Message from Joe Orlow

I've had an opportunity to work with Rabbi Eidensohn for a number of years. I am grateful to be able to contribute to his blog, and I want to thank everyone who has visited this blog with its discussions about Torah marriage, family, and divorce.

Rabbi Eidensohn is in Monsey NY, and I am outside Washington DC. Trenton NJ is between Washington and Monsey, and is where a Chilul Hashem is being played out as Rabbis are on public trial for a crime that involved intent to kidnap and torture a man in order to force a  divorce. And during the trial, a prominent Rabbi has submitted a document to the court where he seems to indicate that a Bais Din led by one of the Rabbis on trial was acting according to Halacha when it ordered that a man be beaten to elicit a Get, and thus the man who was going to do the beating should be exonerated.

At first it seemed to be a cabal of a few Rabbis creating a Chilul Hashem by their beatings of husbands for monetary gain or other reasons. Now, based on this and on other research, the Chilul HaShem is that senior rabbis in the United States are openly backing the torture of husbands through humiliating, demonizing, and other ways of forcing a Get.

We say these Rabbis are ignorant of Halacha. The Shulchan Aruch declares such divorces forced with humiliation and loss of jobs to be invalid Gittin. The great Rabbis in Eretz Israel have declared that any woman receiving a Get from a Beth Din that permits coercing husbands in defiance of the Shulchan Aruch must get a kosher Get before she remarries. They have released a "Sefer Mishpitei Yisreol" about this with their signed opinions and that of fifty American geonim and major Torah personalities. You can get the Sefer by calling 845-352-0532.

The Sefer says that because of the rabbis who think it is a Mitzvah to coerce a husband, that in the next generation one may not marry anyone until there is a thorough checking that they are not descended in any way from an invalid Get, a questionable Get, or a Get given by a Beth Din that has lost its license to give Gittin because it strays from the Shulchan Aruch with regard to coercing the husband.

We are sitting on a volcano on the verge of erupting, splitting families and communities asunder, and where in America is this discussed openly other than on this blog? In Philadelphia, a Rosh Yeshiva with a very famous name, is encouraging a married woman to remarry without a Get. He says he has a Heter for allowing this, which every Rabbi I've contacted in this regard -- and I've contacted a number of Rabbis of Batei Din --  has rejected. To be sure, they have not learned the details of the Heter, which is being kept secret; their rejection seems to be based on their not being any possibility of a Heter in this case. If and when this woman in Philly remarries, any baby born from such a marriage will definitely be a Mamzer D'o'rysa. And yet, where are the protestations? Nowhere in America, except this blog.

Rabbi Eidensohn spent many sessions talking personally to Gedolei HaDor of the past generation: Reb Aharon Kotler, Reb Moshe Feinstein, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev, all of them  zt”l, and others. Rabbi Eidensohn insists that we follow the Shulchan Aruch and not coerce husbands. Those who follow the Halacha in matters of divorce and re-marriage will be able to have children who are not doubtful Mamzerim. Other people will find out the hard way what happens.

Rabbi Eidensohn is now organizing a group of men and women who want to keep the Torah as the Gedolim Reb Aharon and Reb Moshe and Reb Elyashev, all of them zt”l, wanted. Participants from all over the United States are eager to keep the Torah from Sinai and to obey the rules of the Shulchan Aruch as taught by earlier generations. Our people who work to further the goal of saving children from being Mamzerim are invited to write guest posts. We ask that no personal attacks be made, but to talk about things that are important for us to know as we seek to educate others.

If you want to get involved in this Holy project, saving the next generation from facing a flood of Mamzerim, call Rabbi Eidensohn at 845-578-1917. The blog has a Pay Pal link. Please make a contribution which is a means of advancing Rabbi Eidensohn's work.

Shalom,

Joe Orlow

Mistakes in Gittin by Rabbis: What and Why?

In a previous post we attacked a  rabbi for supporting the organization ORA that specializes in humiliating husbands and coercing them to give a GET, something forbidden by the Shulchan Aruch and the major poskim. We quoted in that post the Shulchan Aruch and the Gro who ways that nobody permits coercing a GET just because the wife demands freedom. We also mentioned also that the great rabbis of Israel today not only feared that coercion could invalidate a GET, but also they ruled that any rabbis who forms a Beth Din and coerces a GET, that Beth Din has lost its license as a Gittin Beth Din. Any woman who had a GET from such a Beth Din may not remarry, say these great Israeli rabbis, until she goes to a respectable Beth Din that does not coerce Gittin and gets a new GET.

In the coming generation, large numbers of children born from a woman who remarried using a GET that was coerced by certain Beth Dins, will be considered problems of mamzeruth. Here we want to show  a mistake made by a rabbi  who stumbled in the laws of Gittin.

One rabbi who strongly supports ORA and its coercion of husbands told me the following reason he permits it. He says that he recalled that the Shulchan Aruch says that when it is necessary, the community may force a GET by refusing to have anything to do with the husband who will not give a GET. This sounds like a very solid proof. But if so, what do we do with my proofs that it is forbidden to coerce a GET based upon the claim of the wife that she cannot tolerate living with her husband? My proofs quoted in prevous posts were the Shulchan Aruch 77 paragraphs 2 and 3.

Let us look into the Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 164 paragraph 21. The Shulchan Aruch section is "Laws of Gittin." The Shulchan Aruch discusses what to do with a husband who has been clearly obligated by the Talmud to divorce his wife. For instance, the Talmud tells us that a husband with such a problem must divorce his wife. Since the Talmud requires a divorce, and the husband refuses, it would seem that we may force the GET, even with a beating or other serious coercions. But the Shulchan Aruch rejects this. It seems that there is an argument among the sages what the Talmud means when it says "he must divorce his wife." Does it mean that we force him to divorce even with a beating? Or does it mean only a minor coercion, such as telling him that he is wicked for not obeying the Talmud? The Shulchan Aruch quotes the Ramo, the authority of Ashkenazim, that if we do coerce such a GET for somebody required to divorce his wife, and the Talmud does not clearly say to beat him, we may not make a serious coercion. It would seem from the Shulchan Aruch there that we may tell him that we will call him "wicked" for defying the Talmud, but nothing serious like beatings or being put in Nidui.

The Ramo there states that since we have two opinions one permitting and one forbidden serious coercion, we do not make serious coercion such as a beating, even when the Talmud demands a GET. We fear that  to coerce the GET in a serious manner, even when the Talmud demands a GET may produce an invalid GET.

What then can be done? The Ramo says that we can coerce the husband by decreeing on everyone in his community not to have dealings with him until he divorces his wife. That is, "not to do the husband a favor, not to do business with him, or to circumcize his sons or bury them, until he gives a divorce GET." The Vilna Gaon adds a condition mentioned in some sources for this law, that this public coercion is only permitted if the husband can escape his locality and live elsewhere without people treating him this way. Thus, the Ramo mentions only that we coerce in a passive not direct manner. We don't talk to him; we don't do business with him. But we don't do anything positive to pressure him. Furthermore, the Vilna Gaon adds that the pressure can only be made in a locality where the husband can flee and live elsewhere without the pressure. And the Shach in Gevuras Anoshim agrees.

It would seem according to this that it is forbidden to do what ORA does for many reasons. One, the Ramo only permits passive coercion, not active humiliations. Two, the Vilna Gaon maintains a text of this law taught by Rabbeinu Tam that permits such public coercion only when the husband can escape the coercion by going to a different town. ORA pursues the husband to the next town as well, so its coercion is forbidden.

