AUDIO of Tel Conf #17 Is Your Kesubo Kosher?

click below and then click again on new link

Audio of Tel Conf #17 Is Your Kesubo Kosher?

Tel Conf #17 - Your Kesubo - Is it Kosher?

Tel Conf #17 - Your Kesubo – Is it Kosher? Aug 26 Wed 9:30 PM Call 605-562-3130 enter code 411161#Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Your Kesubo – is it kosher? Why not? Probably, some reliable person supervised the Kesubo writing at your wedding. Torah scholars were present.  So, what is the problem? We list below three problems. One is Reb Moshe Feinstein’s ruling that in large cities some kesubose may be invalid. And today most people are probably in such cities, certainly those in New York City. Another problem is that our Kesubose don’t really assure  a woman that she will be paid. And  the Talmud considers this an invalid Kesubo, and the marriage is considered Zenuse. This is even if the Kesubo is a proper legal document but the wife is not sure of that. Surely if there are real problems in making her sure of herself with the Kesubo. The third problem is that the Kesubo is read publicly, and some information in it may be hugely humiliating. Rabbeinu Yona considers such a humiliation to be worse than murder.

 Problem number one is from the Gaon Reb Moshe Feinstein אג"מ א"ה א' קעח' – The main thing in the Kesubo is the names of the husband and wife. But these names are Hebrew names. And there are many people with the same Hebrew names. For instance, how many people are named Reuven ben Yaacov in New York City? How many are named Yoel ben Chaim? If the wife produces the Kesubo and demands money from Yoel ben Chaim, the husband can claim that it was another Yoel ben Chaim not him who signed the document.

It would seem from the teshuva there that even in a GET, there are circumstances when it could be a problem because nobody knows exactly who the husband or wife is because in a large city more than one person has this name or these names. The only difference between a Kesubo and a GET says Reb Moshe is that in a GET we write names and nicknames so that each person usually has more than one name. So we are not so concerned that there may be two people with the same exact name. But with a Kesubo when we write only one name, it is a problem in a big city. And even in a small city, since basic Hebrew names are not so plentiful, who guarantees that nobody has such a name even in smaller cities? And if they do, the Kesubo is not a valid monetary document. And if the GET was written so that a name is that of one other person in the whole city, the GET could be invalid.

Problem Number Two is that a Kesubo is not like ordinary monetary documents, where A signs he owes money to B. The Kesubo was established by the rabbis so that a woman can be comfortable getting married. She needs a document that will make her sure she will get her money with no trouble. (See Rosh in  Kesubose 56b kol hapochase, and Tosfose Kesubose 51Aמני ר,מ היא  )But do our Kesubos allow her this peace of mind? And the answer is that our present Kesubo definitely provide no peace of mind for the wife, therefore, they are a problem.

The whole purpose of the Kesubo is to give the woman a guarantee that she will get a certain sum of money. (See above) But nobody in the world knows what the amount of money in any Kesubo is, for the simple reason that nobody knows the value of a ZUZ. So the document is essentially worthless in monetary terms.  A Beth Din rabbi once hired a brilliant scholar to figure out the value and he could not do it. The term Zuz goes back thousands of years, and the documents that refer to it come from countries throughout the world in various ages. What is there to convince anyone what a Zuz is in today’s climate? Even the Shekel in Israel where money is always going between America and Israel and people have to know the exact value of both coinages, the value changes every day. So what does a woman get in a Kesubo besides a word ZUZ that changes in value every day, and nobody in the world knows the true value ever? Of course we have in Yoreh Dayah 294:6 the value of a Peruto which is related to a piece of silver the size of a barley grain. One opinion is that it is the value of a half a grain of barley of silver. But then we have to know if we follow the value of a grain of barley in our country or just what. And is the value wholesale or retail? And doesn’t silver fluctuate in value sometimes very strongly? If so, the Kesubo can be interpreted as the value of its being written or the time of the wedding, or it can be when it gets collected? And the Shach brings other opinions. And even if you understand this, if the wife does not feel comfortable and secure in her kesubo, it is invalid. And how can she be secure if nobody knows for sure what the value of the kesubo is because kesubo can be dirabonon or diorayso and we will stop with that.

Problem number three is a problem of murder. A problem of murder? I feel that the present Kesubo system is a problem of murder. The kesubo in ancient times had to clarify the monetary value of a woman’s kesubo. And that was rooted in the reality of her marital status. That is, if she was never married and a virgin, she got two hundred zuz for her kesubo. But if she was married and no longer a besulo or virgin, she got a hundred zuz for her kesubo. But what happens if a woman is not a virgin and she was never married? This is very common today. And every woman whose marital status is an embarrassment must get married with a kesubo and somebody will read the kesubo out loud, announcing to the world that she is not a virgin. This is a humiliation in public that Rabbeinu Yona  in Shaarei Teshuva 139 considers to be worse than murder. There is a gemora in Berochos 23a  that some lowly pagan humiliated a Torah scholar, and he killed himself for the shame. The shame was that she found his tephilin outside a public toilet and brought it to the Yeshiva and claimed that he had slept with her and given her the tephilin as payment. Now, this was obviously a lie. And yet the shame was too terrible and he killed himself. What about a woman who is not a virgin and the kesubo will tell the truth? Is this not murder?

So what is the solution?

The solution is to make a Kesubo using names, addresses and family names, exactly as they are used in legal civil documents.  The sum of money the husband promises is in dollars. It is much easier to collect money with such a document than one with Hebrew names and Hebrew texts. And yet, people will continue doing what everybody else does, to write Hebrew Kesubos with Hebrew names that have problems.  Therefore, we need two Kesubos. One written in Hebrew and one in English. The English one is probably more kosher than the Hebrew one. Therefore, we will add to the English one, “This document will be part of the Hebrew Kesubo, and will override any conflict between the two documents.” This way the wife cannot collect twice with two Kesubos.

But she will be confident of collecting her Kesubo, and be comfortable that her Kesubo is kosher.

Audio Tel Conf EH #16 - Problems with Prenups

click here 

audio of Problem of Prenupts


or click  here
 http://torahtimes.com/2015/08/20/tel-conf-16-problems-with-prenups/

or type torahtimes.com

Why a Prenup is Forbidden by the Mishneh, the Rishonim and Poskim

Tel Conf #16 – Prenups Force a Husband to Divorce His Wife
Wed 9:30 PM Aug 19 - Call 605-562-3130  code 411161#

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

Prenups

Prenups are documents a husband signs at his wedding, empowering the wife to leave the house at any time and force the husband to give her a GET. The husband, from the time that the wife leaves the house, must pay his wife a large sum of money regularly, a sum designed to overwhelm his ability to pay and to force him to give her a GET. The Modern Orthodox world is working hard to force every husband to sign a prenup. When that happens, may truly Orthodox people marry children born from Modern Orthodox women who got divorces because of prenups, or not? And what happens if Orthodox husbands sign a prenup and there is a GET? That is our discussion here.

