EDIT: I hadn’t seen HaLeiVi’s post before writing this, but I will disagree with him until he provides a source for his statement. Note that the Gemara uses the word “alav”, meaning “over him,” not “aleha”, “over her.”
_____________________________________________________________
I hope this post will put at least some of your fear to rest.
First, my translation of the Gemara in question (Gittin 90b):
(The Gemara quotes a verse in Mal’achi, where the relationship between a husband and wife is used as a metaphor for the relationship between the Jewish People and Hashem, then gives two explanations of its meaning:)
Rabi Yehudah says: “If you hate her, send her away (that is, divorce her).”
Rabi Yochanan says: “The one who sends away is hated.”
[[Another version has Rabi Yochanan’s statement as follows:
Rabi Yochanan says: “If she is hateful before the Makom (Hashem),
send her away (that is, divorce her only if she is a sinner).”]]
(The Gemara explains:) They are not in argument – one speaks of a first marriage, the other of a second marriage (that is, divorcing one’s second wife is not considered as serious as divorcing one’s first wife), as Rabi El’azar said: “Anyone who divorces his first wife, even the Mizbeiach (Altar) sheds tears for him, as it says: (he quotes two consecutive verses from the same chapter in Mal’achi).
_____________________________________________________________
It appears that the situation of one who divorces his first wife is a sad one, but this does not necessarily obligate you, as his wife, to attempt to prevent him from doing so.
The section of the Gemara that the above quotation comes from is a discussion of when a man has the right to divorce his wife.
This Gemara was meant to be learned by men, of course, and its message is meant for them. The Gemara does not talk about when a woman should agree to divorce (although there is a discussion of her right to demand it). As Lior mentioned, Rabbenu Gershom gave a woman the right to refuse divorce – but as far as the Gemara is concerned, it’s a man’s decision.
(The following is speculation: Rabbenu Gershom also decreed that a man may not have two wives. Putting the two together, it appears that his concern may have been that a man should not be able to cast his wife aside at will in favor of another woman.
Forcing him to get his wife’s consent before divorcing her, and rendering him unable to marry another woman before divorcing his wife first, is an excellent solution to that issue. It might prove enlightening to read the actual proclamations of the new laws – can anyone link to them on hebrewbooks.org?)
This is not to discourage trying not to get divorced; nowadays, given that you do have the right to refuse divorce, it should certainly be exercised if it can be determined that that is a wise thing to do, for whatever reason. I’m just saying that you may not be too accountable for not saving your husband from himself, should that turn out to be the situation and its outcome – you’re not really meant to have to deal with this in the first place.
Here’s another argument someone made three years ago on this site (copied as is):
tuted:
I find it ironic that one should question divorce because this “mizbach cries”. If divorce is on the table rest assured that both husband and wife, and often the children cry. Given the choice, I’d rather have the mizbayach cry than all these people. Really now are we more concerned about this mizbayach of stone, that of our brother and sister that are crying so.
(Thanks to Popa_bar_abba for possibly giving me the idea for this post – I don’t remember if I had it before seeing his posts {from 3 years ago}.)