A third reason ORA is wrong is that very senior authorities disagree with the Ramo and forbid forcing a GET based upon public passive cordination. One is the Shach, a mighty authority who in general overrides the Ramo. He writes in Gevuras Anoshim two things about this passive coercion. One, as the Vilna Gaon says, that it is only permitted when the husband can go to another place and be safe from the coercion. And two, the Shach says that there are those who feel that today the pain and pressure from the public refusing to deal with the husband is considered not a minor coercion but a major coercion. He therefore concludes that it is better not to do passive coercion. It would seem that the Chazon Ish in the Laws of Gittin agrees with the Shach see 108:12 that we should not do passive coercion because today it is considered a serious coercion more than in the time of Rabbeinu Tam. If so, that it is better not to do passive coercion even for somebody commanded by the Talmud to divorce, surely what ORA does to coerce with public and active humiliations is forbidden and produces an invalid GET. If the woman remarries with a GET from ORA her new children are possible mamzerim.

 Passive coercion is only mentioned in the Laws of Gittin where the Torah demands a GET and the husband refuses. In such a case a passive coercion is permitted by  Ramo. But in EH laws of Kesubose 77 paragraph 2 and 3 we deal with a husband who has no obligation to divorce his wife. And the fact that his wife demands a GET does not permit people to coerce him.The Laws of Gittin are about people who must divorce their wives. And the laws of Kesubose are about keeping a marriage going. In the Laws of Kesubose the Ramo does not permit any kind of coercion, not even passive coercion. It would seem from the language of the Shulchan Aruch and the major poskim on the Shulchan Aruch EH 77 par 2 and 3 that there is no obligation at all upon the husband to give a GET when his wife demands one. And that is the opinion of Posek HaDor Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l. The authoriities quote a Rashbo in teshuva VII:414 that in an ordinary demand of divorce because "my husband is repulsive to me" "if the husband wants to divorce, he can divorce. If he does not want to divorce, he doesn't divorce." It would seem there is no obligation to divorce and surely not coercion of any kind is permitted. Rabbeinu Tam mentioned in Shita Kesubose says that we do not even tell the husband it would be nice or a mitsvah to give a GET. The Chazon Ish Gittin 99 says that if a Beth Din tells a husband he is obligated to give a GET and this was wrong, the GET is invalid from the Torah.

The vast majority of divorces today deal with a woman's refusal to be with her husband, something that is not recognized by the rabbis as an excuse to coerce a GET. The Ramo is talking about a husband who cannot be a man or other problems that the Talmud clearly states must give a GET. But the Talmud does not say we should hit the husband, so we don't do serious coercions, only, according to Ramo, passive coercion. And the Gro and Shach,  major latter authorities both say that only if the husband can flee from his town and find peace is it permitted to coerce  him passively. Thus, ORA would be forbidden even according to Ramo. And as we mentioned, the Shach and Ramo maintain that today we don't do even passive coercion when the husband can flee, because it is considered today a major coercion.

Rabbi Heinemann Backs ORA and Mamzerim

In our recent posts about Philadelphia and the efforts to help a married woman remarry without a GET, we attacked those responsible for this, even though they were prominent Torah personalities. Unfortunately, the Torah world does not know the laws of Gittin. But they do know that the Torah requires a woman to have a GET whenever she is fed up with the marriage. And when I ask people what their sources for this is, as I have sources in Shulchan Aruch and poskim who say just the opposite, I never get a proper answer.

Here is a letter from Rabbi Moshe Heinemann of Baltimore, posted on the ORA website, that gives his full support to ORA and its coercion of Gittin. I believe that this is forbidden. And I believe that this produces mamzerim. 

Here is Rabbi Heinemann's letter, posted for a long time I believe on the ORA website, calling for everyone to support ORA.

I am strongly opposed to this letter for several reasons. One, ORA itself is controlled by Rabbi Herschel Schachter, whose published audio tapes show that he believes in killing a husband who refuses to give his wife a GET. This is the same person who once told somebody that if the Prime Minister of Israel had a program of such and such that he should be killed. He had to flee Israel after saying that, but that is who you are dealing with. How can a serious Talmid Chochom give his name to an organization controlled by such a person? And does Rabbi Heinemann agree that husbands should be coerced to the point of beatings and even death? Of course not, I hope. But even if Rabbi Heinemenndid not know about these hideous opinions of Rabbi Schachter, giving your name full blast to people who may have different ideas than you do is not the way of wisdom. Rabbi Heinemenn should have checked out the ORA organization and its rabbinical leader more carefully.

Let us leave ORA for a moment, and deal directly with the idea supported by Rabbi Heinemenn, that what ORA does, to humiliate husbands and break their spirit until they give a GET, is  a great mitsvah and deserves everyone's support. This is completely wrong. Every GET coerced by ORA is invalid and any Rov involved with such a GET has lost Chezkas Beis Din, as Posek HaDor Rav Elyashev zt"L told me, and as has beeen recently paskened by living Gedolim Reb Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Shmuel HaLevi  Wosner and other gedolim of Israel. Again, gedolei hador of the past and present generations have said that any Beth Din that coerces Gittin in defiance of the Shulchan Aruch (the way the Gedolim read the open words of the Shulchan Aruch without twisting things) is an invalid Beth Din. Any woman who got a  GET from them must get another GET as we do not recognize the first GET from a Beth Din that has no Chezkas Beth Din, because it does what Rabbi Heinemann believes in, coercing the husband to give a GET.   

Now let us supply the sources in the Shulchan Aruch. See Even Hoezer 77 paragraphs 2 and 3, and the Shulchan Aruch, the Ramo, the Beis Shmuel, the Chelkas Mechokake and the Gro. All forbid coecing a GET or pressuring a husband to give one based upon the demand of the wife to be freed of her husband because she cannot tolerate being with him. If Beth Din without the wife's complaints recognizes that the husband is not fit to be a husband, that could lead to coercion. But the majority of cases today of divorce is not because the husband is unable to have children, etc., but because the wife wants out of the marriage. Her complaint that "my husband is disgusting to me" cannot allow Beth Din to coerce a GET or pressure the husband to divorce.

The Gro there EH 77 #5 says clearly that none of the present authorities permit coercion of the GET because of the wife's desire to be free of him. Posek HaDor Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l said that there is not even a mitsvah for the husband to give a GET, but as the Rashbo says in his teshuva VII:414 "If the husband wants to divorce he divorces. If he does not want to divorce, he does not divorce." This statement is accepted by major poskim and is quoted in the Shulchan Aruch EH 77 paragraph 2 and 3.

 The idea espoused by ORA and it seems Rabbi Heinemann that any wife can break the marriage and have the husband forced to give a GET is therefore completely wrong. It is important to maintain a list of all women divorced by ORA because their children may be mamzerim, which is the opinion of the Gedolim in Israel today.

Questions about Remarrying Without a GET in Philly

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

We posted a previous attack on those in Philadelphia who want a married woman to remarry without a GET. It seems that certain nameless rabbis permit this, although at least those “rabbis” are smart enough not to let anybody know who they are. Let us look at the Shulchan Aruch and the idea of letting a woman remarry without a GET. The only reason somebody could permit a woman to remarry without a GET and her husband lives is because there was a condition attached to the marriage and it was violated. So, let us look at this and see how it applies to those who simply rubber stamp a “not-married” sign on any woman who wants it.

