WHY MAKE INVALID GITTIN?

Why Make Invalid Divorces?

There are people working hard to make invalid divorces. The invalid divorces mean that when the woman remarries with her invalid divorce, her new children will be mamzerim, or doubtful mamzerim. So why do so many people even rabbis work so hard to force invalid Gittin? Even when they are confronted with open sources in Shulchan Aruch, Rishonim and Acharonim, they continue. These are Orthodox people, even rabbis. Why?

A Jew once did something so terrible that nobody heard of a Jew doing such a thing. A rabbi was asked how this could be and he replied, “I don’t know why. But one thing I know. He did it leshaim shomayim.” He did it to serve HaShem. When a person steals because he needs money, he knows it is wrong, so he tries to minimize his sin. But when somebody steals because he feels it is a mitzvah to rob a rich man to feed himself, a poor man, there is no limit. Again, when a person is excited about doing a mitzvah but it is an evil thing, he will do any anything. And if he is convinced that the right thing to do is to free a woman from a bad marriage, he will make an invalid GET.

This is one way of looking at it. But this is true for people who are not scholars. But how do the rabbis and the scholar do these things? And what about people who are told clearly the exact places in Shulchan Aruch where it is forbidden to coerce a GET in the vast majority of cases? Why do they continue to coerce divorces?

I spoke to a major Rov who was a backer of people who coerced divorces. I asked him how he could do this against the sources that I mentioned. He told me that he had a source. It was brought in Ramo in the laws of Gittin, that if a man is not able to be a man with his wife, he must  give a GET. But we may not beat him or put him in cherem. We may only do minor things, such as telling him he is wicked for doing this and disobeying the Talmud. Ramo mentions also that we can ostracize the man in a passive manner, as long as he can leave the community and save himself their ostracizing. In this case itself, of the man who is not able to perform in marriage, the Rashbo, Radvaz, Beis Yosef and Chazon Ish and others say clearly that it is forbidden to humiliate him. And yet, this Rov sponsored rallies outside of the house of the husband to force him to give a GET. He reasoned that if it was permitted to tell a man who is not able to function in marriage that he is wicked for not giving his wife a GET, then any case, any man, who refuses a GET for whatever reason, may be humiliated.

And although the Ramo permits only passive ostracizing, this major Rov permitted open active tormenting of the husband with public demonstration that could make him and his family, especially older parents, sick, and terrorize little children. Why? When you want to do a good deed the Satan has you. There are no boundaries. The Ramo says coerce a man who is told by the Talmud to divorce, because he is not a man. So  you coerce every man who will not give a GET, even if he had children with the wife. The Ramo says that we  ostracize the husband only in a passive manner, but the major Rov permitted humiliating the husband in an active manner. Why? You are doing what you think is a good deed. So you invent sources and excuses for it, even though it produces mamzerim.

How can a major Rov cause great pain to completely innocent people? Because the “Agunah” people have demonized men who won’t cough up the GET on demand. The fact that such a lady is the ultimate child molester and will have mamzerim for children is not the issue. People don’t demonize the wife even if she remarries without a proper GET. They demonize the husband.

It is time for men to copy the ladies. Organize, and have your public say. Our blog will allow both men and women to say their piece, without mentioning any names, just in general what their complaints and suffering are. I hope it can be done in a positive way, so that people know that suffering in a broken marriage includes everyone, especially children. And we have to stop working hard to break up marriages. A letter from HaGaon Rav Chaim Kanievsky shlit”o is circulating about a prominent Beth Din that he criticized for breaking up marriages. This has got to stop.

Therefore, if anyone has a comment to make about the divorce situation, male or female, and from my experience I know that such things exist, I will consider putting it on my blog. No names. Just send me an email at dddeid@verizon.net. I don’t take comments easily on my blog, so please email me. If you email me you can say your name, and you can call me also. But the blog usually will not quote a person’s attack on another with using a name or names.

Thank you.

The Latest Treifeh Excuses for Making Mamzerim - GET ZIKUI

Recently a new group of people who invent halacha different than what it says in Shulchan Aruch and poskim have done it again. They have created a new law that doesn't exist that permits women to remarry without a GET. They claim that when their Beth Din says that the husband wants to give his wife a GET, he does want to give the GET, even though the husband is yelling that he does not want to give a GET. They call this ZIKUI. I call it a bald lie and a formula for making mamzerim, which it is.

It is incredible that people have no shame and say complete lies that back their claim that although in Jewish history nobody ever did such a thing they are doing it and they are smarter than the previous rabbis.


The great flaw in all of this is that when the woman says my husband is repulsive to me there is no mitsvah upon the husband to give a GET. Not only that, it is a sin for the husband to divorce his wife if they have children, and if they have no children, it is a sin for the marriage to break up without at least efforts at repairing it. This is based upon the Rashbo in VII:414 "if he wants to divorce, he divorces, and if he does not want to divorce, he doesn't have to divorce." This is brought by all of the poskim in EH 77 two and three. See Gro #5 that nobody disagrees. Thus, the basic premise in all of this that it is a mitsvah for the husband to divorce his wife is wrong. Furthermore, if every single case where the wife wants a GET it is a mitsvah to give a GET and therefore Beth Din can assume the identity of the husband or whatever they call it to represent him and his will and force a GET, why in all of the generations was this hidden from those searching a way to save a woman from a terrible husband? See Teshuvose Marshal 41. Now, in the case where it is a mitsvah to divorce, such as in EH 154 at the end, and the Shulchan Aruch struggles to find a way to help coerce the husband, why doesn't it bring down this idea? Obviously, nobody ever thought of it there or anywhere because it is wrong. Furthermore, even if somebody did think of it, the fact is that most authorities ignored it. We then have the Chasam Sofer in two places in his teshuva that when there is an argument about whether to coerce a GET and the husband is coerced the GET is definitely invalid, even though some rabbis permit the coercion, it is not a doubtful GET but definitely no good. Now, in this case, the Beth Din is giving a ZIKUI based on the idea that they represent the husband who really wants a GET. Why, according to the Chasam Sofer, is this definitely not GET when BETH DIN can invent the husband's will based on their pesak? If so, some rabbis invented the husband's will and the GET is kosher, at least, it is doubtful. But the Chasam Sofer says that the GET is definitely no good. This is proof that Beth Din cannot speak for the husband. And if this is true, that Beth Din can speak for the husband anytime it is a mitsvah to divorce, why, when the Shulchan Aruch says clearly in 154 that a husband who is not a man must divorce by the teachings of the Talmud, that we can't make zikui?
The Latest Treifeh Excuses for Making Mamzerim - GET ZIKUI
The Latest Treifeh Excuses for Making Mamzerim - GET ZIKUI
The Latest Treifeh Excuses for Making Mamzerim - GET ZIKUI

Mistaken Teachings about Gittin

Exhibit number one of mistakes:

"Ironically, this type of agunah, the one whose husband is very much present but refuses to give a get, is a relatively new phenomenon. According to halachah, though it is the husband who gives his wife the get, a woman too may demand a divorce if she can prove that the husband is neglectful, repulsive or abusive. In such an instance, the halachah is unequivocal:

"One who is halachically required to divorce his wife and refuses to do so, a Jewish beth din – at any place and at any time⁷ – corporally punishes him until he says, 'I wish [to divorce].' The get is then written and it is a kosher get."⁸

In short: the beth din is empowered to use any and all methods at their disposal to compel the husband to "agree" to divorce his wife. This includes imposing sanctions on having casual or business dealings with the noncompliant husband, and even using brute force if necessary

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/613084/jewish/The-Agunah.htm

End quote

This is completely wrong. Beating a husband and forcing a divorce is only permitted in extreme cases that almost never occur in real life. A husband marries a woman forbidden to him, even dirabonon, is coerced even with beatings to divorce his wife. But a regular divorce case, where the wife simply claims that she hates her husband, she surely cannot have him beaten to give a GET. Nor can she have Beth Din make any coercion, period.

