ujm
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ujmParticipant
Are you feeling better?
ujmParticipantdass1: He nevertheless bears responsibility for the travesty because he opened the can of worms by allowing anything in the first place without specifying any limits.
hml: Doing that runs a serious risk of causing them to hit age 37 being single.
ujmParticipantHow do they taste differently?
ujmParticipantYou are absolutely correct in that embarrassing family members is completely prohibited. There is no heter in Halacha to do so. And if asked, these unschooled thoughtless organizers and protesters never halachicly justify what they’re doing to third-party family members because they have no explanation or even understanding.
If you look at any of these cases there’s virtually never any siruv against the family members.
And that’s all putting aside whether they’re even correct about the husband himself, altogether.
ujmParticipantWolf, do you speak to your daughters and wife with “Thank you, ma’am”, in similar circumstances?
ujmParticipantGermans are notorious for insisting on use of their titles (including non-medical doctorates.)
ujmParticipantAAQ: You’re assuming that if the sister of the Kallah comes to the wedding next week, it is a serious health risk.
ujmParticipantWhat’s so terrible about not going to your future son in law’s aufruf?
ujmParticipantI believe it is incumbent for posters to henceforth always refer to the OP as “Der Tzadik Reb Volf”. (Wolf doesn’t do him justice.)
ujmParticipant“Last Tishrei, I began saying one perek of tehillim a day.”
Hah! I knew you’re not that biggest baddest worstest horriblest terriblest rasha ever!
“After all, if we’re not supposed to say it in davening, then perhaps it’s better to skip it altogether and not say it on that day.”
Some people say the entire Tehilim every day. Including on Yom Tov. So, clearly, it is appropriate to say.
ujmParticipantIn America every man is a Sir.
ujmParticipantBE: What is “dayelet”? There’s absolutely no mention of that in the Sefer. And what’s your point about Rav Henkin and Rav Schorr?
March 31, 2021 11:04 am at 11:04 am in reply to: Gebrok halacha? Liquids in Pesach Dip recipes (for matza) #1961505ujmParticipantYou cannot drop the Minhagim of your father. If the in-laws cannot accommodate non-gebrochts, the simplest solution is for the son-in-law and his family to not eat by the in-laws for the first seven days of Pesach. They can come on Achron Shel Pesach, when gebrochts can be eaten.
ujmParticipantAAQ: Even by Shidduchim there are halachos that prohibit sharing certain information under certain circumstances (i.e. if the person you share it with might share that sensitive information unnecessarily with other third-parties who are unentitled to know that information.)
FW: Halachicly it is prohibited to read books of kefira. Halacha also requires that we not share loshon hora (even though it is true information), motzi shem ra or rechilas and moderators are required to refuse to publish such comments.
ujmParticipantHalacha requires that we censor what may be read, requires that we censor what books are or aren’t permitted (i.e. books of kefira) to read and requires that we censor what information (even if true) that we may share with others.
ujmParticipant“Censorship” is a proper Jewish/Torah value. We all ought to practice it on a personal level. And any publication that adheres to Jewish Law is required to practice censorship.
The idea that censorship is bad is a purely Western/gentile value.
ujmParticipant“Even if no beis din has so required?”
I don’t think he has any leg to stand on to say otherwise. Technically he’s within his (legal and moral) right to dispute in Beis Din his having to give it. But since he remarried and abandoned his first marriage I think it’s obvious Beis Din will require he give it. (Although, depending on the circumstances, it’s possible they’ll delay its giving until all other outstanding unresolved marital disputes are first settled.) So he legally is within his rights to first have a trial to determine his obligation to give it. But based on the circumstances described (essentially of him refusing to perform his marital obligations to his wife) I think any Beis Din will rule he must give it.
ujmParticipantubiquitin: If he has remarried that would almost surely indicate that the (first) marriage is over and your conclusion is correct that he must give a Get. (I say almost because non-Ashkenazim may be different in this regard.)