Proof from a Mishneh in the Talmud that Prenups are Forbidden

See Nedorim 90b. The Mishneh says, “Originally the rabbis taught that three women who make claims may leave their husbands [the rabbis force the husband to give a GET] and are paid their Kesubo: 1) A woman who tells her husband, ‘I have profaned myself to you’ [she slept with another man]. 2) The heavens are between us [she claims that the husband cannot ejaculate and thus cannot have children and she wants a GET]. 3) I am away from the Jewish people [she forbids herself to have intercourse with anyone, perhaps because intercourse causes her pain (Tosfose 90b). The rabbis changed their minds, because we fear that women will want to remarry with a different husband if a wife has the right to just say something and get a GET.”

We see from this that women who have a right to go free with a forced GET from their husbands lose that right when we fear that this freedom will lead women to say lies so that they will be able to remarry another man.

A prenup is exactly what the Mishneh describes. A woman is given the right to force a GET from her husband just because she asks for the GET. Now every Jewish woman can easily leave her husband and find somebody else. The Mishneh makes is clear that we must guard that women do not have this right. If so, how can we permit prenups?

They Claim Proof from Nachalas Shiva to Permit Prenups

Some claim a proof for prenups is found in the classic Sefer Nachalas Shivo. Chapter 9 deals with documents signed at the Chupah. The long version contains the following condition: “And if chas vishalom the husband should do to his wife something that she cannot tolerate and she needs a Beth Din, then the husband will immediately with no delay give her ten gold pieces for her food. And so shall he give her every month of the contention. And she gets her clothes and jewelry she needs to wear. And the husband will go with her to their Beth Din. (And if there is no Beth Din in their city they will go to one in a nearby city or make zabla.) This is to be done within two weeks after she made this request of him. And the Beth Din will settle any argument and difference between them. And after they come to terms the wife will return to her husband’s house. And she will return any remaining money and her clothes and her jewelry to her husband’s house, where they were originally.”

Some infer from this that a husband can sign a prenup that obligates the husband to pay a monthly amount to his wife when she demands a GET and leaves the house, until she gets a GET. But this document says something much different.

First, the obligations of the husband only begin when the wife suffers at his hands, perhaps from a beating. And the Beth Din that will hear the case  has the authority and ability to find out the truth if he did beat her. If a woman is beaten and she screams people hear it. And if he did something else to torment her, the Beth Din is trained to find out exactly what happened. This is crucial because we explained above that the Mishneh in Nedorim clearly forbids any ruling that gives women the right to force a GET from the husband. We fear that ladies will find  somebody more interesting than the husband and leave her husband whenever she wants. That is exactly what a prenup does. The wife is empowered to force a GET anytime she wants.

See also Kesubose 63b ד"ה אבל אמרה about if a woman who claims that her husband disgusts her can force a GET. Rabbeinu Tam says she cannot otherwise women would find somebody else to marry and force a GET on the first husband. Thus, Rabbeinu Tam would surely forbid a prenup, because it permits a woman to leave her husband against his will and remarry somebody she likes better. We pasken like Rabbeinu Tam see EH 77 par 2 and 3. Thus, it is forbidden to give a woman the ability to force a GET from her husband anytime she wants.

The Tosfose there says that if a woman can force a GET but get no money from the husband not even a kesubo, some would permit it. But if she gets money, such as a kesubo, everyone holds it is forbidden to coerce the husband. Thus, everyone would agree that a prenup is wrong, even those who disagree with Rabbeinu Tam.

The prenup is quite different from the above document protecting the wife who must flee the house of her husband because he did something terrible to her. He and she must  go to Beth Din and while she returns to her parents or some other house, the husband must give her some money for food. With a prenup, the wife, for any reason, can leave the house and demand a GET. And the husband must pay the wife  a large amount of money monthly or weekly or daily until he collapses and has to give a GET. This GET is forced by the prenup, and it says that clearly in the prenup.

The Nachalas Shiva document mentions nothing about a GET, only about going to Beth Din. And once the couple is in Beth Din and the Beth Din clarifies what has to be done there is no longer any payments. This is surely different than the huge sums demanded for not giving a GET by prenups. There the entire purpose of the prenup is to force a GET, and this is forbidden by the rabbis of the Mishneh.

Comments from Rabbonim on Prenups in Daas Torah

I saw in my brother’s blog Daattorah a letter from rabbonim attacking Prenups. HaGaonRav Shlomo Yedidiah bReb Zifroni shlit”o quotes the Gaon Rav Ovadiah Yosef zt”l quoted below that if a wife leaves the house and does not want to return to the husband there is no obligation to pay her money for mezonose or to give her mezonose. But if she left the house because of a fight with a mother-in-law and will return when the mother-in-law leaves, the husband must give her mezonose where she is staying. It all depends whether she maintains the marriage and wants to remain his wife. But if she wants to leave him, he has no obligations to her. Thus, Rav Shlomo Yedidiah shlit”o rules that the prenup forces the husband to give a wife mezonose of a huge sum of money has no place, because since she wants a GET, and does not want to return to him, the husband has no obligation to provide her with mezonose. Thus, the prenup is simply a tactic to force the husband to give a GET, and the GET is thus a GET MEUSO and invalid.[1]

Also in my brother’s blog a letter appears against prenups from Rav Eliyohu Shlesinger shlit”o who stresses that Gedolim of past generations knew all of the problems about women needing a GET and husbands refusing, and they knew all of the tricks to force a GET, but they refused to introduce these things. And that is how we should behave. We are not a generation that can invent devices that could produce invalid Gittin.

In the time of the Gaon Rav Yosheh Ber Soloveitchik as Rosh Yeshiva in YU, people came forward with these ideas, to make changes in divorces that would free women from the obligations of the GET. He responded, “Kolu kol hakaitsim.” The end of all ends. This is the pits. Once we start playing around with the laws of Gittin, we will have a disaster. And today, things are not any better than in his time. In his time the world had many great Torah leaders who could speak and be heard. Today we don’t have any such personalities. And to listen to the mice and their squeaking will introduce destruction.

---

[1] וז"ל הגרע"י זצ"ל בתשובה - ולפ"ז אתי שפיר גם ד' העדות ביעקב, דמיירי שהמניעה ע"י פשיעתו שבא עליה בנדתה וכיו"ב, לכן יש לחייבו במזונות אף על פי שאינה דרה עמו. אבל נידון הרא"ש והטור דהוי ע"י מחלת עצבים אין לחייבו במזונות. אולם יותר היה נ"ל לחלק כמש"כ שיש הבדל בין כשאינה חוזרת אליו לצמיתות שדעתה להתגרש ממנו, ובין כשהיא מוכנה לחזור אליו מיד כשתתבטל הסיבה והטענה שלה כלפיו. ושו"ר בשו"ת זכור לאברהם אביגדור (בדף קנח ע"ג), שהביא מ"ש ה"ה (פי"ד מה' אישות) בשם הרשב"א, שהמורדת בטענת מאיס עלי אין לה מזונות וכו', ודייק מדבריו שאפי' אם נותנת אמתלא לדבריה למה הוא מאוס עליה אין לה מזונות, כיון שאינה רוצה בו, והקשה ע"ז, ממ"ש הריטב"א הובא בשטה מקובצת (כתובות קג), שאשה שיצאה מבית בעלה והלכה לה, אם נתנה טעם לדבריה חייב לתת לה מזונות שלמים במקום שהיא, אבל אם לא נתנה טעם לדבריה פטור ממזונותיה, ואפי' למ"ד יש מזונות למורדת גמורה, התם ביושבת עמו בבית וכו'. [א"ה, וע' בשו"ת הריטב"א הנד"מ סימן קנ. ודו"ק]. ולכאורה דברי הריטב"א אלו הם דלא כמ"ש הרשב"א שאפי' נותנת אמתלא לדבריה אין לה מזונות. ותירץ, מיהו קושטא דמילתא שאינו חולק, דהריטב"א מיירי כשהיא חפצה בו, אלא שמשום איזה סיבה עזבה את הבית, כגון מפני קטטה עם חמותה וכיו"ב, ומש"ה חייב במזונותיה, אבל האומרת מאיס עלי ואינה רוצה להיות אשתו עוד למה יתן לה מזונות. ובודאי דלדידן דקי"ל שאין כופין אותו לגרש בטענת מאיס עלי, אין לה מזונות ג"כ, שאם יכפוהו לזונה, הוי גט מעושה, כיון שכופין אותו באונס ממון. ע"כ. והוא תנא דמסייע לן. (וכמ"ש ג"כ הגאון מליסא בס' בית יעקב הנ"ל