See gemora Yevomose 94b that one may make a condition about getting married and if the condition is violated the marriage is negated. But this applies only to Erusin, or Kiddushin, the stage of marriage when people agree to be husband and wife but they did not have Chupah and may not be together. The second phase of marriage, when the couple are together and certainly when they have relations, are different. When the couple comes together in marital embrace, generally, violating conditions don’t negate  the marriage. Why not? Once a man and woman have relations it is not customary to continue with the conditions that may make the marriage negated. Because if the marriage is negated the husband and wife are living with zenuse which is a disgrace. Therefore, in general, one may make a condition in stage one of marriage. Kiddushin, when the two are not together. For instance, they can say that the marriage will only be valid if the wife is without a serious physical blemish. And if she has such a blemish, the marriage never took place. But once they are together, the general attitude is to refuse living with zenuse, and therefore the conditions are cancelled and the marriage remains.

Tosfoses there D”H but nisuin says that a condition may apply even after the couple is together, but this is rare because of two reasons: One, if the marriage is cancelled after the couple has been together it would retroactively have been a relationship of zenuse, so it is disgrace for a Jewish man and woman to be together without marriage which is zenuse.

Another reason that people refuse to cancel a marriage after they have relations is that the pleasure of being together in intimacy cancels their interest in negating the marriage. These two factors usually operate to cancel any conditions when the couple has relations. And yet, if the couple made a condition and they made it clear that being together will not cancel the condition but it will cancel the marriage if violated, then we could discuss about the fate of the marriage. But the lady in Philly never made any conditions to negate the marriage if such and such happened. Therefore, she has no grounds for negating the marriage. And furthermore, even if she did make a condition before having intimacy and afterwards, and really wants to break the marriage, she is obviously in violation of the standards of most Jews, and is thus a lowly woman.

Only a clearly stated condition made before the stage of marital intimacy can cancel a marriage. And once the condition is violated, the wife must leave the house immediately as she lives without kiddushin in sin. Did any of this happen to the lady from Philadelphia?

The Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 38:35 says that “one who makes kiddushin, the beginning phase of marriage, with a condition, and then has relations, and at the time of the relations was silent and did not promote the condition, the marriage is not cancelled even if the condition was violated.”

See the lengthy study of the Beis Shmuel in EH 38:59. There are discussions and opinions about when a marriage can be negated, when it is not negated but the woman needs a GET to remarry, when the condition creates a doubt and when it is negated, etc. Thus, anyone who seeks to remarry without a GET has an obstacle course to run, and afterwards, no normal person would want to marry her. First of all, the Philly lady taught by Shalom Kaminetsky to rely on a condition to cancel the marriage shows that bias zenuse is something she accepts, and is a lower person in violation of the proper standards Jews traditionally accept. Second of all, she never made a condition that anyone knows about, and nobody knows who permitted her to remarry. What normal Jew who believes in the Torah would marry such a person? And this woman comes from fine stock, as her father was a close friend of the Philly Yeshiva. Is this what he is seeing from his place in Gan Eden, that his daughter refuses my offer to make a GET with her husband, and instead, she makes a circus that would shame almost any Jew?

For shame on her. For shame on Shalom Kaminetsky for helping her remarry and produce mamzerim. And shame on Shmuel Kaminetsky for knowing what is happening and he does not stop it. And obviously, people suspect that the son would surely not do anything without his father’s permission. If so, he has a lot to answer for.

Again, I have spoken with the husband and he wants a GET. But he wants to settle certain things such as custody for his daughter. And yet, Shalom Kaminetsky is helping this lady completely married to remarry without a GET. This can only lead to mamzeruth, something that I intend to strongly publicize. Again, if this woman remarries without a GET, I will strongly publicize the fact that the children are probably mamzerim. And I will let the husband know exactly what I plan to do. I will make him famous, along with the wicked ones who encourage a woman without a father to destroy her life and that of her children.

This woman has no father and is like a yesoma who needs rabbis who will help her, and I am here to get her a completely kosher and normal GET after certain minor things are settled. Why does she insist on following Shalom Kaminetsky along a path that can dissuade any normal Torah Jew from wanting to marry her? This is a major mystery.

I don’t understand the whole story. The husband Aharon Friedman delivered the child he brought back from Washington in 2012 to his mother-in-law’s house, and was pounced on by a group of goons and beaten, but he escaped. Two years later, the FBI arrested a group of Orthodox goons. And a month after the FBI arrested the group of Orthodox goons, Aharon’s wife announced that she does not need a GET, and is free to remarry. A friend of mine was solicited by Shalom Kaminetsky to marry her, even without a GET, which Shalom declared was not necessary.

Why did the wife decide she doesn’t need a GET only after the goons were arrested? And why is Shalom Kaminetsky doing something, to help a married woman remarry without a GET, something that every child knows is wrong, when doing this will invite me and others like me to publicize that he is a creator of mamzerim? And does Shalom not realize that many people, such as me, suspect his father of being involved in all of this? Does he not care about the honor of his father?

I think I have made my point. If they don’t stop now, I won’t stop either. I have the backing of gedolei Yisroel who want me to pour on the heat. It won’t go away. I say to you Shalom, stop now. Call me and let’s settle this with a nice peaceful GET and restore quiet to Philadelphia. I have better things to do than to sit and write articles about mamzer producers. But if they are here, I am also here. And I am in the process of talking to more and more major authorities, who are shocked at this story and want me to fight as I am fighting. And who is the rabbi who told you, Shalom, to marry a married woman to somebody else without a GET? I want him on my list, right up front. And of course, you will supply that rabbi’s sources to disagree with the gemora and the Shulchan Aruch and the accepted policy of Beth Dins never to permit a married woman to remarry without a GET. This is pure rishuse. But there must be a reason for doing this pure rishuse, when it is not necessary in order to get a GET. Surely there is another reason why this woman is claiming that she does not need a GET, and there is surely another reason why Shalom Kaminetsky  publicizes this.

 This is such an interesting case. Rachmono litslon. I feel sorry for the poor woman who is being advised to destroy her life. But I also feel sorry for Shalom Kaminetsky, because what he is doing is obviously related to hidden things I did not mention. But maybe the hidden  things are worse than anything I can write. Who knows?

Making Mamzerim in Philadelphia

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn/Monsey, NY 10952/845-578-1917

I strongly protest the incredible and unheard of sin committed by Shalom Kaminetsky of Philadelphia, probably with his father’s approval, to help a woman remarry without a GET! For years I have strongly protested the actions of Rabbi Shmuel Kaminetsky who tells people to coerce husbands to force a GET from them, in utter defiance of the Shulchan Aruch and poskim. But now his son probably with his approval has decided to sin even further with helping a married woman to remarry without a GET! Incredibly, we don’t hear a roar of condemnation about this from every mouth. It is quiet. Well, now it is not quiet. I hereby protest the hideous sin of the Kaminetskys: Shmuel’s sin of coercing Gittin and Shalom’s sin of encouraging a woman to marry without a GET. Upon remarriage with a coerced GET or no GET, a woman produces children who may be mamzerim, the ultimate child abuse.

Reb Shmuel Kaminetsky has long called for coercing husbands to give their wives a GET upon the wife’s demand when the marriage is broken. This is in utter defiance of the Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 77 paragraphs 2 and 3. There the Shulchan Aruch, Ramo, Beis Shmuel, Chelkas Mechokake and Gro clearly forbid coercing a GET based upon the wife’s demands that she cannot stand the husband. The Gro there #5 says that nobody disagrees. So how can Shmuel Kaminetsky disagree? And furthermore, when Shmuel Kaminetsky signed letters calling on everyone to torture husbands because the wife was tired of them or whatever, did he talk to the husband and hear his side? See Choshen Mishpot 17:5  And did Shmuel Kaminetsky sign these treifeh letters as a favor to his good friend the father of the woman who wants a GET? Is this not highly questionable, to posken for a friend against her enemy? See Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpot VII:6  that both sides in the Din Torah must be equal in the eyes of the Dayan. So how could S. Kaminetsky pasken against the husband when he is a best friend of the father of the wife?

