By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for the Five Towns Jewish Times

IN REVIEW

Last week, the Five Towns Jewish Times ran an article about the very unfortunate dilemma of Agunos. A number of points were made in the article. One point was that Rav Hershel Schachter Shlita, a leading halachic Posaik and a champion of Agunos rights, had voiced serious dissent against what he sees as radically innovative methods propounded by the International Beis Din established by Rabbi Simcha Krauss.

The approach, in essence, creates annulments by unilaterally dissolving marriages after a perfunctory investigation where the three members of the Beis Din determine that there were never valid witnesses in the first place.

This author further pointed out that ultimately the “annulment approach” to resolving the Agunah crisis would both create pariah statuses for the descendants of those who received IBD annulments as well as the potential to cause a marriage rift within Orthodox Judaism. I presented the argument that we must certainly address the Agunah crisis, but not at this double cost of making these young women and their children pariahs and of causing a rift within Klal Yisroel where people will not marry into them.

NEW INFORMATION

Since then, the Five Towns Jewish Times has obtained specific rulings that have emanated from the IBD. It seems that the IBD has thus far issued annulments to seven women. The 5TJT has seen the alleged arguments for three of these rulings. Essentially, the IBD views videotapes of the weddings and seeing no witnesses standing in the front, assumes that there were no previously specified witnesses in the audience and thus annuls the marriages. They also assume incompetence on behalf of the officiating Rabbi, an assumption that is, at best, halachically questionable. A third problem is that the rulings fail to draw crucial distinctions between the Eretz Yisroel based rulings found in the responsum quoted by the IBD (Tzitz Eliezer etc.) and the cases that the IBD discusses itself: The Tzitz Eliezer is discussing cases where the specific witnesses that were previously designated were in fact pasul l’aidus. In the cases in which the IBD have issued their rulings, no such designation has been made. This is a shocking “game-changing” detail that has not even been pointed out by the authors of the IBD rulings. In this author’s view, this is a crucial distinction that undermines the entire house of cards in which these annulments are based upon. A further rationale found in the IBD responsa was that the Chazakah of ain odom oseh b’ilaso bilas znus does not apply to the non-observant, is also a rather untenable position.

Initially, the IBD claimed that they would have full transparency in regard to all their annulments. Unfortunately, the rulings were not made public, even though a full seven annulments have been issued. Only after pressure had some of the information been released.

Further clarifications have also revealed that, in fact, Rav Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg, had not, in fact, backed the IBD initiative. Previously it was reported that he had initially supported the idea but backed away. It seems that this is incorrect. Initial inquiries have revealed that Rav Goldberg Shlita had never backed the IDB initiative in any manner.

It was also claimed by supporters of the IBD that Rav Herschel Schachter had made a deal that he would not come out against the IDB and had reneged on this arrangement. This too, has proven to be entirely unverifiable. Indeed, it is this author’s understanding that Rav Schachter had only met with Rabbi Krauss in June of 2015 at Rabbi Krauss’s initiative. The meeting was held at the Yeshiva University campus in Washington Heights and, in fact, no such “deal” or conversation took place. There was no other communication between the two or their representatives.

Because of Rav Schachter’s dissent, one hundred Rabbis have signed on to attack Rav Schachter’s position. A good many of these signatures are from Rabbis who are simply not on the same page as most Orthodox Rabbis. They have taken the most radical positions on issues of Biblical Criticism, changing the formulation of blessings instituted by the Men of the Great Assembly, recognizing marriages that the Torah clearly prohibits, and engaging in interfaith activities that are clearly forbidden by Halacha.

There have also been several Facebook campaigns subtly attacking Rav Schachter. One such campaign is titled, “I stand with the IBD. Say yes to halachic civility.” The campaign essentially labels Rav Schachter as being “uncivil” in espousing his halachic positions. This subtle dig against a Talmid Chochom leagues beyond those who are attacking him are unacceptable.

On a final note, it is disconcerting that, as yet, the voice of the Yeshiva community has not been heard on a matter that can affect the future of Klal Yisroel. This author has no doubt that in the coming weeks or months such statements will be issued. What is disconcerting is that the Yeshiva community still takes significant time to react to important issues.

The author would like to reiterate that the horrific situation of Agunos must be addressed, but it must be done responsibly in a manner that would not create a pariah status for them nor cause a rift in Klal Yisroel.

Below is a back and forth correspondence between this author and the Dean of Chovevei Torah regarding the possible rift and the pariah status of IBD annulments. [It is being printed with his permission.]

Dear Rabbi Hoffman,

The one thing I would most strongly disagree with is that when the IBD releases these Agunot they or their children will be pariahs. To the contrary well over a hundred – and maybe hundreds – of Orthodox rabbis will be competing to officiate at their weddings. And all the girls or boys they meet, while perhaps getting a thumbs down from their shul rabbi (who may be centrist or chareidi), will find many Orthodox rabbis that will approve of the shidduch. And the families will all go to these weddings, and the friends of families will all go… No split in site as long as rabbis will do the weddings.
Also, the letter is not denouncing RHS, just supporting Rav Krauss.
Gmar chatima tova and yesherkoach on your writing,

[Rabbi] Asher Lopatin

Dear Rabbi Lopatin,

Thanks for your response. I do not know of anyone in the yeshiva community who would marry a child from such an annulment. The Yeshiva world and community is not an insignificant section of Klal Yisroel. What this is doing is ensuring that people from a Modern Orthodox background not marry into families with a Yeshiva background – and that would be a terrible terrible shame.
Yair Hoffman

Dear Rabbi Hoffman

They will all come to the weddings, and if they can find an Orthodox rabbi who gives a thumbs up, they will marry them. Rabbis even in the yeshivishe velt are losing control – for better or for worse.
[Rabbi] Asher Lopatin

Dear Rabbi Lopatin,

Yair Hoffman

Dear Rabbi Hoffman,

I’m listening, I take what you say seriously, but I don’t agree. And that’s for the record!

A gut yor – in all the zip codes!

Asher

The author can be reached at [email protected]