The Torah World Sleeps as A Woman Prepares to Remarry Without a GET

The Torah world is trembling because  Rosh Yeshivas in Philadelphia encouraged a woman to remarry without a GET. I have protested this full blast, and have stated many times on this blog and elsewhere   that if the woman, Mrs. Friedman, remarries without a GET, her children will be considered mamzerim.  Members of her family and associates who encourage her will share her Gehenum. 

A major American Torah personality asked the Gaon Reb Nissim Karelitz shlit"o if there was any heter for the woman to remarry without a GET. He replied that in order to remarry she must have a GET. The Gaon Reb Pinchas Rabinowitz told me that he once spoke to Posek HaDor Reb Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l about such problems and the Rov said, "American rabbis can go so far as to declare a woman free because of Kiddushei Toose." They can think the woman is free, because of their ridiculous ruling, but she is still married. And when she remarries her children will be mamzerim. She will be a sota forbidden to marry either her first or second husband.

Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur are coming soon. We are in the month of Elul. And still, the Torah world sleeps. Who has come out openly against this abomination of permitting a married woman to remarry without a GET? VERY FEW RABBONIM! And the few who did protest or sign a protest did it in a very quiet way. 

Now is not a time to be quiet. If this lady follows the Kaminetsky derech and remarries, every woman will feel free to emulate her, especially as almost no protest was heard from the rabbonim in America despite the fact that this has been going on for a long time.

Those who are silent now, before Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur, show just how much fear they have of HaShem, of Chilul HaShem, of mamzeruth, and what some people may say about them - which is their main problem!

This itself is a great Chilul HaShem, And those who create Chilul HaShem and lower the standards of kedusho so that married women can consider remarrying without a GET are worthy of Nidui even if nobody is declaring it. There is a discussion about the laws of Nidui if it is deserved and nobody declared it, if it happens anyway. That is pretty scary. But some people are more scared of other things.

Audio of Tel Conf EH #15 - Wars of Rabbis and Mamzerim

Click here

audio file - Wars of Rabbis and Mamzerim




or here
#15 tel conf Wars of Rabbis and Mamzerim

If problem with clicks the address for the audio is:

www.torahtimes.com/http://torahtimes.com/2015/08/13/audio-tel-conf-15-how-arguments-of-rabbis-make-mamzerim/

or simple torahtimes.com and the audio is on the top line of windows.

BEWARE OF SOME BETH DINS!

WARNING! BEWARE OF SOME BETH DINS!

Today a man called me and told me an incredible story about his going to a Beth Din. The Beth Din destroyed his life. I called up a Rosh Beth Din I knew, and he told me that if I didn’t believe these stories I had no idea what is going on in the world.

A second Rosh Beth Din told me there are two types of rabbis who specialize in divorce issues. Some like money and some like women. Two husbands told me of their own experience with such people, rachmono litslon.

Now, note that I quote two prominent Rosh Beth Dins that I surely believe are honest and good people. But there are others out there.

I therefore offer the following: If you have a problem with a broken marriage, don’t rush off to sign any papers with a Beth Din. Call me up, for no money and no obligation.

HaGaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev gave me his name for my Beth Din for Gittin years ago.  HaGaon Reb Moshe Feinstein wrote a haskomo for my seforim in halacha that “I know Rabbi Eidensohn many years as one who delves deeply into complex halacha.”  I learned under HaGaon Reb Aharon Kotler two years until he passed away.

 Take a look at my blog www.torahhalacha.blogspot.com and my websitewww.torahtimes.com . You can reach me at 845-578-1917 oreidensohnd@gmail.com

Telephone conference EH #15 Wed night 9:30 Aug 12 – Call 605-562-3130 then enter code 411161#

Call 605-562-3130 then enter code 411161#Telephone conference EH #15 Wed night 9:30 Aug 12 – Call 605-562-3130 then enter code 411161#Wars Between Rabbis Make: Mamzerim, Doubtful Mamzerim, and Laaz about Mamzeruth
By Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

This week a prominent Posek called me and said he wanted to come over to my house. He came and we spent a long time on a case where a woman is planning to remarry without a GET. For a long time I was the only one publicly protesting this in my blog www.torahhalacha.blogstpo.com. However, when the rumor began circulating that the woman was ready to remarry, and that a prominent Rosh Yeshiva was encouraging her, I began attacking prominent rabbis who were silent and threatened them with being put in cherem if the woman remarries. Then some prominent rabbis did get involved and did some real things including signing a letter that the woman was still married and could not remarry without a GET. Some of these prominent rabbis would call me up and thank me for protesting, but they did not protest.

The rabbinical world is split. The major Gedolim stay with the Shulchan Aruch, but others break with it. They want to help “Agunoth” by coercing husbands to divorce their wives even when not permitted by the Shulchan Aruch. Some states in America and Canada have passed laws forcing husbands to give  their wives a GET when the wife demands it. Major rabbis consider this GET invalid and the children born from it to be mamzerim or doubtful mamzerim.  But some rabbis are silent or feel that pressuring the husband is a good deed, in defiance of the Shulchan Aruch Poskim and Gedolei HaDor.

In the recent trial of rabbis who tortured husbands to force them to give a GET, the defense was that some rabbis felt that torturing a husband to force a GET is a mitzvah. But they had no source for this to violate the Shulchan Aruch and the major Poskim and Gedolim.

Thus, in the next generation, people from Torah and Haredi homes will become engaged, and somebody will find out about the GET the mother had;  then people will decide if they want to marry somebody considered to be a mamzer by Gedolei HaDor who stick with the Shulchan Aruch, such as Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav  Shmuel HaLevi Wosner, or maybe they should allow the marriage that will produce more mamzerim, generation after generation.

In our previous telephone conference the topic was What Beth Din is Kosher? Forcing a GET is permitted only with the permission of Gedolei HaDor according to a letter from Gedolim including Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner zt”l. But many rabbis such as Rosh Yeshivas who don’t know halocho so well and therefore rule against the Shulchan Aruch, cannot be a Beth Din. If they coerced a GET the mother is considered as one who got a GET from an invalid Beth Din. The coercion is surely not valid. See Mishpitei Yisroel pages 5-12, with letters from Gedolim in Israel and America about coercing a GET and going to civil court.