There is an in between level, between an absolute mitzvah to coerce the husband even with beatings, and the prohibition to coerce at all, at any level, that operates in most cases of divorce. And that is a husband who is not a man. In such a case the Talmud demands a GET. However, the Talmud does not specify the pressure, if any, that is permitted to make to force the GET. Therefore, in practice, we do not beat the husband. We follow the Rashbo, Radvaz, Beis Yosef and Chazon Ish and others that we may not put the husband in cherem, we may not humiliate him, and we may not hurt him physically. But a husband who is a normal person and surely one who had children with the wife cannot be forced with a beating and surely not with cherem, humiliation or physical pain. Furthermore, coercion with great financial pressure is also grounds to invalidate a GET.

Beth Din does not have any power to force a GET other than the exact cases taught in the Talmud and Shulchan Aruch. These cases usually have nothing to do with the vast majority of marriages, unless the wife starts to lie and gets others to agree with her. Even then, a reliable Beth Din doesn’t pretend that it accepts everyone’s claims in a Din Torah and the truth will out. The Chazon Ish writes that if a Beth Din told the husband that the halacha is that he has to give a GET but this was not true in the husband’s case, then, if the husband issues a GET, it is invalid even by Torah law, because it is coerced and because the husband  was in error when he gave it. Had he known the truth, that he was not obligated to give the GET, he would not have given it. So the giving was a mistake and worthless.

Let's Do Something about the Mamzerim

Let’s do something about the mamzerim. How awful to talk about mamzerim. I once met a doubtful mamzer. I was involved when gedolei hador argued if he was a mamzer or not.  I got to know the fellow in a special way. I never in my life saw such yiras shomayim. After I risked my life and got him a heter from the gedolim in Israel to ask his shaalo to Reb Moshe who permitted him to marry, he refused it. He said, “I am an Israeli and want my rabbonim to pasken.” A young man, just like that, and he gave up his life. Because his rabbonim were not going to permit him to remarry. They told him to go to Reb Moshe because they would not permit him to marry. And he refused to go. I found a Rov who spoke to him and convinced him to go to Reb Moshe. And these are the holy neshomose that are flooding the market with mamzerim and doubtful mamzerim. What will we say to them? I know what I will say to them. I fought for you tooth and nail. But what will you say to them? In a hundred and twenty years, what will we say to the heavenly court, that we did  enough?

My failure in this regard is that I am doing things on my own. I got my brother on his blog involved. That made quite a difference. Husbands who were being battered without mercy because his wife was a cousin of a major Rosh Yeshiva or because her father was a friend of a major Rosh Yeshiva, now had a friend, little me, and my brother. And we gave back, full blast. I challenged the Rosh Yeshivas and Dayanaim: What is your source to permit this coercion? The vast majority of them never even spoke to the husband. They just signed letters to destroy him because the corrupt Rosh Yeshiva asked them to. Their corruption and ignorance was revealed for all to see. And when one of them finally got around to producing a source, I made thirteen pages to refute it. My work was accepted by the rabbonim in Israel and letters went all around the country forbidden coercion through humiliation. Then a sefer was put out with these warnings, signed by Gedolei HaDor including Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner shlit”o. But the inventors of excuses to free a woman are still busy.

And if this blog of mine in two weeks got about four thousand page views, it was because my brother pushed it on his blog. But is that the end?

I got a phone call yesterday from a prominent Head of Beth Din in a major city. He told me that he had a Din Torah that day, and major rabbis of the community were there. He discussed with them what I am doing to fight coerced divorces that make mamzerim. One Rov knew about me and had seen my writings. The other Rov knew nothing about me or the entire subject. So we need more people to be informed about what is going on. At least every Rov must know not to perform kiddushin when one of the couple is the product of a coerced GET. Otherwise the Rov will himself create mamzerim.

A lot of people read this blog. But this is war. It is war for the next generation. Just as there are now many Roshei Yeshiva and rabbis who permit a woman to escape her marriage with coercions and worse, such as the Philadelphia idiot who permits a woman to leave her husband without a GET, despite the fact that the husband wants to give a GET if the wife will fix up the custody situation, after she left the city the husband lives in. Yes, tomorrow will be more idiots and inevitably, more mamzerim. I ask you, what are you going to do about it? Or isn’t that your business? If we have a world where the rabbonim do nothing when a Rosh Yeshiva permits a woman to remarry with no GET, who is tending the store? I ask this, and in the next world, it will be on the agenda.

Rosh Chodesh - Holiday for the Suffering of Israel, Women and the Moon

My Shabbos table for years, at least when I had the energy, was devoted to long deroshose about two things. One was the old Torah that I had learned from Gedolim Reb Aharon Kotler, Reb Moshe Feinstein, Reb Yaacov Kaminetsky, etc., and the second thing was the greatness of women. For instance, I would note that in the first three Jewish families of Avrohom, Yitschok and Yaacov, the men wanted to do things that would destroy the Jewish people, and the women opposed them and saved the Jewish people. Avrohom wanted Yishmael to stay in the family and Soro disagreed. HaShem told Avrohom that Soro was right and that all that she said he must listen to her because Soro was greater than Avrohom in prophecy.

Yitschok wanted to give the birthright, the leadership of the Jews to Aiso, and Rivka fought with him and succeeded in getting the birthright for Yaacov.

Yaacov opposed Leah, but from her came the major tribes and the greatest ones. Also, in Egypt the men gave up under the pressure of slavery and refused to have any more children. Then little Miriam said to her father, "Father, Pharaoh decreed to kill the boys, and  you decree to destroy everyone, as nobody has babies." From this her father relented, took her mother back, and Moshe was born.

Also, the only Jewish leader who was perfectly successful was a woman, Devorah. Furthermore, at Sinai the men worshiped the Golden Calf and the women did not. When the Jews crossed the sea during the escape from Egypt, and the Egyptian army drowned, the men stood and chanted their thanks, but the women took musical instruments, played joyful music and danced. The men took swords from Egypt and the women took musical instruments, as they trusted in HaShem to protect them.

But there is another side to all of this. The women suffer more than men. The man does nothing painful to have a baby, but the mother suffers for nine months of gestation, and child birth, and the raising of the child. Although the home is the realm of the mother, the household is led by the father, who leads the meals in the prayers, and who is the boss.

Men make a berocho "who has not made me a woman." And yet, the gemora says that Jewish women have an easy time entering heaven but not the man.

There were two Jewish prophetesses, Devorah and Chulda. Both of these names are interesting. Devorah means a bee, and Chulda is a mole. This is because a woman has a very holy and elevated status, until she enters the public arena. Then even if she saves the Jewish people spiritually and physically, as Devorah did, she is shaming herself and is thus a "bee". Indeed, the Torah begins with the word בראשית that means בית ראש according to the Zohar. If so, the Torah begins with the role of women, and the first word of a book is its whole essence. And yet, women are not the ones who read the Torah nor do they devote much time to learning Torah.  Are women high or not? Here they are superior to men and here they are the opposite. What is going on around here?

