Rav Schachter’s Intents Are Genuine
Regarding “Response to Rav Schachter’s Criticism of the International Beit Din on Torahweb.org,” (September 3, 2015), Rav Schachter is a GREAT man of TREMENDOUS sensitivity. To even subtly suggest that he is acting improperly or without the most genuine of intents simply cannot be reconciled with the human being that he is, and ANYBODY who has interacted with him knows this. In a dispute between ANYBODY and Rav Schachter, my money is on Rav Schechter.
Sincerely,
Meyer Muschel
via Facebook
Messas Leniency Does Not Support IBD’s Point
Regarding, “Response to Rav Schachter’s Criticism of the International Beit Din on Torahweb.org,” (September 3, 2015), Rabbi Messas’ leniency is not there, and in any event is irrelevant. Its use is a deception. There the husband issued a get, but the Beis Din did not deliver it to the wife. The question is whether Beis Din can be zocheh on the part of the wife. Rabbi Messas (and, in a concurring opinion, much later, lhbcl”c his successor Rabbi Amar shlita) was mattir in such a case. See www.yadlaisha.org.il/Image/uploaded/issue28.pdf or rackmancenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/dindayan-28.pdf.
Sincerely,
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Senior Associate at AishDas
Via Facebook
Rabbi Krauss Is Upstanding
Thank you, Rabbi Bechhofer (see letter above, in response to “Response to Rav Schachter’s Criticism of the International Beit Din on Torahweb.org,” September 3, 2015), for looking into this and correcting (including the lashon of deception to misleading, even if I will still say it could not be intentional). I am curious how your analysis fits with how the teshuvot were actually used in the IBD’s cases listed on their website, if at all. And again, I would ask how else you think one could read this or respond to your points (and mah me’achorei ha’machloket). I say this because Rabbi Krauss is no am haaretz (you can find his credentials online, though you can really understand them from the stories he tells), and he is one of the most upstanding rabbanim I and many others have encountered, so I think it’s more than fitting to be dan le kaf zechut here and truly try to understand where he might be coming from. Even if at the end of the day, you reject his reading.
Loren Berman
Via Facebook
IBD Rulings Invalidated; Women Languish
It is painful that Rabbi Hershel Schachter, in his missive, invalidates retroactively all of the piskei din (rulings) of the International Beit Din through a personal attack against Dayan Simcha Krauss and Dayan Yehudah Warburg, rather than through a response to the halachic principles and precedents articulated in his p’sakim.
In Los Angeles, several women were freed by the IBD based upon evidence of the absence of two witnesses, which are required for establishing a kiddushin (loosely translated—a marriage) or the invalidation of Torah-observant adult Jewish males due to the failure of the officiating rabbi to designate witnesses for the kiddushin.
These women had been languishing, years after their civil divorces were finalized, and where many of the local LA batei din abandoned them as lifelong agunot—claiming there is nothing they can do, or worse, refusing to attempt to summons the recalcitrant husband, anticipating his lack of cooperation.
We all know that there are disagreements between batei din. Many batei din in Brooklyn do not endorse gittin performed by the Beit Din of America, loosely affiliated with YU, because of their procedure of executing the get prior to the hearing on financial or custodial issues. Does that warrant a public attack against the BDA and retroactive nullification of the status of these women?
We support the courageous work of the IBD and believe that their authority will be accepted over time. May Hashem strengthen their efforts.
Esther Macner, Esq.,
President and Founder
Get Jewish Divorce Justice
287 S. Robertson Blvd., #126
Beverly Hills. CA 90211
310-730-5282
www.getjewishdivorce.org
