June 7, 2012 11:57 pm at 11:57 pm #879282rabbiofberlinParticipant
A couple of comments.
To “nishtdaingesheft” : If you accept that artificial insemination is like an actual relation, then there is no difference between that matter and the so-called get me’useh. The child of such insemination is a mamzer, as the woman receiving the treatment is married. I don’t remember whether the satmarer Rov zz’l said that the child is a mamzer but I do remember that every chassidische rov in the US argued with R’Moshe zz’l, yet, R’moshe’s opinion became accepted.
to zahavsdad: ‘in chareidi circles there are no agunas” You are kidding, right?
To all, the gemoro has various instances where you beat the husband ‘at shejomar rotzeh ani” (I want to do it !) and the get is a good get. There were many Poskim in the US who accepted the pre-nup and, as far as I know, the Israeli Poskim were “choizer’ – changed their opinion – that it was a get me’uesh when they heard the details. Today, i don’t beleive that tehre is a serious Possek who disagrees swith the pre-nup.June 8, 2012 1:00 am at 1:00 am #879283
nishtdayngesheft: True, at the time the psak was not on IVF. However, later on, when IVF came around, the Satmar Rebbe at the time ruled that R’ Yoel’s reasoning extended to IVF as well.
A friend of mine who went through IVF told me that he was once at a small event from A TIME. They had a speaker from Satmar there, and he got up and said IVF is assur, and children from it are safek mamzeirim. It did not go over too well!June 8, 2012 5:06 am at 5:06 am #879285NaysbergMember
I don’t have the mare makom, but Rav Elyashev shlita paskens this prenup causes get me’usa.June 8, 2012 7:04 am at 7:04 am #879286
Ok, people have been throwing P’sakim around, but it doesn’t help someone like me to whom this is nogeiah l’maisa. Are there any actual ma’areh mekomos as to what different Poskim hold today, both from a Halachic (possible mamzer problem vs. possible aguna problem) and Hashkafic (prenup makes it easier to get divorced vs. prenup evens the playing field) standpoint?June 8, 2012 7:09 am at 7:09 am #879287RABBAIMParticipant
I have been involved in cases in which ONLY because of the prenup did the husband even show up to Bais Din…………June 8, 2012 12:24 pm at 12:24 pm #879288rabbiofberlinParticipant
If you don’t have a ‘mareh mokom” (source) then why would we accept what you are saying?June 8, 2012 3:27 pm at 3:27 pm #879289zahavasdadParticipant
It depends who you follow, If you follow Rav Shecter, you can sign the Pre-nup. If you follow Rav Elishiv then you cannot.June 8, 2012 4:37 pm at 4:37 pm #879290
I think I would sign one if my wife insisted. I figure that if we get divorced, it will be her problem anyway.
I probably would not marry a woman who was divorced and had had one, unless she indemnified the ex-husband from all rights under it and got a new get. I don’t even know that anyone says it is get meusah except from the comments here, but I don’t wanna take chances. Because that will be on MY kids head.June 8, 2012 7:53 pm at 7:53 pm #879292
The psak of ??? ???? ???? ?????? forbidding these pre-nups is fairly well-known and cited in botei dinim cases in Eretz Yisroel. Google “parshablog on pre-nups” (without the quotes) to read a discussion on Rav Elyashev’s psak.June 8, 2012 8:48 pm at 8:48 pm #879293
PBA: That is a terrible and destructive attitude. On that we say “Shelo L’hotzi La’az Al Gittin Harishonim.” Actually look at a Halachic prenup, show it to your Rav, and honestly try and tell anyone that there is any possible Chashash of Get Meuseh with it. You won’t be able to.June 8, 2012 9:42 pm at 9:42 pm #879294
I just took a look at the actual text of the RCA/BDA prenup. It is quite horrid. (And that is aside from the halachic objections Rav Elyashev has to the very concept and theory of this type of prenup.)
A. It has the husband sign that he is agreeing to forgo Halacha (Jewish Law) in the case of divorce, and accept whatever secular law at the time says for the issues of divorce, even if they are in conflict with Torah Law. (i.e. Separation of assets.)