This problem began before men and women were created. Briefly, the sun and moon were created equal. The moon blazed its light just like the sun. But the moon knew that it was superior to the sun. So it requested of G-d that the sun shrink its light and the moon would rule. HaShem replied, "Go and diminish yourself," Thus, the moon is a tiny bit of light and often dark, while the sun blazes away. The Moon protested bitterly but nothing helped. However, HaShem told the Moon that the Jews would count their holidays according to the Moon, not the Sun. The sun is the "male" essence and the moon is "female."

Keep in mind that this happened before people were created. The sun and moon were angelic servants of G-d, so how could the Moon act this way and argue with HaShem? And what is so wonderful of having the Jews count their holidays according to the Moon that she should be in darkness and the sun lights the day?

But  this Medrash is telling us about the Jewish people. It, too, by keeping the Torah, wants to be special, but instead, the Jews suffer more than anyone else. G-d is telling the Moon, and the Jewish people, that this world is for testing, and those who pass the test merit the happiness of the Future World. But there are various levels in the Future World. Those who have had a good time in this world may have a more difficult time in the other world. But those who worship G-d in this world with suffering, merit in the Future World fantastic rewards.

This is the theme of Shir HaShirim, the Song of Songs. A woman seeks her husband, and while she looks for him the police beat her. She suffers and cries out to her husband to help her. She has questions, meaning, the Shechina has questions, because the Shechina suffers along with Israel in this world, and she wants answers. HaShem tells her that precisely because she was so deserted and desolate in this world, she will merit fantastic glory and happiness in the Future World. Thus, women, Israel and the Schechina are one. This world offers them challenges, and for this, they merit quickly the highest levels in the Future World.

But all of this comes with a cost. The world despises a Jew and women are relegated. The Schechina is also a holiness in suffering because of this. And it seems that HaShem made a mistake, chas vishalom. Therefore, HaShem honors women on Rosh Chodesh, and gives them the day as a holiday, but not the men, because men worshiped the Golden Calf. HaShem commands the Jews to bring a special offering on Rosh Chodesh, the New Moon, to remind him that this holiday for the superior level of women does not really exist in this world, as it is really in the Next World that Israel and women will merit greatness and happiness. HaShem says that this offering is an atonement for Him, for making such a world of suffering for the Moon and women and Israel. We are thus reminded on Rosh Chodesh that what seems down and low in this world is not necessarily down and low. HaShem made it this way to allow for a higher perfection in the Future World. Only there are answers to the suffering of Israel,women, and the Schechina.

ח. 

Demonize Husband and Make Mamzerim

A New Solution to "Agunoth." A husband refuses to give a GET, and a "Beth Din" declares that the husband does want to give a GET, despite his refusal to give one and despite his saying he doesn't want one. The Beth Din says too bad what he says and too bad what he wants. They then declare that the husband wants the GET and tells the woman she can remarry. Of course, the children from such a "solution" will be mamzerim. I understand that people can want to help ladies, but don't they have some shame when they tell this to Orthodox people and say that this is rooted in the Torah?

An apologist for this Beth Din has written in the Baltimore Times, "And while rabbinic authorities offer sympathy for these women, they maintain they are constrained from action in many cases by the boundaries of halacha. The result, at times, has the husband using extortion before granting a divorce, insisting on large sums of money and/or refusing joint custody of children. According to Jewish law, if the agunah marries and has a child, the child is considered a mamzer, illegitimate, and cannot marry." 

Let's stop there. This is the process of demonizing the husband. A man was married for ten years and has five children. His wife demands a GET and he refuses. Did he refuse because he wants money, or did he refuse because he wants his children, or did he refuse because he wants to go to marriage counseling and have his wife, which is crucial for the children who need two parents in the house? No, along comes the new garbage Beth Din and demonizes the husband, and once he is a demon, they know that people will ignore the Beth Din's fantasies in halacha. After all, who will defend a husband who is a demon?

And thus, the "Agunah" war becomes an extension of the hate for men so popular today. The Agunah may jump into secular court and destroy the husband, say lies about him and have him jailed. have him declared a menace to his children and he can only see them  with supervision, and then there are the problems of women who have the children most of the time and teach them to hate their father. Some husbands have reasoned that the wife will do all of these things to them unless she fears about getting a GET. That is the husband's only protection. And there is some logic to this. Just ask the husbands whose wives have demanded a GET. These are  husbands with a good name. There was never any complaints about his being violent, etc., But all of a sudden, when the wife wants a GET, the complaints pour out. And the husband is some time dragged off to the police station in front of his children. Such a person may be quite bitter. And if he knows that everything she said about him was lies, he may want a  financial settlement, and he is in his rights to do so. Furthermore, the basic freedom to split with the husband and destroy his life, and to damage the children who will grow up without a father in the house doesn't say in my gemora. In my gemora is clearly states that when you have a child, even if  your wife is evil, you stay married. You have no right to harm your children because you don't get along with your wife. But the women who want their freedom don't know that gemora.

A prominent therapist told me that these broken marriages in Torah families can surely be helped with the proper counseling. Why do we rush to support a woman who wants to destroy her husband and damage her children, when we don't really know that she has a right or that she is right in what she is saying and doing?

I know husbands who were on top of the world, with good positions, good money, honor and success and lovely children, and the wife wanted out. She went to work on them and they were wiped out. Sometimes a house they paid for ended up with the wife and the children and the husband drained of every penny to pay for incredible level fees as the wife takes him to this and that and the other secular court, always backed by people who have sympathy for an "Agunah." This is terrible.

A judge once asked a wife why she is teaching the children to hate her husband. They are supposed to visit him and they don't. She replied, "They don't want to go" and that was it. Another wife called the police and said that her husband had just raped the little daughter and she had blood to prove it. The authorities rushed over and discovered the whole thing was a lie. And the rabbis and community activists still backed the mother and attacked the father. And the judge kept the children with the mother.

This latest assault on marriage by the International Beth Din which is simply a few rabbis who banded together with such a title, is opposed by Rabbi Willig and Rabbi Schachter of the RCA Beth Din. And then we have another "rabbi" who wants to simply make marriage vanish, another approach that very few people accept, if any, but accepted because it is a help for "agunoth." But  this innovator, Rabbi Riskin, agrees that all those who oppose his idea of making marriage vanish, will also oppose the new idea of the International Beth Din, that when the husband refuses to give a GET they interpret to mean that he really wants a GET! Okay, it is a lie, but aren't we helping Agunoth?

May I ask, If  you want to help Agunoth, do you not mind making mamzerim? And what kind of help is it to have a woman remarry without a GET when she will sin with adultery? Okay, it is a mitsvah to help ladies, but do you help them when they will end up in Gehenum? And when she goes to Gehenum, what about the people who encouraged her?

Every Yom Kippur, those people who have engaged in coercing a husband to divorce without knowing all of the facts, must face up to the fact that the Shulchan Aruch clearly forbids these things in the vast majority of cases. And anyone who forces a GET, or who engages in secular court to terrorize the husband, or who violates the Torah in any way to get a GET, or who encourages such things, will surely face a Judgment, in a court that does believe in the Shulchan Aruch. And in that court, anyone who violated and disregarded ithe Shulchan Aruch is going to have an interesting time.

How a Troubled Marriage Should Behave

How should a troubled marriage behave? This is a difficult question. And the reason it is difficult, is because people with such a problem have three basic avenues to turn to. One, each person in a troubled marriage, husband and wife, can do one of three things. One, they can turn to their parents or close friends. This can often provoke fights that lead to utter destruction. Again, involving parents or close friends in a problem with a spouse is an invitation to disaster. I told this to a prominent Israeli Rov and he strongly agreed.