And Shalom Kaminetsky’s efforts to get this lady married without a GET without mentioning what rabbis permitted it is also unheard of.  I say this: This woman, if she remarries without a GET, will be forbidden to her old husband and her new husband and will be a soteh living in zenuse. Her child will be a mamzer vadai. And if some rabbi does say that a woman can remarry without a GET, the vast majority of rabbis in the world and the greatest ones are completely convinced that the woman without a GET may not remarry.

It is a great mitzvah that everyone call Shalom Kaminetsky and his father and ask them what source they have or what rabbi they have to permit a woman remarrying without a GET. If they remain in their position of being poskim against the Shulchan Aruch we call upon all parents not to send their children to the Philly Yeshiva of the Kaminetskys and not to support the Yeshiva, and to protest to the Kaminetskys that they are making a chilul HaShem and mamzerim.

The idea that one rabbi or two rabbis can permit a woman to remarry for reasons nobody else ever heard of has no place in halacha. See teshuvose Mahari ben Lev IV:19:3 “Even if most rabbis permit dovor shebierva (if a woman is permitted to marry somebody) but some forbid it, we are stringent and forbid the woman to remarry.” And even if we can understand following the majority of poskim who permit her to remarry as we usually follow the majority in pesak, if we have a majority who forbid the woman to remarry and some rabbi or two claim she is permitted, we surely must follow the majority. If so, how can the woman remarry?

The Philadelphia woman is not an Agunah. I speak to the husband regularly and he is happy to settle with a GET but he wants to organize the visitations of the child and perhaps some other things, as in every GET. Shalom Kaminetsky is destroying this woman’s life. He should convince her to contact me and get a GET and settle with the visitations like every divorced woman.  This way she will not be a zona and her children will not be mamzerim. And if she does remarry without a GET, will the Kaminetsky family accept the child in marriage or will they fear to take a mamzer in marriage?

Dovid Eidensohn

The First Two Teachings of the Talmud

What are the first teachings of the Talmud? The Talmud begins with a question: When do we recite the evening Shema prayer? It does not answer the question directly by telling us that we recite the Shema prayer when it becomes night. It answers something else, “When the Cohanim priests enter to eat their Teruma, a sacred food.” So, we still don’t know when to say the night Shema.

The second teaching of the Talmud is that the end time to recite the Shema of night is the first Mishmar or Watch of the night. Whose Watch? This is not answered. One question brings two statements that are meaningless.

When we look deeper into the two answers we detect important teachings about prayer in general and indeed about relating to G-d. And just as these two answers seem to be confusing but actually reveal major concepts of the Torah as we will explain, so when somebody learns any part of the Talmud, he must anticipate deep ideas and find the hidden jewels.

The first teaching that we begin the recitation of the night Shema when the Cohanim enter to eat their Teruma is an interesting law. A Cohan became seriously impure somehow and during the day purified himself in a mikva. He is not yet completely pure and cannot enter the Temple until he offers a sacrifice, but he is pure enough to eat Teruma. Thus, the recitation of the Shema takes place at night but this teaching is taught indirectly. First we must learn that Cohanim eat Teruma before they are completely pure. This tells us that reciting the Shema, accepting the Yoke of heaven, the love of G-d, the great mitsvose of the Torah mentioned specifically in the Shema, do not require a perfect person. Even one who is trying to escape a past of mistakes may say the Shema and turn to HaShem. Shema is a very holy thing and all of us hope to recite it before we die, so our souls enter Paradise with the Shema. But we don’t have to be completely pure to do that. We do what we can, even though further work is necessary the next day. And that qualifies us to say Shema and come to HaShem and declare “And you shall love the L-d your G-d.” Maybe your love of G-d could be improved. But  say Shema as  you are , as you are struggling to find holiness, and that is enough.

The second statement in the Talmud’s beginning is that the final time for reciting the night Shema is at the end of the First Watch. But when is that? The gemora says that this opinion, of Rabbi Eliezar, is talking about the Watch in heaven of the angels. In heaven the angels sing songs of praise to HaShem in assigned times and places. They have Watches. The night is divided into three watches and there are angels for each of them. When the First Watch of night ends, new angels appear, but the time to recite the night Shema has passed according to Rabbi Eliezar.

The idea here is for us to realize that human prayers are closely connected to heaven. The angels pray to HaShem and so do people. This lets us realize how holy prayer is.

Thus, the two lessons in the Talmud are taught in a way to reveal important ideas about the service of HaShem in prayer. First, the holiest prayers don’t require perfect people. And secondly, when we pray, we are praying with the angels, and we are close to the greatest holiness.

Perhaps the greatest problem in life and especially in Torah is to be proud of our relationship with G-d and not depressed by our mistakes. There is so much failure and frustration many people don’t say the Shema and pray with the proper confidence and joy. Here we are encouraged to say Shema and  pray with the angels before the Presence.

Using Good as an Excuse to do Evil

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

A Jew once sinned so terribly that nobody recalled a Jew doing such a thing. A rabbi was asked to explain how this could happen. The rabbi answered, "I don't know why this Jew sinned so terribly. But one thing I tell you. He meant with his evil did to serve HaShem."

All of us have temptations to do evil. Many people will do what they can in business to make a buck, even though it may be improper. But because they realize that what they are doing is wrong, akin to stealing, or actual stealing, they don't lose control completely. They may do some bad things, but there is some kind of control remaining. However, once a person is convinced that the evil deed he is doing or he wants to do is really a good deed, what can hold him back from serving HaShem?

We read this coming week the Torah portion of Mishpotim, meaning "judgment." In this portion laws of stealing and killing are discussed. This is amazing, because the portion before Mishpoatim it Yisro, when the Jews received the Torah from G-d Himself at Sinai and heard the Ten Commandments. Would it not have been more appropriate to follow such an elevated event with something about the highest holiness, such as the building of the Tabernacle, instead of the hideous evil that portion deals with?

But a Jew has a Torah soul, and is not so close to killing and stealing and damaging. But when he is convinced that killing or stealing or damaging is a good deed, and by so doing he serves HaShem, what is to keep him from killing and stealing and damaging?

Someone called me that he had borrowed a large sum of money, and had to repay it. But he had no way to repay it. He became emotional, and began talking about his situation and why the lender should understand. Finally, he got to the point. He won't pay the wealthy man, and the wealthy man won't miss it. But the wealthy man will have the mitsvah of giving him charity. Acording to this, by now paying what he borrowed, the rich man will merit the pleasures of the Future World. Of couse, this was uttered in bitter desperation, but when people are pressured, and they have no recourse, they do the worst things and call it a mitsvah. Thus, the worst evil can sprout from the greatest good.

A woman once came to me with a bitter tale about her husband who wanted a divorce. She wanted him to remain with her. She wanted me to talk to the husband to save the marriage. Now, this is surely a worthwhile and good thing. But this lady was chasing her husband for decades. Her youth had left her and she just kept at it. I told her that if she lets go of her efforts there is a chance she can remarry and find some happiness instead of running around the world asking for people to call her husband. But she was serving HaShem and HaShem surely wants people to stay married. Thus, she gave up her life to serve HaShem.  This woman was once young and lovely. She could have left one marriage and quickly found another one, maybe with better help and preparation to find the right husband. But no, she just kept up serving HaShem, as she saw it.

Not long after this I was by the great Posek Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l and asked him if I was right when I told her to stop chasing her husband and to remarry. He agreed with me. Some times, we serve HaShem and destroy others. And sometimes, we destroy ourselves, HaShem Yerachem.

