web analytics
October 24, 2014 / 30 Tishri, 5775
At a Glance
Blogs
Sponsored Post
Meir Panim with Soldiers 5774 Roundup: Year of Relief and Service for Israel’s Needy

Meir Panim implements programs that serve Israel’s neediest populations with respect and dignity. Meir Panim also coordinated care packages for families in the South during the Gaza War.



Answering the Most Difficult Question About the Agunah Crisis

Ethical and moral laws in the Torah depend on the context. Kindness and virtue largely depend on the subjective expectations of one’s friends and community.

woman behind bars

The ongoing conversation about the agunah problem in the wake of the Gital Dodelson article in the NY Post consistently raises one impossibly difficult question. I’ve been asked this question many times and in many different ways. In my opinion, it’s the fundamental issue of the agunah crisis.

The public is justifiably angry with a husband who does not give a get. But the recalcitrant husband has a pretty compelling argument in his favor.

The Torah itself gives the husband absolute authority in the matter of the divorce. If this is Torah law then we are forced to say that this is God’s will. If God gave the power of divorce to the man alone, how can it be considered wrong or evil if he does not give his wife a get? And how can we call it an injustice when he does not give a get? Don’t blame the husband, blame the Torah. The Torah is at fault. God is at fault. Change the laws of divorce and the problem will be solved!

Some variant of this question is the crux of the agunah problem. In simple terms, why is the husband a bad guy when he doesn’t give a get if God gave him the power to decide if he wants to give the get? It is a very difficult question for an Orthodox Jew. And now it is being asked over and over again.

I think I have an answer to this question.

It’s true that in terms of divorce law, the power to divorce vests in the husband and he is the only one who can dissolve a marriage. The husband must willingly give the get. We are stuck with that law. Pure legalistic Torah matters are almost always unassailable. There is almost no way for contemporary rabbinic authorities to change a law derived from the Torah or even established by Chazal. There’s just no acceptable mechanism within Orthodox Judaism to make changes to Torah law.

(Rabbinic laws often have loopholes baked into the law, e.g. eruvei chatzeros, eruv tavshilin. Pruzbul and hefker beis din hefker are examples of the rabbis creating a legal fiction that circumvents Torah laws with regard to money, they do not change the actual Torah laws.) 

The thing is, divorce law is not the only part of the Torah that informs us how to behave in case of divorce. That part of the Torah will never change. There are other parts of the Torah that do fluctuate and are subject to societal norms and niceties. Ethical and moral laws in the Torah depend on the context. Kindness and virtue largely depend on the subjective expectations of one’s friends and community. Perhaps at one time a certain act or behavior was considered normal and fair. But at a different time it could be considered evil or wrong. Things in this arena are more subjective and they do change. These bein adam l’chaveiro elements of the Torah always apply and I think they are especially important during a divorce.

• One is obligated to love his fellow as himself. “That which is hated to you, do not do to others.” Would a husband want his wife to hold him hostage? No. Thus it is prohibited to hold the wife hostage.

• It is prohibited to cause an animal pain. All the more so it is prohibited to cause pain to a fellow human being. Withholding a get causes extreme pain to the estranged wife.

• One who causes emotional damage to another person is obligated to compensate the victim. One cannot act in a way that causes other emotional harm. R’ Elyashiv paskened that sexual abusers were rodfim (pursuers) because of the emotional harm caused by their violence toward their victims. Causing another person emotional harm is a very serious issue and is absolutely against the Torah.

• The Torah requires that we help unload the animal of our enemy. Many authorities learn from this that we are required to lend a helping hand to anyone who requires help. Does a wife waiting for her get not require assistance?

• We are obligated to follow in the merciful ways of God. Is it merciful to withhold a get? Clearly not. A recalcitrant husband violates this mitzvah as well.

• Read the prophets. Their words often constitute rabbinic obligations. They admonish us for mistreating the underprivileged. A wife at the mercy of her husband is underprivileged.

The list goes on. There are many interpersonal obligations and prohibitions that are blatantly trampled upon when one withholds a get. I don’t think there is an doubt about it.