Two, a person in a troubled marriage can turn to a therapist to try to make Shalom Bayis. But there are those who claim that some therapists are not effective, or rather, some therapists are effective at breaking up the marriage.. Some, of course, can be very helpful, but this option is not a sure avenue of success. The third option is to go to a Beth Din or Rov. Here too, there are Beth Dins that succeed in making Shalom, and some that succeed in destroying marriage. There is a letter from a Gadol about a prominent Beth Din that it destroys marriages. But after the letter was issued, I think it is still in business.

Thus, a troubled marriage has three very delicate options. And often, none of them succeed. Because if  you don't go to parents and friends, and you don't go to therapists, and you don't go to Beth Din or Rabbonim, what else can you do?

What often happens is that after the three things above have been tried and the husband and wife see no change, not only has there not been an improvement, but things may have reached a new level of anger and bitterness. At that point, and probably before, the flies have begun to swarm. There are organizations of people who believe it is a great mitsvah to destroy a marriage, children and all. And they inculcate in husband or wife such hate for the other that nothing is forbidden. This has nothing to do with Torah, but the people who advocate these things usually blame it on some rabbi, and they may be telling the truth.

If there is a rabbi who wants to save marriages, not break them up, or there is a therapist or Beth Din known to save marriages, they should be consulted.

If there are people giving "advice" about how to destroy the other spouse, the couple should refuse any such advice.

When the couple goes for advice with the appropriate person, they should identify the pressures and the problems that are hurting the marriage. Pressures and problems could be lack of money, or not enough money, or bills or things that are needed but there is no money for them. The gemora says that when the kitchen is bare fights in the family begin.

Today, when we live in urbanized areas where real estate prices are quite high, owning a house or paying rent is beyond many people. Some people just suffer. And this hurts the marriage.

Another problem may be the children. Sometimes, a child can be difficult and the parents struggle to deal with it. They may have different ways of dealing with it. And they may argue about whose way is best.

Another problem could be that somebody hurt the other one and they remember it. How to rectify the hurt is a big problem.

Overriding all of this is one thing. Does the couple have the right attitude about marriage? Namely, is the couple committed to marriage? Is the couple committed to their children? Or do they feel that marriage and children must step aside for the personal happiness of the husband and wife?

Today, many or most Torah Jews live in urban areas where real estate costs and the costs of tuition for Yeshiva are terrible burdens. This hurts the marriage. When we factor in the fact that in America people often get what they want as children, and want to supply their children with the same, we realize that marriage can be a challenge. The parents are used to plenty and can't easily adapt to less. And they are upset that they cannot supply their children with what they had as children.

And there is another factor that I heard from a prominent therapist. I once mentioned that there are people who don't understand marriage. He laughed and said that today the problem is worse than that. Today, the parents of the parents don't understand marriage. The present parents as children never saw a truly functioning marriage, so where do they learn how to behave in marriage?

Today it is very hard. And as the pressure builds, and the flies of "helpers" swarm to "help" the wife be free of her husband, and to "help" the husband to have a better wife, how can marriage survive?

Mort Fertel is a prominent therapist available online. He is a Torah Jew with a strong following for his ideas and help for marriage. He insists that commitment is the key to marriage. He says that commitment creates love. But that love does not last, as it is caused by people at a certain age, and as they change, the love weakens. But one who is committed, and constantly creates commitment, produces a love that lasts. But to be truly committed is truly possible when one had parents who were truly committed. Otherwise, it is a problem. But problem or not, if two people, especially Torah people, commit themselves to being committed, for their sakes and for the sake of the children, there is hope.

Sources on the Draft of American Women in 2016

Will American women be drafted after 2016? This is an important issue. Here are some sources from the US government. There are also important documents in the Defense Department's collection of reports on this issue.

1. www.sss.gov/wmbkgr.htm 
2. 1. Usgovinfo.about.com  > Defense and Security of the United States

BACKGROUNDER: WOMEN AND THE DRAFT IN AMERICA While women officers and enlisted personnel serve with distinction in the US Armed Forces, women have never been subject to Selective Service registration or a military draft in America. Those women who served in the past and those who serve today in ever increasing numbers all volunteered for military service. The US came close to drafting women during World War II, when there was a shortage of military nurses. However, there was a surge of volunteerism and a draft of women nurses was not needed. After America's draft ended in 1973, the Selective Service System was maintained in a standby status, just in case a return to conscription became necessary during a crisis. After March 29, 1975, men no longer had to register and Selective Service was placed in "deep standby." But then, in 1980, President Carter reactivated the registration process for men in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and in reaction to reports that the standby Selective Service System might not meet wartime requirements for rapid manpower expansion of the active and reserve forces. Although the specter of a future draft remained solely the concern of young men, discussions in Congress and the Administration about registering and conscripting women periodically took place. Section 811 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1980 (PL 96-107, Nov. 9, 1979) required the President to send to the Congress a plan for reforming the law providing for the registration and induction of persons for military service. The President sent his recommendations for Selective Service reform in a report dated Feb. 11, 1980. As noted above, the President requested reactivation of registration for men. But another recommendation to the Congress was that the act be amended to provide presidential authority to register, classify, and examine women for service in the Armed Forces. If granted, the President would exercise this authority when the Congress authorized the conscription of men. Although women would become part of the personnel inventory for the services to draw from, their use would be based on the needs and missions of the services. Department of Defense (DoD) policy, which was not to assign women to positions involving close combat, would continue. In response to these recommendations, the Congress agreed to reactivate registration, but declined to amend the act to permit the registration of women. In the legislative history for the Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1981, the Senate Armed Services Committee report stated that the primary reason for not expanding registration to include women was DoD's policy of not using women in combat. Additional reasons cited in the report included agreement by both civilian and military leadership that there was no military need to draft women and congressional concerns about the societal impact of the registration and possible induction of women. The exclusion of women from the registration process was challenged in the courts. A lawsuit brought by several men resulted in a 1980 US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania decision that the MSSA's gender-based discrimination violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the District Court enjoined registration under the Act. Upon direct appeal, in the case of  Rostker v. Goldberg , 453 US 57 (1981), the Supreme Court reversed the District Court Decision and upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion, ruling That Was there no Violation of the due process clause of the  Fifth Amendment . The Supreme Court based its decision largely on DoD's policy that excluded women from combat. The Court reasoned that since the purpose of registration was to create a pool of potential inductees for combat, males and females could be treated differently. The Court also noted its inclination to defer to Congress since draft registration requirements are enacted by Congress under its constitutional authority to raise armies and navies, and observed that Congress had in 1980 considered but rejected a proposal to expand registration to women. In 1992, a Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces reexamined the issue of registration and conscription of women. In its November 1992 report, by a vote of 11 to 3, the Commission recommended that women not be required to register for or be subject to conscription. The Commission cited the 1981 Supreme Court Decision in Rostker v. Goldberg  upholding the exclusion of women from registration as the basis for its Recommendation. The Commission also discussed enacting existing ground combat specialties exclusion policies into law to provide an additional barrier to the amendment of the MSSA to provide for the conscription of women. However, an appendix to its report suggested that public opinion was divided on the issue. The appendix, which included the results of a random telephone survey of 1,500 adults, showed that, in the event of a draft for a national emergency or threat of war (and assuming an ample pool of young men exists), 52 percent of respondents indicated women should be drafted, about 39 percent of respondents indicated women should not be drafted, and 10 percent responded they did not know. In May 1994, President Clinton Asked the  Secretary of Defense  to update its Mobilization Requirements for the Selective Service System and, as a part of the Effort, "Continues to review the arguments for and tukar continuing to exclude women from registration now That they 'll can be assigned to combat roles other than ground combat. " In its subsequent report, the DoD position remained "that the restriction of females from assignments below the brigade level whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground, provides justification from exempting women from registration (and a draft) as set forth in the Decision of the US Supreme Court in  Rostker v. Goldberg  (1981). " However, the report also recognized the vastly increased role being played by women in each of the Armed Services who, in Fiscal Year 1994, comprised 16 percent of recruits. "Because of this change in the makeup of the Armed Forces," the report observed, "much of the congressional debate which, in the court's opinion, provided adequate congressional scrutiny of the issue ... (in 1981) would be inappropriate today. " While maintaining that it was not necessary to register or draft women, the DoD review concluded "the success of the military will increasingly depend upon the participation of women." In 1998, at the request of US Senator Charles Robb (D-VA), ranking Minority member of the Subcommittee on Readiness ,  Senate Armed Services Committee , the  General Accounting Office  (GAO) Addressed a variety of questionsMy related to gender equity in the Military . Included was a budget and resource examination of the impact of requiring women to register with Selective Service. The GAO report *  did not address the pros and cons regarding, the exclusion of women from ground combat Positions or from the Selective Service registration Requirement, nor did it make Any policy Recommendations. Instead, GAO simply described the DoD position that there is no need to register women as "being consistent with its policy of restricting women from direct ground combat." NOTE: On January 24, 2013, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta announced the end of the direct ground combat exclusion rule for female service members, following a unanimous recommendation by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Based on the American Forces Press Service's news release, "Defense Department Expands Women's Combat Role," dated January 24, 2013, key statements are highlighted below: The secretary announced that the service branches will continue to move forward with a plan to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service. The change is intended to ensure that the best qualified and most capable service members, regardless of gender, are available to carry out the mission. Panetta added, "If members of our military can meet the qualifications for a job, then they should have the right to serve, regardless of creed, color, gender or sexual orientation." The secretary directed the military services to undertake an evaluation of all occupational performance standards to ensure they are up to date and gender-neutral. Specialty schools will be included in the evaluation, a senior defense official said. ... The entire process is to be completed by January 1, 2016. Once the policy is fully implemented, military occupations will be closed to women only by exception, and only if approved by the defense secretary, a senior defense official said.  (Compiled and edited by The Office of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs, Selective Service System, February 2014.) * Appendix I of the GAO report is Entitled, "Historical Perspectives on Women and the Draft." It provides an excellent chronological summary about this issue and nearly all of it is incorporated, verbatim, in this paper.

