ujm

Are you feeling better?

How do they taste differently?

Wolf, do you speak to your daughters and wife with “Thank you, ma’am”, in similar circumstances?

AAQ: You’re assuming that if the sister of the Kallah comes to the wedding next week, it is a serious health risk.

I believe it is incumbent for posters to henceforth always refer to the OP as “Der Tzadik Reb Volf”. (Wolf doesn’t do him justice.)

In America every man is a Sir.

You 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.

Halacha 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.

“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.

I 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?

“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.

ubiquitin: 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.

It’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.

“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?

Have 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?

Why are you accusing most Yidden of having Tefilin with a plastic seal that is peeling?

ywnjudy: What I saw was plain (round) hand matzah broken in pieces put into a bowl with sugar and warm milk.

I think Rabbi Herbst’s shul on M & E. 5 has a late Minyan downstairs.

The 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.

Should the Supreme Court be abolished because how the Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott?

Any liquid on matzah is gebrochts.

Osina 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.

besalel: 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.

ubiquitin: 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.

Anfrew Yang also promised to support the Yeshivas in their fight for independence from governmental intervention.