Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Goyishe books are assur because of seforim chitzonim. The Mishna in Sanhedrin 10:1 that says a person loses his Olam Haboa by reading the wrong books since it corrupts his mind.
Amil: I do not recall you ever criticizing the headline writers and so-called “journalists” during the Trump era who multiple times every day for four years repeatedly and constantly blamed Trump for things he had no control over and/or wasn’t his job.
YO: Are you Orthodox?
Biden is senile. He can’t be blamed for anything since he doesn’t know his right hand from his left hand.
Have any of these spaceships loaded and/or the martians come out to greet us earthlings?
“but the reality is that more girls today ARE learning talmud than ever before both in school… but ultimately aren’t going to dissuade a baas yisroel who wants to…”
The reality today is that more people cheat, wear short skirts and watch treif movies. They, too, aren’t going to be dissuaded by lectures, since they “want to.”
Avira, what about lechatchila staying over Shabbos in a place (Japan, Hawaii, etc) that it is a shaila which day is Shabbos?
CS: Welcome to the Internet! In this neck of the woods, going off topic or on a tangent is par for the course.
“Maybe the message is from Above to make aliyah.”
Maybe the message is from Above to daven and learn more and use less entertainment.
CS: Welcome to the Internet! In this neck of the woods, going off topic or on a tangent is par for the course.
Joey Biden lives as if he’s in space.
CA, AAQ’s sarcastic mocking of Chareidim, by implying they believe mathematics is kfira.
Replaced Ultra-Orthodox with Jews and replace Bennett with Abbas, and he’d be widely accused of antisemitism.
Bennett rightfully and correctly deserves the same (accurate) accusation, his microscopic kippa notwithstanding.
There’s no reason to give a hoot about the “Google Doodle”.
CA, even PG and G have pritzus, kefira and worse.
Shteigallday, it is black and white. All movies spit out by Hollywood are chazer treif.
DBS: Many prefer an unromantic marriage to divorced life. And/or prefer living full time with their children to seeing them once a week. Or might not have the financial wherewithal or desire to pay for two homes rather than one. There can be many reasons why a person would not want to divorce. Even if their married like isn’t all a bed of roses. Often a difficult married like is better than a difficult divorced life.
“Are you denying that there are a lot of legitimate claims of abuse?”
No. My only point is, simply, that to adjudicate the claim (to determine whether the abuse allegation is true or untrue or any other claim) Al Pi Halacha ONLY a Beis Din can make that determination and that it is strictly prohibited to litigate that or any issues in non-Jewish courts or to use secular judges or to utilize any laws other than Torah law.
“My question is in THOSE cases. He know the truth. Is he a bad person for keeping her in a chanied marriage. Even if strictly speaking as far as even haezer goes he is not obligated to divorce her?”
If he abused her of course he’s bad. I’m not sure why you need to even ask. In order to correct his behavior he is required to stop abusing her. The Shulchan Aruch says that if Beis Din ascertains that it was proven the husband was beating his wife the Dayanim are required to order him to stop. And that if it is proven he continued beating her after being warned by Beis Din, the Halacha is the Dayanim can force his to divorce even if he doesn’t want to. That’s the Halacha clearly stated in Shulchan Aruch. If you’re asking regarding a case where he’s beating her (which he obviously knows) but the Beis Din has no proof of it, then of course he’s being bad and is required to stop or agree to divorce (even if Beis Din can’t force him since there’s no proof.)
But if there’s no proof we can’t accept the allegation as true. The Halacha in S”A is clear about that.
Syag, are you actually denying that there’s a lot of false allegations of abuse in divorce legal proceedings?
The Democrats have a history of electoral fraud.
“It was specified in our previous conversation”
I’m not sure why you’d think our conversation now is a continuation from another thread seven months ago (or expect me to look it up earlier). Nevertheless, I’m glad the point is now clarified for you.
“The only remaining question is if he claims to desire such, but either is lying, or anan sahdi that it is not going to happen) .”
The Torah and Halacha give him the default right to seek Shalom Bayis. If another party wishes to dispute the veracity of that, they have the burden of proof (that meets halachic requirements) to prove otherwise.
“Are you saying the Torah’s approach has a flaw?”
Why aren’t you asking this question against Rabbeinu Gershom? He made the cherem (that a man is prohibited to divorce his wife if she doesn’t want to be divorced), not me.
“Unfortunately, the situation materially changes when the alleged abuse is verbal or emotional and the husband objects. Absent black and blue marks, welts, swollen eyes etc. the victim of non-physical abuse must elicit testimony from third-parties to overcome her abusers objections to offering a get.”
