[Avodah] forcing a GET

Zev Sero zev at sero.name
Sat May 12 20:55:13 PDT 2012


On 12/05/2012 11:39 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:11:49PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> On 12/05/2012 11:08 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>>> The yeish omerim talk about a case in which the gemara doesn't explicitly
>>> require a divorce. That's the case under machloqes. The case where
>>> the gemara does, the SA allows kefiyah, where it doesn't -- machloqes.
>
>> NO.  That is not what it says.
>
> I have no idea how to respond. I highlighted the line in RDE's translation
> that says just that, and you just answer with an unsupported denial.

His translation says the exact opposite, you're just not seeing it
for some reason.  So let's go over the words again, slowly and
carefully.

EH 154:21
All those whom they [Chazal] said must divorce, we force them [to do so]
even with sticks. [Whether or not the gemara says so.  It's enough that
the gemara says he must divorce; it doesn't have to spell out every detail.]
And some say [the opposite]: that anybody that the Talmud does not explicitly
say "we force him to divorce", but only "he must divorce", we cannot force
him with sticks.  [The gemara did not authorise us to force him, so we have
no right to do so on our own authority.]  But rather, we say to him "Chazal
obligated you to divorce, and if you disobey them we have the right to call
you a sinner".

What about that is not understood?  It's crystal clear, isn't it?
Now tell me how you jump from that to a case where the gemara did *not*
obligate him to divorce.



-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
zev at sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
		 are expanding through human ingenuity."
		                            - Julian Simon



More information about the Avodah mailing list