Profile Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Showing posts sorted by date for query marriage divorce. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query marriage divorce. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Sunday, July 28, 2019

Tamar Epstein Leaves Her Husband for a Strange Man; a Child from Him will be a Mamzer

Profile Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

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


Monday, February 11, 2019



Refusal of Torah Jews to Fight Cuomo: Refusal of Torah Jews to Fight Invalid Gittin and Mamzerim: Why?

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

I have written often of the catastrophe of Cuomo in Albany creating hideous laws. One is to allow people to poison a pregnant woman who wants her baby. The fetus dies and the husband has no punishment. He killed a fetus which according to Cuomo may be murdered with no punishment. Of course, if the husband damages the mother with a knife for instance, he is a murderer. Where are the thousands of Orthodox Jews many of them Torah scholars who are silent?

New York State has long had a GET Law which allows a woman to force a GET. A forced GET says Rambam beginning the laws of divorce, (and the poskim in Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 77.2)  forbid forcing a GET.  But nobody cares about the many mamzerim who are springing up in New York. Also, throughout America, senior ‘rabbis’ are telling women to force a GET from their husband. Some tell her to remarry with no GET on the ridiculous grounds that husbands who had children with the wife are not of a status to merit Torah marriage. One senior Rosh Yeshiva who did this is descended from a great Gadol HaDor from Europe who surely would never approve of such a thing. And when the scandal erupted, basically from me and my brother Rabbi Dr. Daniel on our blogs, a senior ‘Rosh Yeshiva’ got involved to get the monkey out of the tree. Then that mamzer maker was restored to his previous status as a pillar of a major ‘Torah’ organization. That is part of the reason I despise and attack that ‘Torah’ organization and don’t recognize it.

Let us tell a story about the Baal HaTanyo and a very wealthy Jew who refused to give charity. If he gave, it was a mere pittance. The time came when a couple needed money to marry. In those days the poverty was terrible and getting married was not always possible without large sums of money. In a particular town the leaders pondered the problem and had no solution. Finally, the Baal HaTanyeh volunteered that he takes the responsibility for raising the money, on the condition that he decides who to visit for it. With no alternative, this was accepted.

There was in that community an extremely wealthy Jew who gave tiny amounts to charity. The Baal HaTanyo chose to go to him, which shocked everyone. The Baal HaTanyo rapped on the man’s door and was admitted. He asked for help so the couple could marry and the wealthy man gave, as he was wont to do, a very small donation. Usually, such would arouse in the person who asked for the money outrage. But now the Baal HaTanyo thanked the man profusely and gushed blessings upon him. The man had never seen such an attitude. He always saw the opposite. In shock, he escorted the Baal HaTanyo out of his house and watched him descend the steps. Suddenly, he called out, “Rabbi! Don’t leave. I want to increase my contribution.” The Baal HaTanyo returned to the house with the man, and took the now larger donation. Again, the Baal HaTanyo didn’t criticize the amount given which was still not what was needed. Instead he gushed blessings on the man and thanked him profusely. The Baal HaTanyo left, and soon, he was again summoned back to the wealthy man’s house. This kept up until the entire sum needed was given by the wealthy man. The Baal HaTanyo departed from the man gushing blessings on him and assured him that the couple now able to marry will be noticed in heaven. This will bring great blessings and happiness to the donor.

The question, however is, why did nobody else think of such a strategy with a very wealthy man? Was it the holy spirit of the tsadik or what? I don’t know. But I can surmise as follows. The Rov of Brisk Reb Chaim Brisker in the period that he served as a major leader of Vollozhner Yeshiva, was once commanded by the head of the Yeshiva to get money from a wealthy man. Reb Chaim travelled to him and explained the crisis in the Yeshiva and how much money it needed, a very large sum. The gevir immediately agreed and went to his safe and pulled out a huge sack of money. He began counting it out, but only counted very small coins, one at a time. This went on and on. Finally, Reb Chaim, who was losing all of this time when he should have been learning with students in the Yeshiva, asked the gevir if perhaps he had large coins. He replied, “When I prepare to give for a mitsvah, the Soton comes to me and begins to complain and tells me not to give the money. When that happens, and he is banging away with his complaints, I have a strong temptation to keep the money for myself. But I respond to him, “NO!” And I keep counting the money, tiny coin by tiny coin, to utterly confound and destroy the attack of the Soton.”

A wealthy man once promised a million dollars for a Yeshiva and everyone was sure he meant it. But he never gave the money and nobody knew why he changed his mind. It was obvious that he really wanted to give the money. Then a prominent scholar said, “Yes, he surely wanted to give that large sum of money, but he did not have the merit to do so.” And so it was.

Is this why we have tragedies with governments destroying lives and few protest? Is his why we have many ‘rabbis’ who give invalid divorces and the wife remarries with an invalid GET and her child from the next husband is a mamzer and few protest?

Perhaps, if the people who do nothing about tragedies would summon their souls and fight back, and begin, even with one small step to improve and achieve the ability to fight, they would do more and more until we saw them out on the street with signs and songs and ferocious complaints, and surely, there would be hope.


Monday, February 4, 2019

A Forced GET makes a mamzer if the wife remarries with it, but what if the husband has a doubt about giving the GET is it a doubtful mamzer?


One may not Force a GET

Dovid Eidensohn



This is the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 77.2 quoting the Rashbo in VII.414 “It is forbidden to force a GET. If the husband wants to, he divorces her. If he doesn’t want to, he doesn”t.

 All of the commentators there forbid forcing a GET. However, the Gro there brings that those who forbid forcing a GET are the Rosh, the Rashbo, the Ran,S and the Ritva. He says further that although Rambam and Rashbam disagree with this, this is this halocho that forcing a GET is wrong. Rambam in the very beginning of laws of Divorce says that the Torah requires a willing GET given by the husband or the GET is worthless. If so, those who forbid forcing a GET mean that the child born from a woman who is divorced by a forced GET, are mamzerim.

