 If so, why did Reb Dovid accept RSK's "teshuva" regarding Tamar Epstein Friedman?

 When I wrote in my blog that Reb Dovid Feinstein is "somebody who deserves to be put in cherem" we can see more evidence as above. And of course, our description of Shmuel Kaminetsky as a "mamzer maker" is accurate. Again, we hope to have more on this topic tonight or tomorrow.