Perhaps the objective laws of divorce won’t ever change. But the subjective laws of how to treat one’s wife during a divorce are subject to change. Maybe at one time it was not evil to withhold a get. I don’t understand it, but I accept that it may have been normative behavior at one time in history. But our common sense tells us that today it is amoral to cause this kind of pain to anyone, let alone one’s wife.

Turns out that while the Jewish laws of divorce don’t obligate the husband to give a get and a wife really cannot divorce her husband, by refusing to give a get the husband is violating several other mitzvahs. In other words, if one isolates the get issue as a pure question of Jewish divorce law it’s true that the wife is powerless and seemingly unprotected. But the Torah is not so simple. We don’t isolate civil law from religious law and we don’t sequester civil and religious law from the Torah’s moral and ethical laws. It’s all part of one Torah given by one God. Exploiting a legal loophole does not justify violating ethical laws in the Torah. It’s forbidden to be a jerk. It’s an issur d’orysa in many instances. It does not matter that the Torah gives him the right to be a jerk. It’s still assur.

I think that the original question obfuscates just how terrible it is to withhold a get. It is so obviously a horrible way to act towards a fellow human being. Regardless of whether it is within the husband’s legal right to withhold the get, it is patently clear that by refusing to give a get a husband is in violation of the ethical and moral laws as well as the spirit of the Torah.

Visit Fink or Swim.

About the Author: Rabbi Eliyahu Fink, J.D. is the rabbi at the famous Pacific Jewish Center | The Shul on the Beach in Venice CA. He blogs at finkorswim.com. Connect with Rabbi Fink on Facebook and Twitter.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

5 Responses to “Answering the Most Difficult Question About the Agunah Crisis”

  1. Ron says:

    Disregarding all facts I am hearing about who is indeed the “normal” spouse. Both of them feel that they would rather have custody than have the option to remarry. Using the get as ransom is the act of his, but continued on by her refusing to concede on the same thing he wants.
    Time for them to realize the is only one cookie in the jar

  2. Ch Hoffman says:

    the good rabbi obviously feels that if husbands and wives got along better with one another during their divorce proceedings and if they were both much nicer people, then the issues of agunah would not arise.

    Well, that's pretty disingenuous; if they got along better, then all issues revolving around a divorce would get resolved amicably – financial, custodial, visitation, and the issuance of a get would be a piece of kugel

    however, the Rodney King "can't we all just get along" doesn't quite work so well in most divorces; that's why there are lawyers, courts, and a lot of angry ex-spouses.

  3. Ch Hoffman says:

    the good rabbi obviously feels that if husbands and wives got along better with one another during their divorce proceedings and if they were both much nicer people, then the issues of agunah would not arise.

    Well, that's pretty disingenuous; if they got along better, then all issues revolving around a divorce would get resolved amicably – financial, custodial, visitation, and the issuance of a get would be a piece of kugel

    however, the Rodney King "can't we all just get along" doesn't quite work so well in most divorces; that's why there are lawyers, courts, and a lot of angry ex-spouses.

  4. You may not be aware that Weiss has recently published what he wants:

    1. Better custody that Weiss can get from civil court.

    2. Dodelson's parents have to pay him $350,000 as secutiry that Dodelson does not go to court to challenge the Weiss-favoring custody agreeement.

    3. An undisclosed sum of money for damages.

    So, it's not a matter of good spouse- bad spouse. This is what Weiss has now announced he is demanding as a condition to giving his ex-wife a get.

    If there is anything in the Torah that prevents a man from giving his ex-wife a get without extorting her, please post here.

  5. Amy Fields says:

    I am a young catholic woman working for a fathers rights attorney that practices in NYC. In the past few years we have helped represent several Jewish men in divorce.

    Reading the article today has made me have to comment, a practice I normally vehemently refrain from doing.

    The Civil Divorce system is broken. Men have very little rights if any, and only those that can afford high priced attorney's have any chance at all of coming out with anything but huge debt. The rest are systematically destroyed and many are even jailed. The system creates criminals out of good men fathers and the women get away with lying and manipulating the courts with full immunity from the law.