B. They agree to use the BDA, and no other Beis Din, for all divorce matters. The BDA is quite on the left-wing spectrum of Orthodoxy and is known to employ a feminist agenda and often eschew Jewish Law in favor of employing non-Jewish law.
C. It obligates the husband to pay her $150 per day, from the day his wife left his home (or forced him out of his home) for any reason. As long as they are not living together, he is obligated to pay $150 per day to her. (Actually it will be higher than $150 since it is indexed to increase with inflation, from the day of marriage, per the CPI.) She could simply wake up one morning and decide to separate, even if Halacha does not allow it or entitle her to a divorce, and he is immediately obligated to pay up or give her a Get.
Furthermore, the prenup makes no such provisions upon the wife should she refuse to accept a Get from him. She cannot be made to pay him any backbreaking daily monetary obligation should she illegitimately decide (even against the orders of the Beis Din) to refuse to accept the Get.June 8, 2012 10:25 pm at 10:25 pm #879295
Tomche: You’re misrepresenting the prenup. Here’s what it says, from the website:
“What Does The Prenup Say?
The Prenup essentially contains two provisions:
1. Each spouse agrees to appear before a panel of Jewish law judges (dayanim) arranged by the Beth Din of America, if the other spouse demands it, and to abide by the decision of the Beth Din with respect to the get.
2. If the couple separates, the Jewish law obligation of the husband to support his wife is formalized, so that he is obligated to pay $150 per day (indexed to inflation), from the date he receives notice from her of her intention to collect that sum, until the date a Jewish divorce is obtained. This support obligation ends if the wife fails to appear at the Beth Din of America or to abide by a decision of the Beth Din of America.
Each of these provisions is important to ensure that a get is given by the husband to his wife in a timely manner following the functional end of a marriage. The first obligation grants authority to the rabbinical court to oversee the get process. The second obligation provides an incentive for the husband to abide by decisions of the rabbinical court, and give a get to his wife once the marriage is over and there is no hope of reconciliation.”
It makes sense to force them to go to the BDA because the BDA trusts itself. They can’t trust every random “Beis Din” made up of three “Rabbonim”, who could be biased in either direction. And they don’t have to go in front of the BDA, just in front of a Beis Din approved by the BDA.
It also clearly states that the wife loses this if she ignore Beis Din at all. And we don’t need to force her to accept a Get because if she refuses then they can give him a Heter Me’ah Rabannim, which is not a recourse available to her.
The $150 a day that they make him pay is the Mezonos that he is Chayav to pay her anyway. The Nachlas Shivah says 10 gold coins, if I recall correctly.
Also, your quote that “The BDA is… known to employ a feminist agenda and often eschew Jewish Law in favor of employing non-Jewish law.” is pure Motzi Shem Ra on big Talmidei Chachamim. I’m shocked the mods let that through. Rav Schachter explains precisely when and how what should be done in Dinei Mamonos. You being Motzi La’az on him is laughable.June 8, 2012 10:31 pm at 10:31 pm #879296yichusdikParticipant
Having just gone through a divorce, I’m positioned to know the implications of either perspective. I agree with Tomche that the prenup he describes is hugely problematic. Not something I would have signed. On the other hand, When I got married I signed a prenup that simply committed me (and her) not to use the get as leverage in case the marriage broke down. I had no problem signing it, and in fact was prepared to do it even in advance of the civil side of things. The thought of using it as leverage was simply not something I could conceive of doing.June 8, 2012 10:52 pm at 10:52 pm #879297
Sam: again, I’m unfamiliar with the issues. But I know my rav defers to rav elyashiv.
Also, I don’t think I have to be concerned shelo l’hotzi laaz, if there are poskim who are holding l’maasa that it is passulJune 8, 2012 11:20 pm at 11:20 pm #879298
PBA: Do you actually know that Rav Elyashiv calls it a Get Meuseh? Do we have a source other than Joseph here?June 8, 2012 11:21 pm at 11:21 pm #879299
Ok, I googled that article, and that article says Rav Elyashiv passuls the get. It is probably not lying–but does anyone have a primary source?