But if he hasn’t remarried then I’m not clear what criteria or yardstick you’re using to classify that “the marriage is over”. It ain’t over until the fat lady sings; he still maintains the halachic right to challenge her request for a Get. And unless a Beis Din, after conducting a trial with the parties in attendance, rules that the specifics of the case fall into a halachic category where he must give a Get even if he doesn’t wish to (which is a rare scenario under Halacha), then the marriage isn’t over.
ujmParticipantI don’t see why Jews should want to do discretional activities that pose a conflict with Shabbos, or any Jewish law for that matter. Even if they can farneigel some workaround that might work most times. Why put oneself into such a precarious position in the first place?
ujmParticipanthuju: Both Judaism and the secular world believe in innocence as proven guilty. Being indicted is equal to being considered innocent until proven otherwise. And enjoying all the rights of innocence.
ujmParticipant“There are many cases where A Rav will encourage someone to give a Get where there is no hope of reconciliation, although m’ikar hadin he isnt obligated too and he is hoping things will change.”
If the rabbi thinks there’s no hope but the husband disagrees and believes that there is hope for reconciliation, since we’re discussing a case where mikur hadin he’s within his halachic right to continue the marriage, if he exercises that right then he’s good. Ultimately in such a case Halacha gives him the call on continuing to hold out for shalom bayis.
“All I am saying is causing tzar to another person by forcing her to remain in a marriage that has no hope of reconciliation, is a wrong thing to do.”
Divorce may cause him a greater tzar than not divorcing causes her tzar. I would present it the other way — causing tzar to another person by forcing him to divorce is a wrong thing to do.
ujmParticipant“You left out a lot of details. Is Dina crying herself to sleep everynight? miserable?… Are you really saying him forcing (no quotes that is what he is doing) her to stay married is a nice thing to do?”
I specifically said “A trial is held and the Dayanim rule that al pi Halacha no divorce is entitled and that the marriage should continue.” That effectively answers/addresses those questions.
“That may very well be, but that wasnt the discussion. what of HIS Bein Adom Lchaveiro obligation THAT is the question”
If you agree that her Bein Adom Lchaveiro obligation is to tell Reuven that she’s willing to continue the marriage then obviously he doesn’t have the contradictory obligation to give her a Get.
ujmParticipantubiquitin: What I posted certainly is correct. Let’s walk though this with examples. Suppose Dina asks Reuven for a Get. And Reuven says no, I love you Dina and wish to remain married to you. So Dina summons Reuven to Beis Din and demands a divorce. A trial is held and the Dayanim rule that al pi Halacha no divorce is entitled and that the marriage should continue. Dina now publicly calls herself an “aguna” and still demands a Get.
Bein Adom Lchaveiro in the above case is the same as Even Haezer. Dina should try her best to put on a smile and tell Reuven that she’s willing to continue the marriage. That would be her Bein Adom Lchaveiro obligation.
Example 2: Same as above but it didn’t yet get to the point of a Beis Din trial. Reuven has no Bein Adom Lchaveiro obligation to give a Get.
ujmParticipantYseribus: “A Get refuser without a Siruv” is the same oxymoron as “A business that makes nothing but money is a poor business.” Or an honest thief.
ujmParticipantIt’s not a problem or a big deal. As long as it is deadlocked, regardless of how many more elections produce the same results, Netanyahu remains in power.
ujmParticipantHaRav Pesach Eliyahu Falk ZT”L cites the actual sources in Halacha throughout the Sefer.
It’s every father/husband’s halachic obligation to insure compliance with all the relevant halachos by his family members.
ujmParticipant“that’s going to be really hard to do in the heat of the upcoming summer.”
Is that any harder than wearing a hat or shteimal, jacket or bekeshe, wool tzitzis, full length shirt and pants in the summer?
ujmParticipantIn most cases the Beis Din has not issued anything. In the cases where they did issued a siruv, and those cases are about 50/50% whether it was issued against the husband or against the wife, the siruv is *only* that the defendant show up to Beis Din in order to have a trial as to whether or not a Get is required to be given. It is not a siruv that a Get must be given, other than in rare cases.
“In the small cases where Beis Din did not pasken against the husband, those have to be taken on a case-by-case basis before forming a lynch mob.”
In cases where there’s no siruv it is absolutely forbidden to take sides or to pressure anyone to do anything.
ujmParticipantHave the Democrats from Obama and Pelosi and Schumer and their colleagues apologized for their many lies, such as regarding the ACA wouldn’t force people to change insurance and boatloads of other examples?
March 22, 2021 10:01 am at 10:01 am in reply to: How are you cleaning your face mask for Pesach?😷 #1959513ujmParticipantUse new ones only.
ujmParticipantWhy are you accusing most Yidden of having Tefilin with a plastic seal that is peeling?