In one of our discussions, Rav Elyashev zt"l pointed out to me that there are rabbis who want to help women remarry when the husband refuses to give her a GET. These rabbis can help get a GET for the woman in appropriate ways, or they can do something not appropriate. It is not that rabbis want to do evil things. But they want to do a mitsvah and  help a woman to be freed when she demands her freedom. Now, maybe the husband and the children don't want a divorce and a broken family, so why break up the family for the wife? But some people feel that the wife has her rights to break the family and damage the husband and the children. Now, a forced GET is invalid. The woman who gets such an invalid GET remarries and has a child. That child is a mamzer. Making a mamzer is the most hideous sin. But some people do it because they want to do good.

jblogreview.blogspot.com attacks Eidensohn brothers and the "old" Torah

Thejblogreview.blogspot.com mystery person nobody knows who it is, attacks the Eidensohn brothers for their Torah ideas about marriage and divorce.

By Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn/www.torahhalacha.blogspot.com/845-578-1917

The mystery author of the jblogreview.blogspot.com has several posts where he rips into my brother and myself for our Torah ideas about marriage and divorce. I am writing this to present the two sides, the Eidensohn reliance on clear sources in Shulchan Aruch and poskim, and those who feel that the Shulchan Aruch is not compatible with today’s moral standards.

My blogspot has 61 posts, mostly about the divorce and marital issues we discuss here. For a fuller understanding of the Eidensohn position, go to www.torahhalacha.blogspot.com  my blog or go to www.daattorah.blogspot.com my brother’s blog and type in coerced Gittin or anything about these topics.

My comments will be in italics and bold. Parts of the post not necessary for comments are omitted and you can go to the jblog itself to see the entire original.

Monday, December 8, 2014

Daat Torah on the Seminary Scandal

The Daas Torah Blog of Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn allows readers to descend into a bizarre segment of Orthodoxy that few Jews probably realize even exists…My response -  Laws of divorce and marriage and family are “bizarre segments of Orthodox that few Jews probably realize even exists.” I know a lot of Jews who understand the sanctity of marriage and the negative sides of divorce. I also know a lot of Jews who understand that a woman whose husband never did anything terrible to her but she has problems with his personality or some such thing should work on the marriage instead of tearing the family apart. I also know a lot of husbands whose wives destroyed the marriage and almost destroyed the husband, turning children against him, draining him financially, even jailing him.

A large part of Eidensohn's blog is devoted to issues of Agunah. Eidensohn also has a brother - Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn - who also runs a blog almost exclusively devoted to the topic.

Most people understand the agunah issue as follows:

Some husbands unfortunately refuse to give their wives Gittin even when the marriage is clearly over. They use the withholding of a Get either as leverage or simply as revenge against their wives. This kind of behavior is of course outrageous. My comment – I deal with husbands who learn the hard way what happens when people like jblog demonize men in a broken marriage. There are many reasons that are not vicious leverage or revenge that cause a husband not to give his wife a GET in a broken marriage. I deal regularly with such problems and I deal with the husbands and they are so demonized by the secular courts and even the Orthodox world that they can be destroyed. There are even well know ways for a woman to destroy her husband, get the children to hate him, drain him financially, have him put in jail, and have a gag order forcing him never to publicize the hideous terror he endures. And these blogs with their hate for men who don’t fork over the GET when the people like jblog want them to, are responsible for this hate and demonizing of men, many of whom are not monsters but are scared for very good reasons. This is a very important topic and I would like to develop it, but not now as we want to keep things moving quoting the jblog. I have many posts on this topic in my blog www.torahhalacha.blogspot.com .

Not the Eidensohn's and company. They see the Get as something a man sometimes "has" to give and sometimes does not. It all depends on the circumstances. So, if the husband has "done nothing halachically wrong" during the course of the marriage, he may not be obligated to give a Get. The Beis Din needs to make this determination based on the evidence presented to them. Furthermore, if the man is not "obligated" to give the Get than you cannot force him - even if the marriage is clearly over. Based on this understanding, the Eidensohn's and company often take issue Batei Din that try force husbands to give Gittin. In their view, the forced Get in this case would be invalid in any case, and would just produce more halachic problems. My comment This is another topic that could use corrections. But let’s continue and not quibble about the jblog  misunderstanding of GET law. I have many posts in my blog www.torahhalacha.blogspot.com about coercing a husband and GET law and my brother does also on his blog www.daattorah.blogspot.com .

For the above reasons, the Eidensohn brothers often believe that it is wrong for a woman to take action to try to get herself a Get. My comment    Yes, I believe that some women are rushing out of a marriage, especially if there are children. Hate organizations like ORA gather people into the street where the husband and his family are humiliated and eventually broken until the husband gave a GET. ALL OF THE FORCED GITTIN GIVEN BY ORA ARE INVALID AND CHILDREN BORN FROM IT ARE MAY BE MAMZERIM. THE WOMAN IS FORBIDDEN TO BE WITH HER NEW HUSBAND AND OLD HUSBAND IF SHE REMARRIES WITH SUCH AN INVALID GET. Hate blogs such as jblog simply feed the fire to produce more invalid Gittin.

Children of divorce suffer terribly, but ORA is concerned about the mother. ORA is led by someone who has publicly called for the murder of husbands who does not give a GET on demand when the marriage is broken.

 And, they certainly oppose using the secular courts under any circumstances. My comment – This is wrong. This jblog reviewer is ignorant of things that he talks about. A Beth Din can give permission to go to court when it is warranted.

…And, what if the women tries to bring her husband to Beis Din? Well, he doesn't have to show up. My comment – This is a lie from an ignorant person who owns a blog.

He can say he does not like her Beis Din and he wants to go to his own Beis Din. My comment – Another lie based upon ignorance. In such a case each side selects a judge and the two judges select a third judge.

There is little doubt in my mind that deep in the recesses of this Daat Torah community lies some very misogynistic ideas. I believe that at their core they believe that women are less than men and that women should be subservient to men ... I think that this bias against women fuels them to search for halachic literature that supports them. And, make no mistake - it is not hard to find such halachic literature, especially considering that much of halacha was written hundreds of years ago when this view of women was prevalent. In fact, much of the "support" that they find is really just a reflection of the mores of the time, and not actually "halachic" strictly speaking. My comment – You believe that people who believe strongly in children and marriage and oppose divorce unless it is really necessary are old fashioned and have an old fashioned Shulchan Aruch based upon an old fashioned Torah. And when you have to deal with all of the children broken by divorce, and with the children from forced Gittin who come to marry into the Haredi world and are told that they are mamzerim, what will you write on your blog?

The Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 154 at the end of Seder HaGet writes, “A person must take great care not to be involved with making Gittin unless he is an expert in the laws of Gittin. Because there are many important details. And it is very easy to stumble in them. And this leads to mamzeruth.” And yet, we see people ripping into my opinions on coerced Gittin, with no sources of their own, simply because they disagree with what I say and what I prove is the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch EH 77 paragraphs 2,3: Reb Yosef Karo, the Ramo, the Vilna Gaon, the Beis Shmuel, the Chelkas Mechokake, etc. And I respond, “If the Vilna Gaon #5 says clearly that it is forbidden to coerce a GET, and nobody disagrees with this, why are you disagreeing?” I have asked many people that question and never got an answer.

The Vilna Gaon on that statement of the Shulchan Aruch that only qualified people should deal with Gittin brings a source as Kiddushin 13a. It says there that those who make Gittin without knowing the laws properly are worse than the generation of the Flood, and greater punishments comes into the world than what happened in the time of Noach.

