Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sounds like a plan, popa. There goes her 50/50 asset split in favor of your 100/0. (She can still take any assets she had from before marriage.)
A frum person who frei’s out is not a tinok shenishba; he’s a rasha.
Thank You
popa: What magazine is kolmos?
Break them.
Truth be told, no one should have been listening to his junk in the first place. Even when the faker was wearing a yarmulka.
What can the American Embassy do regarding an internal Israeli matter regarding an Israeli citizen currently in Israel?
He has no reshus to turn it on to find out; so he must be dan lkaf zchus.
yitzyshalom: Yet for followers of poskim who rule that it isn’t kosher, they will have the halachic status of being a mamzer. Even if another posek holds he/she isn’t a mamzer. See the Gemora in Yavamos that was mentioned earlier.
simcha613: Secular court shouldn’t be giving them anything. A Jew is prohibited from settling a dispute in secular court outside of beis din. Including in divorce matters. Going to arkayos is a tremendous sin.
Feif Un: Not according to the terms of the BDA Prenuptial Agreement. The BDA PNA mandates he must pay her $150 per day, every day, from the day she walks out of his home for any or no reason. Period. The terms are clear in black and white, as written and signed in the prenup. As long as they are not living together he must pay up, even if he has no halachic obligation to give a Get.
aren’t there basic halachic rulings already in place that say when a couple can ask for a divorce or not?
Correct.
So shouldn’t a prenup only cover those?
It should. But the RCA/BDA prenup does not do that. The legal provisions written and signed in the RCA/BDA prenup allow the spouse to invoke the $150.00 daily penalty payments immediately upon demand, by simply walking out of the marriage for any reason or no reason at all.
DY: Even access from a place of business is supposed to be limited to use for business purposes only. How, then, can they offer a recreational service online (from their customers perspective), when recreational and entertainment websites are not supposed to be accessed (even from a business connection.)
DY: He’s saying that his understanding of the psak is that the only permissible use of the internet is for business purposes, and not for any personal or recreational purposes. And the only place allowed for it be accessed from, is a place of business.
And he is asking how then can Mostly Music have any online presence, even outside Facebook (based upon their statement you quoted above of them following the gedolim), when their customer base who accesses Mostly Music’s website and purchases their music online are doing so for non-business purposes, but rather for recreational purposes. Thus Mostly Music is still enabling and promoting non-business use of the internet by maintaining their e-commerce website.
You will not find anyone who holds a person is a mamzer allow a non-mamzer to marry him/her, even if the mamzer’s rov holds he/she isn’t a mamzer. At most you’ll have the exact situation in the Gemorah in Yevamos cited by Popa above, where they will each have to tell each other who the other side considers a mamzer, so they do not marry him/her.
hanab: For yourself, that is probably the best approach. Walk all the way on the side of the building (or property) rather than on the side of the street. This way they have to make room for you, since there is no where for them to push you off into.
Yes, I do that too; walk on the side of the building, in addition to charging ahead.
And the only way to not bring it back, is to not create children that will be considered mamzeirim according to any shitta. Especially according to a world class posek hador, such as Rav Elyashev shlit”a.
That’s nice, except hundreds of thousands of Talmidim and followers of the Psak Din of Rav Elyashev shlita and others will consider those children to be mamzeirim. Its hard to imagine that child finding a shidduch, even among those who don’t consider him a mamzer, when a large portion of Klal Yisroel will consider him or her a mamzer.
And which man would be crazy enough to marry such a woman in the first place, considering their children will be considered mamzeirim by many, even if he doesn’t hold like that?
Perhaps it isn’t and is more manlike. In any event, for the most part I usually find this problem with a bunch of over-talkative women.
Personally, when I am walking alone and there is a group coming that doesn’t seem to want to make room for anyone else on the sidewalk, I simply continue walking full-speed toward them and inevitably the person on the side will quickly move aside (sometimes at the last second) as I am passing in order to avoid bumping into me.
The group needs to make room for the single. They can’t monopolize the entire width of the sidewalk.