March 21, 2021 6:31 pm at 6:31 pm in reply to: Gebrok halacha? Liquids in Pesach Dip recipes (for matza) #1959392ujmParticipantIf a son-in-law is absolutely machmir not to eat gebrochts, including from gebrochts keilim, how can the parents in law have their own daughter, grandchildren and son-in-law over for any part of Pesach other than the eighth day if the parent in laws eat gebrochts and their keilim/utensils/pottery are gebrochts?
March 21, 2021 4:04 pm at 4:04 pm in reply to: Gebrok halacha? Liquids in Pesach Dip recipes (for matza) #1959345ujmParticipantywnjudy: What I saw was plain (round) hand matzah broken in pieces put into a bowl with sugar and warm milk.
March 21, 2021 9:09 am at 9:09 am in reply to: President Donald Trump, Oheiv Yisroel Par Excellence #1959223ujmParticipantThe New York Times has been running multiple angry hit pieces against the Jews and President Trump, another one today not long after the same yellow journalism story several weeks ago, about how Trump was in the pocket of Orthodox Jews and gave so many pardons/communications to Orthodox Jews while Trump was very attuned and in sync with multiple Orthodox Jewish organizations and influential Jews who he frequently took advice from and assisted in many ways.
March 21, 2021 8:39 am at 8:39 am in reply to: Very late Friday night (Shabbos) Minyan in Flatbush #1959217ujmParticipantI think Rabbi Herbst’s shul on M & E. 5 has a late Minyan downstairs.
ujmParticipantThere are often ad hoc minyanim occurring in various places within the airport itself.
ujmParticipantThe Democrat Party ought to be forcibly disbanded by the law due to its history and currently ongoing activities related to electoral fraud, falsehoods and promotion of racism.
March 18, 2021 6:35 pm at 6:35 pm in reply to: Gebrok halacha? Liquids in Pesach Dip recipes (for matza) #1958657ujmParticipantDid anyone hear of a Minhag by some people who do not eat gebrochts but nevertheless will eat matzah in a bowl of milk??
ujmParticipantShould the Supreme Court be abolished because how the Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott?
ujmParticipanthuju has been misled by the left-wing media that he gets his misinformation from. The history of the creation of the filibuster has absolutely zero to do with racism. That false narrative is part of the left’s typical false accusations of racism. Like the boy who cried wolf, cries of racism ring hollow today.
The filibuster was created in the US Senate rules in 1806. It began to actually get used in 1837. Neither its creation nor its first use has anything whatsoever to do with racism.
March 18, 2021 3:35 pm at 3:35 pm in reply to: Gebrok halacha? Liquids in Pesach Dip recipes (for matza) #1958412ujmParticipantAny liquid on matzah is gebrochts.
ujmParticipantChild alienation is when one parent belittles the other parent in the view of the child. Or when one parent denies access to the child by the other parent or minimizes access.
Giving a Get is supposed to be done, when a couple agreed to separate and have resolved all outstanding issues required to divorce and setup post-divorce arrangements. The Get is given as the last step following the resolution of all issues between the couple.
March 18, 2021 3:31 pm at 3:31 pm in reply to: Clean sweep by frum candidates in Village elections in NY #1958409ujmParticipantOsina didn’t prevail. There is no additional round. The election used Ranked Choice voting, which all occurs on one election day. They completed counting the Ranked Choice.
ujmParticipantAccusations of racism is an old time tool in the left’s and Democrats’ political arsenal. It is their best catch-all on-demand tactic when all else fails.
It is best ignored.
ujmParticipantbesalel: The mother and any other relatives have nothing to do with it and aren’t responsible for any part of, or party to, the dispute.
ujmParticipantubiquitin: Fantastic then we are in full agreement.
Though this part throws me off and seems to contradict the first point…
Permit me, please, to explain the difference between the two cases. In the former case he acknowledges the marriage is over. That effectively means he has no intentions of fulfilling his halachic obligations as her husband. That creates a halachic obligation upon him to divorce. Since if he’s unwilling to carry out his martial obligations to his wife he’s halachicly obligated to accede to her request for a divorce.
OTOH, in the latter case, where he wishes to reestablish shalom bayis, he has no halachic obligation to grant her request for a Get. Barring extenuating rare circumstances that Halacha declares gives her a right to a Get, he has the right to choose to continue the marriage, despite her desire to end it, and furthermore can even take his wife to Beis Din to demand she continue fulfilling her wifely obligations to him.
