שו"ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק ב סימן ב במורדת שהשיגה דיווארס וכמה אלפים דאלאר ע"י הערכאות ואינה רוצה לקבל גט כדי לצערו אם יש להתירו לישא אחרת בלא מאה רבנים כ"א למב"י תשכ"ב. מע"כ ידידי הרה"ג מוהר"ר צבי יונה געלער שליטא רב בפארטלאנד ארעגאן. הנה בדבר האשה המורדת שכבר איזה שנים שהשיגה דיווארס בערכאות וגם לקחה ע"י הערכאות שלשים אלף דאלאר במזומן ובית וכלים שמכרה בעד עשרים אלף והשופט דערכאות סגר בבאנק אלף דאלאר מהשלשים שחייבו את הבעל ליתן לה עד שתקבל גט כדמו"י וכבר הסכימה לקבל גט ונסדר בסיאטל וכתר"ה נעשה השליח לגרשה וכשחזר לפארטלאנד והודיע להאשה בדבר הגט שבידו חזרה בה ואמרה שאין רצונה לשחרר את בעלה בשום אופן ולעולם לא תקבל את הגט כדי לצערו. הנה זה ודאי שאף אם לא נאמין שהיא גרמה הקטטא שביניהם אלא שהוא התחיל בקטטא עד שיצא מזה שהיא השתדלה ע"י לאיער בערכאות להשיג דיווארס נמי כיון שהסכימה ליקח גט וחזרה בה כדי לצערו נחשבה למורדת כיון שאינה רוצה לא לדור עמו כאשתו ולא להתגרש כמפורש בסימן ע"ז סעיף ב' ואם מרדה מתחת בעלה כדי לצערו ואמרה הריני מצער אותו בכך מפני שעשה לי כך וכך או מפני שקללני או מפני שעשה עמי מריבה שולחין לה מב"ד ככל דין מורדת עיין שם ומסיק הרמ"א דלאחר י"ב חדש אם הוא רוצה לגרש צריכה לקבל ממנו בעל כרחה או מתירין לו לישא אחרת עיין שם, וכ"ש בכאן שכפי שידוע לכתר"ה היתה היא המתחלת בקטטא והיא השתדלה בענין הדיווארס. והנה אם צריך בכאן להיתר דמאה רבנים, מפשטות לשון הרמ"א משמע שמתירין אותו במורדת לישא אחרת גם בלא מאה רבנים שלא הוזכר שם לא ברמ"א ולא בנו"כ. ועיין בתשובות מהרשד"מ אה"ע סימן ק"כ דבמורדת לא גזר הרגמ"ה, וכיון שלא גזר אין צורך להיתר דק' רבנים אבל מפני שלא יבואו לומר על כל דבר קטן שהיא מורדת לכן סובר שאין להתיר אלא כשעברו איזה שנים שידוע שהיא מורדת, וראיתי באוצר הפוסקים סימן א' ס"ק ע"ג אות כ"ד מביא כן גם מרעק"א ועוד הרבה אחרונים שמתירין בכה"ג גם בלא ק' רבנים עיין שם. אבל מ"מ לכתחלה יש להשיג היתר ממאה רבנים וכן נוהגין אבל אם אי אפשר כדכתב כתר"ה יש להתירו גם בלא ק' רבנים כיון שזה חמש שנים שהלכה מבעלה והוציאה ממנו בערכאות חמשים אלף דאלאר והסכימה לקבל גט ונכתב ברצונה וחזרה מלקבלו כדי לצערו שזה יותר לא שכיח מהאופנים שבמהרשד"מ ועובדות האחרונים. והגט יהא מונח ושמור בהכשו שלא יתקלקל עד שתבוא ותקבלהו מהשליח. ידידו, משה פיינשטיין
Can you please provide a translation or summary of Rav Moshe and Rav Shternbuch's teshuvos?
