October 8, 2021 12:15 pm at 12:15 pm #2013675DBSParticipant
For it or against it?October 8, 2021 12:44 pm at 12:44 pm #2013692Ng76b3cParticipant
They should not hold a get but make sure you do not get into a trap of paying your ex too much $$ get a lawyer and don’t sign any agreements without a lawyer looking at itOctober 8, 2021 12:44 pm at 12:44 pm #2013691
Also, why is public shaming only sanctioned when it affects someone else, but in all other areas we are told to “mind your own business” and not judge or protest? Why are recalcitrant husbands evil vile scum, but “chas veshalom” we protest chilul shabbos or pritzus?
Secular philosophy of “it’s only really bad if it hurts someone” is the key here.October 8, 2021 12:53 pm at 12:53 pm #2013689
The only time public shaming is allowed for any violation of such things is when a beis din that both have accepted upon themselves – without another beis din taking the other side – says rhat one party, either husband, wife, business associate, etc, is in breach of beis din.
In most of these cases, there is always another side. R. Daniel Eidensohn on his site clarifies this with proof in most of the high profile cases. In one neighborhood, placards with a man’s face and name were distributed on streets, while one beis din was apparently on his side. That is indefensible. Women sometimes wish to take away mens’ entire lives, both in terms of their children and their money. There needs to be a bargaining chip; the man can say that if you want to extort me and take money just because goyishe law says you’re entitled to it (even though she didn’t work for it at all, and even if she was working her wages go to her husband) then you won’t be able to remarry.
I don’t see what’s wrong with that scenario, bitter and sad as it may be. Are there cases where one party is clearly wrong? I’m sure there are, but mindlessly shouting how many years a woman has been an Agunah (and exactly how many are there? 50 in the nyc area?) does not mean she is right.
In almost all of these cases, if a woman would agree to not take any money besides her kesuvah(if she’s entitled to it…her wanting a divorce because she isn’t happy makes her lose that right, a taanah of “maus alai”, which is extremely common) and agrees to joint custody, I’m sure that 95% of the time this wouldn’t be an issue.October 8, 2021 4:39 pm at 4:39 pm #2013710NOYBParticipant
Yiddishkeit is not twitter, we don’t cancel people. Even in the 1 case where a beis din told people to go protest, the people went on to go after the guy’s family and their jobs, which is 1000% ossur. Are you a scumbag piece of garbage if you abuse halacha to hold someone in a marriage? for sure! But chukas hagoyim in the worst possible way is not a good method of getting people to listen to halacha. That guy from Afghanistan gave a get after 20 years b/c he was afraid of ISIS, should we start handing people to ISIS for not giving a get?
Not to mention all these major “yorei shomayim” and “shluchei beis din” who spend their days on social media yelling about this stuff, and give interviews to the most disgusting, animalistic news outlets telling loshon hora on yidden to the lowest class of goyim around.
Does any of this seem like something torahdig? Do pictures of these protests look like an event the Chofetz Chaim and R’ Moshe would be seen at, or an event AOC would be at? Do they look like birchas Kohanim by the kosel, chavrusah tumult in BMG, or the women’s march in DC? Do the announcements to go sound more like the invitations to the siyum hashas or an antifa protest?October 8, 2021 4:39 pm at 4:39 pm #2013711Yabia OmerParticipant
Mecha’a, not “Macha”.October 8, 2021 6:04 pm at 6:04 pm #2013713
A marriage is a partnership and can only be ended through mutual consent. The courts can try to force the husband to give a get, but the husband must willing give the get.
There was a case in Israel where the husband to get away from giving a get, went to Afghanistan in order to escape. He finally gave the get after over 20 years possibly because in return for his being allowed to immigrate to the US legally and escape the Taliban.
The problem with court pressure whether it be a Bais Din, Government Court or court of public opinion is that the husband can flee the jurisdiction. Once that happens the courts have no power over him until they find him, which can be very hard if he left the country or works off the books..
I don’t believe a husband should hold back a get. But if a husband is holding back a get there must be a reason which needs to be addressed. Social pressure can have the opposite effect, for example a husband paying child support and alimony who because of social pressure flees the jurisdiction he may stop paying besides making it harder to get the get. So I am not sure what purpose the Macha servers.October 8, 2021 6:05 pm at 6:05 pm #2013714
A husband doesn’t have to give a divorce (Get) if he doesn’t want to if he wants to remain married to his wife. Even if she wants a divorce. That’s the rule and law in the Torah and as codified as Halacha in Shulchan Aruch.
There are a very small number of exceptions where she’s entitled to a Get upon request, when the situation meets one of the few exceptions specifically listed by Chazal stating so. But as Avira pointed out even in those exceptional cases he’s not obligated to give a Get unless and until a bona fide Beis Din that both parties agreed to its jurisdiction over their case rules he’s obligated, after conducting a full Beis Din trial and reaching a Psak Halacha whether an obligation exists or not.October 8, 2021 6:08 pm at 6:08 pm #2013715Yserbius123Participant
@aviradearah The logic I’ve heard from Agunah activists is like this. Both sides in a bad divorce have a lot of weapons and ammo to use against each other. And in each case there are advantages and disadvantages that differ from couple to couple. But the one constant is that the husband always has the ability to withhold the get which makes it an uneven playing field.October 8, 2021 6:08 pm at 6:08 pm #2013716
“If you want to extort me and take money just because goyishe law says you’re entitled to it (even though she didn’t work for it at all, and even if she was working her wages go to her husband…”
Yasher koach…true enlightenment cloaked in daas torah.October 8, 2021 6:12 pm at 6:12 pm #2013736BenephraimParticipant
If you believe that you are marrying על דעת בית דין then why do you need a מחאה. Your בית דין can be מפקיע your marriage. If in the alternative you are not then still הפקר בית דין . Why protest? Use your power of בית דין as it was meant to be.October 8, 2021 7:04 pm at 7:04 pm #2013757
“I’m sure that 95% of the time this wouldn’t be an issue.”
This does not seem to be your area of expertise. You are quoting party lines and it doesn’t match up with real life.October 8, 2021 7:04 pm at 7:04 pm #2013756
GH- i cannot find any response that should be allowed thru by the mods so I’ll just say ‘cringe’ and leave it at that.October 9, 2021 9:24 pm at 9:24 pm #2013795
Yserbius; what strategies does a man have besides the ability to withhold a get? It might be a stronger weapon, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be used – obviously it should not be used to simply get what he wants or something he isn’t entitled to, but when a woman uses secular court to get her way, which is a very powerful tool indeed (the court can put him in jail if he refuses), why is it unfair to allow him to do so?
My main issue is with the fact that these activists believe the woman without exception; the mere fact that she has been unable to get remarried for whatever amount of years it is, is sufficient to demonize the husband. Are there mean spirited men who wish to torture their ex wives? I’m sure there are a few. It’s possible that there are a lot, but the activists do not know – all they know is that there were some rabbis somewhere who said she was right and that she’s been an agunah for 15 years, therefore the husband is wrong.
Syag – I don’t know about party lines, all I know is that the activists are employing tactics which are usually against halacha, that can potentially render a get pasul and the resulting children mamzerim. Is my assumption about peaceful resolutions wrong? Could be. It could be that there are a lot of husbands who want to take revenge on their ex wives and ruin their lives. It doesn’t change the fact that in practice these social media and protest campaigns are not acceptable. If even one of the accused men are innocent, they have done more harm than good. You are correct that I do not have halachik experience in this area, but then again, who here is a dayan? I think we all know people who were involved in divorce cases.
Benephraim…hafkaus kidushin was discontinued in the times of the rishonim. It also is not up to us to make new scenarios beyond when chazal make them, as we are only doing the shlichus of the former Sanhedrin. What you are suggesting is extremely dangerous and banned universally by the poskim.
GH – I don’t claim to be enlightened; maaseh yadehah lebaalah is a mishnah; or is the mishnah outdated to you? There is a device of aini nizones ve’aini oseh, that a woman can claim independence financially from her husband (aside from achilas leros in nishsay milug, tzon barzel etc) and keep her wages, but the default is that the husband keeps everything in exchange for his obligation to feed the wife. In these cases, the women did not make thus stipulation, so their wages go to their husbands.October 9, 2021 9:24 pm at 9:24 pm #2013787
Syag: Gut voch and I will leave it with a mutual cringe. No reason to aggravate the Mods so soon after Havdalah.October 9, 2021 9:25 pm at 9:25 pm #2013719Amil ZolaParticipant
Didn’t Zablon Simintov refuse his wife a divorce for decades?October 9, 2021 11:47 pm at 11:47 pm #2013882
AviraDeArah, just to clear up an halachic misconception; only if the husband supports the wife does the wife’s wages belong to her husband. If the wife however, declares that she is supporting herself then the wife’s wages do not belong to the husband.October 10, 2021 12:04 am at 12:04 am #2013887
Philosopher, i mentioned that above – it’s the clause of aini nizones ve’aini osah, but that’s not the default relationship.October 10, 2021 7:44 am at 7:44 am #2013891
Philosopher: Avira pointed out what you’re saying in his most recent comment prior to yours (in the section he addressed to GH). That being said, if the wife declared that, it becomes effective from the time she made that declaration to her husband, but it doesn’t retroactively affect any wages she earned before the formal declaration.October 10, 2021 7:46 am at 7:46 am #2013896
AviraDeArah, I am assuming that a woman who demands a get supports herself and therefore the husband would have no rights to wages . (This is much more pro-woman and fair than the so-called “enlightened” US laws that devide all of a couple’s assets evenly regardless of who actually worked for the money or inherited it.)October 10, 2021 7:55 am at 7:55 am #2013932
If the ex-wife does not collect any money from the husband ie alimony or child support then her income belong to herself. But if she is collecting alimony and or child support then her income belongs to the husband as long as he hasn’t given a get.
These cases occur because the wife gets the secular divorce first and then tries to get the get. If she would get the get first the whole problem would have occurred.October 10, 2021 10:27 am at 10:27 am #2013832
That should be achilas peros and nichsay milug**
In secular law, a marriage is an equal partnership and thus when it is disbanded, an equal split is appropriate. In halacha, that is most certainly not the case. The same way a woman was supported by her husband (or at least he was obligated to do so) she can be supported again by her next husband. Why should she get half or even anything when halacha does not entitle her to it?October 10, 2021 10:27 am at 10:27 am #2013994
Abba_S, why would money for the kids mean that she does not support “herself”? Men often think that giving money for their wives to buy clothing and food for their kids means giving money to the woman. No, it does not, it’s for the kids. It does not say that a husband who gives money for his wife for their children supports his wife and therefore her wages belongs to him. It says that if she supports “herself” her wages belongs to her.October 10, 2021 10:27 am at 10:27 am #2014003mentsch1Participant
Having actually been through this process here are words of wisdom
Ideally the civil divorce and get should be executed at the same time with the process being guided by a frum mediator or bais din.
No one wins. There are compromises necessary. But if people actually want to follow halacha and do what is best for the kids they need to accept the rulings of the impartial parties outside of the fighting.
The problems start when one side isn’t interested in guidance but winning or his/her own cheshbonos. And with such a person what use is a macha? You can have all the gedolim in the world line up on one side and he will still have his cheshbonos.October 10, 2021 11:00 am at 11:00 am #2014063
And I should add that it’s vice versa, a woman paying for her kids expenses is not supporting her husband, or ex-husband if she’s the one paying child support ( which happens sometimes if she a bigger earner than the husband). No one says, if the wife contributes to the children’s expenses, that she supports the husband (or ex-husband) so why say the husband supports the wife (or ex-wife) if the money goes for the kids?October 10, 2021 11:00 am at 11:00 am #2014060
Same topic, different label. So we see the same comments, many sane, others, not. But mostly all are unwelcome because they generalize. And this is ridiculous because every situation is different. There are men who are jerks, and refusing to give gittin because they are simply not mentchen. I’m not sure that much is accomplished by the drama that some people and organizations do to these individuals, but it does create chilul Hashem, bizyonos, and often damage. And there are many cases, probably the majority that involve delays in giving gittin because the affirs of division are not resolved.
I have encountered many cases where the women made their husbands miserable in court for prolonged months, even years, with no legitimate claim. According to matrimonial attorneys, a huge percentage of claims of abuse, whether against the children or domestic violence, are simply fabrication. (And sometimes they are true.)
While the guy is busy defending himself, having legal expenses that she does not have (she uses the prosecutor’s office), and being publicly shamed much of the time, she has the court fighting for her, penalizing him constantly. Moreover, she finds the tricks to withhold the children from him while making him pay for that, too. No, withholding is cruel. But the issues are not resolved yet, and the severance of the gett is not complete.
This same mecho’oh against men for withholding should also address the women who withhold resolution. And the statistics are alarmingly close to 50-50. So we need not to make generalizations. It’s not the greedy women, and it’s not the cruel men. Divorce is a painful process, and it brings out the worst midos in a person. And way too many divorces are bitter battles, costing everyone lots of money and anguish. The wreckage left behind is horrible for all. Everyone loses (except for toanim and lawyers). The now divorced and single men, women, and the children all suffer.
We should all take note that the organizations that exist to provide support for either the men or the women must be considered suspect here. It is not uncommon that there are individuals who provide “emotional” support for divorcing people, actually guiding them to make the process riddled with accusations and counter accusations, prolonging the cost and agony. How rich the community would become if we concentrated on ways to bring shalom to couples, and assisting them in parting (when this is inevitable) in a peaceful manner.October 10, 2021 11:17 am at 11:17 am #2014077
Abba: Al Pi Halacha an ex-wife is not entitled to alimony. If she forces him to pay monthly alimony via a non-Jewish court ruling kneged halacha then she’s a thief. A wife who stole from her husband is not supposed to be given a Get (even if she would otherwise be entitled to it) until she pays him back. See Rav Moshe Shternbuch, Rav Elyashiv’s and others teshuva on this subject.
As far as her wages and earnings, they belong to the husband until she makes a formal declaration to him that she discharges him from being obligated to support her. Any earnings of hers after that declaration belong to her. And he’s no longer obligated to support her.
Child support is the husband’s obligation Al Pi Halacha up to a certain age. (It is less than 18.) But he’s not halachicly obligated to give the child support money to his ex-wife. He can choose to spend it on his children directly.
Using any non-Jewish court for rulings on child support, alimony, assets separation (halachicly virtually all martial assets belong to the husband unless the wife owned it prior to their marriage) or any other disputed matter is strictly against Halacha. ALL disputes MUST be adjudicated in Bais Din only. If any party utilizes arkaos (secular court) then they lose any rights they otherwise would have against the other party.October 10, 2021 11:17 am at 11:17 am #2014079
“This same mecho’oh against men for withholding should also address the women who withhold resolution. And the statistics are alarmingly close to 50-50. So we need not to make generalizations”
Most would agree that each case is unique and we should “avoid generalizations”. However, you make an even more important point that is new to me that “the statistics” prove that women obstruct resolution in roughly 50 percent of contested divorce cases. Could you provide the source of those “statistics” or the name of the author(s), government agency or organization who published those results (since you cannot post a link). Thanks.October 10, 2021 11:19 am at 11:19 am #2014091smerelParticipant
In the absence of clear Rabbinic guidance from respected Rabbonim (not aguna activists-see below) I don’t see how anyone can get themselves involved in a fight that doesn’t pertain to them and don’t know both sides of the story.
I’ve seen video’s of Aguna protests. Some of the people in the crowd looked like they were relishing the opportunity to fight with and harrras someone else. I won’t even start with those who harras family members…
A certain rabbi who was a major aguna activist (he no longer is due to external factors) told me point blank that he takes it for granted that a women coming to him is the victim and saying the truth even without speaking to the husband.October 10, 2021 11:30 am at 11:30 am #2014106
Thank you smerel.
It is no surprise to me that Joe and Avirah continue to sock puppet each other with extremist views in the name of Torah. And always in regard to punishment, women and children. If you follow closely you will find they rarely have others agree with their views or their presentation as stated. Are they the only 2 real talmidei chochomim here and everyone else just isn’t in the know? And how odd that so many of the batei din don’t pasken that way? Are they also deficient in learning, ch”v, and not as committed to truth, ch”v? I wish these 2 would take some time to learn from a live rav about use of internet to spark controversy in the name of halacha, use of internet to “spread truth”, and some social understanding of those they believe to be “helping”.October 10, 2021 11:31 am at 11:31 am #2014101
GHadora: The Israeli rabbanut has posted statistics saying that about 50% (slightly more if I recall) of those refusing a Get are women.October 10, 2021 11:32 am at 11:32 am #2014112
GHadora: The Israeli rabbanut has posted statistics stating that about 50% (slightly more if I recall) of Get refusers are women.October 10, 2021 12:55 pm at 12:55 pm #2014132
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.October 10, 2021 4:57 pm at 4:57 pm #2014162
Syag; can you please explain how batei din do not pasken “that way”? I have not received shimush in choshen mishpat – maybe there’s something i missed in learning, but all of what i said above (along with UJMs posts) were straight gemara, rishonim, and shu”a. Is there a bais din that obligates a man to give child support at the discretion of his wife and not on his own, alimony, or division of estates and property? If so, please name them and their halachik rationale; until such time I’ll assume that you’re going by what people do in practice, which is that money is divided etc….but who says that’s right? Just because people do things in order to get money, doesn’t mean it’s ok. Many “frum” businessmen take jews to court; I’ve even heard some say it publicly in shul without shame – that doesn’t make it right.
Divorce is obviously messy; I do agree with “the little i know”s description, also to those who wanted a source, there was an article about it on YWN a few years ago that has been quoted on this forum many times.
Smerel; I’m sorry, but to assume that the husband is always wrong is gross jurisprudence. I cannot fathom how a rov can have a bias so much, to the point of believing at face value whatever a woman alleges without derisha and chakira (she’s not even kosher le’aidus!). My rebbeim often said that a marriage not working out is more often than not, the fault of the husband, but whatever mistakes he makes have bearing on her rights in a divorce only in regards to obligating him to divorce and forcing him to pay a kesuvah; if his faults are at a certain degree, if he is abusive(not to be confused with being a jerk), doesn’t provide, has addictions, or any number of major problems, then she is entitled to her full kesuva(nowadays with tosefes, it’s about $20k), but if she’s just unhappy, or he is not communicative, or other common complaints, she is saying “maus alai”, that she is disgusted by him and she relinquishes her kesuvah. Those degrees are to be worked out by a beis din who will do proper derishah and chakira, which at the minimum requires knowing both sides of the story.
It’s like the kangaroo courts of college campuses where any and all claims by women are believed without question….a horrible neuvas hadin that i am shocked a dayan would employ.
I agree that there are more male deadbeats and abusers than women; perhaps far more, but there are at least a “miut hamatzui” of horrible women as well.October 10, 2021 5:02 pm at 5:02 pm #2014191
You are correct in noting that there is no halachic obligation to pay alimony. There is about child support. Here, there is considerable misinformation. I am not a posek. So I will share what I gather from exact references.
Even Hoezer 71. This addresses the obligation to support one’s children. Rema says age 6, but clarifies this as whenever is the norm as per the chachomim of the times. While I have heard this being less than perfectly consistent among rabbonim, it is sometimes 18, other times 21. I have yet to encounter any rabbinically drafted agreement that specifies any age below 18.
You are correct, that support for children might be delivered in a manner that bypasses the mother. That could conceivably comply with halacha. However, there is a serious bump, and I say this based on hundreds of hours spent with dayanim, toanim, and frum attorneys. The court tosses agreements that do not pass muster in the court for adequate care/support for the children. Even with full agreement by the two parties, the court will force litigation if they feel the children are not being supported enough.
Not included in much of the dialogue here is that the father has several other expenses for the children, often serving as snags to the negotiation. Tuition is halachically the responsibility of the father. Does this include day care, tutors, etc.? Health care is not addressed in halacha. But it is a reality. Who takes the responsibility, and by what percentage? How do we insure the visitation occurs as agreed upon? As part of the civil divorce, the agreement gets filed in the court. Can the court be used to enforce it, or does this enter the discussion of mesira and arkaos? Is there basis in secular law to provide additional child support for the months of chagim?
In reality, toanim and batei din are keenly aware of their role vis a vis the secular court. And they tailor their work to avoid conflict. In many states, batei din have zero input into decisions about visitation and custody. In others, they have an opinion that is regarded, but not binding.
Lastly, no beis din has authority to enforce any of their rulings. In my experience, batei din look for the secular courts to back them up. And I am referring to the most “right wing”, frum batei din.
Smerel made a point that the videos of some agunah protests seem to involve onlookers who are uninterested in the case, but attracted to the drama. I have never witnessed these events, perhaps for the better. But I do hear the suggestion, and I do know of individuals who might well fit that profile.October 10, 2021 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm #2014196
UJM: I’ve done a reasonably comprehensive search of the Rabbaniut website (the gov.IL URL followed by “chief_rabbinate_of_Israel” sublinks) and there is NO posted reference to any statement, study, or estimate of any such statistic. Perhaps you might provide the date or the sublink (since we can’t post full URLs) that might lead to this statistic. TksOctober 10, 2021 5:19 pm at 5:19 pm #2014230
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.October 10, 2021 5:34 pm at 5:34 pm #2014234
TLIK – it’s more than there not being an obligation to pay alimony, as UJM said, it’s straight thievery to take such money, but many disgruntled wives feel that they deserve it – women talk a lot about “hitting him where it hurts”, getting what they feel owed for all their suffering (sometimes real, sometimes imagined).
Is this what gadolha and syag are defending?October 10, 2021 7:25 pm at 7:25 pm #2014245
Not at all. I am protesting your (plural) tunnel vision in your desire to get your point across regardless of appropriateness of time and place.
Don’t change it to something elseOctober 10, 2021 8:55 pm at 8:55 pm #2014280
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.October 10, 2021 8:57 pm at 8:57 pm #2014296
GHadora: Search for the story on Israel National News (Arutz Sheva) entitled: Rabbinical Court: More female than male get-refusersOctober 10, 2021 9:12 pm at 9:12 pm #2014313
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.
The limited available data I’ve seen and my own anecdotal experience do not support the assertion that the vast majority of divorces in the frum tzibur involve two parties with equal bargaining power and resources willingly submitting themselves to a final adjudication by a beis din and subsequently willing to submit the psak din to a secular court in a settlement context. Nor have you supported your assertion that in 50 percent of cases, it is the woman who is making “unreasonable” demands of the husband or otherwise seeking use the secular courts to “destroy” their him. The halacha is what it is and is not the issue being debated.October 10, 2021 10:50 pm at 10:50 pm #2014310
Many of you have claimed that child support is an obligation of the father which is correct. But under secular law this can be as high as 50% of income before income taxes. This comes in as cash as opposed to food or clothing, goes directly to the wife to disburse as she sees fit. In many cases the bulk of this money is spent on her not the children. So if she is getting this money she might not be entititled to her income is all that I am saying.October 10, 2021 10:51 pm at 10:51 pm #2014326
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.October 10, 2021 10:52 pm at 10:52 pm #2014330
If the couple were “Refine Frum Jews” they probably wouldn’t be divorced and if they were the husband wouldn’t be holding back the get.October 10, 2021 11:01 pm at 11:01 pm #2014368
Ujm, your comment that it isn’t obligatory to give a get is absolutely disgusting. If a woman wants a get she has to get a get unless she is making unreasonable demands or withholding visitation rights from the husband. I am not saying that every single divorce was done out of necessity, but I believe the vast majority was necessary.
You know what, a lot of things are not obligatory according to halacha, that does not mean we don’t do it. Withholding a get for no valid reason gets a man on the path straight to gehinom.October 10, 2021 11:47 pm at 11:47 pm #2014389
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.October 10, 2021 11:49 pm at 11:49 pm #2014393
“the large majority of frum Yidden are Yirei Shamayim”
Yes. But that does not mean at perhaps the most emotionally stressful time of their lives when they feel that their own well-being and and that of their children is at risk, frum yidden will act rationally and strictly in accordance with the technical requirements of halacha. I’m not sure anyone is suggesting that “the majority” of frum divorces, end up in contentious/bitter secular court proceedings. However, in cases of wholly-inequitable proposals based on the financial history of that relationship (not that infrequent as more women work outside the home as the primary or supplemental income earner) or where there has been any history of verbal/phsyical abuse, don’t expect otherwise “yirai shamayim” to act rationally. Sadly, the frequency of contested outcomes is higher than you seem willing to accept. Further, the statistics from EY you cite to may not be comparable to those in the US and UK where there is much easier access to secular courts to redress perceived inequities).October 11, 2021 7:47 am at 7:47 am #2014433
Ujm, will you also sell your underage daughter to whomever you want because you could do so according to halacha?
I really pity the women in your family. Unless you are a troll… Can you tell me of what purpose does it do to keep a woman chained who doesn’t want to be married to the likes of you?
I’m telling you that many people have a straight path to gehinom paved with excuses of “but it was allowed according to halacha”! Whether such an excuse is used for untzniusdige dress when some women always find excuses like “it doesnt say anywhere in halacha that you can’t wear a long wig till the waist”, to abusers who abuse with an excuse that “halacha allows it”…there’s a path straight to gehinom, guaranteed!October 11, 2021 7:59 am at 7:59 am #2014464
The deference I give to the secular court is not because I feel they should have a role. It is the consensus of the overwheming majority of rabbonim, batei din and toanim that it is necessary to be in accordance with the court to avoid the potential for other conflict. This might be made into a stronger argument because the batei din (or any other arbitration situation) have no jurisdiction in custody or visitation. And these agreements get filed in secular court. In NYS, anything in the agreement reached in BD concerning these matters is ignored. And the court reserves the right to litigate. In other states, the arrangement might be different. So it is the batei din that defer to the court, or look to rule in accordance. It should also be noted that batei din have a glaring distinction from the courts. The goal of the psak is that both parties agree to it, and that the BD not impose its psak on the two parties. Court does not do that. It rules and imposes.
You seek that BD should rule according to Halacha. Yes, in an ideal world, that might be possible. But I draw you to the Gemora (Bava Metziya 30A) לא חרבה ירושלים אלא שהעמידו דבריהם על דברי תורה. The finality of halacha requires something else besides the strict application of halacha. I would not say this alone. This is a Gemora. In reality, BD tries to “work things out”, which is about creating compromises (also required in halacha).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.