Rabbi Moshe Heinemann openly advertises on ORA’s website to back coerced Gittin. He writes, "SO FAR O.R.A. HAS HELPED FREE OVER ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY WOMEN WHICH IS A TREMENDOUS ACCOMPLISHMENT...I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THE SUPPORT OF THIS IMPORTANT ENDEAVOR."
Rabbi Heinemann obviously does not know that the Rashbo VII:414 states that even a husband who is commanded by the Talmud to divorce his wife may not be humiliated. The Radvaz and Chazon Ish agree with this. But Rabbi Heinemann congratulates an organization that produced 150  coerced and probably invalid GITTIN and who knows how many mamzerim!

We thus see how bad the situation is. Rabbi Heinemann those who violate the Rashbo, the Radvaz and the Chazon Ish, the Shulchan Aruch 77 par 2 and 3 and all of the poskim there, and the Gedolei haDor in Israel such as Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, as quoted in the work Mishpitei Yisroel. That means 150 women who probably have invalid Gittin, and 150 women who may have children from other husbands who are mamzerim. And Rabbi Heinemann rejoices at this.

Audio for EH Tel Conf #14 What is a Kosher Beth Din and What is Not?

Audio tape of Tel Conf EH #14 - What is a Kosher Beth Din?

Jewish Outreach Congregation - Program and Progress

Jewish Outreach Congregation – Plans and Programs – Elul 5775-6

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Jewish Outreach Congregation has now several programs.

We give a weekly telephone conference on the laws of Even Hoezer, marriage and family. Very few people know these laws. People are inventing laws that create invalid Gittin. Women who remarry with these invalid Gittin may have mamzerim for children.

Our blogspot www.torahhalacha.blogspot.com. has over a hundred posts.. So far this year we have over 15,000 page views. The emphasis is on Halacha in marriage and divorce. Few people know these laws and a mistake in a GET can invalidate it. A woman who remarries with an invalid GET can have children mamzerim.

We also have a website www.torahtimes.com, with text and audio, and a blogspot with videos, www.torahmarriage.blogspot.com . The videos are mostly about Rabbi Eidensohn’s personal study under Geonim Reb Aharon Kotler and Reb Moshe Feinstein zt”l.

There is a growing trend for governments such as New York and Quebec to force husbands to give a GET or lose custody or money. This makes an invalid GET. Nobody is fighting this as we do. The disgrace of Rosh Yeshivas and prominent rabbis coercing husbands who are married to their relatives, etc., is also something we openly fight. And the Rosh Yeshivas in Philadelphia who are encouraging a woman to remarry without a GET, despite the fact that the husband would give a GET, is also publicly opposed by us, and we don’t know any competition.

People have lost confidence in rabbis. Families are collapsing. Children are leaving the Torah. Some don’t want to get married at all. We are with our very limited resources, getting a small group of people organized to fight these things.

I need about two hundred dollars a month just to survive with the present programs to pay Verizon for the internet and the telephones and upkeep of the old computers.

We are planning on putting our material into books, which could produce income. But it costs money to produce books.  I published some books that people read and enjoy. But without money I could not advertise them, and the stores are not interested in books that have no advertising. One book, Secret of the Scale, deals with the critical issue of the gender wars and what the Torah in the revealed and hidden law tells about male and female. I also published a book The Torah that Was, the Torah that Will Be: Stories of Rosh Yeshivas, which was the personal experiences I had with Reb Aharon Kotler, Reb Moshe Feinstein, and other Gedolim. I have a new volume there bringing things up to date. It also attempts to solve the present family and Yeshiva problems with past solutions. Gedolim told me that the situation in Yeshivas is critical and must be fixed. But I don’t see anyone doing any fixing.

We therefore are trying to expand our programs and the funds needed for their upkeep.

I have done what I can. I am seventy-three years old. Alone, I can’t continue. But with some help, we can really move.

If anyone wants to help, please contact me at:

Dovid Eidensohn/845-578-1917/eidensohnd@gmail.com

Thank you.

tel conf EH #14 WHAT BETH DIN IS KOSHER FOR GITTIN?

Tel Conf EH #14 – What Beth Din is Kosher? Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Wed night 9:30 Aug 5, ’15 – call 605-562-3130  code 411161#

Years ago I spoke at length with Posek haDor Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt”l about coerced Gittin.  This was about the time that New York State began coercing husbands to give a GET upon demand when the marriage was over. The Rov feared that such a law could create invalid Gittin and mamzerim, chas vishalom. I asked him the following question:

Let us assume that I go to Beth Din and protest that I do not want to give a GET to my wife. The Beth Din then coerces me, maybe even beats me, until I say, “I want the GET.” The Beth Din then writes a document that the GET has been properly performed and that the wife is free to remarry. I then go outside in the street and begin complaining that I was beaten and coerced and that the GET is invalid. And the Beth Din maintains that I gave the GET willingly. Who will believe me?

I am now disputing a BETH DIN, who are at least two witnesses that are believed over everything else. And furthermore, they are a BETH DIN that may be stronger than two witnesses. See Sefer Raviyo #919 about witnesses and Beth Din. (Raviyo was Rebbe Eliezar ben Rebbe Yoel HaLevi, from a famous family of gedolim who lived in the early period of the Tosfose, after Rabbeinu Tam.)

On the other hand, I am not even one witness, as I am talking about myself and not a witness. So what can I do if I am coerced to give a GET?

The Rov replied, “A Beth Din that does things in defiance of the Shulchan Aruch loses the status of Beth Din.” His exact words, as I remember them, were that he removed from the Beth Din “the Chezkas Beth Din.”

What does this mean? It means two things. One, the Gedolei HaDor have the power to define a proper Beth Din, surely regarding Gittin that can end in mamzeruth. Second of all, the gemora in Gittin 88b tells us that  the power to coerce a GET is reserved for those given the privilege by the early musmochim, those who had semicha from Moshe Rabbeinu’s musmochim. It goes without saying that these musmochim of early generations only gave the privilege of forcing a GET to the greatest rabbis in the world, not to people who violate the Shulchan Aruch. Thus, a Beth Din that violates the Shulchan Aruch is denied a status of a Beth Din by gedolim such as Rav Elyashev and others we will mention soon. Also, the status of a Beth Din to coerce Gittin is a very high level given only by the musmochim, those given Semicha  by Moshe and his disciples who passed on the Semicha to latter generations. When this ceased around the time of the Talmud, coercions by Beth Dins can only be done in a Beth Din whose standard is accepted  by the early musmochim, those who received semicha with the authority of Moshe Rabbeinu. Surely, those that defy the Shulchan Aruch are not included. Thus, a Beth Din that violates the Shulchan Aruch has no status as a Beth Din, not by the standards of great rabbis today who are decisive in this, but even more by the obvious instructions of the disciples of the Musmochim of Moshe Rabbeinu, that only the greatest rabbis can coerce a GET. Surely those who tamper with the Shulchan Aruch and invent things are invalid and not recognized as a Beth Din.

I saw a letter a while back signed by Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner and a few other greats that nobody can coerce a GET without permission of Gedolim. Of course, many Beth Dins do just the opposite. And if a woman received a GET from them there is a problem, as such a Beth Din is not a Beth Din and its Gittin are not recognized.

Recently a book was published about these laws called Mishpitei Yisroel that contains copies of letters from Gedolim in Israel and America about the sin of coercing a GET and the sin of going to secular court instead of Beth Din. Going to an invalid Beth Din is not going to a Beth Din.