Note that the Gro says that Rashbam and Rambam disagree and would allow a husband to be forced to divorce his wife. But the Rambam on that subject does not say this. He says rather that if a woman does not ask for a GET but stays in the house and takes care of the children doing basic housework, but denies the husband marital intimacy, we force a GET, on the condition that Beth Din gives the husband time to straighten out his marriage. If he fails after the stipulated time to do this, we force a GET. But if she demands a GET, there is an open Mishneh in Nedorim 90b that we do not trust a woman these days to force a GET, they were trusted in earlier times, but today women learned to lie about their husbands to get a GET so today we don’t believe them anymore. The Vilna Gaon brings this from a Tosfose in Kesubose 63b a lengthy Tosfose where Rabbeinu Tam forbids forcing a GET but some other such as Rashbam permitted it. The question it:

What does Rashbam do with the Mishneh which is not contradicted anywhere? The same question can be asked of the Modern Orthodox who created an obligation on all husbands to pay their wives $150 a day for each day after he denied he a GET. What do they do with the Mishneh that today and for hundreds of years since the Mishneh in Nedarim, we don’t allow a woman to force a GET?

Perhaps Rashbam holds like the Rambam, that we can force a GET if the women is against her husband having marital relations with her but stays in the house and takes care of the children. If she doesn’t mention asking for a GET the Mishneh does not apply, at least according to the Rambam. Rashbam could agree. But if she asks for a GET Rambam could also agree with the Mishneh that she has no right to force a GET.

Be advised also that a mamzer is a terrible thing. But worse than a mamzer is a doubtful mamzer. A mamzer may marry a mamzeres. But a doubtful mamzer may not marry a mamzeres and may not marry a Jewish woman.

A doubtful mamzer is discussed in Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 4:24.  A doubtful mamzer is described as a man who marries a woman who is possibly married to another man. If she is really married to him and he has a baby from her, the baby is a mamzer. But if there is a doubt if she is married to that other man, a child born from her is a doubtful mamzer.

I had a question as follows: A husband is being forced terribly to divorce his wife so that he just can’t take it any more. So he gives the GET with bitterness as he is absolutely opposed to being forced. But when he comes to give the GET he realizes that if the GET is worthless, his wife cannot remarry, but, he also cannot remarry, because he never divorced his wife. If so, and if he thinks this way, and has a doubt if he really wants to divorce his wife, and especially if he revealed his thoughts to people so that somebody would marry him with no fear, the GET is probably good. Because a forced GET when we know the husband accepts it is probably kosher. But what if we don’t have two witnesses to this, maybe one witness, or maybe people spoke to the husband and know that he was afraid of not being able to remarry and may have decided to make a kosher GET maybe not. Does that make the child a doubtful mamzer that he cannot marry a mamzeres or a Jewish woman?


Kabbala and Living in a Dark World


A person who commits a capital crime that requires death is only punished this way if he was warned and violated the warning and if the warning was done by two male kosher religious witnesses. What, therefore, is the status of a husband who qualifies either for a beating to divorce his wife or for a humiliation for committing a sin? Does he also require a warning from two kosher witnesses and does he too have to defy the warning that he will be punished for that or not?

A more difficult question is as follows. If a person lives among deeply religious people and defies the Sabbath, we understand that he, if warned and violates the warning, deserves his fate. What, however, happens when a person lives in a time where everybody is not religious, or many people are not religious, and this person comes from a family where people for generations were not religious? Does strong punishment still apply there? That I don’t know. Such people may have the status of shogage or inadvertent sinners and not be considered guilty at least not at the level that serious punishment requires. When Rabbi Elchonon Wasserman zt”l the senior disciple of the Chofetz Chaim came to America to raise money for his Yeshiva, about a hundred years ago, most Jews were not religious. I was born in 1942 and once I was talking down the street wearing a yarmulke and a Jew approached me, very agitated, and said, “You wear a yarmulke in public? Don’t you know that people came from monkeys?” My father was America’s leading battery scientist who invented a battery that doubled the capacity of American non-nuclear submarines. He trained me how to argue. So I knew how to respond to anyone. I immediately thought of an answer to this fellow: What about giraffes who have huge high necks? Do they come from monkeys who have no high necks? But I was a very young boy and he was an older man, so I was silent. But that was America. Children were taught to ignore heaven and to make money. People like me from parents that I had were rare.

Today, when the style seems to be for ‘rabbis’ to invent a new Torah to force a GET and even not to give a GET at all, and there will be a crisis of mamzerim, I strongly advise people to consider marrying with Pilegesh, because even if it is somehow less than regular Kiddushin as it does not have Kiddushin or Kesubo, it also does not have mamzerim, and that, to me, is the main issue.

I wish to conclude by saying that I agree with the Ramban and the Gaon Rav Yaacov Emden that one who marries with Pilegesh may do so, but should  be guided by rabbis exactly how to maintain themselves. Yes, technically two people can marry with Pilegesh, but without constant rabbinical supervision and guidance for Pilegesh people to succeed is a different story. Also, there are perhaps certain leniencies in Pilegesh not available in regular marriage, but I would personally not have interest in helping people use these leniencies, because leniencies can damage peoples’ respect for Pilegesh. And this is likely a factor in what the Chelkas Mechokake says that some people protest when a family member marries with Pilegesh. But people who marry one on one a husband and a wife with Pilegesh, I say, kol hakode, but again, only if there are rabbis preferably from the community to guide them and to stand up for them that they are fine people and following the Torah.




