Showing posts with label Freeing a married woman without a GET in Philadelphia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freeing a married woman without a GET in Philadelphia. Show all posts

Thursday, November 13, 2014

Leaving Without a GET: "Daas Torah" in Philadelphia

In our previous posts here, we have discussed the problem of the modern Yeshiva and its invention in halacha, especially the laws of Gittin, where women are helped by forcing the husband to divorce, which makes an invalid GET and mamzerim. But just when we thought that things could not get worse, we find that in Philadelphia a married woman is going on dates. She, it is said, has stated that she is "free" and she has Shalom Kaminetsky to support her and help her remarry. He told somebody that I know and trust that although she has no GET, she doesn't really need one. He refused to say what rabbi said that a married woman doesn't need a GET. However, since Shalom's father is Reb Shmuel Kaminetsky, we assume that he works with his father's permission. The girl and her family are known to be close to the Kaminetskys.

In our previous posts we showed proof that the Roshei Yeshiva who permitted humiliating a husband have no proof or opinion to support them, as they defy open teachings of the Rashbo in teshuva VII:414, Radvaz Volume II:118, the Beis Yosef author of the Shulchan Aruch in Tur 154, and the Chazon Ish in Gittin 108. Furthermore, the true gedolim in Israel have written in letters and a new sefer published on the subject that anyone who receives a GET from a Beth Din that practices coercions in defiance of halacha must have another GET, as the first one is not recognized. I heard personally from HaGaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l that a Beth Din that coerces a GET in violation of halacha loses its chezkas beth din, meaning as the present gedolim have said, that the woman needs a new GET from a kosher Beth Din.

Surely, a Beth Din that allows a married woman to remarry without a GET entirely is an invalid Beth Din, and all Gittin that it makes are invalid unless a reliable Beth Din investigates carefully and approves the GET.

Of course, the Philadelphia inventors of halacha have no source for what they say. But there are plenty of sources that disagree, as we will bring here. First of all, Maharshal in teshuva 41 says that even a wicked husband who converts to another religion and cannot do anything positive for the wife in marriage, the marriage is still valid, and the issue is whether to coerce him to give a GET. But the Philly Rosh Yeshivas disagree with the Marshal, whom the Ramo considered to be greater than he was, and they have ruled that such husbands allow the wife to remarry without a GET.

And what if the wife becomes wicked and leaves the house? Is the husband free to remarry without a GET? The Posek HaDor of his time Reb Yitschok Elchonon zt"l in AYIN YITSCHOK I, the first few teshuvose, has many cases like this, and in all of the cases, the marriages stood, and the husband had to give a GET or have HETER MAYO RABONIM. See also teshuva 36 the husband became insane, and yet, she is not free to remarry until it is known that the husband died. See also teshuva 61 a wicked man gave a ring to a girl and uttered You are mikudeshes li and she obviously did not want to marry him. It is obvious from the teshuva there that if she did hear all of his words even if she immediately afterwards rejected him there would be a serious problem of her being married to him. But the Philly rabbis, if she would have had a father close to their Yeshiva, would have taken care of her that she was free to remarry.

Also, throughout history there have been women whose husbands turned wicked and left them and they are Agunose. Why did the rabbis of those times not say that since the husband is so wicked as to leave his wife and become a rosho that the wife would never have married him in the first place had she known how evil he was, and therefore, the marriage never took place? But the rabbis throughout history have never ruled that a woman whose husband has turned wicked can say that she never would have married a wicked person and therefore the marriage never took place.

Furthermore, in the worst case scenario, when a woman has a wicked husband and it is known that had she known about him she never would have married him, we find clearly that the marriage is not ended and she is still married. See Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 154:1 in Ramo that a husband who marries a woman and then becomes a member of another religion, that the marriage is still valid and the wife is not free to remarry without a GET. There is even a question whether such a person can be coerced to divorce. Now, according to the Philadelphia inventors, why can't the woman simply say that she never would have married such a person who changes his religion, and then remarry?

The Ramo says there that if the husband is known to have relations with strange women, some permit to coerce such a husband to divorce. But we see that if the husband is not coerced to divorce, the woman cannot just leave because she never would have married such a wicked person and the marriage was a mistake. Indeed, where do we find in the Shulchan Aruch that a woman is married, maybe has children, and the husband becomes wicked and the marriage disappears? There is no such thing.

Furthermore, the lady in Philadelphia has never claimed that her husband is wicked or anything of the sort. She simply says that she could find a better husband, even after she had a child from the first husband. The first husband is a very respected person with a very good job in Congress. So how can the inventors in Philadelphia come up with a reason to remove the marriage after she had a child with the first husband especially as even she never said he did anything hideous?

Without going into further proofs here, we see that the "Daas Torah" Rosh Yeshivas who invented the permission to coerce husbands because the wife was a cousin or friend of a Rosh Yeshiva, which is pure corruption, now have invented the removal of marriage entirely, despite the fact that nobody in Jewish history ever said such a thing. And if it is true, that whenever a wife regrets marrying the husband the marriage is removed, what marriage is there that hasn't been removed at one time or a hundred times over as people always have moods and disagreements and even worse, but who assumes like the Philly rabbis that the marriage disappears simply because the wife wants the marriage to disappear so she can marry somebody else?

Some years back the Rosho Rackman invented this idea, that any woman whose husband did not give a GET, can remarry, because had she known that he would not give her a GET, she never would  have married him. And all of the rabbis, including and especially the YU rabbis, blasted him out for this, and eventually, he pulled back somewhat. For sure, all of the women who remarried from Rackman lived in sin and their children from the new husband are mamzerim. And the Philly lady if she remarries, will have mamzerim for children. BE WARNED! The Philly rabbis who encouraged a married woman to remarry without a GET are wicked and have no place in halacha. Nobody should ever ask them an opinion in Torah, because they just invent what they want and call it "Daas Torah" as we explained. How anyone can send their child to the Philly Yeshiva is beyond me. If the Yeshiva rabbis there told people to eat treifeh, would anyone send their child there? So how can anyone send a child to that Yeshiva, and how can anyone contribute to it, when the Yeshiva rabbis encourage mamzerim and women sinning with other men who are not their  husbands?

Yes, there are some "rabbis" who encourage the remarriage of married women without a GET. One is the head of the RCA, the same Beth Din that issued a siruv to the FBI's fake husband. If you want fake husbands, and fake halacha, go to the RCA and the rabbis of the Philly Yeshiva. At any rate, in the Philly situation, to my knowledge no rabbi has openly permitted the woman to remarry. Obviously, the Kaminetkys are aware of what she is doing and Shalom's active help is proof that he and probably his father approve of her remarrying without a GET. Both of them are deserving of CHEREM. They are producing mamzerim, and if a mamzer is produced, they are the child molestors. Please, don't send your child and do not support a Yeshiva run by child molesters!