I made a Beth Din for Gittin under HaGaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt”l and I asked for permission to use his name for it, which is an incredible chutzpah, but he gave it immediately. We dealt with Russian Jews who at that time had no rabbis who could give Gittin. The Rov at that time was fighting the New York State GET law, and I spoke with him at length about coerced Gittin. He told me that any Beth Din that makes Gittin with coercions not accepted in the Shulchan Aruch loses its right to give Gittin. Women divorced in that Beth Din must get another GET. If they did not, and remarried with the GET from the non-Shulchan Aruch Beth Din, her GET is not accepted, which could make great problems for her children from the second marriage and for her. It is possible that her children will be considered mamzerim and that she would be forbidden to be with either or first or second husband. When that happens, chas vishalom, and it is happening right now, with many women, and children are being born from these questionable Gittin, what will klal Yisroel do? What can we do? We will split. Those who don’t believe in the Shulchan Aruch will marry the mamzerim, and the rest of us won’t. This is the ultimate child molestation. And the people who are responsible for it will answer to a Higher Source. Recently, a Sefer Mishpitei Yisroel about the laws of Gittin and those who transgress it has come out. Gedolei HaDor Reb Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner and others have said what Reb Elyashev zt”l told me, that any woman who received a GET in a Beth Din that coerces husbands in violation of the Shulchan Aruch, that the GET is invalid and she must have another GET. Now, what do the bloggers who are attacking me going to do when the mamzerim come to the Yeshiva and then want to marry?  Will they publish in a blog that they are sorry?

Ignorant Rabbis Talk about Gittin

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn/dddeid@verizon.net/845-578-1917

The following article appeared on my brother’s blog daattorah.blogspot.com.. I have printed here almost the entire article, underlined certain of its words, and put here and there my bold comments in brackets []. My blog www.torahhalacha.blogspot.com contains 61 posts about topics of marriage and divorce and shows how widespread is ignorance about laws of Gittin.

Times of Israel    by Rabbi Levi Brackman

In my fourteen years of practicing as a rabbi I have been asked numerous times to offer counsel and support to couples in failing marriages. Despite the fact that it takes two to tango, often the breakdown of a marriage is more the fault of one party than the other. Yet, no matter how the marriage ends and who is at fault, if the husband does not actively agree to give a Gett (Jewish religious divorce) immediately after the wife requests it he is always in the wrong no matter what.     [ I disagree. Let us assume that a husband has ten children who will be destroyed by a divorce, and let us say that the divorce is being pushed by the mother of the wife, and the husband refuses it. Is he evil? Again, the idea that a woman  can just get up and destroy the lives of the husband and children because of reasons that may be open to debate, has nothing to do with the Torah. To put it a different way. I have semicha from HaGaon Reb Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt”l to be a Rosh Beth Din in Gittin, and I have a very strong semicha from Reb Moshe Feinstein on my seforim in halacha. And I don’t talk the way this article talks. I don’t get up and pontificate about things that are not supported by the Shulchan Aruch. This entire article has nothing to do with the Shulchan Aruch, and the quotes that it makes have nothing to do with the laws of Gittin as we will explain.]

From a religious perspective, the Torah is very protective about the feelings and dignity of women — even more so than that of men. The Talmud warns men to never hurt their spouses feelings and or cause them to weep. It cautions men to be exceedingly careful about their spouses dignity and honor (Baba Metzia, 59a) and to respect and honor them more than they honor themselves (Yevamot, 62b, Maimonides, Ishut, 15:19). These guidelines are based on Biblical sources and have been codified into Jewish law. Furthermore the Talmud tells us that in matters of worldly and household affairs the women’s opinion takes precedence to that of the man’s (Baba Metzia, ibid). [These quotes are about married women and have nothing to do with women who leave the house taking the children.]

Clearly a man who refuses his wife’s request to give a religious bill of divorce for any period of time after it is made clear that from her perspective the marriage is over, is contravening these extremely serious sections of Jewish law in the most grievous manner possible. But refusing to give a Gett is also the mark of a man who lacks basic human empathy and common decency.[...] [Pure baloney. Why does the author of this article not quote the exact place in Shulchan Aruch that talks about a woman who wants out of a marriage? The answer is that he probably doesn’t know where it is, and secondly, if he does know, he also knows that it says just the opposite of what he is saying here. The statement in Shulchan Aruch about a woman who wants out of the marriage is in Even Hoezer 77 paragraphs 2 and 3. There, all of the commentators go along with the words of the Rashbo in a teshuva VII:414 that a wife who wants a divorce “if the husband wants he gives a divorce, and if he does not want he does not give a divorce” meaning, as Rav Elyashev explains, there is no obligation upon a man to give his wife a GET when the wife leaves the marriage. The Gro there #5 says that nobody disagrees.]

Some men hide behind Jewish law as a reason not to give a Gett. They argue that all aspects of the divorce needs to be settled before they are Halachicly (according to Jewish law) allowed to give the Gett. [I believe this is the pesak of HaGaon Reb moshe Feinstein zt”l that everything must be straightened out before the GET. Especially today, when after the GET the wife can go to secular court and get a gag order to destroy the husband, it certainly makes sense to delay the GET until everything is worked out exactly.]

They then proceed to make any settlement as difficult as possible, allowing them to continue their abusive and controlling behavior. Tragically there are some Jewish courts that allow men to behave this way. Happily, however, most of the larger reputable Jewish courts will not allow narcissistic men to use religion as a tool to further abuse and blackmail their wives. The most obnoxious Gett refusers, however, seem to avoid reputable Jewish courts. As pernicious, are men who tell their wife, who is desperate for a divorce, that they “want to work on their marriage” and therefore won’t give a Gett. Again this ploy won’t work at most reputable Jewish courts.

In the final analysis, the refusal to give a Gett by a husband, for any reason, will cause pain to his wife and therefore is not only contrary to the spirit of Judaism it contravenes the letter of the law as well. [What letter of what law?]

[We see here just one of many examples of people who never learned the laws of Gittin, who don’t  have any great authority to quote, but who invent and distort to prove their invalid points. And from these “rabbis” many women will have broken families, invalid divorces, and now, a new thing, women told by “rabbis” to leave their husbands with no GET! And it just gets worse and worse.]

Marry or Not Marry?

Marry? Yes or No or Maybe

Should one marry or not? Let us look at this from a Torah perspective. First, should a person remain unmarried? The Shulchan Aruch answers that question in the beginning of Even Hoezer. A man surely is a sinner for not marrying. And a woman, also, should marry. The reason for this is one to fulfill the mitzvah of having children, which is a mitzvah even if one already has a son and a daughter, because each additional child is an additional mitzvah.

Also, a single is suspected of sin. One is not supposed to be suspected of being a sinner. Therefore, one should marry  to fulfill the mitzvah of having children and to save from himself or herself suspicion that they are following the yester hora in their singledom.

The great Reb Chaim Felagi in Chaim Vishalom taught that in a broken marriage husband and wife are a menace to society. Anyone in a non-functioning marriage is a constant threat that he may fulfill his biological drives in the wrong way. There is suspicion of that, and there is the actual threat of that. Therefore, not only should one marry, but if the marriage breaks down the husband and wife are potential dangers to the community.

There is also a thought of the Tsemach Tsedek of Lubavitch that a woman who is trapped in a bad marriage may simply leave Judaism, and maybe take her children with her. Thus, a bad or broken marriage is itself a mighty problem. And one who is not married is also such a problem.  And today with so many broken marriages, things just get worse and worse. HaShem Yerachem.

Coercing a GET is also a problem. So, there are many problems.

There are those who marry and do their best. And some marry and do better. They attach themselves to people who can help them maintain a good marriage.  People need constant help and encouragement to maintain a good marriage. Those who know this and act upon it have a much better change of sustaining a good marriage. And those who go their own way, without proper guidance, take a great chance.

