- This topic has 70 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
gotrump: Thanks for shouting but we are not the goyim with the “death do us part” as part of the wedding vows. Again, a husband and wife could avoid mistakes but unforeseen circumstances could cause issues that could lead to a divorce and that includes health and wealth. Don’t be so naive.
I find it to be of very poor form and morals for a spouse to seek to run away from their spouse and request divorce due to their spouse suffering from health issues (physical or emotional) or their spouse experiencing a reduction in their material wealth.
Joseph- or others. If a beis din is following the goyish standards regarding custody division of assets etc. In place of halachah must the parties follow the beis din?
JJ, it’s expressly prohibited for a Beis Din to use secular/non-Jewish laws instead of using Halacha/Shulchan Aruch. They can’t say even though halachicly this is your asset, since non-Jewish law says to award it to the other party, that’s what we’ll do.
To GoTrumpkopf
We marry hoping to thrive with one another and to have the yichus of a bais neaman b’yisroel. Not everyone has that mazel and unless you are deliberately trolling, you will recognize that there are circumstances where a couple, in consultation with their rav and counselors conclude it must be ended. If you want to sit there and make these mindless generalizations, don’t expect an intelligent response…
P.S. All caps are disrespectful to the CR participants
Joseph- I know they shouldn’t but from what I’ve heard some if them do. Maybe bc they are scared the civil court will overturn their ruling if one of the parties isn’t happy with the psak. For whatever reason people have told me it’s done that way. If someone then doesn’t listen to the beis din they can be put into cherem or whatever the beis din does to people who don’t listen.
Can’t the beis din also claim Dina dmalchusa?
JJ, it’s expressly prohibited for a Beis Din to use secular/non-Jewish laws instead of using Halacha/Shulchan Aruch. They can’t say even though halachicly this is your asset, since non-Jewish law says to award it to the other party, that’s what we’ll do.
Nonsense. You know neither choshen mishpat, nor have experience of typical dinei torah (momonus or gittin). Unless it’s masne al mah shekosuv batorah you can absolutely agree that a transaction is per law of the land, and if it comes to beis din then secular law is what the beis din we’ll have to evaluate (frequently with Council’s opinion).
Yerushah also, if it was a matono mchayim.
You guys can spout your views of halacha with a gazillion cites to maseches gitten as to the prescribed outcomes. In the real world, where at least some of us live, a couple will consult with the rav and other professionals and pursue the path that works for them. Hopefully, they will find a way of staying together, but as the majority of posters have noted, sometimes a point is reached where the marriage must end. Generally, a beis din will find a way in those cases for a get to be issued so that both can move on in their lives and the children are not living in a combat zone. Where that is not possible, there are sadly a growing number of cases where couples simply move apart and live single lives w/o a get and in some cases, simply rely upon civil divorce understanding the consequences from a halachic perspective.
Joseph:
You wrote: “JJ, it’s expressly prohibited for a Beis Din to use secular/non-Jewish laws instead of using Halacha/Shulchan Aruch. They can’t say even though halachicly this is your asset, since non-Jewish law says to award it to the other party, that’s what we’ll do.”
Your armchair Monday morning quarterback stance is not flattering. I would agree with you that there is too long a list of complaints about batei din, and that the system is broken. But you insinuate that batei din abandon clear halacha and base their piskei din on secular law. That is absolutely untrue. Are there rogue batei din? Absolutely. These are comprised of self-serving baalei aveiroh who exploit the public and justify their rogue behavior. But that is found everywhere else, too, and batei din are not unique. Such is the yeridas hadoros that we observe today. But as a generalization, this is a vicious lie, and you know that.
There are sometimes valid reasons, sanctioned in halacha, when to apply a standard that has its source in secular law. Usually this occurs when there is no clear direction in Shulchan Aruch. You will ask for an example. What is the halachically determined standard for visitation? Shulchan Aruch does not address visitation at all. There is normative practice, and this directly or indirectly references to the secular standard. Similar to secular law, there is no connection between child support and visitation, and denying one because the ex-spouse is non-compliant with the other has zero merit in halacha or secular law.
It is correct to note that the beis din situation is poor. But the accusations you imply are outrageous and dishonest.
joseph: Is it poor form or morals that one spouse cannot deal with the physical or emotional issue that the other spouse faces or even the financial issues that happens during the marriage? It may be but many of us have friends or relatives where this happened. Let’s try to talk in reality and not the “nirvana” that everyone wants to live in. We generally do not enter into marriage with thoughts of divorce. However, the OP and others keep talking about “mistakes” the spouses make and how to avoid them. Divorces can happen without either spouse making a mistake. If one wants to enter marriage without taking that into consideration they IMHO are doing themselves a disservice.
GH: Are you saying that my responses are not “intelligent”? I know that am not the “sharpest knife in the drawer but I am also not the dullest”. =D
JJ, Dina D’Malchusa is not all encompassing and it is inapplicable regarding many things. If the Shulchan Aruch says one thing but secular law says to do it another way on whenever subject (monetary, etc.), we follow Halacha/Shulchan Aruch and not non-Jewish laws.
Ash, you’re completely wrong. Besides, what “transaction”? The marital assets aren’t from some transaction between the husband and wife. The Halacha clearly states that any money or assets a wife comes into possession of during the course of her marriage is the full property of the husband.
Regarding yerusha, if it was a a matono mchayim then it isn’t a yerusha.
TLIK, where have I ever commented on this thread regarding particular offenses of any Beis Din or, for that matter, systematic problems of such? I haven’t; my comments have been general about Halacha that butei dinim are mandated to operate under. That being said, as a rule of thumb (that deviates in instances both ways) is that left-wing/modern beit dins are more often problematic with deviating from Halacha in favor of non-Jewish laws whereas right-wing/chareidi butei dinim are much less likely to do so.
And, yes, in things such as business transactions Halacha itself states that local customs are taken into account governing the legal effects and ramifications of such transactions. And local customs often include recognizing local secular law. Halacha specifically tells us to take that into account. But Halacha also tells us we cannot take into consideration local non-Jewish law governing personal relations and activities (including monetary) between fellow Jews. Especially so when Halacha specifically and directly provides laws governing such interactions and monetary issues that differ from what the local secular laws govern for such disputes.
Joseph- regarding assets I believe you’re incorrect. The husband isn’t entitled to gifts his wife received during the course of the marriage, only the “fruits of her labor”. For example if the husband gives the wife a necklace for her birthday; that stays hers. If she chooses to give it back of course she can but she has every right to sell it and keep the money. Same applies to gifts given by others. There are more complex situation where halacha can be complicated (say she volunteered for an organization and they gave her an expensive thank you gift).
iac: I believe one of the primary reasons Rabbeinu Gershom was motivated to enact the Cherem against a husband unilaterally divorcing his wife against her will was for situations such as you describe. Imagine a wife suddenly suffers from a huge health problem r’l. She is c’v confined to a wheelchair and needs aid to simply move or get up. And it is believed her conditional is permanent and incurable. Or she is now starts suffering from great emotional or mental health difficulties. So the husband then feels he could “do better” and marry a healthy wife after divorcing his now crippled wife. Rabbeinu Gershom made sure she can stop him from doing that and force him to remain married to her.
Similarly the Torah gives the husband the right to decide not to divorce even if his wife demands it. Imagine a husband becomes poor. Until now he was middle class or even wealthy when business went bad and the family is now living in shambles and on shoestrings. The wife is embarrassed by her new financial state. She can do better. So she demands a Get. The Torah says no. He has the legal, moral and ethical halachic grounds to deny her request and insist that the marriage continue.
And in both the above examples the wife and the husband would be correct to deny the divorce request.
To the OP:
Make sure you feel a connection and attraction to the person you’re dating prior to marriage. Don’t assume it’ll come afterward.And once you’re married, here’s a way to keep that marriage wonderful: Never expect, always appreciate. My wife and I live by this rule.
WB, MiddlePath. It’s been a veeeery long time!
joseph: Again, you are taking my examples and declaring the position of ONE of the spouses demanding the divorce when faced with adversity and the other spouse either not consenting or unable to consent. I am NOT talking about that type of situation. I am talking about where the couple, facing trying circumstances that have affected their marriage and not caused by a mistake of either spouse, and have been to a Rav and whatever counseling demanded by their state or country of residence.
As for how to achieve SHLOM BAYIS, I heard that R’ Chaim Ozer was asked about this and he answered that when he was married he and his wife divided the household responsibilities: he would handle all the ruchniyos decisions and his wife would handle all the gashmiyus decisions. He did not recall a time that either one of them violated this agreement.
The second part I heard about R Ozer is that it was all richnius
Joseph, you have a habit of presenting your boich svoros or incomplete knowledge as fact.
The Halacha clearly states that any money or assets a wife comes into possession of during the course of her marriage is the full property of the husband.
As always, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Actually, halachah also says she can claim איני ניזונת ואיני עושה which means of she’s earning she can keep it all – during marriage and beyond.
Ash, she certainly can claim that. But that isn’t the default. By default Halacha, any income or assets she comes into possession to during the course of marriage belongs to her husband. Furthermore, if she does claim איני ניזונת ואיני עושה, she forfeits her right to have her husband support her. Critically, as well, is if she does make that claim it is only effective going forward, not retroactively. So any income and assets (other than a small number of exceptions such as gifts he gave her) that she accumulated during the course of her marriage up to and until the point she makes that formal claim, still remain the full property of her husband.
Since the discussion here is about divorce, if she hadn’t previously claimed this before divorce was considered it is of no use to her since up to that point all income and assets belong to him and she can only claim it for future income or assets that she generates.
Daas Yachid: “The best way to prevent divorce is to not get married.”
Precisely my thoughts as soon as I saw the OP.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.