Remarriage

Home Forums Family Matters Remarriage

Viewing 32 posts - 51 through 82 (of 82 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #740626
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    It would also be difficult for him to marry his ex-wife after she died. That was my point when I wrote maybe that’s only before they died.

    True. 🙂

    The Wolf

    #740627
    smartcookie
    Member

    This is one spooky thread….

    #740628
    haifagirl
    Participant

    My (non-frum) aunt has her place reserved for her in between her first husband and my uncle.

    #740630
    oomis
    Participant

    In the LDS church, you can be sealed in a marriage which transcends death.”

    Yup, I had forgotten about the Morons…er…sorry, Mormons.

    Those poor women really were given a raw deal. They couldn’t remarry, but their husbands still can take a gazillion wives.

    #740631
    twisted
    Participant

    May i clarify something? In the time of the Mashiach, it will be BAU with recognizable halacha with some adjustments. Olam Haba is a different platform, with no way to know what will in fact be, and quite possible not anything supporting our concept of marriage.

    AND: MINOOS AlERT; our souls are not part of Hashem, we acknowledge the indivisibility of Hashem twice daily. PSA

    #740632
    TheGoq
    Participant

    oomis there is no call for belittling other faiths you may not agree or understand their lifestyle but you shouldn’t mock them, when people of other faiths mock us or deride us we cry anti-semitism and rightfully so, i’m sure plenty people make fun of observant jews and our customs, perhaps we should take a higher road.

    #740633
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    it will be BAU with recognizable halacha with some adjustments

    BAU?

    The Wolf

    #740634
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    The Ben Ish Chai discusses this issue, if death dissolves the relationship.

    From the ?? ??????

    ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???/ ???

    ?????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?????, ???? ?? ???

    ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ???? ???

    ???? ????? ??????? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ???.

    ???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????

    ???? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ?? ???? ????? ????

    ????? ?????, ????? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ????.

    ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????

    ?????? ?? ??????? ?? ????, ????? ??? ?? ????

    ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? :

    It seems they are still Halachicly married, but she is allowed to marry someone else.

    #740635
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    I have a question about the Ben Ish Chai’s answer. I find it hard to believe that there was no need for a new kiddushin after Mattan Torah when there was probably no kiddushin in the first place (since it was before Mattan Torah and there was no mitzvah of kiddushin).

    Alternatively, you can consider the case of those people to the case of someone whose heart stops but is then “brought back” by CPR — they were dead by a clinical standard, but “true” death is only when it’s permanent*.

    It seems they are still Halachicly married, but she is allowed to marry someone else.

    Does that make her children from the second marriage mamzeirim after Techias HaMeisim since her original marriage is still valid?

    The Wolf

    * Not counting the ultimate Techias HaMeisim, of course.

    #740636
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Of course, if you hold of gilgulim, this whole question suddenly becomes *much* more complicated. 🙂

    The Wolf

    #740637
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Does that make her children from the second marriage mamzeirim after Techias HaMeisim since her original marriage is still valid?

    Just to clarify my question — a comparable case would be one where an aguna remarries on the basis of the testimony of two eyewitnesses and yet, they were mistaken and her husband shows up. She was allowed to remarry, and yet, because her original marriage was still intact, her subsequent children are mamzeirim.

    The Wolf

    #740638
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Does that make her children from the second marriage mamzeirim after Techias HaMeisim since her original marriage is still valid?

    The Wolf

    Since the marriage is not an illicit relationship, they are not Mamzerim. The case of Ba’a Memedinas Hayam they are Mamzerim, because even though she is allowed to marry, sof davar, the relationship is illicit (i.e., we only allowed her to marry due to our own ignorance, not due to it actually being muttar).

    Think of it like the Torah allowing the woman to marry a second husband. The child would not be a Mamzer in that case.

    As far as the Ben Ish Chai, the death of Klal Yisroel was permanent, and required an Act of God to reverse. As far as Keddushin is concerned, the point is good but questionable. BB 120a talks about Amram doing a “Maaseh Lekuchin” to Yocheved to take her back. Also see Rambam Ishus 1:1, and a similar question exists there.

    [email protected]

    #740639
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Since the marriage is not an illicit relationship, they are not Mamzerim. The case of Ba’a Memedinas Hayam they are Mamzerim, because even though she is allowed to marry, sof davar, the relationship is illicit (i.e., we only allowed her to marry due to our own ignorance, not due to it actually being muttar).

    Think of it like the Torah allowing the woman to marry a second husband. The child would not be a Mamzer in that case.

    WADR, I believe you are confusing two different cases.

    An agunah is allowed to marry based on the testimony of one witness. However, if she does so, she is required to perform an investigation and if her first husband shows up, she’s out of luck in that she loses both husbands.

    If she marries on the basis of two witnesses and with the permission of Bais Din, however, she is afforded the protection that if her husband returns, she does not have to leave him (the first husband). In this case, the marriage is sanctioned by Bais Din and is perfectly permitted. And yet, her kids (with the second husband) end up as mamzeirim anyway.

    The Wolf

    #740640
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    WADR, I believe you are confusing two different cases.

    An agunah is allowed to marry based on the testimony of one witness. However, if she does so, she is required to perform an investigation and if her first husband shows up, she’s out of luck in that she loses both husbands.

    If she marries on the basis of two witnesses and with the permission of Bais Din, however, she is afforded the protection that if her husband returns, she does not have to leave him (the first husband). In this case, the marriage is sanctioned by Bais Din and is perfectly permitted. And yet, her kids (with the second husband) end up as mamzeirim anyway.

    The Wolf

    Nope.

    The fact that it was sactioned by BD does not allow her to remain married to the second husband!

    The “Assur L’Baal Ul’Boel is waived “Mipnei Sheasah B’Rishus”, but that is NOT an issur Torah, since there was an Ones (see Rashi Yevamos 87B). The children from the second relationship are still Mamzerim.

    The first case (where there is only one ayd) is to be machmer on her at the end so she should check well at first (See Yevamos 87B). Also see there regarding relying on BD.

    #740641
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    The fact that it was sactioned by BD does not allow her to remain married to the second husband!

    Right. She can only remain married to the first. But nonetheless, the children from the second marriage, even though permitted under the circumstances are still mamzeirim. I guess I wasn’t clear in my summation.

    But that being said, why wouldn’t our case be comparable? She is permitted to remarry (since she has positive evidence that her husband died) but if he should somehow return (say via Techias HaMeisim) then her children by her second husband are mamzeirim.

    Since I don’t believe that to actually be the case, I would think that her first marriage is actually terminated (in toto) by the death of her husband.

    The Wolf

    #740642
    Bobchka
    Participant

    Seems to me that paople are forgetting the mishna v’koneh es atzmo b’get uv’meesos ha’bal if thec husband dies she is not married anymore. if she dies the knot is still tied

    #740643
    cherrybim
    Participant

    This entire thread is nonsense since no one has ever come back to tell us what it’s like in Shamayim concerning spousal relationships. No one is taking a stroll together or having a picnic in Shamayim; it’s an entirely different dimension of which we have no concept of.

    Same thing goes for T’chiyas Hameisim. The g’mara may speculate on some issues, but we don’t know how it will conform to our existence today.

    Moshiach is another story, nothing will change except that the goyim will recognize that Hashem is the true one and everything that results from this belief; and we’ll have a lot of answers to our questions.

    #740644
    Health
    Participant

    twisted – “AND: MINOOS AlERT; our souls are not part of Hashem, we acknowledge the indivisibility of Hashem twice daily.”

    I found this on another web site:

    I guess you agree with that author!

    Perhaps all these Gedolim knew a little more than you and understood our Tefillos more than you?!! Kol Haposel B’momo Posel!

    #740646
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    But that being said, why wouldn’t our case be comparable? She is permitted to remarry (since she has positive evidence that her husband died) but if he should somehow return (say via Techias HaMeisim) then her children by her second husband are mamzeirim.

    Wolf: You are equating BD allowing the wife to remarry to Hashem allowing her to remarry. That is just not true.

    In the case of Ba’ah Memedinas HaYam, as far as Hashem (who is omniscient) is concerned, she is not allowed to remarry. The fact that she can return to her first husband is only due to her being an Ones. As far as Hashem is concerned, she is only married to the first and hes never been married to the second.

    As opposed to the case of Techiyas HaMaysim, as far as Hashem (who is omniscient) is concerned, she IS allowed to remarry. When her first husband gets up (let’s say like R’ Zeira), she will Halachicly be married to both. (And the concept does exist in Halacha, see Gittin 82B, Keddushin 60a).

    WADR I think this is where it gets confusing: Mamzerus is only created by Biyas Issur. If a woman has two husbands B’heter, then a Mamzer can not be created.

    #740647
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Bobchka: That is part of the question, if Get & Misa do the same thing (and what it means “V’Kone Atzma”, to get remarried or to dissolve the first relationship completely).

    cherrybim: This has spawned an interesting halachic discussion, while it may have no practical Nafka Mina, it helps in understanding the sugyos. The thread is very useful.

    #740648
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    I just remembered Rashi in Keddushin 2a (which Bobchka quoted the mishna) says Misa allows her to be in her own Reshus to remarry, which would lean towards the Ben Ish Chai.

    Emphasis mine

    #740649
    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Wolf,

    I think BAU stands for business as usual.

    #740650
    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    I am comforted to see that a number of posters have noted that there is a major difference between “yemos hamoshiach” -as per the Rambam paskening like Shmuel in chelek- when nothing changes except “shibud malchyios” (the throwing off of our oppressors yoke).

    One question on the Ben Ish Chai- how do we know that the Bnai Yisroel did NOT need another kiddushin after mattan torah?

    gavra-a-work- are you referencing a woman ‘married to two men’ as the “mehashtoh’ and ‘leachar zman’ sugya? (Kiddushin, perek Ho-omer) I haven’t looked up your references yet.

    I am pretty sure that in that case,she must divorce both.

    In any case, this whole thread is totally speculative-as techiyas hameisim is a real difficult concept to understand. Does the person come back as a young man/woman? or as the old man/woman that died?

    there may be a small indication from the “atzomos hajeveishim” and the Tanna who declared that he was a descendant of theirs. Presumably, he was not a mamzer-even though he was born later, after their ressuscitation. Was he born to the same parents?

    As far as the hetter of a woman “after death”, if my memory serves me correctly, isn’t there a question about “eishes eliyahu”, who went up to heaven alive? was he considered dead to the world?

    #740651
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    ROB:

    1: Yes, Leachar Z’man is the case Keddushin 60a. Conceptually, the idea does exist, even if there are issues in practice (Ayin Shom).

    2: Eishes Eliyahu is different because the question there is if he is still halachicly alive or not.

    #740652
    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    on second thought- the ‘ben ish chai'” proof from Mattan Torah is not comparable. At mattan torah, the Jews had their bodies intact- their souls left their bodies -porcho nishmoson- and so when the Almighty returned their souls- it was not as if they actually died. In the story of Rav Zeira and Rabba- they cut his head off and he surely was considered dead-Psik reisha velo yomus?- and so, the question remains, does his erstwhile wife need new Kiddushin?

    #740653
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Mamzerus is only created by Biyas Issur.

    That’s correct. IIRC, R. Moshe paskened that artificial insemination from someone other than the husband does not create a mamzer because there was no Biyas Issur (although he says that, if at all possible, the husband’s sperm should be used).

    If a woman has two husbands B’heter, then a Mamzer can not be created.

    Ah, but that’s the magic question… if there can be said to be a cardinal rule of Jewish marriage law, it’s that a woman cannot be married to two men at the same time. Saying that she can have two husbands at the same time is such a major chiddush (and that’s a huge understatement) that you need to have *really* good sources to allow it.

    The Wolf

    #740654
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Ah, but that’s the magic question… if there can be said to be a cardinal rule of Jewish marriage law, it’s that a woman cannot be married to two men at the same time. Saying that she can have two husbands at the same time is such a major chiddush (and that’s a huge understatement) that you need to have *really* good sources to allow it.

    Practically, she can’t. Halachicly, she might be able to. See the gemaros I quoted (They are NOT Halacha, but the concept does exist). Delve into why the “rule” is true, and there are halachic loopholes that can around it.

    (There is a Chakirah as per why an Eishes Ish can not get married to another individual. IIRC, The s’ddadim are Kinyan and Ervah, neither which apply if the husband dies (although there is a sa’ad to say the kinyan still exists in some respect, but it becomes non-exclusive, due to Missah being a Matir on a Gezaras HaKasuv level)).

    What will happen when Moshiach arrives, I have no clue. I’m only discussing the lomdish aspects of the question.

    #740655
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    ROB: If you are interested, see the next piece in Ben Ish Chai regarding what actually happened between Rabbah & Rav Zeira.

    #740656
    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    gavra-of course I am interested ! will look it up at earliest convenience ! now yo uhave to tell me where it is- IN “ben yehodiyohu’?

    #740657
    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    gavra-boy-you bring me back to my old yeshiva days- exporing ‘chakiras”- I remember the question whether “missah’ (death)is a ‘mattir”…I cannot remember the different aspects of this….stimulating, though!

    #740658
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    gavra-of course I am interested ! will look it up at earliest convenience ! now yo uhave to tell me where it is- IN “ben yehodiyohu’?

    Yes, on that Gemorah in Megillah.

    And thank you for getting me to remember some of my “Toras Neurai”. I may be wrong on the aspects of the Chakira, as it was a while ago. (Perhaps someone who is in the Sugyah can shed some light here?)

    #740659
    mewho
    Participant

    only thing i remember hearing is that if a widow marries again she cannot go to the cemetary to visit her first husband

Viewing 32 posts - 51 through 82 (of 82 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.