What I don't understand in this context:1) Why is the same term, "moredet", used for a case like this, where the wife definitely just wants to spite the husband by refusing the get and for a wife who was abused, but whom the rabbanim will not believe, or for a wife who just wants her peace and quiet and leaves her husband2) I think it is fair enough to allow remarriage once the husband deposited a get (and she can take it whenever she wants, without further ado). Why is there no provision that this should be the case?3) In the same sense that rabbonim are employing extraordinary means to allow him remarriage once they see that the wife refuses the get to spite him, why are the same rabbonim not ready to take extraordinary measures (like annulation of marriage, posul eidim, mekach taut, etc) to react to a similar situation when it is the other way round'4) Why do so many batey din accept that instead of paying the ketuba, the husband receives a severance payment just so that he will give a get?
3) the obvious answer is that the tasks are totally different for freeing the wife and the husband. The wife is starting out with a clear Torah prohibition for getting remarried without a get while for the husband it is not even a rabbinic prohibition to remarry without a get and perhaps no prohibition at all except for minhag
Daas Torah wrote: "the obvious answer is that the tasks are totally different for freeing the wife and the husband."I must agree with Helas. It is not at all obvious. It is my observation that this is a question of sympathies and motivations, as much as (if not more than) halachic limitations. The whole stringency of the requirement of the husband's absolute, without a sliver of pressure, willingness to divorce is a rabbinic interpretation. Rambam obviously understood it differently. There are opinions to rely upon to lighten that requirement thereby permitting a variety of effective "incentives." Wrong actions carry consequences. That is how HaShem designed His world. Why should the abusive husband be insulated from all the consequences of his wrong actions to maintain a rabbinic notion of his "pure" willingness to divorce.And similarly the mekach taus. In most cases of this sort there was a real taus. The woman would never have married someone she believed was capable of abusing her in this way and leaving her an aguna, or not fulfilling his ketuba obligations etc.etc. Yet there is no rabbinic interest or motivation to explore those ways of releasing her.And helas's #4. We rabbis make such a tado at weddings...making sure that every word in the ketuba is right and the names are exact etc. etc. And in reality, when it comes to actually applying the document, it's not worth the paper its written on and as Helas states, its the husband that gets the payment so that he will "willingly" give the get. Something is upside down. We rabbis have made a mess of HaShem's holy Torah and in our zeal, have actually desecrated HaShem's intention for the Torah to be a model of true justice.For years there was no halachic basis for turning child abusers over to the secular authorities. Suddenly, with pressure, outrage, (and shame) there has been a shifting of sympathies, so halachic bases are now found and promulgated until they become almost mainstream. This would also be possible for gittin if there was suffient sympathy for the plight.I have actually taken a break from rabbinics because I couldn't stand hearing myself give over the justifactions for these injustices any more.
That's complete halachic hogwash.The bottom line is this: Under Torah Law, a man can marry multiple wives, simultaneously. A woman cannot. A woman, by Torah Law, can only have one husband. There happens to be a rabbinic regulation -- that only some Jews have accepted as a minhag (Sephardim and other non-Ashkenazim never were subject to that rabbinic regulation) -- that limits a man to one wife at a time.
I am rather shocked by your answer - assuming that you understand the halachic issues. For example the issue of mekach ta'us has to be a mistake at the time the marriage was established. Abusive psychopathology which developed later doesn't count for mekach ta'us. Establishing that the husband was sick but he concealed it is very difficult if not impossible. I assume you are familiar with Rav Moshe's teshuva dealing with mental illness. He required that the mental illness was already known at the time of marriage. Rabbi Rackman's mekach ta'us which you seem to agreeing with has been widely rejected by Chareidim and Modern Orthodx as a perversion. There are a number of good tapes at yu.org on the subject.Also regarding the issue of child abuse. There was no sudden revelation from Sinai - it was the result of recognition that serious psychological damage was caused by abuse - not just that fact that some sin was done. There definitely has been a lag because of the social pressures etc - but the halacha of rodef was already known as was the issue of BM 83 C.M. 388. See the Chasam Sofer to Gittin 7a etc.This awareness of the serious of harm of abuse is relatively recent in the secular society also - basically going about to the 1970 as a result of the awareness of the issue of psychological trauma produced by the Vietnam War and the Women's Liberation movement.