Shlomo taught in Mishlei 20:24 “From HaShem are the steps of a man. And a man, what will he understand about his road?” We are born onto paths where we go. But do we understand what we are to do and where we are to go? Our hope is that HaShem will guide us and help us. Without that, what hope is there? Praying to HaShem and asking advice from our elders give us the wisdom to succeed.

The Wife Leaves the House with the Children: Is this Stealing from the Husband and Children?

Does a wife have the right to leave the marital house?
Does she have the right to take the children with her?
Does the husband have no rights to his children?
Does the husband have no rights to the wife?

Rashi Bamidbar 12:5 "When one sins against her husband by living with a strange man, she sins against her husband and against HaShem." The holiness of marriage means that a woman must respect her husband and she must respect HaShem who is also involved in the marriage.
If so, may a woman just walk out of the marriage?

The Maharshal, the greatest of the acharonim, teaches in teshuva 41, that a woman who complains about her husband that she cannot tolerate living with him, that we do not force the husband to divorce her, but we do not force her to stay with him. Even if she cannot prove her complaints against him, she may leave and stay with her father. All money spent by the husband on his wife must be returned, if she leaves him.

The Maharshal does not discuss what happens with the children. May the wife take them? It  would seem that any money the husband gave his wife as a gift must be returned to him if she left him. Why should the children be any different? It would seem that the husband has a right to demand that his children stay with him.

Furthermore, if we have a situation where a wife leaves a husband, does the husband not have a right to be heard, that perhaps the marriage could be saved with some marriage counseling? I have heard from leading marriage counselors that even very difficult marriages can be saved, sometimes with much effort, but they can be saved. If so, a husband has a right to be heard, that maybe things could be changed and improved and the wife should stay.

A child has a right and a great need for two parents. If a parent takes a child away from a parent, that child suffers. The Beth Din says the gemora, is the "parent of orphans." That is, young children are the province of Beth Din who must protect them. Surely when the wife runs away with the children, Beth Din must return them to their father.

See Even Hoezer 77 when a woman claims she cannot stay with the husband. There are various situations and various opinions but surely there are times when she leaves with no Kesubosa and if so how can she claim the children that surely have a father?

All of the above applies to women leaving the house with the children. If the husband leaves sthe house with the children, he violates the rights of his wife and the mothet of the children.

All of the above assumes that the wife or husband leave the house and take children along with them. But if the parent that takes the children inculcates in them dislike for the other parent, this is surely a very serious situation. A child has the right to love his parents, both of them. A parent who teaches a child to hate another parent violates the rights of that parent and the rights of the child.

How sad that today we have such problems. And how sad that some of these problems are encouraged by some parents and somse friends and some idealists.

A prominent therapist once told me that there are children who grow up without understanding what it means to be married properly. And today, he said,  this is often because the children grew up in a house where their  parents did not know how to behave in a marriage. And what about the third generations? When does it end? And does it end?

These are family problems predicted in the Mishneh end of Sota. And it concludes, "And there is nobody to help us except our Father in Heaven." Reb Elchonon explained, "Even in such terrible times, if we apply ourselves, HaShem can help  us. We must never despair."

Wealth 4 - Wealth of Knowing This Physical World

Wealth 4 Knowing the Physical World

The Four Wealths are Torah, Money, Social Skills and Knowing the Physical World. Why is Knowing the Physical World an important Wealth?

The Chofetz Chaim’s major disciple, Reb Elchonon Wasserman, began his daily learning in Telzeh Yeshiva by spreading out a Russian newspaper and reading it. The Mashgiach was horrified but the Rosh Yeshiva permitted it. Reb Elchonon maintained that HaShem speaks to the Jewish people through the newspapers. The success of evil is because of Jewish sin. Therefore, when we know what evil there is in the world, HaShem is speaking to us. He tells us the forces of evil arranged against Jews and he indicates to the Jews what sins they did to deserve this.

Of course, not everyone could be like Reb Elchonon, and it was indeed rare for anyone to begin his learning in Yeshiva with a Russian newspaper! A prominent Dayan told me that his father imitated Reb Elchonon in Reb Elchonon’s Yeshiva. I told him I don’t know if today such a thing would be tolerated.

When some students wanted to study German, Reb Elchonon joined their group. But he let everyone know what he was doing, and this was not what they wanted. Reb Elchonon said that we must learn certain things, but we must be open about it, not keep it secret. There were those who felt obligated to read certain things and I strongly doubt that they wanted to advertise it. But Reb Elchonon felt it important to do certain things even things that nobody else did. But he didn’t want it to be a hidden venture. He let people know what he was doing.

The gemora says that Greater is he who works with the toil of his hands than the G-d fearing. Why is this? Isn’t one who fears HaShem greater than one who works with the toil of his hands? But we see from this that one who toils with his hands to earn a living, and participates with the world at its base level, has achieved a spiritual level. Working with one’s hands and working with the physical world is part of HaShem’s plan for Creation. The Creation was made for people to grow crops, raise cattle and sheep, make wine and oil, etc. All of these things connect the Created person to the Creator.

A person who understands basics in carpentry, electrical work, etc., can more readily participate in the world, the Creation and unite with the Creator.

Wealth 4 - Wealth of Knowing This Physical World

The gemora in Berochose discusses how much somebody must work and how much somebody should learn Torah.  There is a discussion between Rabbi Shimon bar Yochoi and Rabbi Yishmael. It seems that the ruling in the gemora is that people should work. But how much to work and how much to learn is a separate topic.  We turn in our next post to that question. How much do we learn and how much to we earn?

4Winds of Wealth for Happiness Post 4- - Wealth 3 - Social Skills

4Winds of Wealth for Happiness – Wealth 3 – Social Skills

The Four Wealths are Wealth in Torah, Wealth in Money, Wealth in Social Skills and Wealth in Understanding the Physical World.

We are now up to Wealth 3 of the 4 Wealths – Social Skills. Social Skills includes family, skills in marriage and raising children. Social Skills includes Derech Erets, the Way of the World, in dealing with others, Jews and non-Jews. Dealing with Human Beings who are in the Image of HaShem is a sacred skill. One who makes a good impression on others makes a Kiddshin HaShem; and one who makes a bad impression on others makes a Chilul HaShem.

Thus, this third wealth, as it creates with proper skill Kiddush HaShem, elevates a person to the highest pinnacle of kedusho, sanctifying the Holy Name. And lack of such skill creates the great sin of Chilul HaShem.

Recently, I told a prominent therapist of my concern that many people today don’t know how to behave in marriage. He responded, “Their parents don’t know how to behave in marriage,” he said, “so how are they supposed to know how to behave in marriage?”

I once spoke to a prominent Rov who told me, “You are from the old generation and I don’t know if you can understand the present one.” This is taught in the famous Mishneh in Sota about the End of Days when family itself will disintegrate and respect will disappear for elders.

Before the Great Light of Moshiach will come the Great Darkness of Evil. And the Great Darkness of Evil will produce a generation or so where respect for elders disappears. Therefore, today it is very hard to achieve a wealth of social skills because of this.

Is there hope? Reb Elchonon Wasserman zt”l taught that the Mishneh there tells us, “And we have nobody to rely on except our Father in Heaven.” Reb Elchonon says that people mistakenly interpret this to mean that only HaShem can solve the great problems of the End of Days and we are helpless. But this is a mistake. We must not forget that HaShem will help anyone, anytime, who wants to serve HaShem. Even in the greatest darkness, one who strives for holiness and Derech Erets can achieve it.

