Jlem rabbinical court refuses to let widow of 13 years marry

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Advanced Search Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> In the News

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

grace413

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:38 am

Scrabble123 wrote:

(Your question bothers me. It's kind of yentaish, but maybe you meant it in an innocent way). I don't know, as I'm not a dayan, and that is a complex issue, but I can tell you that when it comes to offspring, people always find ways to be maikel bidieved. Still, when it comes to being in those situations people are lechatchila machmir.

I can see how it sounded yentaish but I am really just interested in the halacha because I like to know these kind of things and there tends to be a lot of misinformation about personal status halachot.

I sincerely hope you are correct about finding ways to be maikel bidieved about these situations.

PinkFridge

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:41 am

the world's best mom wrote:

If she is innocent of causing her husband's death, then we do need to feel bad for her. But if she is guilty, I don't feel one bit bad. And either way, leave the Bais Din out of it. It's not their fault. It's still her fault for living with him against Halacha.

I don't know enough to comment but I'm inclined to appreciate the BD's stance about marrying her. (And the people on the B"D may not be the same people who could have pushed yibum earlier.)
BUT I do feel very sad for her. Sad that she felt trapped, sad that she could make such a decision.

Last edited by PinkFridge on Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:44 am; edited 1 time in total

sequoia

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:43 am

This makes me furious.

I think if these idiocies continue in the 21st century, more and more people will abandon halachic marriage altogether and just have civil ceremonies. What is the reason to willingly participate in a system that only hurts you?

dancingqueen

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:44 am

I'm kind of shocked that women here are so cold regarding this women's situation. So if you Cv"s were in her shoes you would pay the fee or just never remarry or have children?

Raisin

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:46 am

grace413 wrote:

I don't know exactly how it would work but there is no secular divorce in Israel. The question is would a civil divorce from wherever they married be acceptable or would they need a get.

Does anybody know what is the actual halachic status of this woman's children?

I do know that rabbanim are very very hesitant to declare a person a mamzer. So I imagine they will use any halachically legal loophole to say they are not mamzerim. Which there likely are in this case.

Raisin

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:50 am

Where does it say that her original husband was ashekenazi? Only that her current partner is.

Tablepoetry

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 9:17 am

Raisin wrote:

I do know that rabbanim are very very hesitant to declare a pe mamzer. So I imagine they will use any halachically legal loophole to say they are not mamzerim. Which there likely are in this case.

And how about using any loophole to prevent these women from being victims of sadistic in laws? Or is that not a priority?
It's incomprehensible that in this day and age a man can have so much control over a woman who's not even his wife.

Imogen

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 9:19 am

Heartbreakingly sad! Grotesque that matters of halacha are not kept firmly separate from extortation and blackmail, in fact no different to the blackmail entered into by some for the granting of a get.

Forcing a young widow to pay for the privilege of being free to marry again is plain wrong. If neglect was a charge against the young widow following the death of her husband alongside misappropriation of funds perhaps independent legal action was or should have been taken against the wife, but that should not be connecte to the enactment of a religious ritual like chalitza, quite the opposite! Money should be kept out of it all, insults Torah values.

I can understand the pain of a young agunah condemned to be childless and alone, and similarily the agony of this young widow who choose to flout halacha and co habit with a new partner and have children I do not agree with her behaviour but as others have stated I do entirely understand her motives and torment. How can honest Torah loving rabbonim uphold the integriy of a Beit Din if they know money is being forced to change hands, is that not contravening Torah laws on financial integrity and judicial independence? Very distressing piece of news.

faigie

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 10:31 am

The answer is simple. If a BIL doesnt want to do the chalitza, throw his sorry tuchas in jail. If it comes out that he tries to blackmail her for a chalitza, treat it like any other case of blackmail, and throw his sorry tuchas in jail for twice as long, plus a fine.

Chayalle

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 11:30 am

I guess forced Chalitza is different than a get right? If the Chalitza is done, it's done. No questioning it's validity.

ITA with Faigie then.....force him to do it.

saw50st8

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 11:32 am

Except he was in Canada right?

Scrabble123

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 1:51 pm

As I stated before, I don't like the question or the topic (so yentaish and not refined), but Rabonim always try the most to me maikel on the status of children bi'dieved, but to be machmir letchatchila. A man just brought up this story to me and told me that there is a machlokes if lack of yibum renders someone an Eishes Ish. Anyways, he said that these children will definitely NOT be considered mamzerim. BH (and I know that there will be idiots who will discuss it anyways), but that it is known that a woman is not allowed to marry or have other partners until chalitza is done. That's a great example of maikel & machmir to protect people.