I sure hope that quote would not apply to a hashgocha agency.
NFN: I wouldn’t categorize different flavors of Orthodoxy as different flavors of Judaism. So I would surely state it still practices the same Judaism as its founders did. Though, you also note that it is different than the flavor your family (currently) practices. This I cannot dispute, as it appears from the timestamp that you have posted your comment from Boulder, Colorado during the Sabbath.
Mod-95: Thank You for allowing those two links. The EDAH article was from a 2005 issue of their journal. Rabbi Willig came out with his halachic prenup approximately circa 1999. So Rav Elyashev’s strong halachic objections certainly apply, even if there have been minor modifications of the legal terms of the current prenup. The reason given by RYSE for his objections still apply.
Also, there have been no significant changes to the RCA/BDA prenup between 2005 and 2012. Certainly nothing substantial to change its halachic problems.
And the JPost article from 2005 noted that the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, at that time, refused to allow prenups due to Rav Elyashev’s halachic objections.
I’ll also just note that one of the links not approved was to the site of Gil Student, a known MO blogger rabbi who supports the prenup. He acknowledges the fact that Rav Elyashev issued a psak against the prenup.
Mods, please allow the links below. They are only discussing Halacha. See:
==>HERE<== (bottom of page 4)
This is from the THE EDAH JOURNAL, a radical left-wing modern orthodox organization that strongly supports the prenup. Forget all that is written in it… the writer acknowledges that Rav Elyashiv holds it causes an invalid Get.
If you want the primary source, check ???? ??????. But references to RYSE’s psak is abound over the internet. Here are another few quickly found:
These two are allowed.
I note that the edah article is from before the most recent pre-nup was suggested, and I imagine the authors were attempting to solve the previously existing problems.
Also, the Jerusalem post article refers to a psak from the 1960’s–well before this proposal.
-95
Sam2: I got it right. Nothing you responded disputed my essential points. Read the actual terms of agreement being signed, rather than the PR writeup on the website “explaining” the prenup – that is written to fool people into signing it without clearly and closely reading the actual terms on the signature pages.
$150 PER DAY (plus inflation) is an insane amount that is impossible for most people to even possibly meet even if they wanted to. Most people don’t even earn that much income ($1,050.00 per week, post-taxes.) It is far far away and above from “mezonos” support. The Nachlas Shivah doesn’t say 10 gold coins PER DAY.
It also coerces a Get at-will, even if Halacha does not obligate him to give a Get. He is obligated, under the legal terms written in the actual contract of the BDA prenup, to start paying $150 a day as soon as she walks out on him for any reason (or no reason at all).
And all the wife risks losing is the mezonos if she defies beis din. A Heter Meah is a hugely difficult, time-consuming and expensive undertaking. It can cost upwards of $50,000 to arrange a legitimate Heter Meah. Who could even afford it? You rarely hear of any cases of heter meah.
Why isn’t the wife subject to $150 a day for illegitimately refusing a Get, just like the husband is subject to?
The Chasidishe Hashgachos rely on the OU very often. So, if you turn down the OU, everything else comes along.
That is not exactly accurate. The Chasidishe hashgochos do not accept the OU hechsher for all products. They don’t accept them on certain OU foods that the OU allows certain kulos for, that they don’t accept.
So sometimes one can not rely on the OU for certain food products while relying on the OU for certain other food products, due to different kashrus standards.
I just took a look at the actual text of the RCA/BDA prenup. It is quite horrid. (And that is aside from the halachic objections Rav Elyashev has to the very concept and theory of this type of prenup.)
A. It has the husband sign that he is agreeing to forgo Halacha (Jewish Law) in the case of divorce, and accept whatever secular law at the time says for the issues of divorce, even if they are in conflict with Torah Law. (i.e. Separation of assets.)
B. They agree to use the BDA, and no other Beis Din, for all divorce matters. The BDA is quite on the left-wing spectrum of Orthodoxy and is known to employ a feminist agenda and often eschew Jewish Law in favor of employing non-Jewish law.
C. It obligates the husband to pay her $150 per day, from the day his wife left his home (or forced him out of his home) for any reason. As long as they are not living together, he is obligated to pay $150 per day to her. (Actually it will be higher than $150 since it is indexed to increase with inflation, from the day of marriage, per the CPI.) She could simply wake up one morning and decide to separate, even if Halacha does not allow it or entitle her to a divorce, and he is immediately obligated to pay up or give her a Get.
Furthermore, the prenup makes no such provisions upon the wife should she refuse to accept a Get from him. She cannot be made to pay him any backbreaking daily monetary obligation should she illegitimately decide (even against the orders of the Beis Din) to refuse to accept the Get.
From the information provided in the OP, there is certainly no Kiddush Hashem.
The psak of ??? ???? ???? ?????? forbidding these pre-nups is fairly well-known and cited in botei dinim cases in Eretz Yisroel. Google “parshablog on pre-nups” (without the quotes) to read a discussion on Rav Elyashev’s psak.
Isn’t Igud run by a Lubavitcher?
Jbaldy: You are very mistaken. That isn’t merely DaasYochid’s view. That is the view of the entire chareidi spectrum of Daas Torah of the Gedolei Yisroel shlita.
I think every elected office (other than POTUS) should be recallable by the electorate. That being said, the standard to force an election should be very high (i.e. number of petitions.)
C’mon, fellas. You can get an umbrella for $3. They’re disposable.
The Radak (Sefer HaMichlol, introduction) writes that Loshon HaKodesh is all but forgotten to us, and all we have left is what is in Tanach.
The Chasam Sofer notes that while Chazal used many words and phrases borrowed from the Greeks and Romans, they never coined a new word, as has been done in modern Hebrew, for in their holy opinion it was preferable to use other languages rather than create even a single new word that did not have its like, its example, in the Torah, since it could not be rooted in sanctity.
The Chasam Sofer EH 2:11 says that in ancient times Jews used to use a modified version of the non-Jewish languages for everyday (divrei chol) talk, similar to what Yiddish is.
The Chasam Sofer writes that the reason Jews do not speak Loshon Hakodesh as a speaking language is because it is inappropriate to use a holy language while enveloped in Tumah, which is our current status. The Rambam writes that a love song in Hebrew is more repulsive to Hashem than the same song in Arabic, for instance, because the pollution of the Holy language is an additional crime. If someone wants to store pornography in his house, thats bad enough. But to store it in the Aron HaKodesh is unspeakably worse. So to cause Loshon HaKodesh to be used as a street language, complete with all the disgusting ways it is used today in Israel, is just more of a reason why we should make sure it never gets into the streets. For our Creator to look down at the world and see His holy language – or even elements of it – used in magazines such as are sold in Kiosks on Yaffo or Dizengoff Street, or spoken by the lowest of the low trying to make a sale, is not something that he or we are happy about.
The Kuzari writes that Avrohom Avinu, therefore, spoke 2 different languages. One for holy speech – that was Loshon HaKodesh, and the other for mundane speech – that, the Kuzari says was some non-Jewish language that Avrohom Avinu took and changed around a little on his own. And thats the idea behind Yiddish. It is a non-Jewish language that we took and twisted a bit in order to make it exclusive among us.
Why do you think there has been a change? It always was like this.
What if someone recommending she break it off causes her to break it off with her zivug?
Perhaps your information about him having quit is mistaken.
Was he called the Hun because he was such a sweet guy that everyone called hun? Or because he was forerunner of the Hungarians and they were called the Huns back then?
bein_hasdorim:
The Rambam does not restrict the prohibition to a place where people are suspected of mishkav zachar.
Gemara in Brachos 43b states that a Talmud Chacham should not venture out to the street while anointed with perfume. The Gemara reads:
??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??????? ???????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ????? ??? ????? ?? ????? ???.
?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ??? ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ????
Kesef Mishnah:
Courts generally don’t declare innocence, Ron. So how do you get there?
IOW, he can never be innocent. How Jewish.