Last Updated February 25, 2014 © 2014 Selective Service System

War with Husbands: How to Win Big and Go to Gehenum

I think that this post's title is so hideous that only I could have thought of it. But I follow the gemora in Pesachim that warns us to speak properly. The exception is when we have to clarify confusion. Then we have to say it like it is. And, after years watching in growing agony what goes on in Torah marriages when they go down the drain, I am writing about this problem: How women can successfully make war with their husband. Wat wives are doing today in increasing numbers, and often or usually with some support from some rabbi. The punch line, is as above, "and Go to Gehenum." Now, I am not on the "Gehenum Board" in the Other World; but based upon the Torah sources I will supply here, the women who are doing the tricks and ferocious things we will describe are going to have to answer for it. And while they are doing that, they may be hearing the screaming of the rabbis who told them to do it, from the smoke filled pits outside the Heavenly Beth Din.

And as I am wont to do, when I give somebody a criticism, I like to mention also, perhaps at the beginning, the other side of the coin. This is especially true with women, who are more easily received in Heaven than men, so that their getting to the higher world is basically easy for them, while it is not easy for men, as the Gemora in Berochose says. So, what favorable thing can we say about fighting wives before we blast them out and say they will go to Gehenum?

What is going on today in divorce is going on for two reasons: One, husband and wife have no training in dealing with divorce. At least, not for the first few divorces. Two, there are rabbis and their supporters who organize and teach frightened women what they must do to destroy their husbands and get a GET.

A wife in a troubled or broken marriages often is afraid and even panics. They turn to others for advice. Usually, they turn to parents and close friends, who love them very much and are bitter at the husband for distressing their daughters or dear friend. In my Shalom Bayis Beth Din project I insist that no relative or friend ever get involved in a  problem marriage, especially one who divorced themselves. A senior rabbi in Israel heard this idea from me and vigorously added his approval. That is probably the one worst problem in broken marriages, when close family and friends "help" the wife to fight the husband and they are not equipped emotionally to do anything else. Only outsiders who have no strong emotional inducements may help in a troubled marriage.

Relative to this problem of "helpers" who teach the troubled wife how to get vicious, we  have strangers who have taken upon themselves the "mitsvah" as they put it of "freeing" a woman from her husband. They feel that any husband who refuses a GET to his wife is evil and must be forced to divorce. In halacha, this coerced GET is invalid and children from the next marriage are mamzerim. But this is a big business, one powered by very senior rabbis and Rosh Yeshivas who don't know what they are talking about. One has called for coercing a husband even to beat him until he dies. Another has permitted a woman needing a GET to leave without a GET. That is surely invalid and the children in the next marriage mamzerim. But these "rabbis" are so sure of themselves. They have no sources and I have plenty of sources, but because of their high position in the community people especially ladies who don't know the science of confronting a mistaken senior rabbi obey them and perform the mitsvah of destroying a husband with gusto. These people have their share in the child molesting that occurs when the baby is born from the next marriage and the child is a mamzer.

Then we have the organizaiton ORA that sponsors rallies outside of the homes of husbands and their families. People who refuse to give a GET have their family targetted, fired from jobs, etc. It is a terrible war and pressure and does result in many divorces. These divorces are usually invalid and the children born from them are probably mamzerim.

Now let's get to the main point, the evil things that women, fine and decent and Torah people, who love their children and parents but end up breaking their hearts, who are gentle and kind but end up with the utmost viciousness, and what they do in their war with the husband.

War with Husbands: How to Win Big and Go to GehenumThe technique is as follows. Call up a rabbi who permits women to do anything to get a GET. The rabbi never knew the caller but shoots out permission to call the police, to put the husband in jail, to break the marriage, etc. and etc. And the woman finds other women and some men who are influenced by these "rabbis" to make war on a person who may be completely innocent, and maybe the wife is a liar, as sometimes happens. But the war starts and... That is enough for today. But there is much more on this subject, hopefully, in another post. Back to our present post and a final word to the destroyers of marriage and children:

Next stop is Gehenom. But, enjoy the hate while you can.

The New "Treifeh Agunah Movement" Powered by Ignorant Rabbis

In our previous post we discussed the treifeh Agunah movement founded by someone hwo declared war on the Shulchan Aruch, as I describe there. We also noted that she succeeded in persuading many rabbis who don't know the laws of Gittin, because very few of them do know the laws of Gittin, to help ladies who demand a GET. And these rabbis, some of them dayanim or Roshei Yeshiva, have "helped" in a big way. Now, many women terrorize her husband, have him jailed, turn the children against him, and drain him financially until his life is a fire. This is happening today big time and tomorrow it will be worse.

These ladies are  from the finest families, from the best Torah schooling. And now they do things completely forbidden by the Torah. If they are really successful in the new world of treifeh fighting, they will force the husband to give a GET, not realizing that a coerced GET is invalid. And when she remarries, her children will be mamzerim. The Gedolim of Israel have decreed that a divorce given by a Beth Din that is known to coerce Gittin not in accord with the Shulcan Aruch, is considered invalid until a proper Beth Din will check into it. I heard from HaGaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt"l that he takes away Chezkas Beth Din from a Beth Din that coerces Gittin against the Shulchan Aruch. And guess what? The tidal wave of war against the Shulchan Aruch, powered by a famous and senior Rosh Yeshiva, has now gone beyond coercing a GET, to telling a woman she doesn't need a GET to remarry if her husband won't give it! Once she is fed up with her husband, either she gets her GET, or she can remarry without a GET! If only the Boss of the original Agunah movement would know how far she has succeeded!

TheNew "Treifeh Agunah Movement" Powered by Ignorant RabbisSadly, many good and learned Torah scholars are saddened when they hear of this  violation of the Torah, but they are silent. This is the "new Torah." Any idiot can come along and toss the Shulchan Aruch in the trash, and nobody will utter a public word against him. Well, here is an exception. Me and my brother are busy fighting these things. And my brother asked me, where is everybody else? I told him that we do our work lishmo and don't have a job from the community. But those who live off the community and could lose their job if they start up with the Agunah lobby or some prominent Rosh Yeshiva, they have learned to keep their mouths shut, at least in public. In private, of course, nobody is going to marry such a mamzer born from an invalid GET. I would like to see if the Rosh Yeshiva or Rov who permitted a woman to remarry without a GET, or with a coerced GET, would marry his child to her children.

And let  us remember when the mamzerim arrive and some rabbis acknowledge that nobody may marry them, that this is the work of the Boss of the treifeh Agunose, who succeeded in getting prominent rabbis who did not know the laws of Gittin to support them to do their treifeh things.

In our next post, we want to detail what treifeh things are being done, often with the approval of prominent rabbis. And if anybody has a source to show that I am wrong and that they are right, I am very interested in seeing it, because there is no source for what they are doing.

The Agunah Movement and Mamzerim

Many years ago, there were serious Agunah issues. They were not Agunahs because a husband sunk in a ship and nobody was positive he was dead, which is the traditional Agunah. They were people whose husbands were alive and well and hoping to maintain a good marriage. But for some reason, the women did not like their husbands, and refused to be with them. They insisted on a GET, and the husbands resisted. Many people tried to settle things but nothing worked. I got involved, and both of these marriages were ended, but that is not the main news. The main news is that the marriages were ended with absolutely no rancor on any side. Big rabbonim and askonim were involved. The husbands had their opportunities to be heard, and finally, things worked out and there was a GET. The entire community was involved. The husbands knew it and everyone knew it. But it was handled with consideration for every side, and they appreciated it.

It was not an easy thing, and after it was over, I was sick for a while. But it was worth it. Because everything was done peacefully and everyone involved left with a good name, Some of them involved remarried, and as far as I know are happy.

In those days, what became the Agunah movement began. I heard about it and called up the heads of the Agunah movement, which were two women: The Boss and her assistant. I suggested to them that they work with rabbis to arrange divorces when necessary. The assistant agreed. But the Boss refused. She said to me, "I don't want to work with rabbis. I want to force rabbis to change the halacha of divorce." I was stunned. I asked her, "Do you really think you can force rabbis to violate the laws of the Torah because of your Agunah movement?" But that is exactly what she said. And that is exactly what she decided to do, and that is what succeeded. Today there is a flourishing Agunah movement that violates the Torah constantly. It produces mamzerim,  married women remarrying without a proper GET, and lately, produces women who just walk out on their husbands without any kind of GET, and remarry, simply because they are somewhat disappointed in their husbands! The Boss won!  Rackman invented a permission for any woman to remarry because  a husband who does not give a GET shows he is a bad husband and the marriage to him is nullified. There is absolutely no proof of this in the Torah, and the Shulchan Aruch and the poskim are full of the opposite. But that is the situation today. And that situation is producing mamzerim right and left. And for mamzerim, there are no solutions.

Rackman was the first of the evil rabbis, but not the last. The enormous pressure of The Boss and her followers became a mighty movement. Today, a woman who wants a GET has many ways to get it,ways that defy the Torah and produce mamzerim. So, the Boss won, and the babies lost.

The Philly Lady Who Wants to Remarry Without a GET

The Philly Lady Looking to Marry Without a GET

The Philly lady looking to remarry without a GET has been so advised by her rabbinical adviser that she does not need a GET. Now, why does every woman in the world who is married and needs a divorce need a GET, and why does the Philly lady not need a GET? Well nobody has openly stated that they permit it. But she is still looking for somebody to marry, without her GET. And nobody has protested, other than this blog.

If this woman doesn’t need a GET it must be that the marriage doesn’t exist. But she was married. She had a child with the husband. What happened to the marriage? Those who permit her to remarry without a GET must hold that the marriage vanished. That could happen if the husband married her and then it was discovered that the marriage was conditional and the condition was not fulfilled. But in this marriage, there were no conditions.

Furthermore, when somebody makes conditions to their marriage, and the conditions are not met, the marriage can vanish retroactively, but this holds true only if all that was done was Kiddushin. But once the couple marry fully and are together, even if one makes a condition and it is not kept, there is a serious problem whether or not the marriage is valid. See Even Hoezer 38:35 and 36. It seems that people make kiddushin with conditions and they want them fulfilled. If the conditions are not fulfilled the marriage vanishes. But after Kiddushin when they are together already in marriage through Chupa or biah they negate the conditions. Thus, even if we assume that there were conditions that were not met in the marriage of the Philly lady, once she had a child she surely negated the conditions and is married and needs a GET.  This holds true whether or not there was kiddushin and then a chupa, and certainly if there was marital intimacy [and certainly if there was a child because most Jewish women don’t want children to be born from zenuse]. Once they are together with chupa or biah, they are mochel conditions so that the being together will not be bias zenuse.

But for some strange reason this lady is considered different than all of this, and she is judged as one who does want bias zenuse. How did her rabbinical adviser know that? Or maybe her “rabbinical adviser” never saw the Shulchan Aruch EH 38:35 and 36 where it is stated, “All of this [that conditions destroy the marriage] is only valid until the two are together [chupah or biah] but if they are together she is certain married, because we assume that when they were together in chupah she negated the conditions. Therefore, she is married and he has to give her a kesuboh.”

Now, if this couple not only married but had a child, even if there was a proper condition and the condition was not met, there is a serious issue whether the marriage vanishes. Because “nobody makes his marriage into zenuse.” If the woman claims that she is free, she is claiming that she lived with her husband and had a child from him with znuse, something that is strongly frowned against, and that runs against the feelings of good Jewish people. Whether such a condition survives intimacy and surely having a child is a serious question. We might want to go into that serious question another time. But for now, let us keep it simple. The wife claims that her marriage vanished. If it vanished, she had a child with no marriage. The child is born out of wedlock, and she had a child out of wedlock. If she is happy with that status, is the child happy with it? When the child comes of age and the child looks for a shidduch, will someone want a child born out of wedlock, from zenuse? This now becomes an issue for Beth Din, because “Beth Din is the father of orphans.” Children whose parents claim falsely that they were born out of wedlock invite the censure of Beth Din.

Well, we will supply a complaint to hasten the process. We will stand up for the honor of the child, who is a pure child, born from a pure marriage, from a mother who is being advised by some nut of a “rabbi” that she is not married. And that nut job obviously does not care about the child. Maybe the child is not paying him, or maybe… But we will state which is obvious to any rabbi who is not a nut job. This woman is married. If she remarries she is sinning with not zenuse but niyufe mamosh. If she has a child it is a mamzer. And yes, just as Beth Din, or responsible people if there is no Beth Din, have a moral duty to speak out to help a helpless child, so do you and I  have an obligation to publicize to the world that if this woman remarries, her new children will be mamzerim. And the child she had with her real husband is completely kosher. If her “rabbi” has it reversed, it is probably because his “daas Torah” is in reverse. But we will speak up for the two children. The one born already is a pure child from a pure marriage. And the one who cholila vichass will be born from this lady who claims that she is not married now, her child or children will be mamzerim. Not doubtful mamzerim, but definite mamzerim.

Philly lady. Give my regards to your “rabbi.” You will be hearing more from me. But I don’t blame you. I blame him. The K people in Philly are behind all of this. And I won’t stop mentioning it. Now, let me talk to you.

Your husband wants to give you a GET. But you have to settle with him, not loads of money, not loads of burdensome things but improved visitation from the daughter who left Washington to live in Philadelphia. Even though you played pretty rough with him for years, he is not looking for revenge. I am in touch with him and anyone from your side who wants to settle things, contact me at 845-578-1917. And know this: If you have a child without a GET, the child will be hearing from me. And it will never stop. Maybe whoever told you how to behave will call up the people sitting in jail now who tried to beat up your husband, but failed. Maybe they will beat me up and shut my mouth. Maybe.

Proof that Philly Produces Mamzerim

MAMZERUS in Philadelphia?

The recent effort by the Kaminetskys of Philadelphia Yeshiva to “help” Mrs. Friedman, a married woman, to remarry without a GET, is a hideous rishuse. Somebody told me he was asked by Shalom Kaminetsky if he wanted to marry Mrs. Friedman. He asked if she had a GET. He was told no, and that she doesn’t need a GET, only lichumroa. When asked what Rov permitted her to remarry without a GET, the answer was that when he will marry her he will be told what Rov permitted it.

Let us assume that somewhere, in some hole in the ground, there is a Rov who permits a married woman to remarry without a GET, because she wants a different husband, etc. May the woman remarry based on that one Rov? If the Shulchan Aruch and all of the poskim forbid it, what Rov can permit it? But, perhaps, somewhere, there is a “rabbi” who permits it. May the woman remarry because some rabbi or even a few rabbis permit it? That is our question.

The Rashbo in Teshuva I:353 elaborates on the laws of pesak halacha. He says that if there is an argument between two rabbis and one is greater than the other in wisdom and number of students, we never are permitted to do as the opinion of the smaller rabbi, even if there is great urgency. If there is an argument among rabbis who are equal in wisdom and number of students, we follow the majority usually, but if there is a great urgency we can sometimes do as the minority.  But if it is generally known and accepted that the halacha is as the teachings of the majority, we don’t accept the teaching of the minority even if there is a great urgency.

If there is a doubt because the arguing rabbis are equal then if the question is a Torah issue we must be stringent. But if the issue is a rabbinical issue we may be lenient. If the community accepts a rabbi to adjudicate their Torah issues, everyone in the city must follow that Rov whatever he says. If the community does not have a single Rov who rules on all Torah issues for the community, but the community has decided to follow the Rambam or some similar Posek in all that they do, this is permitted. But if a Rov in that city brings proofs to differ with that particular posek, he may follow his own logic. Because the Rambam is not a real Rov for the community and therefore a Talmid Chochom may disagree with him if he is worthy to argue with the Rambam in general. But if the Rov is appointed by the people of the city and is alive everyone must obey him even a Talmid Chochom who disagrees.

If there are two scholars who disagree and they are equa,l in Torah questions they must be stringent. But if two scholars disagree with one scholar who are all equal, we go according to the majority.

Let us now turn to our case of the runaway married woman. Not a single rabbi in the world has openly taken credit for this pesak. So, as far as the world is concerned, the woman who remarries is a SOTA and her children are mamzerim. A man who dates the woman should ask a question of his rov if he is doing the right thing, otherwise, he should stay away from her. And if he does not stay away from her, and marries her, even after hearing the name or names of the “rabbis” who permit it, he is sinning with a married woman according to the opinion of the vast majority of the rabbis and the great rabbis who have never permitted such a thing.

We, all of  us who are truly Torah Jews, follow the Shulchan Aruch. The Shulchan Aruch has various cases where a woman was tricked into marriage by a bad person and she finds out what happens and she is very bitter. She wants out. The Shulchan Aruch says that we force the husband to give a GET, because there must be a GET. The fact that the woman has changed her mind about marriage even for very good reasons does not change the fact that she is married. See the previous post with sources.

Another source we mention here is the Laws of Kesubos Even Hoezer 77:3 that quotes 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 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?

Bottom line: The Rosh is brought down in Shulchan Aruch above. The Gro paskens like that. Who is this “rabbi” who disagrees and permits Mrs. Friedman to remarry without a GET? And why are the Rosh Yeshivas who screamed at Aharon the husband for not giving a GET not attacking the Kaminetsky attempt to marry a married woman? And why are the rabbis in Washington still torturing Aharon Friedman as if he was unworthy to enter their shull? If Mrs. Friedman says she doesn't need a GET, why is Aharon being tortured to force a GET? And why are the rabbis in Washington tormenting Aharon after he obeyed the Baltimore Beth Din, while his wife ran away from it?

Leaving Without a GET: "Daas Torah" in Philadelphia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Part Six of Broken Marriages and Divorces- What is the Solution for our Future?

 They key to our future is to return to one of two paths. One, is the style of Torah initiated by the Gro and Reb Chaim Volloznher, that students learned without enough food for years. I don't think think this is likely to happen and if it is started I don't think it will last very long. In those days starving was part of life. Today, nobody heard of it. So that is not a solution.

Another idea is to go back to the style of Chazal, as indicated by Rambam and the gemora. The goal in life for a Jewish man is to be great in Torah, also wealthy, and in addition to be great in Derech Erets and human relations, meaning of courses family as well, and four, to master basic skills needed for life, as the rabbis taught, "Greater is one who toils with his hands than those who fear heaven."

Years ago when I taught English to children late in the afternoon, I was exhausted, they were exhausted, and one day the Principal came into the class during recess and found that all of the children were working with pen and paper doing their school tasks. He asked me why the children don't go to recess. I explained that they did not want to go to recess. They liked doing work. He walked out and did not complain.

A prominent therapist has said that happiness comes from doing something that offers two things: One is that he can do it, and two, that it is a challenge. If the challenge is too hard, the person gets frustrated and quits. If the challenge is too easy, the task is boring. But if a person works on a challenge that he can do, but it is a challenge, the flow of his feelings will be happy and positive, even more happy and positive than when he enjoys himself eating or some similar pleasure.

If we can begin our children's education at a very early age to learn how to learn Torah, to learn how to earn, to learn how to have Derech Erets, and to learn how to cope with various physical tasks, we produce somebody who after many years of this is ready for marriage. A woman who marries such a person is very likely to be happy. She has Torah. She has money. She has Derech Erets. She has a talented husband. What more can she ask?

But how do we do this? We have to first teach the value of this program, which is really the program of the Torah from the earliest times and the way of the gemora. We find in the gemora the greatest Talmudists who were often very wealthy. How could this be? If children all earned as children and came to adulthood with the money to buy a house without a mortgage and a steady income, we understand. Some of these children continued earning until they became wealthy, and some became very wealthy. But as children and as adults, the learning was the major task of the day. But the work was a steady project, even though it was not the major task of the day.

Our task now is to find people who realize the danger of raising children in the present environment, and who want to give their children a chance at a really wonderful family life, great in Torah, great in wealth, Derech Erets and general skills.

Let us realize that young children spend an enormous amount of time watching television and playing ball and wasting time. If we can capture the "flow" of the child to earn money, he will gladly work hard at it. Every coin that clinks into his pocket will strengthen his resolve to continue. And when he succeeds in Torah, not with lessons that are designed to show how clever the teacher is, but are designed in the ancient Torah style to begin from the beginning and master the entire work, and to continue until more and more books are truly mastered, happy children and successful children will be happy and successful adults.

I am looking for people who are interested in developing such programs. If you are interested in this, call me at 845-578-1917. Thank you.

Part Five of the Yeshivas and Broken Families

If we study the Talmud and its related works, we see that ancient Israel raised its men to achieve four things: One, a Jewish man was trained to seek greatness in Torah. Two, he had to earn a living. And according to Rovo, if he learned Torah, he should strive for wealth, so that he would not be pressured by fiscal problems when he was learning. Thirdly, he had to learn Derech Erets and how to deal with his fellow, whether in family and marriage or general society, even with gentiles. Fourth, he had to learn basic worldly things, as the Talmud says, "Greater is one who toils with his hands than the G-d fearing."

A person as a child was trained to learn Torah, but also trained in the other things. Thus, Rambam says that one may not marry until he purchases a house (no mortgage) and has a steady income. Now, if people married at the age of seventeen or eighteen, and they learned in Yeshiva their whole young life, when did they get the money to buy a house? And how did they suddenly have a steady income? Obviously, the training of a child was to do what an adult should do. As the Shulchan Aruch in Orach Chaim tells us, after Shacharis one must go to work, because all Torah without work is waste. And without a steady income one enters into borrowing and eventually stealing and endless sins.

Working did not begin when the person was ready to get married. He was trained during childhood to prepare for life exactly as an adult would do: the major part of his time was learning, and part time the person works. If a child begins this program as a child, a decade plus later he will have extensive experience in business and other fields. He will have earned enough money to buy a house. He will have had years of setting money aside for investments. Thus, the students of Rovo told him that they owned real estate and it supported them so they only had to work part time. This began in childhood.

When such a child reach adulthood, he married solid in money, solid in Torah, solid in Derech Erets, learned by practical dealings with people for many years in business./ Because he was involved in Derech Erets, he also picked up basic skills needed to be "one who toils with his hands" that was greatly lauded by Chazal.

A wife in such a situation had a good income, a nice house, money for what she needed, clothes that cost more than her husband's clothes, because Rambam says that the husband must honor his wife more than himself, and this means spending on her, as Raishis Chochmo says. The husband has learned Derech Erets and can get along with people, and his wife benefits from this. And if something has to be done around the house, the husband is experienced with working with his hands. Such a woman is surely blessed and happy. Why in the world should there be, heaven fore fend, problems and divorces?

But what about today? Somebody goes to Yeshiva. He learns many years. He hears this shiyur and that talk but rarely does he master Torah. Rather, he masters the lecture that shows how clever the Rosh Yeshiva or Magid Shiur is. After years of this, he has forgotten the complicated shiurim and has only smatterings of this or that. I know somebody who has spent years trying to finish Shass Bieeyune, and he only needs a few more masechtose. But he is paid in Kollel not to finish Shas but to listen to lectures that the Yeshiva forces him to attend. And Shass may take years and years. So we have no Gedolim. But furthermore, we have frustrated Bnei Torah. Years of this kind of learning  rarely produces someone great in Torah. He surely rarely becomes great with wealth. Derech Erets? The Yeshiva culture is to encourage the greatness of a Talmid Chochom, that people owe him great honor and money. This is the opposite of the mitsvah taught in Rashi and the Zohar that "and he shall make his wife rejoice" means he makes her rejoice in marriage, not himself.

The wife may not appreciate her role in all of this. She works hard in a job to support her  husband to become a Gadol, but as time goes on, no how much he learns, the job of being a Gadol goes only to the family of the Rosh Yeshiva. Others just keep grinding away with no end. And the wife is not getting younger. More and more children arrive and she sees no end to her labors to support a husband who will need support for ever. When she mentions this to her husband he tells her that Daas Torah requires her to honor her husband. Without going into the gory details, we have a picture of why there are broken marriages and divorces. Yes, "A Yeshiva is Hashchoso." It destroys men. It destroys women. It destroys children.

Yes, there are a few people who can truly become Gedolim. But the present system is surely not the path to this. If so, why of the many thousands who have learned for many years in Yeshiva and Kollel, we have major Rosh Yeshivas who support gay rights and coerce husband with invalid Gittin producing mamzerim? And they, rachmono litslon, are considered by the Yeshiva to be "gedolim" that everyone must obey!

Part Four of the Yeshivas and Broken Marriages

What happened when all of a sudden going to Yeshiva was popular? This took place in the sixties, after the passing of HaGaon Reb Aharon zt"l. The new generation was a time of great turmoil in America. The Viet Nam War was going full blast.  Americans were going there to die and suffer greatly in the heat and swamps, never knowing when a bullet would fly at them. Victory was elusive, but death and wounding was not. Students who were being drafted rioted. Throughout America, the students and the hippies revolted. Colleges became centers for rebellion against everything sacred. No longer could an Orthodox Jew go to college.  And who wants to go to college and get drafted? A Yeshiva student was exempt. Therefore, Yeshiva became popular.

Someone in Yeshiva could go for a few years on the sums of support demanded for marrying a Kollel fellow, and people were found who would pay it. In addition, the huge sums of the Poverty Programs were enlisted for those learning who had little money. Beautiful buildings went up, lovely families were established, even while the rest of the country wallowed in the agony of rebellion and drugs. Many parents who lost their children in college looked enviously at the Yeshiva students.

At that time, those few students who had learned before the changes, and who had suffered from the privations of the early years, became Rosh Yeshivas. This was a time when the rabbis in America had not supported the Yeshiva movement. There were open wars with Mr. Mendlowitz and America's rabbis. There was even an attempt to isolate Reb Aharon from the rabbis, but it failed and the senior rabbi who initiated it died suddenly, in the middle of his preparations. Thus, the new generation of successful Yeshiva rabbis was one without true rabbinic leadership. Rosh Yeshivas were not trained in halacha and rabbinic services, but now, they were asked questions by their many students and their families, and the general community. But they did not have the preparation to answer many of these questions. Therefore, they initiated the idea called "Daas Torah" meaning, they would say whatever they thought. Rosh Yeshivas now assumed the mantle of Gedolim, without knowing as much as a Gadol should know. Anyone who disputed their findings was considered a rebel against "Daas Torah." There was a vacuum in true halacha, so evident when the major Rosh Yeshivas made invalid Gittin. As a very senior Rosh Yeshiva once said to me, "You know Gittin. Tell me, where does it say about the names of the GET?" I told him where in the Shulchan Aruch it said about how to write the names in a GET. The Roshei Yeshivas had to write Kesubose. But they did not study the laws of Gittin and did not know how to write the names. I once saw a Kesubo and saw that it was invalid. I asked who wrote it, and was told a certain major Rosh Yeshiva.

Let us now return to our original question. Why is there divorce among Torah Jews? And we will now, having prepared the basic ideas, will turn to specifics that cause the divorces and broken families in the Yeshiva world. We turn now to Part Five of the Yeshivas and Broken Marriages