Eida Chareidis Ravaad HaGaon HaRav Moshe Sternbuch Shlita has come out in harsh terms against pre-nuptial agreements, which have become increasingly popular as rabbonim are working to prevent future agunos. A growing number of organizations that work to free agunos are backing such agreements, as are major rabbinical organizations around the world. In some cases, rabbonim will not marry a couple that does not have an accepted pre-nuptial agreement. It is important to point out that there are various texts and rabbonim who frequently marry couples are more in the know as to which texts are viewed as halachically acceptable to them.
In his lengthy responsa the Ravaad addresses the pre-nuptial agreements, and Rav Sternbuch and other Gedolei Torah remain adamantly opposed to such agreements. The rav explains an agreement was brought to him, the version written and accepted by the Rabbinical Council of America.
After conducting a lengthy halachic discussion on the agreement, it is reported the rav has concluded the agreement may compel a husband to divorce his wife unjustifiably, and therefore he feels the agreement represents a ‘פרצה’, a break from acceptable tradition, adding the agreement does not carry great benefit with the exception of a small amount of women whose husbands make them agunos against halacha.
What has Rav Sternbuch more concerned is that he feels that on the other side, such an agreement may destroy the institution of marriage for if a husband does not want to give a divorce, which is often the case, the woman has worked it out but now, a woman can force her husband to divorce her. He adds that Rabbeinu Gerson made his cherem not to divorce a woman against her will so that there would not be too many divorces and therefore we would not create an agreement that will facilitate getting divorced.
The rav adds the agreement is bound to the courts and therefore, not what it appears to be on the surface.
שאף שלמראית עין הסכם זה כפוף לכאורה להוראות בית הדין מכל מקום אין זה אלא מסווה בלבד.
And finally, Rav Sternbuch calls on gedolei torah in Eretz Yisrael and the United States to sign against the agreement, which he fears may even R”L lead to mamzerus.
את דבריו חותם הגר”מ שטרנבוך באמירה חריפה וכותב “הנני קורא לגדולי תורה כאן ובארה”ב לעמוד בפרץ למחות נגד מתקני הסכם קודם נישואין שלא יתפשט תקנתם רח”ל, כי שטר הסכם נישואין זה אינו תקנה אלא תקלה, שהוא חורבן הדת ממש ומכשילין בחשש איסור אשת איש ומרבים ממזרים בישראל”.
(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
22 Responses
But he doesn’t have to divorce her. He can just go back to living with her and not have to pay any more money.
Curious to know if Rav shternbach shlita had private correspondence with the rabbanim responsible, including Rav Zalman nechemya Goldberg, before issuing this public statement. Just curious
4 Questions:
1.How does a prenup compel a husband to divorce his wife? It may be less of a deterrent but not compelling to divorce. Meaning the husband would have less of a problem divorcing his wife because he doesn’t have to pay her.
2. How do prenups force a woman to divorce her husband?
3. Aren’t prenups a deterrent from women seeking divorce which is better than the husband seeking divorce because of נשים דעתן קלות עליהן?
4. How does this lead to mamzerus?
Thanks
Rav Sternbach is one of our leaders, but he is very much against anything new. If pre-nups can help, we must use them.
1. Rav Eliashev also paskened l’halacha that the RCA/BDA type prenuptial is assur and causes Get Meusa (invalid Get) and mamzeirus. The teshuva is available in Kovetz Teshuvos.
2. What the RCA prenuptial calls mezonos is in fact halachicly considered to be a kenas not mezonos. This renders the Get to be meusa.
3. Only MO rabbis promote this prenuptial. Outside of the MO world this prenuptial is almost never used. Even within the MO world many and possibly most MO rabbis do not promote this prenuptial.
I had spoken with one of the leaders of the RCA and BDA who is a leading proponent of their prenup, and has for many years been one of the leading voices expressing its halachic acceptability. I asked him about the prenup costing $150/day (which equals $55,000 a year in so-called “mezonos” payments to his wife – and that amount is on top of and in excess to any child support payments he must make and on top of any potential court ordered alimony and on top of any 50/50 split of marital assets ordered, and of course the $55K/year he must pay her is after he paid taxes – so he needs to earn over $80,000 a year just to pay her $55K. And if he earns, say, $80K/year, he will have approximately 0 (zero) money for himself and his children after paying his wife.)
Specifically, I asked this RCA rabbi/BDA dayan whether if the amount in the prenup was set at $500/day instead of $150/day, but otherwise the prenup was exactly the same as it is, if the prenup would still be halachicly kosher. He admitted the prenup would not be halachicly acceptable with such terms. He said it would not be halachicly valid because $500/day is in excess of the halachic mezonos amount, and thus it would not be considered mezonos but rather would constitute being a knas. And he acknowledged such a prenup, if utilized to procure a Get, would render it invalid. And he admitted even though the terms of the prenup is describing that dollar amount as constituting mezonos, it wouldn’t help as in reality it is in excess of mezonos despite the verbiage of the prenup.
I told him that $150/day, or $55,000/year, for one person is far in excess of mezonos and is in fact a knas thus rendering the Get invalid. Very few men can afford to pay someone $55,000 a year after they pay taxes. And still be left over money for their own living expenses and for the living expenses of their children. Therefore, the BDA prenup as it currently is constituted renders it halachicly invalid.
And a single person does not need $55,000/year for mezonos. Especially as she can be working herself and keeping her own income. (Remember, under the terms of the BDA prenup the husband responsibility to financially support his children is not reduced based on him paying his wife $55K/year.) In fact the BDA prenup specifically states that the wife, besides getting the $55,000 every year in payments from her husband, also gets to keep her own income. Normative halacha, of course, states that the husband owns his wife’s income. The only exception is if the wife agrees that her husband does not have to support her. Since she is demanding the $55,000 in annual payments from him, she is demanding support from him. Thus her income belongs to him. So the BDA prenup, in fact, grants her more than just his $55K payments, considering she’s also being given her own income.
The teshuva got cut off in the middle. Could you please post a complete version?
Well Rav Ovadia, Rav ZN Goldberg, Rav Osher Weiss, as well as Rav מרדכי Willig and Rav Hershal Shachter came out in support. If anyone here is a Talmud of Rav Shtetnbach- that is one thing, but otherwise follow your Rov. If the pesuchis and stumos in your tefillin have 9 yudin empty after Shema and more than 3X the word “Asher” empty before Vahaya I’m shemoah (which is Rav Sterbachs Shitah, and I doubt anyone here has that in their tefillin)- then you can not use the pre-Nup otherwise………
I believe mezonos is codified in S”A EH 70:3 (or 77).
$55,000/year cash support, as the BDA PNA terms set, is far in excess of any reasonable halachic mezonos requirement for one person. And the BDA PNA requires him to pay her more than $55,000/year. He must pay her the $55K PLUS her earned income (ma’aseh yadeha) which is halachicly his property (as I explained.) So if she is earning $60,000/year for her job, he is effectively paying her $115,000/year.
And the $55K he has to pay her is after his taxes are paid. How many men earn enough money to pay anyone $55,000 cash a year after they paid the IRS, State and City income tax, property tax, sales tax, etc.?
Very, very few very wealthy men could afford that. It is far above any reasonable mezonos halachicly. Check the Shulchan Aruch.
And, again, after paying her $55,000 every year, and with her keeping her own income, he has to pay his child support. His children’s Limud Torah/yeshiva. His childen’s food and housing and clothing. And he has to pay his own food and housing and clothing.
$55,000 cash is far more than necessary for one person to survive on. He has no halachic mezonos obligation to pay more than her very basic food and living (minimal clothing, etc.) expenses.
Also remember, as far as housing expenses for his wife is concerned, if he wants the marriage to continue (despite her demands for a divorce) he has the right to offer her to live in his marital home instead of being responsible to pay mezonos expenses for her to rent a separate apartment from him.
To propagate the crazy idea that one woman needs $55,000 a year for basic living expenses would effectively mean claiming that a married couple without children need minimally $110,000 for basic living expenses, after they paid taxes. So a young newlywed couple would need to earn $160K (pretax) for basic living?? And a couple with say four children needs to earn something like $320K a year pretax for basic living?
Claiming such numbers is insane. Very few people come close to earning such numbers even without considering children (i.e. $110K aftertax).
And remember she is getting far more than $55K. She is getting $55K cash + her full salary.
And also think about the husbands whose income is $50K a year. Or $65K a year. Or even $75K a year. Pretax. They don’t even earn $55K aftertax to pay her, even if they gave her every penny they earn. And what about the husbands who earn $90K a year. Or $110K a year. Pretax. After paying her $55K a year (aftertaxes) they have almost nothing to pay for their own living expenses. And their children’s living expenses.
Halacha makes no such mezonos demands on husbands. Not even remotely close. These figures make it clearly and unambiguously a knas (penalty) not mezonos (support).
I really do not see in the Mishna that a man should be beaten up physically until he give he consents to a divorce. What I do see is that if a man significantly maltreats his wife that she can terminate the marriage. Any rulings that annul this fundamental right should not be considered valid.
This is the 1st time I have ever seen the Eida Charedis so correct, as clearly most other issues, especially as they pertain the Medina, are extreme and very off the mark.
1. If the husband feels he can ignore the Kesubah, what keeps him from ignore a “pre-nup”? In common law countries, it is a private contract that could fail for lack of consideration, and will have the same problems of enforceability in non-Jewish courts that a kesubah does.
2. If it renders the marriage invalid under halacha, it resolves the problem of agunos.
P.S. My suggestion would be to have Beitei Din set up a “legal insurance” fund to pay for the government law costs of a divorce for parties who use a Beis Din for deciding the terms of the divorce, and a separate fund to cover the legal fees of the spouse who ignores the Beis Din. Few husbands will refuse to give a “get” if the wife has “deep pockets” – and it might be easier pay for her “lawyering up” than to rely on enforceing a pre-nup (whether the RCA one, or the tradition one, i.e. the kesubah).
don’t understand why it’s mamzerus? Marriage was with chuppa and kedushin???
This is horrible!!!
“If a husband doesn’t want to give a divorce which is often the case now a woman could force her husband to divorce her” yeh that’s how marriage works. If a person doesn’t want to stay married she doesn’t have to!!!!!! It should never be that one person has that wielding power that he doesn’t have to work on the relationship and the wife is forced to stay married to him becuz he refuses to give her the get.
“single person does not need $55,000/year for mezonos”
Obviously someone who has never tried to live in the NY area as a single person.
…at this rate the next step will be to abolish the kesuva as it exerts undue pressure on the husband and any subsequent children born after a divorce imposed by the kesuva will be deemed to be safek mamzerim.
It seems obvious to me the concern about mamzerus is for potential future children the woman may have from a new marriage: if this prenup results in an invalid get, then the woman is not halachically divorced, and we thus must be worried that any children she might have from a subsequent union may have the status of mamzerim.
akuperman: It does not render the marriage invalid halachicly; rather it renders the divorce (Get) invalid halachicly.
Also note, that under halacha there is no obligation to give a divorce if one desires to remain married (despite the spouse’s desire for a divorce.)
SMFG3: It causes an issue with mamzeirus, since if the Get was invalid, she remains an eishes ish, and if she remarries and has children without a valid Get…
Fayge: Divorce must (generally) be mutually desired. One spouse generally cannot force the other spouse to get divorced unwillingly.
charliehall: The husband’s halachic obligation for mezonos support of his spouse if very basic and minimal (basic food and basic clothes) and nowhere close to $55,000 per year for a single person.
“The husband’s halachic obligation for mezonos support of his spouse if very basic and minimal (basic food and basic clothes) and nowhere close to $55,000 per year for a single person. ”
She is supposed to sleep in the subway?
“She is supposed to sleep in the subway?”
If he wants and permits his wife to sleep in his home, he has fulfilled his obligation of providing her room and board even if she declines his invitation.
(Aside from the fact that even in the five boroughs of NYC a single person can rent a basement or room for very low four digits dollars per month. Recall that the husbands obligation for child support is in addition to and above the $55K prenup payments to her. And it has also been pointed out he is giving her double $55K, as he is being forced under the RCA prenup to give her the income she earns, which is his, in addition to the $55K.)
Also note, that per halacha he can fulfil his mezonos obligations by supplying the food and clothing for his wife in his home and in his home only, and making it freely available to her if she chooses to live in their marital home. He is under no halachic obligation to support her mezonos outside of his home, should she leave the marital home, if he makes it available in the home.