The Ponovitecher Rov was a Rov at a time when keeping the Torah was not fashionable. He asked the Chofetz Chaim what to do. The Chofetz Chaim answered that when there is a Civil War we have to choose the strongest side, that side that will win. The Ponovitcher Rov asked, “Does that mean that I must accept the dictates of the wicked?” The Chofetz Chaim answered, “HaShem is the strongest.”

Today it is very hard to maintain a marriage, raise children, even to get along with people. But if we apply ourselves and trust in HaShem, He can help us and bring us the Third Wealth, the wealth of marriage, family, and various social skills including Derech Erets that precedes the Torah.

Decide! Divorce or Not

Decide! Divorce or Not

People marry, have children, often many children, but the marriage isn’t working well. Should the couple divorce? What should be the factors in this matter?

We mentioned in our previous post that divorcing when there are children is very questionable. In fact, the gemora clearly forbids it in two places. And yet, every day another family with a large amount of children divorces. Perhaps this is wrong. But how can people live together and fight constantly?

The Chofetz Chaim once advised a couple to divorce. Somebody asked him how a tsadik can say such a thing. The Chofetz Chaim replied, “According to you, that you must always make Shalom Bayis, why did the Torah permit making a GET?”

A key element in this issue is the First Team of those who can make Shalom Bayis. There are, in very community, those people who are more capable than others in making Shalom among quarrelling couples. When these worthies have tried their best and nothing changes, perhaps it is time to look for other solutions to the crisis. On the other hand, what is so terrible if you fail once and try again?

They key in all of this is to reach  the husband and wife and create hope that maybe a divorce is not the only way. Maybe after years of suffering people will grow up and behave. Maybe. It is possible.

A major therapist told me that some people have bad traits that require dedicated work with a top therapist for years to cure. But the same therapist told me that he has worked for decades with the hardest cases and can achieve results. Of course, it depends how dedicated the people are because working on yourself is not an easy task.

Here is my plan. A and B have split. There are a lot of children. On the one hand, the children really need two parents in the house. On the other hand... There are two ways to approach things. One is negative and one is positive. Let us eschew the negative now because when I discuss it it makes me feel negative! So let's try positive!

It means like this. A and B are at loggerheads. How deep the pain is I can't imagine, and I go past it. What else can I do? Let's talk about positive things. The husband and wife have split, there are certain issues that will provoke bitter fights, and there are other things that won't produce bitter fights. Now, here is my plan.

Today is the end of Chanukah. Let us go to our couple and say as follows. Let's take a Holiday from war. Let's do the miracle of Chanukah. How? Each person will think only positive about the other at least for Chanukah, and at least for the experiment I make.

The couple at this point has not settled anything. Therefore, the wife is bitter and the husband is bitter. No, no, no. It is Chanukah. And if it not Chanukah, we will invent a new Chanukah. Any ridiculous thing is better than broken chldren.

So let us talk to A and B and say, Guess what! Today is Chanukah, the real or invented one. Let's do one thing. Let's make the children happy. What about gifts fo the children? What about a party for the children? Now, don't think this is an easy matter. For all of this you need somebody who is respected by both sides so much that they will put away their weapons at least for a limited period. That is no simple matter. When I get involved I don't take money so people have to respect that. And I am also too old to suffer from the fights so people have to behave. I also believe in miracles. So let us assume that there will be a miracle. The husband will come to the wife and the children with goodies or whatever and for a few seconds everyone can smile.

That is basically step one. But there is another idea. Now that somebody is involved in the whole thing, and that person obviously is enamored of fantasies, why not be truly ambitious? If the major therapists I spoke to assure me that the right person can fix a broken marriage, why are we different? If it takes two years to fix a bad trait, but the person tries hard from the beginning, maybe this makes a difference. When you see somebody trying, somebody who is the father of your children, you have to think twice before your break dishes.

I am seventy two years old and I married off nine children. But I am still running around to people who are experts to get advice how to behave in marriage. And when they tell me something, whether or not it hurts, it helps and I really try to behave. Let's consider that. What hope is there when a person splits in marriage and will sit with children from a broken family for long years. Who will marry these broken children? Maybe, just maybe, it will be possible to plant impossible thoughts.

I once made Shalom Bayis at a GET. The Rov worked for nothing. But isn't that what is it all about?

Jewish Torah people, who spend their whole lives learning Torah and musar, can't we somehow convince them to save their children from a broken family? Maybe I am just too optimistic. But when I come to the other world, that foolishness will protect me.

May You Divorce When You Have Children?

 Let’s Talk about Divorce

So many people get divorces these days. Even those with children battle it out and aim at divorce. But this is surely wrong. First of all, is marriage something that we try on today and discard tomorrow? Kiddushin is a sacred thing. If husband and wife realized the sanctity of marriage and the holiness of the children, would they just divorce with all that implies? The popularity of divorce is proof that the entire Torah world is sick. Even animals love their children. But some parents love their rights, their freedom, etc. But once a person signs on to Kiddushin and has children, how will they answer in the Other World for the pain they cause the children? And who says that the pain of the spouse will not be judged?

The gemora in Eruvin 41b talks about suffering people. One of them is a man who has an “evil wife.” This is defined as one who yells at her husband during the day and when it come time to join him at the meal she turns away and will not sit with him. The gemora Yevomose in 63b says that “an evil woman, it is a mitzvah to divorce her.” On the other hand, maybe she has children, or she has a large kesubo. We see from that that if one has children, divorce, even for an evil woman, is not available.

I once was in a Beth Din during  a GET, and saw that the wife was crying bitterly. It seems that two Israelis married and had a wonderful marriage. But the husband became religious and Haredi, a real Yeshiva bochur. The wife tried very hard to be religious, but she could not be religious. So there was a divorce, and the mother took the child.

Not long after this, I went to Posek HaDor Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt”l and told him about this. I asked what right the father had to destroy his child by giving her to a non-religious woman. He agreed. He said, “If she will keep taharas hamishpocho, he should not divorce her.” Imagine, a person is learning in a Yeshiva, in a Kollel, and his wife doesn’t keep Shabbos. He has more children and this non-religious lady raises them. Fine. But not divorce. And today, children are tossed out to twist in the wind for all kinds of reasons.

When you have a child you are stuck. It is that simple. And guess what? When you marry, you are also “stuck.” Unless you don’t accept the obligations if marriage, which is not a Torah attitude.

There is a lengthy gemora about this, regarding the great prophet Hoshea. See Pesachim 87A that Hoshea was the greatest prophet of his time, greater than Yeshayeh, Omus and Michah. HaShem told Hoshea, "Your children have sinned," and Hoshea could have replied, "Are they my children and not Your children?" Not only did he not do this, but he told HaShem, "Change them for a different nation." HaShem was not satisfied with this and decided to teach the prophet a lesson. 

He told Hoshea to marry a noted prostitute. Hoshea did this (it is not clear if it actually happened or was just a dream) and had children from her. Then HaShem told Hoshea that his level of prophecy now required him to separate from his wife and be holy and together with HaShem with prophecy, as Moshe did. Hoshea was very upset about this. He said how can I leave my children? That was what HaShem wanted him to say. He therefore said to Hoshea, your wife has children but you are not sure if they are even from you. But you refuse to leave her. How can I leave my people?

Hoshea realized his mistake and his sin and began praying for the Jews that HaShem forgive them. This was what HaShem wanted. But we see from the gemora that to leave even a wicked woman is not so simple if children are involved.

And yet, today, there is a flood of people going for divorces and there are terrible fights over custody. Children who go through this suffer. And "Beth Din is the Father of orphants." Meaning, there is a responsibility to care about children whose parents are not taking care of them. Beth Din should protest the incredible divorce rate. But things just get worse.