You said we’re in full agreement. I think I’m just highlighting that Veasisa Hayashr Vehatov can mean a spouse should continue in marriage and fulfill their martial obligations even if they want out. Rather than assuming it means the spouse who wants to continue the marriage should throw in the towel against their will. So, perhaps, though we agree with each other on this discussion, we are each highlighting different aspects of Halacha.
Thank you for having this discussion.
ujmParticipantubiquitin: I think a point that gets blurred in these conversations , is although he doesn’t have a halachic obligation, he may have a moral one.
Your morals or the other fellow’s morals? Who is deciding what is moral? And to further expand on your comment, see my additional points below, in this reply.
If the marriage is over, certainly if he has moved on and remarried a get should be given in (nearly?) all circumstances.
Who decided that the marriage is “over”? If they mutually agree that the marriage is over, then normally your point is correct. A Get must be granted (by him) and accepted (by her.) That would, indeed, be the case in the majority of cases where they both agree the marriage is over.
But there are even exceptions to that. To take an example, if one of the parties halachicly wronged the other party, and that wrong still hasn’t been corrected by the party who committed the wrong, it might be halachicly correct to not yet proceed with the Get. Rav Moshe Shternbuch shlit”a (and possibly Rav Elyashiv zt’l, as well) have teshuvos, for example, where if the wife went to non-Jewish court (arkaos) for marital assets distribution or for custody, in contravention with halacha prohibiting arkaos, and received things that are halachicly unentitled to, not only can he withhold a Get until she undoes what she received and wholly rectifies him for his loss, but he can even remarry while she’s still in breach of halacha. (He even debates whether he can remarry without a heter meah rabbonim; he concludes m’ikur hadin he could but it is proper for him to first receive the heter.)
But suppose another example where one spouse thinks it’s over whereas the other spouse still insists on restoring shalom bayis, we can’t tell the one asking for shalom bayis that it is “over”.
Now granted, he may not be strictly speaking obligated to do so, and pressuring him to do so unwillingly may create a real problem of Get meusah. But that doesn’t change the fact that he is a bad person, who deserves shame.
Now this point I must take strong exception to. If strictly speaking he’s not halachicly obligated to divorce, as you give in your example, then generally speaking he has no moral, ethical or other imperative to do so even if she wants to divorce. Halacha is replete with examples (check the Gemora as well as Shulchan Aruch) of when one spouse asks for a divorce, when the other spouse desires to continue the marriage, where we deny the request for a divorce. The more frequent examples are when the wife wants to divorce but there’s at least one circumstance that comes to mind where if the husband wants to divorce, but the wife doesn’t want to divorce, where we don’t let him divorce her. (This example I’m thinking of is m’ikur hadin m’doraysa, applicable to all Jews not just to Ashkenazim who have Rabbeinu Gershom.)
Ashkenazim have the Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom which prohibits a husband from divorcing his wife even if he wants to, if she does not want to. But all Jews m’doraysa have the reverse example of when the husband doesn’t want to divorce then he does not have to divorce and has the right to choose to continue the marriage. And he may even summon his wife to beis din to enforce her obligations to him as his wife, if she isn’t performing them. The fact that Rabbeinu Gershom extended further where we can deny a request for divorce, in more cases than what are covered m’doraysa, demonstrates clearly that denying a divorce request is often proper.
My underlying point is that this newfangled idea that if one spouse wants to divorce when the other does not, then the one wanting it generally has the right to it over the objections of the other spouse, is wrongheaded and has no basis in halacha. (L’havdil, even among the non-Jews, until fairly recently, courts would routinely deny petitions for divorce if the court believed divorcing was unwarranted despite one spouse requesting it.) Of course, when there’s “cause”, i.e. a spouse is actively committing physical abuse, etc., where halacha states is a valid reason to grant a divorce against the will of the declining spouse, such exceptions are recognized as valid basis’ to grant it even against his will. But those are exceptions, not the rule.
ujmParticipantCY: Is this the NY-Miami route that you’re flying?
ujmParticipantAnfrew Yang also promised to support the Yeshivas in their fight for independence from governmental intervention.
ujmParticipantIn Olam Habah.
-
AuthorPosts