- This topic has 22 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
So, this is an interesting problem.
The prenup basically makes that Beis Din of America is the arbiter on the divorce.
But, what if BDA no longer exists?
Or, even worse–what if BDA still exists, but it is after the big upcoming split in orthodoxy, and BDA goes with the conservative?
You think that is impossible? Not impossible at all. And I read the agreement; there is nothing that provides for either eventuality. I don’t know how anyone can sign it, or anyone can feel safe having signed.
Good thing my roshei yeshiva say not to anyway.
Rav Eliashev and others paskened a Get from a husband with this type of prenup constitutes a Get Me’usa, and thus an invalid Get. She remains married to him even after the Get.
Bigger people than you say to use it. You don’t like it, don’t use it. I believe the Rav in my community won’t be mesader kiddushin unless the couple has one.
There are many problems with any organization’s attempts to invent a new halacha. Perhaps a better agreement might be to agree that in event of divorce, the wife picks the Beis Din, since she is the one with problems if there is no “get”.
In some countries there is an generally recognized Beis Din, sometimes with official status, but there are usually multiple subgroups and if one of the factors in the divorce is religion, that is likely to be a problem. One doesn’t know in advance what country one will be living in ten or twenty years in the future, or what that country’s policies will be. In the USA, policies have varied between total respect for a Beis Din in settling matters of divorce between Jews, to making it a crime to go to a Beis Din for a “get” unless you already had a divorce from the government.
Of course the solution would be for people getting divorced to act rationally and not trying to rip off each other, but that verges on relying on a ??.
This is a stupid post and an ad hominem attack on the Modern Orthodox community.
And this is not invention of a new halakha.
Sure it is. R’ Willig is your strawman, since he is the posek who authorized the Prenup.
How would the RCA be involved with the Conservative Movement? Your insinuation is that people affiliated with YU are somehow inclined towards that perspective, when they are the finest of the finest in Orthodoxy. R’ Schachter, R’ Willig, and all of the great rebbeim at YU are gedolim of the highest caliber.
And the text of that prenup is borrowed largely from Nachlas Shiva.
Rebdoniel: It is a new “invention” to specify which Beis Din will litigate a matter that hasn’t yet to arise, now knowing the conditions under which it will arise. As it is, the kesubah (together with the body of halacha) creates a duty to go to a “Beis Din” when ending the marriage. The RCA addenda is new (though a few others have tried it, including some non-Orthodox), as part of an effort to make it easier to get the assistance of the American courts to help when one party (usually the husband) doesn’t want to give a “get” (either because he is illegally shaking down the wife’s family for money, or because he doesn’t want a divorce). If the parties were “modern Orthodox” (or whatever) when they married, still are when the divorce, and haven’t moved to a different country – there isn’t a problem — but if one party has changed lifestyle, or has moved, there is a problem and the RCA method won’t help.
A better solution to the matter might be for the community to adopt a policy by which the wife stipulates which Beis Din she wants (since she is the one who can’t remarry with a “get” and whose children will be mamzer if she does), and perhaps offers to pay the legal fees of the party whose spouse if refusing to go to Beis Din.
It is a (minute) problem, but your solution is no better. What if the wife wants to go to Rabbi Sally’s Bais Din for Women’s Rights? If I had to bet, the chances of an individual woman going Conservative is much higher than the chance of the RCA being wrested out of R’ Willig and R’ Shechter’s hands (especially considering that the trend among RCA recent musmachim is to the right, not the left).
Historically much was done to prevent women from becoming Agunahs. Rav Moshe would invalidate Adim from a wedding after the fact in order to declare the marriage not valid and no get needed.
And Ive read Seforim that discussed Iffy Gets like one in Hawaii especially in case where the husband was not too keen on giving one.
It is a new practice to take a hard line on this issue
Rabbi Schachter is a gadol in learning, but certainly not someone who is good for public relations. I stand 100% by what I said about him vis-a-vis his odious remarks on women, non-Jews, the Rosh haMemshala, etc., all of which are true. His remarks are available in the public sphere to be viewed. Saying over the truth is nothing a person has to make teshuva for.
ZD – You’re off. There is a big difference to be Mattir Agunas than to break normal Halacha in the first place. Throughout the generations the Poskim were always trying to be Mattir Agunos with Kulahs. This prenup and the NY State “Get” law just throws out Halacha that Chazal instituted. Actually, all these things do is prevent people who follow these two things, even by accident, from remarrying. Because now, most Frum people who keep Halacha, won’t marry them.
PLEASE – stick to the topic, and not get into a fight about whose Rabbi is bigger.
zsdad: Rav Moshe never did any such thing, such as later invalidate witnesses from an Orthodox wedding.
PBA,
Listen to the moderator and keep things on topic.
Health is 100% correct- the poskim throughout the years have utilized tons of creative thinking and have done everything possible to avoid the agunah crisis.
Rebdoniel: Now you are showing some clear ignorance. I would hate to think where you get your information. R’ Schachter made odious remarks about women? Just because some moron leftist thought that R’ Schachter saying that a wedding is perfectly Kosher if a monkey read the Kesubah meant that R’ Schachter thinks that women are monkeys doesn’t mean that R’ Schachter has made “odious remarks about women”, as you put it. Next time fact-check before you make such claims. (Also, the famous line about the prime minister was taken out of context and put on Youtube. I should know. I was there.)
That is, IMHO, a very good reason why women don’t learn gemara. They hear a legal/technical term like Maaseh Kof, and they take it personally and go get all insulted.
To bring it back on topic, the prenup says 2 things:
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.
The Nachalas Shiva was a sefer of shtaros published in 1664 by Shmuel Ben David Moshe Halevi, and one of the forms he included was a tenaim almist exactly similar to the provisions in the prenup, and he says that this dated back to the Takanos Shum, the authoritative communal enactments adopted in the early Middle Ages by the leaders of the German communities of Speyer, Worms and Mayence.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.