A Beth Din that commands a husband to give his wife a GET may by its command create an invalid GET, as the Chazon Ish rules. (See EH Gittin 99:2 par 2 יש לעיין .)

Therefore, before going to a Beth Din a person must clarify if the Beth Din has chezkas Beth Din or not. And it must clarify if the Beth Din commands a husband to give a GET.

In the next generation, many children will be born from mothers who went to an unrecognized Beth Din. What will happen with these children?

New York State has passed a law that forces a husband to give a GET to his wife when the marriage is over. Such a GET is quite possibly or probably invalid. If the wife remarries and has a child the child could be a mamzer. The terrible thing about this is that the New York Law was passed by Orthodox people, one a Modern Orthodox rabbi with great political connections. These laws have been passed in Canada but there the law is much worse than the New York GET law. And the pressure to make more states and countries force a husband to give a GET is a terrifying problem. And of course, the sad thing is that the people pushing these laws are mostly Jews, many Orthodox.

Reb Chaim Soloveitchik, son of Reb Yoshe Ber Soloveitchik, has said, “We have to learn about haredim, because many of our children will be haredim.” But if Modern Orthodox and even some Orthodox rabbis make coerced Gittin, and children are born from them when the mother remarries, how can those children who become Haredi marry? Does anyone care?

What will these people who got the GET laws passed do when a child comes to them and asks how a mamzer can marry? In the next generations there will be many such children, and today, nobody talks about these things. Who cares? So, it is child abuse. But is this as bad as a woman who wants a GET?

If the Shulchan Aruch forbids a forced GET, those who disagree will answer to heaven. What will they answer?

To purchase a copy of the book Mishpitei Yisroel on the issue of Kosher Beth Dins call in Monsey, NY at 845-352-0532.

Dovid Eidensohn - 845-578-1917

Attack on Shalom Kaminetsky Encouraging Tamar to Remarry without a GET

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn/Monsey NY 10952/845-578-1917/eidensohnd@gmail.com

Remarrying in Philadelphia Without a GET, Chas ViShalom

Question: Mrs. Friedman, maiden name Tamar Epstein, has left her husband and declared that she can remarry without a GET. Shalom Kaminetsky, the Rosh Yeshiva of Philadelphia, no doubt encouraged by his father R Shmuel Kaminetsky, has long encouraged Tamar to go her own way, to leave her husband, and now to remarry without a GET. When it became known that Tamar was actively dating and thinking of remarrying without a GET, there was some activity by some of the many rabbis who completely deny Tamar the right to remarry without a GET. But Shalom claims that he has rabbis who permit her to remarry without a GET. Because the vast majority of rabbis, including many senior rabbis, have completely forbidden Tamar’s remarriage without a GET, and Shalom claims that some rabbis permit it, what is the law we must follow in this matter? Are Tamar’s children from a new husband with no GET mamzerim?

Answer: Yes, her children from a new husband without a GET are mamzerim. It is completely forbidden for anyone to marry her until she gets a kosher GET. The reasons for this ruling are below.

1.       A married woman can only escape her marriage with a GET or the death of her husband.

See Laws of Kesubos Even Hoezer 77:3 Ramo and Gro that quote from the Rosh in teshuva 35:2: A woman was tricked by a wicked person into marrying him. He told her lies and she believed him. But once married, she realized they were lies. The Rosh says that although he does not allow coercion of a husband to force a GET in most circumstances, in such a case he permits it. However, he clearly states, that even in such a case where it is clear to all that the husband is a liar and lowly person and the woman would never have married him had she known about him, the Kiddushin remains and there must be a GET.

If so, how can we assume that Mrs. Friedman, who never said her husband was a liar or horrible, just that she had some small complaints, how can she unravel kiddushin?

2.       There is a way for a woman to make a condition in her Kiddushin, in her marriage, in case she fears that the husband has some blemish. If she makes a condition, something that requires knowledge of the laws of conditions, and the condition is valid, then if the husband has the feared blemish the Kiddushin is invalid, and the marriage never occurred. See EH chapter 38.

3.       That is, a married woman can only leave her husband with a GET or with the death of her husband. But if a woman fears a certain blemish or whatever and makes a valid condition that her kiddushin is only valid if the husband is free of that blemish, in that case, if the husband had the blemish the kiddushin is invalid.

4.        Note that in marriage there are two phases: Kiddushin and Nisuin. Kiddushin is when the wife is in her father’s house and the husband may not have intimacy with her. Nisuin is when she comes to the husband’s house and they are fully married. Conditions only help with Kiddushin, but Nisuin is different, as we will explain.

5.       See EH 38:34 “If one makes Kiddushin to a woman and he or she immediately change their mind, even if the change was immediate faster than one can utter a few words, she is married with Kiddushin.”

6.       The husband or wife who made a condition can negate the condition without witnesses, until there is Nisuin, intimacy or Chupah. EH 38:35

7.       Once there is Nisuin or Chupah we assume that the condition made at the time of Kiddushin is now negated. Otherwise, if the condition remains, the couple is together without marriage which is bias Zenuse, a disgrace. See Even Hoezer 38:35

8.       This is because to have relations without a kosher marriage is a disgrace, Bias Zenuse. See Chelkas Mechokake EH 38:48

9.       Now, in the event that a couple said clearly that they have a condition and will maintain it even after Biah, the condition holds. But this is considered a disgrace and unless we hear a clear demand for the condition after the wife goes to the husband, we assume that the previous condition was limited to Kiddushin and is no longer valid.

11    What does this mean for Tamir Epstein Friedman? She never made a condition, she never claimed to make a condition, and if she did make a condition, it would be negated when the couple had a full marriage and lived together. They had a child together. Thus, the condition, even if it did exist, is negated at Nisuin.

12    To invent a finding that Tamar can remarry without a GET the only way is to prove that she entered marriage with a clear condition and maintained it all of the way through the marriage. But this never happened.

  13   We have in recent years rabbis coming forward with inventions to free women from their husbands, such as Rackman, but these all died out and nobody respects them. But there is always somebody else claiming these things. Rabbi Gedaliah Schwartz told me that he sent away a couple who were married and lived together for thirty days and came to him for a GET. He told them they had no need of a GET because they had no Biah. They had marriage with a ring, but no Biah. If so, they are married. That is what is says in Shulchan Aruch EH 26:4: “A woman attains Kiddushin in three ways: by receiving something of monetary value [such as a ring]; by receiving a document [that spells out the marriage], or Biah.” We see clearly that Biah is only one of three ways to achieve Kiddushin. But this inventor sent a couple away with no GET after they asked for a GET because he invented a law in defiance of the Shulchan Aruch that a ring does not make marriage. Such people as him are busy inventing ways for women to leave their husbands without a GET. But all they produce are mamzerim.

14     If Tamir Epstein Friedman remarries without a GET from her husband Aharon, the child will be a mamzer diorayso. This is the opinion of all of the prominent rabbis, some who are very heavily involved with this case and know all of the facts. Nobody knows the name of a single rabbi who has permitted her to remarry. I was told two names, and called them, and they both denied it. It is common in these cases for names to be offered up of rabbis who permit these things, but usually, the rabbis when contacted strongly deny it.

15      A prominent rabbi involved in this case went to Israel to check out the halacha and everyone told him it was forbidden for her to remarry without a GET. They were shocked that in America such a ridiculous thing can be done, to allow a woman to remarry without a GET. One of the rabbis he spoke to was a Gadol HaDor  in Bnei Braq who said there is nothing to be done except a GET.

16       I spoke to senior rabbis who are shocked that Shalom Kaminentsky could help Tamir remarry without a GET. Shalom will not say what rabbis permit this. So let us assume that ten prominent rabbis permit it, which is absolutely ridiculous. But I want to make a point here. Again, ten very prominent rabbis permit something, and ten very prominent rabbis forbid it. What is the halacha?

17     This is a sofek diorayso, and the woman has hezkas aishes ish. If so, she is forbidden to remarry.

18     The Mahari Reb Yosef ben Leib, said by some to be the rebbe of the Beis Yosef, writes that in his time if the majority of the rabbis permitted a woman to remarry and a minority forbade it, that the rabbis would not permit the remarriage. See Mahari ben Leib IV:19:3.

 19     In Philadelphia, we have the opposite: the vast majority are against it, and a tiny number may be for it. Surely, we do not follow the minority.

20      Also, when great rabbis argue with lesser rabbis, we follow the greater rabbis. See  the Ramo in Choshen Mishpot 25:2, that in a machlokess about halacha if it is a question of a Torah ruling we must be stringent. This means, that if ten rabbis forbid her to remarry and ten rabbis permit it, she may not remarry. So how can Shalom Kaminetsky permit her to remarry?

21      The Ramo says there that we follow the greatest scholar over the lesser scholar, and we follow the majority against the minority. The great rabbis oppose her remarriage without  a GET, and so do the vast majority of Torah authorities. If she remarries and has a child, it is surely a mamzer. See also Rashbo 1:263.

22  The Gedolei HaDor are strongly opposing any changes to marriage law, such as this. We follow them, Reb Chaim Kanievsky, Reb Shmuel HaLevi Wosner, Rav Kupshitz and many other gedolim. Shalom Kaminetsky is not a posek, and if he gets involved in these things, with ridiculous inventions, he will produce mamzerim

Tel Shiur EH - Modern Orthodox

Wed night July 29 telephone conference Shiur #13 call 605-562-3130  enter code 411161#

Modern Orthodox

Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Jewry in general is filled with failure. “Most people sin with stealing.” “All Jews sin with Loshon Hora.” “Three sins everyone does every day: sinful thoughts, praying and being sure of being answered, and loshon hora.” (Bovo Basro 164b-5a) Our topic, however, is failure that becomes enshrined officially, when people call themselves not Orthodox but something else, Modern Orthodox or like the new apikorsim mamosh who call themselves Open Orthodox even though their leaders say clearly that they don’t believe in the Torah. Yes, we maintain a difference between a Jew who fails and a Jew who hangs up a sign and says “I don’t keep this or that.”

We are going to speak here about Modern Orthodox, but we also mention the trend  for some Orthodox rabbis to violate clear statements in Shulchan Aruch and poskim when it comes to women’s rights to have a GET on demand.  Some husbands can be forced to divorce, but these are rare. We see rabbis who humiliate husbands and coerce in violation of the Shulchan Aruch, and they are not Modern Orthodox. In fact, one  Yeshiva rabbi in Philadelphia went so far as to pronounce a married woman free to remarry, and the Modern Orthodox condemned it. To my knowledge, other than myself, no Orthodox rabbis condemned it publicly, although almost all of them condemn it privately.

Thus, what we say here about the Modern Orthodox also applies, increasingly, to even the Yeshiva Orthodox. Halacha about coercing Gittin is being openly violated in various Beth Dins and among other rabbis. In the coming generation, therefore, when we look for a shidduch for ourselves or our children, we must determine if there if there is a GET in the family, and if so, if the mother had children, and if the GET was kosher, and not coerced. Gedolim in Israel have already stated, as I heard in person from Rav Elyashev zt”l, that those who violate Shulchan Aruch in making forced Gittin, etc., lose the status of a Beth Din, and the wife must get another GET from a kosher Beth Din. The children born from this remarried woman with an invalid GET are possibly mamzerim. (See Sefer Mishpitei Yisreol with the signature of dozens of Gedolei hador about these matters including Reb Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner.)

Let us now go back a century or so, and look at the Orthodox Jewish community. There were no Yeshivas as we have today. There was no Torah ViDaas, no Chaim Berlin, no Lakewood, etc. But around this time Yeshiva University was founded. Its goal was to create American rabbis and laity educated in both religious and secular law.

Dr. Belkin was a major Torah scholar known as the Radiner Genius [Radin was the location of the Chofetz Chaim], but he was also a foremost scholar of Greek literature. He had an incredible personality and could influence people with a very brief presentation. He gathered for Yeshiva University the greatest Roshei Yeshiva in Europe, such as Reb Shimon Schkop, the Meitsiter Ilui, Reb Moshe Soloveitchik and his son Reb Yosher Ber Soloveitchik. On the other hand, he had outstanding secular scholars teaching regular studies. Albert Einstein gave his name to Yeshiva University, and it had a very good name in every area, religious and secular.

Students who spent hours a day learning gemora spent also hours a day learning secular things, which were filled with apikorsis. Inevitably, there was an imperfection in all of this. We call this imperfection Modern Orthodox. There is a good reason for such a term. Haredi or basically Orthodox Jews are exposed somewhat to the secular world, but the major influences are religious ones. Yeshiva University created a student filled with religious and secular knowledge. The religious instructors were often European, whereas the secular instructors were Americans who speak easily to the American students.  The clash between religious and secular learning in YU was a challenge. Modern Orthodoxy is a label of the compromises that result from this challenge.

Once a young YU rabbinical student who was ready for semicha came to the Rosh Yeshiva with a problem. He wanted to find the laws of taharas hamishpocho but when he opened the Shulchan Aruch, all that he found was about the sin of drinking blood. When the Rosh Yeshiva heard this, he went to tender his resignation. But he was told, yes, even this is progress. There is no way at this time of improving on this. If you leave, everything will be lost. And he stayed, because he realized that this is America, and even this is an experience of hope, and without it, there is nothing. Indeed, the leading Rosh Yeshivas and Mashgichim in America learned at Yeshiva University. Rabbi Mordechai Gifter and Reb Nosson Wachtfogel eventually realized that they needed to go to European Yeshivas, and they did. Rabbi Gifter became the Rosh Yeshiva of Telshe and Reb Nosson Wachtfogel became the Mashgiach of Lakewood. Without YU, what would have become of them?

The intense study schedule in YU created a problem. A person wanted to enter American society with a good salary, something that required an advanced education. After getting this or that degree, the student had to spend some years training in his new position. By the time the job was steady, and he or she was ready to marry, they were no longer so young.

Biologically, a person at sixteen is highly developed. But in an Orthodox or Haredi world, people know that marriage is right around the corner and this gives some control. But the Modern Orthodox have no way to resist the biology. They are not young, one. Two, for years, they have been watching movies, television, magazines and videos that arouse the worst instincts. And they are constantly meeting boys and girls, talking to them, in a society where tseinuyse is relative.