Raisin

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 2:00 pm

If her children will not be considered mamzerim, (and maybe she checked this out before she had them) its not as bad as being an agunah, especially for someone who is not frum and doesn't care if she is living with someone out of wedlock.

Still, its possible she did feel very pained and guilty about the whole situation of living with someone and not being married.

What an evil evil family to do this to her. Not only are they harming her, they are making a huge huge chilul hashem.

zaq

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 2:51 pm

Tablepoetry wrote:

I am always aghast how there are loopholes for things like shabbat elevators, but not for this.

Blu Greenberg said it best: When there is a rabbinic will, there is a halachic way, and when there is no rabbinic will, there is no halachic way.

There is little rabbinic will because it's a problem only for women. I say "little" not "no" rabbinic will because there is a small cadre of rabbanim who are trying to find ways to avert this kind of situation (more in the case of seruvei gittin, naturally). Pity we have no Beit Din with the legal power of malkot.

Capitalchick

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 3:12 pm

"The ceremony requires the widow to take off the shoe of her brother-inlaw, known as the “yabam,” and spit in front of him."

Can we please never let any non-Orthodox Jew or gentile know about this absolutely humiliating, insane custom?

imasoftov

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 4:21 pm

The children are not mamzerim. Mamzerim are only born when the parents' relationship is one that is punished by kareit or death in beit din (Even Haezer 4:13), and the prohibition violated here is not one of those but is a "lav" which is clear from Rambam, Hilchot Yibbum v'Chalitza 2:18

PinkFridge

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 6:44 pm

Capitalchick wrote:

Er, it's not an insane custom. It's a halacha in the Torah. Deal with it.

sequoia

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:03 pm

PinkFridge wrote:

Er, it's not an insane custom. It's a halacha in the Torah. Deal with it.

Where do I begin?...

Dolly Welsh

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:15 pm

One thing yibum does, historically and eternally, is give a childless widow, who could easily be a person of no particular value to her husband's family, and her own might be far away, access to protection. Otherwise she could end up in the street begging! It is very valuable!

They have to give her a husband and a home.

She wouldn't have much access to that otherwise, as she would no longer be a virgin, and, many would think she couldn't have children.

Of course, this one did have children later. But that's the way it might easily look in other cases.

Yes, this one found male companionship and protection another way, but that doesn't mean that's something to count on. And yes, it's extra-legal, and not what she wanted, or what a woman would deserve.

So, of course, a refusal to marry her and do right by her would have to be punished by a symbolic rebuke, hence the shoe pulling and the spitting. It's symbolic and not bad or horrible. But it's something. It has to be not terrible but not quite nothing either. It is proper and correct.

Yes, it is usually just a formality. But an important one. It should not be discarded.

I am way out of my depth here, but wasn't the refusal to do yibum the functional equivalent of actually accepting to marry her?

Once yibum is refused, doesn't she have a right to a wedding and a home?

What I mean is, she had power too.

She could have insisted on a wedding and a home.

If they weren't nice to her as this BIL's wife, she would then be in a position to petition a beth din for a divorce, in the usual way.

Or, if they and he didn't feel like living with her, and they obviously didn't, then it is THEY who must pay HER to go away, no? The other way around. Not her paying them.

At that point it might have been negotiated rabbinically that they both had equal power and it was time to compromise. But the story seems to say only the family had power and the woman had none.

Yes, if they thought she had engaged in wrongdoing with respect to his illness, proper care for him, and money allocated for medical care, that could have been handled another way, not using yibum at all.

I am not saying she acted well or ill; the story doesn't make that at all clear. They may have excellent reasons for being mad at her. That's another matter altogether.

But obviously I am way out of my depth here.

zaq

Tue, Sep 09 2014, 7:26 pm

Capitalchick wrote:

Ahem.
This is a Mitzvah DeOraita, not a "custom", stated quite clearly and succinctly in Devarim 25:9. It's SUPPOSED to be humiliating to the yavam-didn't-wannabe. He has an opportunity to perpetuate his dead brother's memory and refuses, which is a pretty dolgarned cheesy way to act. Granted, since the Cherem D'Rabbenu Gershom, any Ashkenazi yavam who is already married has no choice, and in our modern era we don't much go for this kind of forced marriage anyway, but that's not the point of this thread. In this case, the won't-be-yavam deserves to be flogged, not merely spat at.

Page 3 of 5

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next