This really becomes a fascinating problem then, since here is the issue:
If we had a sanhedrin, we could just pasken the shaila.
Usually today, we have machlokes, and just have different minhagim.
But here, we obviously can’t have different minhagim, because we will be like beis hillel and beis shammai not marrying the mamzerim or pegumim from each others families. We don’t want that.
But that means that any group can effectively impose its will on the rest of us, by being machmir on gittin. In this situations, it is (apparently) Rav Elyashiv, but what if next time it is Popa?June 8, 2012 11:27 pm at 11:27 pm #879300
PBA: I found it very ironic that the same type of blog that was put down for saying that R’ Shteinman endorsed Nachal Chareidi (maybe the same blog, who knows?) is used as the main source for what should be a major P’sak by R’ Elyashiv.June 8, 2012 11:30 pm at 11:30 pm #879301
I’m unfamiliar with that blog.
I have heard my rebbeim talk about pre-nups, and they said to not use them. However, if I recall, the reason was that it is not proper to plan for divorce–not a halachic issue. That is my reason for not wanting to sign one, but I would do it if my wife insisted.June 8, 2012 11:41 pm at 11:41 pm #879302
PBA: I once said that to someone. I would be very insulted if I was asked to sign one of these prenups because it would show that the girl I’m marrying doesn’t really trust me not to be M’agen her, which is a huge deal. But what can we do? Those who take advantage of their ex-wives have caused problems for the rest of us.June 8, 2012 11:44 pm at 11:44 pm #879303
In any event, I’m sure curious to see what happens the first time this gets litigated. I wonder if NYS courts would really enforce it.June 8, 2012 11:52 pm at 11:52 pm #879304
Sam2: I got it right. Nothing you responded disputed my essential points. Read the actual terms of agreement being signed, rather than the PR writeup on the website “explaining” the prenup – that is written to fool people into signing it without clearly and closely reading the actual terms on the signature pages.
$150 PER DAY (plus inflation) is an insane amount that is impossible for most people to even possibly meet even if they wanted to. Most people don’t even earn that much income ($1,050.00 per week, post-taxes.) It is far far away and above from “mezonos” support. The Nachlas Shivah doesn’t say 10 gold coins PER DAY.
It also coerces a Get at-will, even if Halacha does not obligate him to give a Get. He is obligated, under the legal terms written in the actual contract of the BDA prenup, to start paying $150 a day as soon as she walks out on him for any reason (or no reason at all).
And all the wife risks losing is the mezonos if she defies beis din. A Heter Meah is a hugely difficult, time-consuming and expensive undertaking. It can cost upwards of $50,000 to arrange a legitimate Heter Meah. Who could even afford it? You rarely hear of any cases of heter meah.
Why isn’t the wife subject to $150 a day for illegitimately refusing a Get, just like the husband is subject to?June 9, 2012 12:05 am at 12:05 am #879305
Mods, please allow the links below. They are only discussing Halacha. See:
==>HERE<== (bottom of page 4)
This is from the THE EDAH JOURNAL, a radical left-wing modern orthodox organization that strongly supports the prenup. Forget all that is written in it… the writer acknowledges that Rav Elyashiv holds it causes an invalid Get.
If you want the primary source, check ???? ??????. But references to RYSE’s psak is abound over the internet. Here are another few quickly found:
These two are allowed.
I note that the edah article is from before the most recent pre-nup was suggested, and I imagine the authors were attempting to solve the previously existing problems.
Also, the Jerusalem post article refers to a psak from the 1960’s–well before this proposal.
-95June 10, 2012 2:24 am at 2:24 am #879306
*By Eidah Chareidis I meant Nachal Chareidi. Mods, if you can fix that in my second-to-previous I’d be much obliged. Thank you.June 10, 2012 2:56 am at 2:56 am #879307
Mod-95: Thank You for allowing those two links. The EDAH article was from a 2005 issue of their journal. Rabbi Willig came out with his halachic prenup approximately circa 1999. So Rav Elyashev’s strong halachic objections certainly apply, even if there have been minor modifications of the legal terms of the current prenup. The reason given by RYSE for his objections still apply.
Also, there have been no significant changes to the RCA/BDA prenup between 2005 and 2012. Certainly nothing substantial to change its halachic problems.
And the JPost article from 2005 noted that the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, at that time, refused to allow prenups due to Rav Elyashev’s halachic objections.
I’ll also just note that one of the links not approved was to the site of Gil Student, a known MO blogger rabbi who supports the prenup. He acknowledges the fact that Rav Elyashev issued a psak against the prenup.June 10, 2012 4:03 am at 4:03 am #879308
yichusdik: When I got married I signed a prenup that simply committed me (and her) not to use the get as leverage in case the marriage broke down. I had no problem signing it, and in fact was prepared to do it even in advance of the civil side of things.
I’d have no problem signing something like that in theory, but the question is would Rav Elyashiv? Is it not considered forced because there’s no financial penalty?June 10, 2012 11:46 am at 11:46 am #879309zahavasdadParticipant
I read a psak about a man in Israel who was divorcing his wife and didnt want to pay child support. He claimed the kids were not his.
So they took a DNA test (There were 2 kids) and the DNA showed that one kid was his and the other not. He was still ordered by the Rabbanut to pay child support and the daughter was not a mamzer. (It was the daughter who was not his daughter)
other cases involved conservative or reform weddings and remarriages where the Rabbanut delcared the original wedding invalid to avoid a mamzer
The point is time and time again Rabbanut try to avoid having someone become a mamzer even if there is strong evidence to prove so (ie they claim the original wedding was invalid)
If it came down to a case where there was an actual person involved who might be a mamzer, I suspect the rabbanut would find a way around it even if Rav Elishiv held differentlyJune 10, 2012 4:45 pm at 4:45 pm #879310
Mods: you allow posts like zdad’s, above?June 10, 2012 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm #879311
That is ridiculous. The first case is not a mamzer at all, because there is a chazaka that rov beilos achar ha’baal. Rav Moshe paskened that reform and conservative weddings are not marriages.
You’re just pulling cases that you don’t understand because you haven’t learned enough, and using them as evidence that there are no rules. There are rules; you just need to know them.June 10, 2012 6:04 pm at 6:04 pm #879312walton157Member
@Soarin: Your opinion of the shidduch crisis is correct–parents taking over. But, let’s not forget what stupid qualifications/questions were asked of “the other” family.
What color tablecloth is used for the Shabbos table?
Do they scrape or stack (the dirty dishes)?
How heavy is the mother?
How heavy are the siblings–usually the girls (what a surprise)and so many others…
We did this to ourselves.
I hardly ever hear: “what about the person’s midot?”
What about the person’s hashkafah?
What about the person’s derech eretz?
More important than the decor of the home.
Let me know if you agree/disagree. I like to read other CRers opinions. Thanks.June 10, 2012 6:59 pm at 6:59 pm #879313SoarinMember
I agree with you that people may ask ridiculous questions about the other family. Though I must say that I receive many phone calls from mothers seeking information and never once been asked the questions you posted…I would be blown away had I been asked those question, as I find them insane and completely irrelevant to the characteristics of a person. Mothers of boys usually do question the weight of the girl they are looking into. The table questions are completely ridiculous and I would never want anyone I know to get into a family like that!
I believe that the foundation of a happy, successful marriage stems from the middos and haskafah of an individual. Those are the questions that should be asked!!! It’s imperative to question the true essence of a person and the character traits by which they lead their day to day life, hopefully with honesty, integrity, and true empathy towards others. If only people would awaken and realize what’s really important to them in establishing a solid relationship.
If the decor of one’s home is the focal point of a shidduch, all may be lost, as people have majorly different tastes and opinions. lolJune 10, 2012 10:08 pm at 10:08 pm #879314yitzyshalomMember
this is ridiculous:
1) the beit din were able to beat, starve, execute people as they saw fit. To execute someone for a specific biblical transgression such as breaking shabbat was virtually unheard of due to the difficulty in providing witnesses. However, if there was a mad murderer running around, the beit din didn’t have to hang around waiting for 2 kosher edim; they would execute him under a pretext like ‘morid be’malchus’.
2) if your rabbi says you can do something and another rabbi says you can’t, the other rabbi’s opinion is irrelevant as far as you are concerned. We do not have a sanhedrin and your jewishness goes according to your rav. So if your rav says you can use one your divorce would be kosher and your future children and not mamzerim.
Saying that another persons rabbi makes halachic rulings for you is like saying all ashkenazi people hold sephardim are breaking pesach when they eat kitniot. I can’t believe that people here are even discussing this.June 10, 2012 10:22 pm at 10:22 pm #879315
That’s nice, except hundreds of thousands of Talmidim and followers of the Psak Din of Rav Elyashev shlita and others will consider those children to be mamzeirim. Its hard to imagine that child finding a shidduch, even among those who don’t consider him a mamzer, when a large portion of Klal Yisroel will consider him or her a mamzer.
And which man would be crazy enough to marry such a woman in the first place, considering their children will be considered mamzeirim by many, even if he doesn’t hold like that?June 10, 2012 11:45 pm at 11:45 pm #879316
We know Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai had major machloksim about yibum to the point that perfectly valid marriages for one of them led to mamzerim according to the other. Yet the Mishnah still says that they didn’t stop marrying into one another’s families. The question is, does that mean because they respected each other’s psak, and therefore if Beis Hillel called someone a normal Jew, Beis Shammai would rely on that even though according to their logic he would be a mamzer? Or does that mean they respected each other to the point that even though Beis Hillel may have thought someone was not a mamzer, he would make sure to tell any Beis Shammai followers not to marry him because according to Beis Shammai he’s a mamzer? If it’s the second case, then if you are a talmid of R’ Willig or R’ Schachter, then of course you can use the pre-nup… just keep track to warn any potential R’ Elyashiv followers from marrying into that family.June 10, 2012 11:54 pm at 11:54 pm #879317
We know Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai had major machloksim about yibum to the point that perfectly valid marriages for one of them led to mamzerim according to the other. Yet the Mishnah still says that they didn’t stop marrying into one another’s families. The question is, does that mean because they respected each other’s psak, and therefore if Beis Hillel called someone a normal Jew, Beis Shammai would rely on that even though according to their logic he would be a mamzer? Or does that mean they respected each other to the point that even though Beis Hillel may have thought someone was not a mamzer, he would make sure to tell any Beis Shammai followers not to marry him because according to Beis Shammai he’s a mamzer? If it’s the second case, then if you are a talmid of R’ Willig or R’ Schachter, then of course you can use the pre-nup… just keep track to warn any potential R’ Elyashiv followers from marrying into that family.
Good point. Let’s read the gemara. Gemara says on 14b that they would tell each other which families they were not allowed to marry. So we’ll do that.June 11, 2012 12:58 am at 12:58 am #879318nitpickerParticipant
Good point. Let’s read the gemara. Gemara says on 14b that they would tell each other which families they were not allowed to marry. So we’ll do that.
yes indeed that is what they did. it is tremendous shvach for basi shammai and bais hillel that they were able to handle this very bad situation with dignity.
but it was still horrible. we dont want that back. and we are not bais shammai or bais hillel and would not be able to handle it anyway.June 11, 2012 1:07 am at 1:07 am #879319
And the only way to not bring it back, is to not create children that will be considered mamzeirim according to any shitta. Especially according to a world class posek hador, such as Rav Elyashev shlit”a.June 11, 2012 2:17 am at 2:17 am #879320
R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt”l had a teshuva on the topic of shmita and heter mechira. The question was if someone held of the heter had a guest who didn’t hold the heter worked, was it a problem for the guest to eat the food? He says that as long as the host has a good posek to rely on, it is fine for anyone to eat at his home.
You may remember that a while back, I had a thread about kashering a dishwasher. When I asked the Rav in the area I moved to about it (after I’d gotten the heter about kashering it from the Rav in my previous hometown), he quoted this teshuva and said anyone could eat at my home.
I believe the same teshuva would apply to this situation. R’ Schachter and R’ Willig are definitely people we could rely on.June 11, 2012 2:25 am at 2:25 am #879321
Tomche- easier said than done. You have to look at the other side too. If you look through Chazal, you see the tremendous concern they had for agunos, and how they sometimes “cut corners” to protect them. The answer to the issue is not to ignore pre-nups, because unfortunately there are men who take advantage of the system and are willing to make women agunos for their own benefit. If according to major poskim that prenups do not create a get meuseh, and they protect women from becoming agunos, that also has to be taken into account. I don’t know the answer- safek mamzerim vs. agunos, but it’s not that simple.June 11, 2012 2:28 am at 2:28 am #879322
Feif- at the same time, Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai also had competent poskim and they didn’t rely on each other. Maybe mamzerim is a more chamur din than dishwashers, but until we have a Sanhedrin, if R’ Elyashiv truly believes the RCA pre-nup is a get me’useh, I don’t see how his followers could rely on R’ Schachter and marry a woman who was divorced with it.June 11, 2012 2:30 am at 2:30 am #879323
You will not find anyone who holds a person is a mamzer allow a non-mamzer to marry him/her, even if the mamzer’s rov holds he/she isn’t a mamzer. At most you’ll have the exact situation in the Gemorah in Yevamos cited by Popa above, where they will each have to tell each other who the other side considers a mamzer, so they do not marry him/her.June 11, 2012 3:33 am at 3:33 am #879324
Feif: There is a halachic process for deciding that as well.June 11, 2012 5:01 am at 5:01 am #879325Song of BlessingParticipant
I think a prenup makes sense and although I’d want one for protection but ‘d also be worried why I’d want one. Its like going into a marriage and right from the start thinking about just incase it doesn’t work out – doesn’t really set a good tone into what is supposed to be a beautiful start.
What I am curious about is… I don’t really know enough about pre-nups – but aren’t there basic halachic rulings already in place that say when a couple can ask for a divorce or not? So shouldn’t a prenup only cover those? That way people cant just get divorced for any silly reason. Maybe its like that already I don’t know but I think it makes sense and it would seem less insulting if it was written on the kesubah “if these certain things are broken then…”June 11, 2012 6:27 am at 6:27 am #879326
aren’t there basic halachic rulings already in place that say when a couple can ask for a divorce or not?
So shouldn’t a prenup only cover those?
It should. But the RCA/BDA prenup does not do that. The legal provisions written and signed in the RCA/BDA prenup allow the spouse to invoke the $150.00 daily penalty payments immediately upon demand, by simply walking out of the marriage for any reason or no reason at all.June 11, 2012 7:24 am at 7:24 am #879328yitzyshalomMember
There are many machlokes between different rabbis; some say that x is permitted and some say that it is forbidden. Jews believe that we are created ‘btzelem Elokim’ which means that we, like God, have to power to create, to change the natural order. That is why halacha is ‘not in heaven’ – it is on earth for the rabbis to decide.
By definition, someone who doesn’t hold with this is basically saying that when there is a machlokes, one rabbi is right and will go to heaven and the other who is wrong is sinning.
That ‘torah lo bashamayim’ and that rabbis have the power to affect the natural order via their halachic decisions is such a basic concept or orthodox judaism that I am shocked that you seem not to know it.
Therefore, when a gadol, who is reliable, states that x is kosher, then for all his followers, x IS kosher. End of story. And all other rabbis must accept that for those people x is kosher even if it wouldn’t be for their followers. Therefore those children will not have the spiritual definition of mamzerim.