A religious woman got a job in NYC in an organization with an excellent name, but it was associated somewhat with the Modern Orthodox. Early on in her new job, a boy put his hand on her in a friendly way. She jumped back. The surprised boy said, “Are you shomer Negiah?” and left her alone. Now, when a boy assumes that a girl doesn’t care if he puts his hand on her, you have a mighty pirtso in halacha. Because touching a woman, something usually associated with pleasure, is a capital crime that can require one to die rather than to commit. This is a clear example of Modern Orthodoxy dealing with “reality.” Older people heavily dosed with constant sexual arousal have a very hard time keeping halocho. And some of them just don’t keep it. And, as we saw in the above, this was done publicly, in an office, where a lot of people were working. That is Modern Orthodox. And in this case the gap is terrible.

This brings us to the issue of Agunose, another area where Modern Orthodox y cannot keep the open law in the Shulchan Aruch that a woman whose husband will not give her a GET may not remarry. Because the Shulchan Aruch clearly states that if there is no GET the woman cannot remarry. Further, in most cases, the husband cannot be humiliated or otherwise pressured to give the GET. If the GET is coerced, it is invalid, and the children born from it are possibly mamzerim.

Rabbi Gedaliah Schwartz, head of the Modern Orthodox Beth Dins, told me that he permitted a husband and wife who had been married Orthodox, and who had lived together for a month, to leave his office without a GET and remarry. He told me that there was no Biah so there was no marriage. This is pure ignorance. Kiddushin is valid with a ring or document without  Biah (EH 26:4). But this he didn’t know.  Another person told me that when he was involved with ORA and humiliated men until they divorced their wives, he was told that a major Modern Orthodox rabbi simply annulled marriages at will. Here we see that the gap between Haredi and Modern Orthodox is such that in the coming generation, any divorced woman who received a Modern Orthodox GET and has a child, may have a child that is considered by Haredim to be a doubtful mamzer. The Haredim will intermarry. The Modern Orthodox will, if they have divorces, have children that cannot marry Haredi children.  And we know that some Orthodox rabbis do wrong things with Gittin, such as annulling it or coercing a GET. So any divorce must be carefully checked out.

Reb Chaim Soloveitchik said that many Modern Orthodox will become Haredim. What is their mothers had a Modern Orthodox forced GET or annulment? The child would be considered by Haredim as mamzerim or doubtful mamzerim. The lenient rabbis  are thus preparing a terrible fate for those who will be considered possible mamzerim and nobody will want to marry them, other than other Modern Orthodox. And when these have children, they will also be doubtful mamzerim, with no way to reverse it.

The greatest tragedy in all of this is that there is no leadership in the Torah world fighting these change in halacha, and fighting those who make invalid Gittin and mamzerim. The great social force of women’s rights has spread to the Yeshiva world, and there is almost nobody around to publicly fight back. When a Philadelphia Rosh Yeshiva openly encourages a married woman to remarry without a GET, I am the only person in the United States to openly protest. I have publicly attacked senior rabbis for their silence, even the ones who congratulate me for fighting.  And hopefully, there will be a change. But I don’t know of any change right now, that is, some fight it quietly, but to openly condemn it publicly, I don’t know who does it, other than a few rabbis who may make their opinions heard in their circles. But the public blast such as this blog is missing.

When Reb Yosher Ber Soloveitchik zt”l heard from his students various ideas how to “improve” the situation with marriage he declared, “Kolu kol hakitsim” meaning, “We have reached the bottom.” And he stopped it. But today, there is nobody to stop it, and these rabbis who invent this or that have nobody to oppose them. The result will obviously be mamzerim. This is the ultimate child abuse. Why is a rabbi who creates such child abuse not considered a demon, but the husband who refuses to give a GET for perhaps valid reasons, is considered a demon?

Yosef Orlow Speaks

 

People tend to be smart. Many people go to schools where they study logic as part of most of their studies. Even in English class students have to write reports and essays that are based on logic. Math, all the sciences, law: all based on logic. There are popular books written on logic, also.

So many single people and married people can see through phony stuff.

Nowadays, there Rabbis who claim they can annul marriages. But this is illogical the way it's being applied! What man will want to dedicate himself to a woman who will run off tomorrow and get the marriage annulled at her whim? What man can even be sure his wife is his? Maybe she annulled their marriage in the afternoon, and just stopped by in the evening to pick up a few things.

And it makes a mockery of the prohibition against adultery. A woman can think: I'll sin and get it annulled later.

So annulments on the scale which they are now taking place are plain illogical, and downright stupid, not a word I throw around a lot. And people are smart. They may think "Who needs this stupidity? If this is marriage, it's not for me."

But I also don't buy the argument that some Rabbis have to water down the rules or they'll be out of a job, poor things. Ridiculous!! Starve to death, fools! But they won't have to starve to death. Because Jewish women have always been the spiritual mainstay of the Nation. They entered Eretz Yisrael, not the men. So the women would not rebel and turn to anyone else. They would fall into line.

And who is Joe Orlow to stand up to the great Rabbis who permit women to walk out their annulled marriages? You know what I say to that question?! Who are these annulling Rabbis to stand up to G-d!! And don't give me that "Lo Ba'Shamayim" jazz either. The Torah may not be in Heaven, but neither is it in that cesspool that annulling Rabbis mistake for their soul.

Poem about a Broken Family

NOTE: This is a common thing today, a marriage breaks, and children and parents and grandparents suffer. The suffering is only known to them, because nobody can imagine it who has not experienced it. HaShem Yerachem. 

Kina of the Chevlei Moshiach

Inbox

x

Chanoch	11:18 PM (12 hours ago)

Kina of the Chevlei Moshiach

written by Rabbi Chanoch Lebovic
in memory of R' Melech Chaim ben Moshe A"H
in honor of his third yartzeit 27th of Tammuz, 5775

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

A terrible epidemic has befallen us, due to our sins,
Around the world it spreads swifter than the winds.
Destroying pure jewish homes by tens of thousands, sadly
Wreaking havoc in one of the fundamentals of our faith, family.

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

Parents were so recently, affectionate and glowing,
False allegations, lies and attacks at each other they are now throwing
Jailing the parent of your child, like a murderer or thief,
It is more important to win, than to be a Jew, true to our beliefs.

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

How many thousands have fallen, been broken, and torn,
From their beloved children, many just infants, yet still do mourn
"Where is Tatty?" So tenderly and innocently asked,
The child painfully realizes that his father is just "Uncle Tatty", at last.

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

We must cry rivers of tears, like the mighty Euphrates
For the thousands of children, whom from their father were alienated.
Filled with hatred, fear, and disgust for their own flesh and blood constantly
Instead of hugging their dad and playing together with glee

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

We wonder why children are turning away, so many
From the very beliefs that kept and protected us so long from our enemies
Their bubbys and zaidys, uncles and aunts, happily gave their lives for it
Why are our children throwing it away? Dimming the candles their grandparents lit.

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

Raising kids in a toxic environment with hatred and lies,
Growing up in broken homes, and for his father he cries.
Nobody to go to shul with or to study with like any other yid
With such lousy role models what can we expect from our kids?

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

If we would have only prayed and held demonstrations for our own mishpochos,
Like for the three Israeli children, and the boys in Japan, with all our kochos
We'd have balanced and secure children, you'd agree without hesitation
And we would proudly have safe and happy families, for many generations.