[1] Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer laws of Kiddushin 26:1. Ramo there explains that the Shulchan Aruch feels that if a man and woman marry with intent to marry without witnesses and without Kiddushin, we force them to separate. The Ramo explains because we fear that the couple who married without rabbis or witnesses will be embarrassed to go to the Mikva and thus will sin with Nida. But if the couple married with the knowledge of rabbonim who supervise the couple to obey all of the commands, including Mikvah, then Pilegesh is permitted. The Vilna Gaon provides proof for this to permit Pilegesh from gemora Sanhedrin 21A that “general marriage requires Kiddushin and Kesubo and Pilegesh requires neither Kiddushin or Kesubo.” The Vilna Gaon says that the understanding is that the Pilegesh has no obligation to make a Kiddushin or Kesubo. Nothing is mentioned about a GET, but major poskim say that no GET is required when the wife or husband wishes to end the marriage. Thus, the level of Pilegesh has nothing in the gemora that would obligate a Pilegesh, other than for the husband to provide his wife with a domicile in his house and for her to be faithful to him and not deal with other men with zenuse. If she does, she must leave his house and break up the marriage.

[2] Meyuchesses means that the Rashbo had many volumes filled with his teshuvose. But one of these volumes clearly had teshuvose signed by the Ramban. There the Ramban encourages Pilegesh and says that the Rambam permits it as long as it is not zenuse. We understand from the Ramban that the Rambam in Melochim who permits Pilegesh only for a king is talking about a person who takes a Pilegesh who will sleep with other men not her husband, as zenuse. But if she marries somebody as a real marriage, as was done by many people mentioned in Tanach, nothing is wrong. But if done derech Zenuse, a king may do it, we assume that nobody will go near the wife of a king, even if she does not accept the bonds of marriage. If the king, for instance, takes a very beautiful woman against her will, this is not a normal marriage, but is derech Zenuse, but nobody will antagonize the king and do anything about it. At any rate, the Ramban permits Pilegesh, along with the Vilna Gaon and Reb Yaacov Emden, and the Vilna Gaon says that the Rambam agreed. If so, we must explain the Rambam’s opposition to Pilegesh for one who is not a king as referring to a woman who did not join in marriage with her husband in the style of true marriage, but was taken by a person for her beauty or whatever reason, and because the marriage was forced, only a king may do such a thing.

[3] Shita Mekubetses Kesubose 64b page 1190 in my edition phrase beginning וכתב רבינו יונה ז"ל וזה לשונו

[4] The word in Hebrew is ללוותו probably means to walk with him

[5] See Shaarei Teshuva of Rabbeinu Yona number 139, 140, 141.





[1] Berochose 17A

[2] Bamidbar chapter 27 from passages 1-21

[3] Devorim 24:5


 How Reb Aharon Kotler Redesigned a World without Torah


We want to study a teaching of the Orach Chaim HaKodosh, in the beginning of Aikev, about head and feet. It answers a very strong question on the book of Malachi whose final passage produces a threat from HaShem to utterly destroy the world if fathers and sons don’t learn to get along properly with each other. But the Mishneh at the end of Sota tells us that before Moshiach comes boys quarrel with their fathers and ladies quarrel with their husband’s mothers. Why, then, is the world not destroyed? We will discuss this and to it add a discussion how my rebbe Reb Aharon Kotler came to America and revitalized the learning of Torah even in the Kollel experience. Stories about how he did this.

Goal Four: We live in a time of great confusion, as taught in the Mishneh in Sota mentioned above. Reb Aharon succeeded. How did he do it? And what can we do to succeed as well, in a world teeming with serious errors?

First of all, Goal One. How can we pray to HaShem if He is in heaven and we don’t understand anything about heaven with worldly finite minds?

The Torah begins “In the beginning of ___, HaShem created the heaven and the earth.” It does not say “the first thing in creation was the creation of heaven and earth.” It says “In the beginning of ___” meaning, it does not say in the beginning of what. Thus, the Torah begins with a statement that has no understanding.

But keep in mind that heaven is not a dimension open to people. And here the creation was about heaven as it was about earth. But in the beginning of creation means the beginning of heaven as well as earth. But people cannot understand heaven and so how can they understand in the beginning of what heaven was created?

We are not able to understand in the beginning of what heaven was created. So it is left unsaid. But that itself is crucial for us to understand. Yes, there is a heaven, and yes, we don’t understand it, and yes, G‑d wants us to know that there is a hidden heaven and that it is hidden from us, but we must know that it is there, and that HaShem is there, and that we have a role to play in heaven even if we don’t know what it is or what heaven is. But HaShem gave us a Torah, and although much of life is hidden from us, when we devote ourselves to learning Torah and studying under great rabbis, much becomes revealed to us.

In fact, the missing phrase in “in the beginning of__” has a meaning precisely what I just said. We cannot with our finite minds know HaShem or heaven, but if we study Torah properly. the lights of heaven percolate into our system, each person according to his efforts and piety. Each of us has the potential to understand things that are beyond us, through Torah and piety and fear of HaShem.

There is a famous story from the tsadik Reb Shlomo Schwadron, about the Second World War, which, when it broke out, and the Germans invaded Poland, led to terror and killing. A Jew fled Poland and came to Israel, because he realized that in Poland only death awaited the Jews. But if he came to Israel, perhaps somehow he could find a way to save his wife and children.

He came to Israel and remembered a tradition that one who prays forty days at the Kosel can merit miracles. He went for forty days to the Kosel, crying bitterly that HaSHem save his wife and children. On the fortieth day, he noticed a man praying. He realized that this man was not an ordinary person, but a great saint. Perhaps, he thought, this person can tell me about my family. He went to the person and asked him to please tell him how his family is. The man was befuddled and simply ran away. The Polish Jew ran after him, but the man ran home quickly and shut the door after him. The Polish man rapped on the door, and he heard inside somebody running. It was that same person who now opened the door and said, “Now I have the obligation of honoring a guest. Please, come in, and let me get something for you.” He brought out some food and was quite friendly. The Polish man said that he wanted to know about his wife and children. How are they? Is there a way to save them from the fiends?

The man suddenly grew somber, put his head down and thought a bit, and then asked, “And if I tell you, will it remain a secret?” “Yes,” said the man. The man asked, “Do you live in a house on the corner with two floors?” “Yes.” “The Germans are inside the house, but they are not bothering anyone. Your family will be safe and sound and come to Israel.” And so it was.

This is also the idea in “In the beginning of____” You and I don’t know what that missing phrase is, but that holy man did know. And each Jew has the potential to increase his piety and holiness and achieve wonderful knowledge through the Torah and light of heaven.

It was known that the holy rabbi Rav Yeshayeh Karelitz, the Chazon Ish, would regularly be consulted by very sick people, and he told them very often things completely opposite from the doctors. He once told somebody who asked him that the key to saving a person’s life was a doctor so and so, and the Chazon Ish added, that this doctor did not have to do anything for the sick person, but he had to be at the hospital during the surgery. For some reason, the doctor was unwilling to be the doctor to perform the surgery, and another doctor did it. But the person got better. The doctor then asked somebody, “Okay, your rabbi was able to determine that if I would come the person would get better, something that was not at all obvious to me. But how did he know that I should watch the surgery if I did nothing?” The answer: The rabbi wanted it that way. He knows why, I don’t.  As I recall the story the time came when this doctor himself came to the Chazon Ish and asked him why it was important for him to come if he did nothing. I don’t recall the answer. But it is known that the Chazon Ish, although a rabbi in a small farming village which eventually became a large city, was constantly besieged by people who needed this or that miracle immediately, and he always helped out. He actually was part of a group of relatives who were saints who did make miracles regularly. The great saint Reb Chaim Kanievsky is part of that family, and Rav Shach was also a participant in making miracles. Greatness in piety and greatness in Torah go a long way.

This first passage begins with the heaven and the earth, two opposite dimensions. Angels are in heaven and people are in this world. People in this world are removed from HaShem as He is in heaven. But HaShem created people who in a way are holier to Him even more than angels. For this reason the angels cry out in pain, Why are pious people close to G‑d and the angels outside of that level?

HaShem created angels who sing His glory and fulfill His will. People, on the other hand, are not angels, far from it. This world is filled with evil. Even good people are usually not perfect. As the woman in the Song of Songs said, “I have been made black as the ancient dead.” But the creation was essentially for humans who have evil inclinations and do sins, and they are required to live their lives with their pain and evil thoughts and deeds, and to do penitence, and then they will be forgiven. That penitence is light from darkness, and a very high light, the true purpose of Creation.

“From the darkness you will see the light.” But only from the darkness. The angels are heavenly and very close to HaShem, but they cry out that people are closer to HaShem than they are. Only light from darkness is the true holiness. Angels naturally perfect are remote from that. But people with their remoteness from heaven who repent their evil ways and seek light from darkness, can find it. And when their light arrives, it is the true purpose of creation.

People saddled with darkness and evil thoughts have a hard time finding light, and surely have a hard time discovering what the first passage of the Torah teaches, “In the beginning of ____ HaShem created the heaven and the earth.” Struggling to find that light is the purpose of life. Struggling to battle the evil inclination is higher than sitting in heaven and singing to HaShem, because light from darkness is the greatest light.

The Kabbalists says that when HaShem sent the soul of Adam from heaven into the world, He even then realized that the world would be filled with challenge, darkness, and yes, evil, and yes, pure evil. He wanted Adam to taste this evil even in the highest dimensions as he sailed down into the Garden of Eden. HaShem always knew that evil would be a great part of the world, as challenge, as the force that people would conquer to merit the highest light and portions in heaven greater than the angels who have no evil temptations. For this, HaShem had prepared in heaven a male and a female set of angels whose job it would be to bring evil when HaShem wanted them to do it. That job began with the sailing of Adam into the Garden of Eden. It continued when the angel of heaven whose job was to tempt men tormented Adam on the way down into this world, and her husband terrorized Adam’s wife Eve until she ate from the forbidden fruit and got the first humans expelled from the Garden of Eden. But we are going too fast.

The work of the angel whose job it was to torment men and seduce them began her work, as we explained, higher than this world, as Adam’s soul was coming down from heaven to the Garden of Eden. Her husband terrorized Eve who ate from the Forbidden Fruit and got Adam and her expelled from the Garden of Eden. But after she arrived in this world, she was sitting with her husband in heaven, during the marriage of Adam and Eve. The marriage of Adam and Eve was a Kabbalistic affair. They stared at each other and began to count the letters of the Alpha Beth, the alphabet. Each letter mentioned and studied brought great powers to the marriage. Soon the angels in heaven, almost all of them, were watching this, and then, as the letters went higher and higher, they all came down to watch up close.

The only angels left were those whose job was to bring evil to the world. They looked around and saw that they were all alone. This did not appeal to them. After all, they were created for a purpose. Sitting there while the angels watched the wedding was not their job. So they went down into the world. This time, it was the wife, an extraordinary beauty, who did her job. All she did was to walk near Adam as he was staring at Eve, who was also a great beauty, but she was not an angel, and Adam did notice the angel. That second, all of the angels disappeared. The wedding was over. The angel had done her job very well. Adam and Eve separated, unlike what we would anticipate for people who actually marry. In the case of Adam and Eve, there was only one woman in the world for Adam, and he should have accepted her and mollified her for noticing the angel, but he was so bitter that he decided to have nothing to do with Eve who had dealt with the snake and got both Adam and Eve banished from the Garden of Eden. For years, he lived alone. And when he slept, the angel of evil came to him and tempted him to give birth to forces of evil or demons. That angel really did a bang-up job. I think she should have asked for a bonus!

Adam’s misery continued for a long time. One day, he met Kain, the murderer of his brother Hevel. Kain didn’t appear to be a broken murderer. Adam asked why not and he said, “I repented and HaShem accepted it. He gave me a power to be saved from those who want to kill me.” When Adam heard that HaShem accepts penitence, he realized that that applied to him. The first step, he realized, was to make peace with his wife and establish a true marriage, based not on perfection but on the penitence that both of them had to make for what they had done to each other. Adam went to Eve and declared, “You are the mother of all life.” Now Adam and Eve were reconciled and the angel didn’t get a bonus for that.

One day Adam was talking to HaShem and asked how many years he would live. HaShem said, One thousand years. HaShem then told him about various people including King David. Adam asked how many years David would live. HaShem replied, a few hours. Adam said, “I give him seventy years of my life.” HaShem accepted that.

It is interesting to know that the gemora asks how it is possible that the most holy people, King David who said, “My heart is still inside of me” meaning it has no evil inclination, and the Jews at Sinai who died when HaShem spoke to them, and the angels brought them back to life with great crowns, but they worshipped the Golden Calf. The gemora explains that these people were not designed to sin, were far from it. But HaShem wanted to prove that the holiest people, those farthest from sin, can do the worse sins. Once people realized that even the holiest people can sin and HaShem accepts their penitence, anyone can repent, and indeed, the most important thing is not light or darkness, but penitence. King David did a lot of crying after the sin of Bas Sheva, which he did after HaShem warned him to anticipate divine testing that he would be forced to sin. David realized when he saw Bas Sheva that this was what HaShem meant. He realized also that if he controlled himself he would insult HaShem, and so he did the sin. For that he had to do a lot of crying and penitence. But that crying and penitence was what HaShem wanted, not the sin.

I want here to confess that my rebbe in the beginning of his sefer The Gates of the Kabbala quotes, as is his wont, the Vilna Gaon and other greats of Kabbala, to explain why HaShem created the world and how people can know HaShem when we can’t know Him. I don’t want to quote the exact words of these greats because I learned the hard way, after studying teachings of many gates of great kabbalists, that they didn’t necessarily want to reveal everything they said to people like me. I had to work very hard until I was able to follow their thinking, at least, to some degree.

Against my better inclinations, I suppose I should just say a few words of quote from words of these Kabbalists my rebbe quoted, although I fear it would just make some people like me confused. But to understand the true confusion here, let me say that the Kabbala takes literally the fact that this world is not only different than heaven, but people in this world with their very limited finite knowledge, are not only unable to know heaven and certainly HaShem, but even those forces that HaShem created specifically to bring light to people, contain sections that it not only is forbidden to describe them, but it is forbidden to even say that they exist!

Yes, HaShem created, for the benefit of people, Ten Sefirose, or worlds. The highest world is KESER or crown, and it is only a Sefira designed to bring light to people. But we may not say that it exists! The second sefira underneath KESER is CHOCHMO. We may say that it exists, but it is a heavenly body that imparts nothing of significance to mortals other than the fact that it exists, something forbidden for KESER.

CHOCHMO has a wife, BINA, the third Sefira down from the top. BINA is never separated from CHOCHMO, she has no fear from him, and they are never separated. Both of them were created simultaneously. But he is above the barrier to heaven and she is facing down into the bottom seven which are much closer to human understanding. CHOCHMO is terrified of KESER.

While we are at it, let us mention one fast fact. The bottom Sefira is a woman, MALCHUSE. Into her go the evil of this world, and she suffers terribly. She is the woman in the Song of Songs who cries out, “They have blackened me as the blackest in the world.” That sounds pretty terrible. But this is Kabbala. Rabbi Moshe Chaim Lutsato in Adir BaMorom says that MALCHUSE, meaning monarchy, has a good friend. It is a Sefira. And it is KESER. And guess what? Again, we are talking about the great Kabbalists. Just listen and don’t faint. KESER and MALCHSUE are one! KESER comes down to MALCHUSE and MALCHUSE rises, not up to KESER alone, but past KESER, into the heavenly realm where no humans may think what is happening there. Yes, MONARCHY and KESER are one, which is not the whole truth. The whole truth is that MALCHUSE goes farther into heaven than KESER. If you are not dizzy now, I can’t help you.

While you hopefully are dizzy, let me throw out some more dizziness, just quotes from my rebbe and the great Kabbalists such as the Vilna Gaon. HaShem wanted people to know Him, but that is impossible. How can mortals know heaven and how can they know HaShem? So HaShem created a force that enables people in this world to know HaShem enough to pray to Him and worship Him. Its name is צורת מרכבת אדם העליון in English the Form of the Chariot of the Senior Man. If you are not totally confused, allow me to help you. There is a passage in Ezekiel about his vision of a heavenly throne and the form of a man was upon it. Now, this passage was presented to all readers, the throne and the man. I don’t think it was a real man, of course, and I surely don’t believe it was HaShem chas vishalom. But could it have been the Chariot of the Senior Man, created by HaShem to reveal His light to mortals, perhaps when they study Torah properly? If you are dizzy, what difference does it make?

Sunday, February 3, 2019

Answers to Questions


Answering Questions
Dovid Eidensohn

To    YG
This is the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 77.2 quoting the Rashbo in VII.414 “It is forbidden to force a GET. If the husband wants to, he divorces her. If he doesn’t want to, he doesn't."
 All of the commentators there forbid forcing a GET. However, the Gro there brings that those who forbid forcing a GET are the Rosh, the Rashbo, the Ran, and the Ritva. He says further that although Rambam and Rashbam disagree with this, this is this halocho that forcing a GET is wrong. Rambam in the very beginning of laws of Divorce says that the Torah requires a willing GET given by the husband or the GET is worthless. If so, those who forbid forcing a GET mean that the child born from a woman who is divorced by a forced GET, are mamzerim.
Note that the Gro says that Rashbam and Rambam disagree and would allow a husband to be forced to divorce his wife. But the Rambam on that subject does not say this. He says rather that if a woman does not ask for a GET but stays in the house and takes care of the children doing basic housework, but denies the husband marital intimacy, we force a GET, on the condition that Beth Din gives the husband time to straighten out his marriage. If he fails after the stipulated time to do this, we force a GET. But if she demands a GET, there is an open Mishneh in Nedorim 90b that we do not trust a woman these days to force a GET, they were trusted in earlier times, but today women learned to lie about their husbands to get a GET so today we don’t believe them anymore. The Vilna Gaon brings this from a Tosfose in Kesubose 63b a lengthy Tosfose where Rabbeinu Tam forbids forcing a GET but some other such as Rashbam permitted it. The question it: What does Rashbam do with the Mishneh which is not contradicted anywhere? The same question can be asked of the Modern Orthodox who created an obligation on all husbands to pay their wives $150 a day for each day after he denied he a GET. What do they do with the Mishneh that today and for hundreds of years since the Mishneh in Nedarim, we don’t allow a woman to force a GET?
Be advised also that a mamzer is a terrible thing. But worse than a mamzer is a doubtful mamzer. A mamzer may marry a mamzeres. But a doubtful mamzer may not marry a mamzeres and may not marry a Jewish woman.

To IK

The husband has an obligation from the Torah to make his wife rejoice, especially in marital matters. Also, this applies to a house strapped for money that if there is not enough money to buy a winter coat and it is wintertime, the wife must be satisfied and get the coat. An extremely poor person who has to go out in the winter may switch coats with his wife as there is only money to buy one coat. (Raishis Chochmo) A woman whose husband wants intimacy but she doesn't like having marital affairs with him is a moredess, a rebel against the husband. Rambam indicates Beth Din should give the husband time to straighten out his marriage. Failing after that period, Rambam maintains that the woman may force a GET, the condition being that she not ask for a GET but she remains in the house tending the children. The problem then switches to the husband. A young man cannot maintain holiness with no marital relations with his wife. An older man who wants a child whose wife is too old to have children may seek a rabbi who permits him to marry another woman perhaps only as a Pilegesh but not with Kiddushin because Rabbeinu Gershon prohibited marring two kiddushin wives, but some permit a person who had no children from his first kiddushin wife to marry a Pilegesh and the wife is now too old to have children that she marry a Pilegesh. See Reb Yaacov Emden on this. Marrying a Pilegesh requires that a local rabbi supervise their marriage, although they don't make Kiddushin and may split up at any time.



AE

I  There is no such thing as kiddushin against the will of the woman. I dare you to find any support for such an idea! 

Answer. I said that a man can be forced to marry but not a woman.

2 David was punished  severely for taking Bas Sheva. He did Tshuva his whole life for this avaira. How can you say he was permitted to do it? 

See Avida Zoro 4b: Rabbi Shimon bar Yochoi said, "Dovid could never have sinned with Bas Sheva as he stated in Tehilim, 'My heart is still inside of me' that I can't sin. The Jews at Sinai were far from sinning with a Golden Calf as it is said, 'I hope that you will always maintain your piety.' Why did they sin?  HaShem caused them to sin to teach the most important thing in the world. If an individual sins, not matter what, if he repents properly, HaShem forgives him. If a community sins, HaShem forgives them." But Rashi explains that HaShem forced them to sin to bring the to penitence and forgave them. If people subsequently sin they will say, if these perfect people sinned and were forgiven, we too can repent and will be forgiven. Thus, teshuva is the purpose of creation and it was taught by those forced by HaShem to sin. David lost the Shechina for twenty days or twenty weeks. And some of the Sinai Jews were killed. But the lesson was learned.

3 The Ramban had a different girsa of the Rambam. The statement of the issur was not there. 

I was bothered by this for a long time. Then I began slowly to read word after word in the Rambam in Melochim and I found a funny word that made no sense. Rambam says that only a king may marry a Pilegesh and he adds "and OMO HOIVRIAH." Now, if plain people who are not kings may not marry a Pilegesh, but an OMO HOIVIRIAH, basically a woman sold by her poor father who has no marry to find a husband gives her as a servant to a man who may have a son, and there is a fear that father or son may abuse the girl. The solution is a marriage against the will of the girl as Pilegesh. 

This is exactly what happened with Bas Shevah who gave birth to Shlomo who became king. The marriage was a Pilegesh to a king so that was surely no problem. In fact, if Dovid was not a king and took a Pilegesh with force such as one married by her father who could not afford to marry his daughter, as OMO HOIVRIAH, she is permitted to anyone not just a king. But people who are not marrying with force and both want the marriage, the Rambam, Ramban and Gro and Bais Shmuel, considered the major posek of the acharonim, permit Pilegesh.

4 Show me anywhere in Hilchos Mlachim that says that a king can abduct and rape any woman he wants. I guarantee you won't find it.

According to you, why does the Rambam mention Omo Hovirah who is permitted to be Pilegesh, if she surely didn't become a slave willingly.

5 The only reason Shlomo was made king was that David swore to make him his successor. It had nothing to do with the rights inherent to an abducted woman.

If Shlomo was the product of a woman who was taken with force and if forced women are not Pilegesh, Shlomo came from two people who were not married. Is that what you think? Is this person the one who wrote what may be the holiest book of Shir HaShirim which is pure Kabala see Ari z"l on Shir HaShirm, who only touches on the explanation there, but I found more in other Kabbala seforim.




One may not Force a GET

Dovid Eidensohn



This is the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 77.2 quoting the Rashbo in VII.414 “It is forbidden to force a GET. If the husband wants to, he divorces her. If he doesn’t want to, he doesn”t.



 All of the commentators there forbid forcing a GET. However, the Gro there brings that those who forbid forcing a GET are the Rosh, the Rashbo, the Ran,S and the Ritva. He says further that although Rambam and Rashbam disagree with this, this is this halocho that forcing a GET is wrong. Rambam in the very beginning of laws of Divorce says that the Torah requires a willing GET given by the husband or the GET is worthless. If so, those who forbid forcing a GET mean that the child born from a woman who is divorced by a forced GET, are mamzerim.



Note that the Gro says that Rashbam and Rambam disagree and would allow a husband to be forced to divorce his wife. But the Rambam on that subject does not say this. He says rather that if a woman does not ask for a GET but stays in the house and takes care of the children doing basic housework, but denies the husband marital intimacy, we force a GET, on the condition that Beth Din gives the husband time to straighten out his marriage. If he fails after the stipulated time to do this, we force a GET. But if she demands a GET, there is an open Mishneh in Nedorim 90b that we do not trust a woman these days to force a GET, they were trusted in earlier times, but today women learned to lie about their husbands to get a GET so today we don’t believe them anymore. The Vilna Gaon brings this from a Tosfose in Kesubose 63b a lengthy Tosfose where Rabbeinu Tam forbids forcing a GET but some other such as Rashbam permitted it. The question it: What does Rashbam do with the Mishneh which is not contradicted anywhere? The same question can be asked of the Modern Orthodox who created an obligation on all husbands to pay their wives $150 a day for each day after he denied he a GET. What do they do with the Mishneh that today and for hundreds of years since the Mishneh in Nedarim, we don’t allow a woman to force a GET?



Be advised also that a mamzer is a terrible thing. But worse than a mamzer is a doubtful mamzer. A mamzer may marry a mamzeres. But a doubtful mamzer may not marry a mamzeres and may not marry a Jewish woman.


Monday, January 28, 2019

Fighting Great Sins against Biblical and Family People


Plan 2 for the New Agudah

Dovid Eidensohn

The first plan of the New Agudah was to savage Agudas Israel for its backing of toeiva which is forbidden by HaShem in open passages in the Torah. Our second plan is to work with others to make a massive effort for people of all religions men and women to become truly angry at Cuomo for destroying a human fetus and causing terrible agony to women and family. If our second plan works out, Cuomo will begin to realize that his hopes of becoming President are fading, and that the people who hate him and fight him are growing stronger. The Democrats in his party cannot ignore that. Once this begins, our leading fighters against Cuomo who visit Albany regularly and convince some politicians to refuse what Cuomo wants will only increase. If we continue a bit longer, the tide may turn.

But regarding fighting Cuomo and those who maintain that everyone must respect those who violate the Torah and the rights of family, let us mention  a letter from the Gaon Reb Moshe Feinstein zt"l which is brought in my blog torahhalacha.blogspot.com. 

A major problem is the Law of Divorce in New York State whereby women can pressure a husband to give a GET under certain circumstances. Rabbi Chaim Malinowitz, a prominent rabbi now in Israel, has an article published on the Internet discussing the history of the two GET Laws of New York State. The first GET law was approved by the rabbis because it had nothing to do with a GET only with New York civil law. However, the second law was never approved by senior rabbis, which makes a great threat to New York State Jewish divorces. Senior rabbis in America and Israel have wondered why the second GET Law was passed without the  approval of the rabbis. There is further a complaint that nobody complained about it, except as we find Rabbi Malinowitz, who wrote his thoughts after the deed of making the second law.

The uniqueness of the Second GET Law is that it is perhaps a rare invention of a law that essentially only impacts severely on one religion, and in that, only on one segment of that religion. But the terror of the law is that a woman who leaves her husband with an invalid GET is still married. If she remarries a man not her husband she is living in serious sin and may never return to her husband and is further forbidden with the second man. If she has a baby by the second man the baby is a mamzer, forbidden to marry a Jewish woman unless that woman is a mamzeres. But this applies only to a baby who is known to be a mamzer. He can marry a woman who is known to be a mamzeres.

However, a man who is known only as a possible or doubtful mamzer, is in more trouble than a definite mamzer. A doubtful mamzer may not marry a Jewish woman who is a mamzeres and may not marry  a Jewish woman who is a doubtful mamzer. See Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 4:24.

This leads us to another very serious problem with divorce and GET which is very prevalent today in America and Israel. The entire grim story is spelled out exactly by the recent book Mishpitei Yisroel written by the greatest rabbis of Israel and fifty great rabbis from America.

A woman wants a divorce, maybe because she hates her husband. The husband refuses, maybe because he loves his wife or because he has children from her who will be pained at the loss of their married parents. Or because a judge may split the children who will not only miss a parent but may miss their siblings.

A GET must be given by the husband willingly if the couple was married with Kiddushin. But if the couple was married with Pilegesh they may separate simply by any of them leaving the marital home. So we emphasize here the woman married with Kiddushin which is the vast majority of women. If she forces a GET she may not remarry. If she does remarry, the new husband’s children with her are mamzerim.

If the husband is pressured and divorces and wants to remarry, he has a problem. If he agrees to give a GET so that he can remarry and agrees for that reason to divorce his wife, she is divorced. This can lead to great complications for him and his children. But if he is not sure if he wants to divorce his wife, the GET is a doubt. Maybe it is kosher, and maybe it is not. If so, the husband and the wife may not remarry. And if the husband makes a great show and pressure that he must have a wife, we tell him simply all that he has to do is to give his wife a GET willingly.

Another battle for the A New Agudah is the war in New York State and some other states, England and Canada, regarding treatment of GLBTQ people. I refer to those states and countries which require children to study about GLBYTQ and to learn to treat them favorably whatever that means. Surely insulting them for their status is a crime. All of these laws deny Heaven and the Creator who ruled in the bible that sodomy is a capital crime if done deliberately in front of proper witnesses. Even if one does it privately it is a terrible sin. Indeed, the sin of “do not draw near to sin” is considered by Rambam a Torah crime and Ramban a rabbinical crime. “Do not draw near” is defined as one who talks to a woman out of desire or who behaves in a way that can easily get him to do a serious sin. But one who commits a definite sin such as sodomy is surely a sinner by biblical standards. Despite this, killing him without proper witnesses testifying to having seen the act is not punished with death.





Pesak from the Gaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt”l in a Divorce and the Gaon Reb Moshe Feinstein zt”l with a person who wants to die.



Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn



Some years back I was training to be a posek. I would go to various rabbis, dayanim and Gittin experts to learn from them. Once I came to a GET and I walked into the room with those getting divorced. A woman was crying bitterly and next to her sat a woman who looked at me with hate. Of course, she thought I was part of the Beth Din. But I was just a visitor who knew nothing of the people involved in the GET.

The head of the Beth Din was a friend of mine who explained that the man and women had a son. They were secular Israelis and then the husband became religious. The wife was madly in love with her husband. But although she tried her best, she could not tolerate being religious. Finally, advisors told the man to divorce his wife. The wife was crying terribly, because she loved her husband.

I was very disturbed by the decision of the advisors of the husband to counsel him to divorce his wife. Who gave the husband the right to give his son away to his wife who was not religious and would probably raise the son to be irreligious?  But I said nothing then.

Not long after this, I was visiting my rebbe in Israel, the Gaon Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashev zt”l, one of the greatest Torah authorities. I told him how disturbed I was that the husband gave away his son. (I didn’t tell him what I thought about the advisors who couldn’t make a compromise with the husband and wife. If the wife is madly in love with her husband, but she can’t be the supper fanatic that he became, let him behave in a way that her love will tolerate. But I knew nothing about the husband and wife and why should I talk about such things? So I told him what I did know and awaited his response.)

Rav Elyashev told me: “If the wife would tolerate yaharas hamishpocho (go to the mikva regularly), he would not advise a divorce.” That is a tremendous ruling, something only the greatest sage can utter! It meant that the wife won’t keep Shabbos and maybe not kashruse and who knows what else. But if she keeps taharas hamishpocho the marriage continues. It means that the wife will be the mother of all of his children, and all of them will be raised by a woman who is not Orthodox.

I wonder what the Rov would rule if the woman did not love her husband madly. Maybe that was critical. Maybe he believed that her love would continue if he did not divorce her, and she would very slowly but surely become more and more religious. If she truly loves her husband, and the husband could be encouraged not to be a cruel fanatic, maybe that could improve things? But I did not ask that question. Maybe it was too late to ask questions.

One thing comes out from this sad story. When somebody is faced with such a problem, ask only the greatest authority. There is a postscript to this story that has nothing to do with divorces. I used to speak regularly to the Posek HaDor Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l. Furthermore, I only asked him questions that if he did not tell me the answer, I would probably never find an answer for them.

I once asked him if a person is hopelessly ill and there is no cure. He is in agony and wants to die. Is it necessary to keep him alive even if he wants to die? I am not referring to mercy killing. I am talking about basic “keep him alive” care. Reb Moshe told me that in such a case the person may be allowed to die. I later discovered that his pesak is two open gemoras, Gittin 70 and Avoda Zoro 12. A dying person should be kept alive long enough to arrange his financial affairs with his children so they don’t fight over the inheritance. Perhaps we assume that he is willing to suffer that long, but longer is not necessary.

I once told this to the Gaon Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner zt”l and he replied, “Poshut azoy” that is obvious. I wondered why he answered that way and then I realized that since Reb Moshe was the Gadol HaDor in paskening Rav Wosner felt that to say he agrees would not be appropriate, so he just said, “poshut azoy.”

I once heard from the Gaon Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l that with a serious medical problem we may need three doctors.

Today there are many children who are not successful in schools and begin to take drugs. In Monsey two children overdosed and are buried in the Orthodox cemetery. 

For children like this, how many doctors do we need?



Goal 19 - RCA Prenup Makes Mamzerim Unlike Rav Ovadiah Yosef's Document that is Not a Prenup

 

The Problem with RCA Prenups



RCA Prenups are promises the husband makes to his wife that if she demands a GET from him for whatever reason he will either honor her request and give a willing GET to her, or he will pay her the sum of $150 a day until he gives the GET. We combine here two things. One is the claim of the RCA that their Prenups are crucial for family, and the other is my refutation of what the RCA claims. The text of the RCA is here in regular text and my comments are italic and bold. Text that I single out from the RCA text to comment upon is underlined in the original and in my comments. (In some situations where all text had to be equal this does not apply.)

Another issue is the claim some make that the Gaon Rav Ovadiah Yosef had a document that was like the RCA prenup and that he accepted the RCA prenup. That is wrong, as I will point out. The document of Rav Ovadiah Yosef is not about forcing a husband to give a GET, but about making Shalom Bayis. Also, the RCA prenup gives all power to the woman to force her husband to give her a GET, and the document of Rav Ovadiah Yosef has all power in the issue in the hands of the husband, who selects how much money he will pay her until they are united once again by the Beth Din, and crucially, the husband picks the Beth Din. This is completely different than the RCA prenup that assigns all power to the wife. Furthermore, there is a clear Mishneh in Nedorim 90b that a woman must not have the power to force a GET on her husband because we fear that she will use the power to find another husband.

This Mishneh is quoted by Rabbeinu Tam in Kesubose 63B in Tosfose. It is the source of the law that a woman who claims that her husband is distressing to her cannot force a GET, because we fear that she will have the power to divorce her husband because she likes another man. The RCA insists that all married woman have a prenup and the ability to force the husband to divorce her anytime she wants, which is direct contradiction to this Mishneh and the basic laws of limiting the power of a woman to force a GET.





We will further strongly protest people who don’t do sins themselves, but don’t accept the biblical blame on those who do these serious sins. They too deny the Torah.