I am shocked to think that people here actually thought that when there was machlokes through the ages it meant that one side was right and the other wrong, as opposed to both being right but using different concepts to arrive at different conclusions.June 11, 2012 10:18 am at 10:18 am #879329
For those who don’t accept the pre-nup- how can we protect women from men who want more than a Beis Din or secular court are willing to give them, and will not give their wife a get in order to get what they want?June 11, 2012 10:28 am at 10:28 am #879330
Tomche: except if the Beis Din decides that a get isn’t warranted. If she drops her claim, then fine – no payments need to be made. If she doesn’t, then she forfeits her right to the money, as is outlined in the document.June 11, 2012 1:54 pm at 1:54 pm #879331gavra_at_workParticipant
A few points:
1: The prenup descibed has no incentive for the woman to comply. I would believe it more if the woman would also have a similar K’nas.
2: Making a kinyan to pay is difficult at best. I would imagine that another bais din would find it unenforcable.
3: I agree here 100% with Tomche (I’m shocked too) that it should only cover reasons that Halacha considers to be acceptable for divorce.June 11, 2012 6:25 pm at 6:25 pm #879332
yitzyshalom: Yet for followers of poskim who rule that it isn’t kosher, they will have the halachic status of being a mamzer. Even if another posek holds he/she isn’t a mamzer. See the Gemora in Yavamos that was mentioned earlier.
simcha613: Secular court shouldn’t be giving them anything. A Jew is prohibited from settling a dispute in secular court outside of beis din. Including in divorce matters. Going to arkayos is a tremendous sin.
Feif Un: Not according to the terms of the BDA Prenuptial Agreement. The BDA PNA mandates he must pay her $150 per day, every day, from the day she walks out of his home for any or no reason. Period. The terms are clear in black and white, as written and signed in the prenup. As long as they are not living together he must pay up, even if he has no halachic obligation to give a Get.June 11, 2012 6:36 pm at 6:36 pm #879333
There’s a HUGE difference between typical Halachic Shailos and this case. Typically you’re right, if you hold of a certain hechsher then that item is perfectly Kosher for you and might be not Kosher for me, that’s fine. My family got our first microwave because a friend “treifed-up” theirs with cholov stam, so gave it to us. To them they couldn’t use it, but we could- no problems there. Same thing with anything else.
The problem here is that the results don’t affect only the individual. Yes, according to one shitah the person’s a mamzer and according to another (s)he’s not, but what happens if- as happens often- that child decides to become a follower of the more Yeshivish derech? Suddenly now they’re considered a mamzer? The simple “I used to not keep Cholov Yisroel and now I do” just doesn’t apply here, and I would never enter into a marriage if one day my kids might have to consider themselves mamzeirim, or if potential Shidduchim might consider them mamzeirim.
@simcha613- There are ways to do it- including, perhaps, a pre-nup- but it would have to be written up differently so that there’s no ch’shash get meusah.June 11, 2012 6:52 pm at 6:52 pm #879334gavra_at_workParticipant
For those who don’t accept the pre-nup- how can we protect women from men who want more than a Beis Din or secular court are willing to give them, and will not give their wife a get in order to get what they want?
How do we protect both sides from extortion?
I know of a “Rabbi” who had the need to leave his wife because she wouldn’t move outside Eretz Yisroel (Pashtus, the Halacha is that she can force him to move TO EY, but there may have been other considerations, I don’t know the exact case). He got a Heter Meah, and she is an Agunah. On the other side, you have women who refuse to accept Gitten until their conditions are met.
A possible solution is to require significant funds submitted before the wedding by both parties, to be released to one side on the withholding of a Get. Placing a lien on the real property of the parents would fulfill the qualifications needed.
Another idea would be to sign an arbitration agreement that the Mesader (or successor) has the right to force binding arbitration, which would then be recognized by both Bais Din & courts.
Therefore, when a gadol, who is reliable, states that x is kosher, then for all his followers, x IS kosher. End of story. And all other rabbis must accept that for those people x is kosher even if it wouldn’t be for their followers. Therefore those children will not have the spiritual definition of mamzerim.
See Bais Shammai above. Mamzers all. Just like a Sephardi Sefer Torah is Passul for Ashkinazim, and they can’t be Yotze (due to the changes in the letter) Zachor with it, as well as vice versa.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.