As I’m sure we all know, many such allegations are nebulous or untruthful, being alleged (and that’s often the keyword) in order to secure unwarranted gain in the legal proceedings. As such, the Shulchan Aruch is very clear that Beis Din cannot accept an unproven claim without witnesses. It isn’t like in goyish courts where they’ll take whatever the (often underqualified, biased or incompetent) judge thinks sounds more “credible”.
There’s good reason why Halacha prohibits Jews from utilizing non-Jewish courts. What is very unfortunate is that the Hamon Hoam sometimes accepts allegations at face value. The Torah doesn’t accept public opinion as a basis for judgement.
On the topic here, regarding electing to decline granting a requested divorce, I’m referring to situations where the husband sincerely desires to continue the marriage and seek Shalom Bayis. (I’m not speaking of a situation of a vendetta.) And in such a scenario, that is where the halacha clearly gives him that fully yashrus, ethical and appropriate right to decide to continue the marriage even though his wife wanted to end it.
TLIK: If Yirei Shamayim want to completely conform to halacha, they absolutely can do so. We both know how halacha has extremely harsh words and condemnations for those that utilize arkaos, to the point that even if both parties agree to use a secular court instead of Beis Din, it is strictly forbidden. And that it is even forbidden for both parties to agree that Beis Din can utilize non-Jewish laws in their decision rather than straightly follow halacha. Even if both parties agree and would be happy to accept such an arrangement.
In many cases (depending on the state of residence and other factors) the parties could simply not file any court case or otherwise involve the courts. They could separate and mutually agree on the issues without a court order. Even if that isn’t feasible, they could involve the court to the minimal extent possible. Even in New York, they can file an “Uncontested Divorce” agreeing to their own terms for property division and child custody. While you’re correct that NY has legal the Child Support Standards Act, the spouses are legally able to jointly file a “Stipulation Regarding Child Support” that opts out of the state Child Support Guidelines and sets themselves the terms and conditions of the child support.
L’maaisa, there’s no halachic basis to force one spouse to give unfettered unaccountable funds to the other spouse in the name of child support, that many have pointed out is often inappropriately used for other purposes. His obligations to support his children can be met by him directly expending the funds on their behalf without necessarily involving his ex.
Regarding property division, it is well known that halachicly almost all marital assets belong to the husband. There is no reason, rhyme or basis to deviate from halacha in order to achieve the secular non-Jewish ideal of something like a 50/50 split, that has no halachic basis.
philosopher: Au contraire. You have it backwards. For all of world history until starting around 1960 the entire world instinctively and naturally knew and understood that marriage was mutual, both in establishing marriage and in ending marriage. Just as one person cannot marry another person without that person’s consent, one spouse cannot unilaterally end a marriage without the other spouse’s consent. L’havdil elef havdolos, secular courts, for centuries, often denied one spouse’s request for a divorce if the other spouse contested the request. Even as late as around ten years ago courts in New York sometimes denied requests for a divorce.
And such has always been the Halacha. The Posuk in the Torah clearly says a divorce can only occur if it is the ratzon, will, of the husband. If it isn’t his will then he has no halachic, legal, moral or ethical obligation to divorce simply because his wife wants to divorce. Obviously if the wife has a legitimate provable “cause” where her husband wronged her (i.e. beats her), in a situation that Chazal decreed fits the specific criteria where in such a situation she’s entitled to a divorce, then she can indeed force him through Beis Din to divorce her. But in a case where there was no cause, that meets halachic requirements to mandate a divorce, then she has no right to a divorce.
And if a spouse has no right to a divorce, demanding one doesn’t obligate the other spouse to acquiesce. Halacha describes situations, also, where the husband wants to divorce his wife but he is not permitted to. No one protests against those halachos to demand the husband be granted the unfettered right to divorce his wife, in such situations. Similarly, if the wife has no right to a divorce, if her husband elects to continue maintaining the marriage after declining her request, then al pi halacha she’s required to accept that, and perform her wifely obligations to her husband. And if she still refuses, then it is her who will get gehenim whereas he’ll get gan eden for the suffering she caused him by wrongfully demanding a divorce and then refusing to perform her obligations to him.
Throughout history all this was understood and accepted by Yidden the world over. It was only after the goyish world started “No Fault Divorce”, which was a novel concept 50+ years ago, unprecedented in history, that slowly certain segments of Jews started to have this new gentile idea unfortunately seep into their own hashkofos, despite the halachos to the contrary and despite it never have been Jewish practice, halachic jurisprudence or psak before (or since, for that matter).
Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom took away from Ashkenazic husbands their right to unilaterally divorce their wife. Since Rabbeinu Gershom’s decree, wives have the right to veto her husband’s ability to divorce her. Is anyone alleging that Rabbeinu Gershom created an unfair situation where a husband cannot divorce his wife when he wants to? No, because Rabbeinu Gershom is obviously correct. A husband shouldn’t divorce his wife if she doesn’t want to divorce. Similarly, as per the Torah directly itself, a wife cannot get a divorce if her husband doesn’t want to divorce.
AAQ: If you go back to the age of silent films you might indeed find a film without pritzus.
And you can’t skip pritzus. Once you saw it you cannot unsee it.
ubiq: Who said the marriage is over? That point wasn’t specified in the conversation. And more importantly, the marriage is over in whose opinion? Are you asserting that either spouse can unilaterally decide the marriage is over even if the other spouse disagrees? If you’re asserting that, you’re halachicly wrong.
ubiq: Are you really that dense? There’s no Halacha that you must play music during selichos. There IS a Halacha that if a husband doesn’t want to divorce the wife is obligated to continue being his wife.
All movies have pure pritzus and, hence, are prohibited. There’s not a single movie, other than animation perhaps, that lack pritzus.
“determined to pontificate on the supremacy of halacha over logic, secular law, common sense and contemporary societal norms.”
Halacha IS supreme over secular law and your perceptions of common sense and contemporary societal norms that are Kneged Halacha. And there’s nothing more logical than strictly following Halacha.
Reb Eliezer, Taiwan is a sovereign part of China.
juju: There is little antisemitism in Hungary. Additionally, Hungary has a very Jewish friendly government for the last decade.
There is serious antisemitism in France, Germany and to a somewhat lesser extent in England.
Lubavitch deserves a lot of credit for bringing back thousands of Yidden.
There’s at least one, if not more, threads already on the exact issue of girls learning Gemorah. Google it and bump it back with your chochmos.
I did.
huju- No facts are a hallmark of the left.
CTL – Actually, there’s no limit on how many years a person can be president. A person can be elected Vice President an unlimited number of times and then repeatedly assume the office of the presidency with the resignation of the President-elect or President.
It’s quite funny. For four years the Democrats cried that Trump won in 2016 via fraud. After 2020 the Democrats claimed fraud is rare to non-existent.
In 2018 the Democrats cried Brian Kemp won in Georgia illegitimately and that they will not recognize his win. Suddenly in 2020 the Democrats decreed that it is “undemocratic” for the loser to not recognize the winner.
Philosopher: It is befeirush Halacha clearly stated as such in the Shulchan Aruch and throughout the poskim. It isn’t even controversial or debatable. It comes directly from a posuk in the Torah. And no one disputes it.
Even if it isn’t a popular Halacha in the 21st century. The Shulchan Aruch gives numerous examples of when a wife asks for a Get and Beis Din is required to tell her it is denied and that she must remain married to her husband.
The system considers a moderators approval of a post to be an edit. You’ll only see that note if the original poster makes another edit after approval (and doesn’t uncheck the show edits option.)
CS: You’re sounding like a broken record crying troll on every thread. Instead, if you’re handed a lemon, make lemonade.
GHadora, you’re conflating part of my comments with parts of comments from another poster, in making a cojoined response to a point that wasn’t made. (I said nothing about 50% or about unreasonable demands.)
That being said, the majority of frum divorces, in fact, do NOT end up in contentious/bitter secular court proceedings. I certainly stand by my assertion that the large majority of frum Yidden are Yirei Shamayim.
GHadora: Search for the story on Israel National News (Arutz Sheva) entitled: Rabbinical Court: More female than male get-refusers
The only people movies are okay for, are people who eat pork.
Was there fraud? Absolutely. Was it enough to change them outcome? Probably not but there’s absolutely no way to be certain.
Fraud has been a hallmark of the Democrat Party for many decades. When Lyndon Johnson stole the election from Nixon on behalf of his running mate John Kennedy in 1960, as is widely known was done by LBJ in Texas and by the Daley crooked political machine in Chicago, it wasn’t a new thing for the Democrats. They had much experience. Daley was an old hand as was LBJ and other Democrat machines.
And they didn’t suddenly stop committing fraud after stealing 1960. In New Jersey Democrat candidates were convicted of election fraud even in the last decade.
TLIK: As I mentioned earlier I agree with your general view and approach on this issue. One nekuda, if I may beg to respectfully differ, is that I think you’re giving to much deference to secular courts/law. M’ikur hadin, the secular courts and the secular law should have absolutely zero bearing on this (or any) proceeding, case or dispute between two Jews, on matters of divorce, assets ownership, custody, visitation, child support or any other issues between Yidden, whether husband and wife or between strangers.
I understand your concern regarding the non-Jewish courts demanding to enforce various secular law as they may pertain to custody, child support or possibly other issues. But since, I believe, we are discussing Yirei Shamayim, who want to strictly and completely follow Halacha — even if and when they may be engaged in a dispute with another Yid (i.e. a spouse), therefore we should be operating under the assumption that both parties will do what is right Al Pi Torah and Din. Which means they’ll both naturally insist to completely adjudicate their dispute in Beis Din, exclusively using Halacha to determine the resolution of all issues.
If a married couple decide to split and amicably reach an agreement between themselves on all issues, including assets separation, custody, visitation and child support, as well as any other issues, and simply go through the legal process to technically formalize obtaining a writ of divorce so that they’re legally not married any longer, I don’t believe any judge will override their amicably and jointly presented agreement to the court. Even if there is some law on that books giving the judge that technical right. In fact, regarding a couple that have children but were never legally married to each other, as a large percent of gentile couples these days live, they can reach whatever amicable agreement they want regarding the money and children without even involving any court or filling any court case. In the vast majority of states any court will be elated and more than happy to accept a mutually agreed arrangement as is. It’ll save the overworked, overbooked, backlogged court docket from having to spend countless of tens or hundreds of hours of court time litigating issues that the parties mutually reached an agreement.
On that token, if two Yidden fully adjudicate all their outstanding disagreements in Beis Din (or mutually, privately, outside of Beis Din) and come to court with the Beis Din ruling and present it as their joint mutually agreed arrangements on all issues, including monetary separation, custody, visitation and support, it is extremely highly unlikely that any court will demand a court case be held to relitigate what was agreed to.
In fact, in many states if they reached an agreement and have no no dispute, they don’t even need to file any court case or involve the court whatsoever. They can simply carry out what they agreed to and have no dispute over. Obviously these are state laws and each of the fifty states (or foreign countries) will have their own legal nuances.
And that is the way to live Al Pi Torah and Halacha without utilizing any arkaos, c”v. So for any and all Yirei Shamayim, the above is how they would and should approach this.
So then we are left with the cases of where we are dealing with one of the parties to the dispute is not a Yirei Shamayim. And their lack of Yiras Shamayim is evidenced by the fact that they refuse to accept full and complete adjudication of all outstanding issues via Beis Din, utilizing halacha exclusively to determine the outcome. For example, if one disputant refuses to let the secular court know that all issues have been resolved (if a secular court is somehow necessary in the process, let alone if he/she kneged halacha initiates a secular court case). So what do we do about such a situation? The Beis Din should then put a Siruv on that party. And deny that party any halachic rights he/she would otherwise have been entitled to (i.e. a Get), until they reverse their kneged halacha actions and reverse/repay any gains they illicitly (kneged halacha) obtained from the secular system.
But since the large majority of frum Yidden have a chazaka of being Yirei Shamayim, the last type of unfortunate situation should be a distinct minority of divorces. But nevertheless an option in the toolbox of Butei Dinim, should it be necessary.
But to reiterate, I generally agree with the points you’ve made on these issues.
Avira, a significant nuance of Halacha in a maus alei case is that he isn’t obligated to give a Get, if he doesn’t want to, but she isn’t obligated to continue living with him, if she doesn’t want to.
There are almost no Jews living in China.
Syag: smerel’s sentiment here is generally the same as my own. So is noyb, tlik and Abba, in addition, of course, to Avira. In previous discussions on this issue many other posters agreed with my points on this topic. Most notably, I think, is Milhouse who is a longtime poster here and a venerable Talmid Chochom who consistently agreed with virtually every aspect of all my halachic comments on this issue. Butei Dinim do pasken like this. Additionally, I indeed have discussed this issue personally with various Rabbonim, Dayanim and Talmidei Chachomim who share the same halachic conclusions I’ve cited here.
Now I can’t disagree with you that perhaps a “majority” of internet posters strongly disagree with our halachic citations on this issue. But when you realize that a majority of internet posters, even on “Orthodox” sites, are non-learned and/or teens and/or girls and women, who never learned these halachas yet feel highly qualified to comment (based on their gut feelings) on a subject they’re unlearned halachicly in, it easily explains why a “majority” of internet posters disagree.
GHadora: The Israeli rabbanut has posted statistics stating that about 50% (slightly more if I recall) of Get refusers are women.