So at the end of the day, allowing when necessary a man to marry a second wife is simply a matter of setting aside a rabbinic regulation that only applied to some and not all Jews in the first place. And that rabbinic regulation itself made a provision right from the outset to set the regulation aside in special circumstances.A woman is strictly forbidden from having a second husband by Torah Law. A man is not.
there would be other ways to explore: for example have at least one passul eid or a mistake in the ketubah for every marriage, so that, if need might arise, the marriage could be declared null and void."The bottom line is this: Under Torah Law, a man can marry multiple wives, simultaneously."I think that this requires the agreemnt of the wife. If she refuses the get, I suppose that her agreement to a second wife is not forthcoming.By the way: the rabbonim of Marocco forbade second wives about two generations ago... plus every bride can stipulate in the ketubah that the husband will not be allowed to take other wives...I agree with ben beno: it seems more a question of will than a question of possibilities...
Under Torah Law the wife's agreement is not necessary for a man to take additional wives.
You don't even know to read what is written here and I should trust you to know under which conditions a man can take a second wife according to halacha?
Can you post either a full or summarized translation?What does the Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom entail and when is a Heter Meah Rabbonim needed and not needed. And when a HMR can or cannot be issued. And who can issue a HMR. And who qualifies to be one of the 100 signatories to a HMR. And how do non-Ashkenazi men remarry if their wife illegitimately refuses a Get. Or can a non-Ashkenazi force a wife to accept a Get, since the only thing preventing that is the Cherem, which is only applicable to Ashkenazim?And is there any halachic issue with a Sephardi marrying two wives, simultaneously, today? After all, they do not have the Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom preventing it. And Sephardim did, indeed, have multiple wives until even modern times, before they moved to countries that had goyishe civil laws preventing it. Some Sephardim moved to Israel with multiple wives. And Rav Ovadia Yosef said a few years ago that Sephardim should not follow Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom and that it would be good if they would marry multiple wives today.
Dovid I don't have the time. I am looking for an article that goes into detail - so far I have not found one.
Can you at least translate Rav Moshe's teshuva in the interim, as it is shorter than Rav Shternbuch's?
It appears anyone with smicha can be one of the 100 signatories to a HMR.I heard that a legit HMR can cost upwards of $50,000. I don't understand why, as it seemingly shouldn't be too difficult to attain, as any yodle with smicha can sign.
The seculars were up in arms when Rav Ovadia Yosef shlita announced that Sefardim should marry more than one wife these days.
I am working on translating Rav Moshe's teshuva - but it will take a day or two to be completed
Thank You, RDE, for your upcoming translation of Rav Moshe. If you have a chance to translate Rav Shternbuch, that too would be much appreciated.
The only reason for the hetter by a moredes is lo plug - which is not universally accepted and when it is difficult to obtain a hetter, no reason to be machmir. So much for the false laughable allegations of corruption against Rav Gestetner by corrupt individuals on this blog.They will have to answer for their falsehoods achar meah ve'esrim shono.I have not had the time to read R sternbuch's opinion. from another opinionj of his, he insisted on depositing a get, not in reb moshe or the achiezer (latter if i remember correctly).
So Rav Feinstein and Rav Shternbuch both say that this is only by a moredet that refuses to come to B"D and refuses to accept a Get. Rav Feinstein also places the need for a considerable time to have passed and the wife to have gone to Arkaot against the husband. So unlike Stan and Rav Gestetner, this isn't universal for any woman with the status of a Moredet, but only for one who refuses to accept a Get.I am assuming then, as Rav Shternbuch has written elsewhere that the husband would still be required to deposit a Get by the B"D.
ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!please use either your real name or a pseudonym.