Woe to our eyes that witnessed these horrors, woe to our hearts that were shattered

Audio of Telephone Conference #12 Rights of Parents and Children in Divorce

Click Below to hear audio. Cick once to reveal website and then click again to play audio.



Rights of Parents and Children in Divorce




http://torahtimes.com/2015/07/24/audio-of-telephone-shiur-12-eh/

Telephone Conf Shiur #12 EH - Rights of Parents and Children in Divorce

Shiur Telephone Even Hoezer #12 – Rights of Parents and Children in  a Divorce

1.       We know that there are discussions on the rights of a husband or wife in a GET divorce. Here we want to discuss the rights of a parent when the child seeks a divorce, and the right of the children when the parents seek a divorce.

2.       Let us begin by stating that the divorce of a child or a parent is a devastating thing. That is, when a person or couple want a divorce, this causes great pain to the parents of the couple and their children. Regardless of whether or not this pain has its own specific halacha, it is real. That is, a parent, even if we ignore the mitsvah of honoring a parent, has something to say about a divorcing child, simply because of the agony produced.

3.       Is a parent different than other Jews, who are commanded, “Love your fellow as yourself”? Is this how we love a parent, by breaking their hearts over the horrors of a child’s divorce?

4.       I once heard of a bitter battle over divorce, and it seems that a parent was so ill from it that I was warned not to talk to him about it at all, for medical reasons. Here we see that the horrors of the divorce could kill a parent. Is this not something to think about?

5.       The Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Dayo 240:1 tells us that we are commanded to honor and fear our parents. In paragraph 3 we are told, “How far does the mitzvah to fear our parents go? If one is dressed well and sitting at the front of the community and his parents came and tore his clothes and hit him on his head and spit in his face, he must not shame them, but be silent and fear the King of Kings who commanded this.”

6.       YD 240:24 “One is obligated to honor his father-in-law.” How much honor is given during the breakup of  a marriage?

7.       It is true that the son does not have to obey his father who prevents him from doing a mitzvah (YD 240:25) such as the son who wants to learn Torah somewhere he can succeed and the father forbids him to do this because there is an element of danger to travel there, or if the father forbids the son to marry somebody the child wants to marry. However, what if the father tells the son not to divorce his wife because he has children who need both parents? Here the father is telling the son to do a mitzvah, and the son must obey because it is a mitzvah and it is also a mitzvah to obey his father. And if the father says nothing, but will have great pain from the divorce and the suffering of the children, is this not also a violation of honoring a parent?

8.       See Rashbatz I:אונסא דאחריני that listening to a father who wants the son to make peace is a mitzvah. Furthermore, if the son is beaten to force him to obey his father, such as when the father commands him to divorce his wife, this is not a coerced GET because it is a mitzvah to obey the father and end the fighting.

9.       The Chazon Ish Gittin 99:2 ד"ה בב"י שם suggests that others disagree with Rashbatz and say that one is not obligated to obey his father in such instances. However, the Rashbatz clearly says that the son must listen to his father to divorce in order to make peace. That is, the father’s command is not enough to force the son to obey unless the son is already obligated by the Torah to do the mitzvah, whatever it is. Therefore, the sources the Chazon Ish brings to disprove the Rashbatz are only if there is no separate mitzvah to obey what the father has commanded. But if there is a separate mitzvah to do what the father commands, and the father adds his command, then the son must obey his father. That answers the questions of the Chazon Ish on the Rashbatz. We are not, ruling in this dispute, just mentioning it.

10.    Having said this, we mention the Chofetz Chaim who once counseled  a couple to divorce. Somebody said to the Chofetz Chaim, “And can the Chofetz Chaim tell people to divorce?” The Chofetz Chaim answered, “According  to you, why does the Torah command the laws of divorce when the couple must always make peace?”

11.    And what of the rights of children who are being torn apart by the divorce?

12.     See Pesachim 87b that HaShem told Hoshea to divorce his wife so he would be closer to HaShem and farther from material things, but Hoshea protested that he had children, and how could he divorce his wife? HaShem agreed with Hoshea not to divorce his wife. We see the importance of children not being separated from their father through a divorce.

13.    See also Pesachim 113: If somebody divorces his wife once or twice and then takes her back, this is intolerable, but if he had children from her, it is acceptable, because how can he leave his children?

   .   See Choshen Mishpot 290:1  “Beth Din is the father of orphans.” Beth Din is responsible for the welfare of little children. If the welfare of children depends to a great degree on the success of the marriage, should Beth Din not try to make shalom instead of accepting a GET right away?

.        There was once a massive program for some mitzvah. And I thought, for this mitzvah there is a massive program. But for saving marriages there are no massive programs. Indeed, what programs are there at all?

      The terrible problems with marriage today are convincing some people to refuse to get married in the first place. There is a huge increase in single-dom. What massive program is done for this?

  .   There are many broken children. What massive program is being done for the children?

  .   Gedolei HaDor told me that the entire system is a problem. There is something very wrong.

  .   Briefly, in earlier generations for thousands of years, people learned and earned. There was no special class of people who only learned, although here and there an individual did this at great cost with great difficulty. (Zohar Chodosh Beraishis)

     But, says the above Zohar, today we can no longer do learning without earning, and “if there is no bread there is no Torah.”

  .   Rebbe Yehuda quoted in the Zohar above says that whoever only learns and does not prepare himself to work is as one who takes paganism to himself. Without a good job or income a person just runs after a few dollars and has no peace of mind to serve HaShem and learn Torah.

     Rambam דעות ה,יא says that one may only marry if he has a house and a job. But if people married at seventeen and learned before then, when did the money for a house and a job come about?

     A child has no mitzvah other than to prepare for being an adult. If an adult must learn nine  hours and work three, as Rambam says ת"ת א,יב, a child must emulate this. That is, a child, from earliest years, combines earning with learning. After ten or fifteen years, the child, helped by parents to learn and succeed, has a good income, property and training in earning. He marries at seventeen or eighteen and has a paid up house and a job. He has money and peace of mind and shalom bayis. He raises his children to make money and succeed in learning and earning.

  .   Indeed, we find Gedolei HaDor throughout the generations who were wealthy. Rovo in Horiyuse י ע"ב told his students to achieve wealth to be able to learn without worries and distractions.

     Today, everyone must learn, and there is no source of money other than the wife and her parents spending money that is not there. It doesn’t work. And the marriage doesn’t work.

     It is time to go back to the way of Chazal. We no longer can raise children to learn as they did in Vollozhen, in constant proximity to starving. That is over with. Today, we must raise children who earn and learn as children, and enter adulthood with wealth, as was done in earlier generations for thousands of years.

  .   Again, I heard from Gedolei Yisreol of the past and present generations, that the present system is not working. Obviously, the divorces and broken children testify to that.

      The above  Zohar tells us that today there is no other path than “If there is no bread there is no Torah.”

     We must return to the old way of earning, learning, and achieving wealth in Torah and money.

     How this can be done, to truly emulate the ancient ways of Chazal, requires much thought, especially today when children cannot go to work by governmental decree. But to work for themselves is not forbidden. At any rate, we must consider the fiscal situation to improve marriage and family life.

     If anyone wants to discuss these things I can be reached at eidensohnd@gmail.com or 845-578-1917.

Dovid Eidensohn