    I am not familiar with this particular case but have seen several very similar.

    In over 80% of all cases its the women that wants the divorce, the men are usually the ones that fight to keep the marriage going. The women then have to force the issue by hiring an attorney and suing in court for the divorce. The majority of divorce lawyers follow the same path and that is to get the husband out of the home as quickly as possible. They then proceed to reduce him to nothing more then a welfare state for the wife in the most disgusting and demeaning way.

    The easiest and quickest path to this is to start by turning them into criminals. It is common practice to immediately get restraining orders based on lies or exaggerated truths because we all know nothing will happen to the woman. What's worse is the husband has no clue that its happening and isn't even allowed to defend himself until its to late.

    At that point its all down hill for him. Most men go into panic mode and actually do break the law in one way or another thus proving the need for the restraining order to begin with. CAUSE AND EFECT. Its perfect tactics and works 99% of the time.

    For me as a young woman working for a fathers rights attorney, the shame of it is we don't have more orthodox Jewish clients because the rest have absolutely no recourse whatsoever. Suicide is not uncommon.

    The answer is for all divorcing couples to be civil and collaborate, and this is especially true with Orthodox Jewish women. Most if not all of you bring this upon yourself. If you live by your faith you die by your faith and anything you will do will be judged by your faith.

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
The car that crashed into a Jerusalem train station, killing an infant and injuring eight, in what is being probed as a terrorist attack.
Tearful Message from Baby Terror Victim’s Grandfather
Latest Blogs Stories
Chaye Zisel Braun

Arab terrorism against Jews and the State of Israel is not something we should be “calm” about.

European Union

Is the EU “Jewish challenged”?

Car in Light Rail Runover

The headlines refused to scream “ARAB TERROR ATTACK;” instead the phrase “Suspected Terror Attack.”

"Shiloh"

I’ve heard many times I write what others think, making them extremely happy; that’s why I continue.

Though secular, Hitman’s CV includes writing music for, recording, and popularizing religious songs.

Polls indicate that the Palestinians are much more against a two state solution than the Israelis.

Has the Jewish world adapted to the times? Hear the answer with Doug and his guest, Rabbi Berel Wein.

Leon Klinghoffer’s daughters: “‘Klinghoffer’ is justified as ‘a work of art’…This is an outrage.”

Kids bring in the light and let out the darkness through breathing exercises; it changes people.

If I make a million dollars in 2 weeks, how can I observe something like this and sit by quietly?”

Sometimes collective action against the heinous acts of the majority is not enough. The world should not only support the blockade of Gaza; it must enforce the dismantling of Hamas.

How long will it take for Israel and the Jewish World to admit that we are in very serious danger?

How do changes in technology affect the human life and our interactions with each other?

Palestinians (and Jordanians) often use the term “provocation” regarding Israeli action in Jerusalem

The zealots who engineered the ban have been publicly disgraced.

I am sick and tired of this one way street boycott! Time to boycott all products developed or invented in the Palestinian controlled areas! Let’s start with……umm….

More Articles from Rabbi Eliyahu Fink
QuestionsandAnswers-logo

People act not because they think it’s right; they do what they do because it’s what they want to do

Dusk in the early morning hours seen from Mt Meron, Northern Israel. March 26, 2014.

What do we do when we want to be mad at God but we also want God to make it all better? Indeed, what do we do?

Rambam would also allow charity from a mumar as long as the person maintains basic belief in God and Judaism.

There is no song that tells the story of freedom like Shir HaShirim.

It is unfair to judge a 52 year old man with the glasses of a person who lives in a different world.

Adegbile was not making a moral statement by representing a man convicted of killing a cop.

Women learning Torah is becoming increasingly permissive, but women wearing tefillin is becoming increasingly stringent.

When the “offensive” statements in our Talmud were stated, no one thought they were offensive.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/fink-or-swim/answering-the-most-difficult-question-about-the-agunah-crisis/2013/11/07/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: