What pained me, however, was the fact that Rabbi [Yehiel Yaakov] Weinberg was very much in favor of relief for agunot by annulment, and for those about to marry, by the use of contracts for conditional marriages, which was the proposal of one of his disciples – if not his most famous one – the late Rabbi Eliezer Berkowitz [sic - should be vitz]. Rabbi Weinberg hoped other well-known scholars would agree with him; his modesty prevented him from going it alone.
His view would not only have solved the problems of these women whose husbands refuse them a religious divorce, but with Rabbi Berkowitz's proposals would have terminated altogether the incidence of the problem all over the world.
What a tragedy this is. Yet happily I learned that what he approved was followed in practice by many rabbis all over the world, and especially Sephardi rabbis, whose rabbinate was always more liberal in this area than Ashkenazi ones.
Yet why cannot modern agunot claim to be accorded Sephardi liberalism? Does the Torah or their ketubot bind them to the stringency of Ashkenazim? The stringency of most Orthodox rabbis is only alienating Jews and giving the Torah tradition a bad image. It is also decisive.
May the memory of Rabbi Weinberg in the Yeshiva world he loved inspire penitence and induce much change of heart there.
I've also seen that Rabbi Dr. Michael J. Broyde, a student of Rabbi Rackman's (see On the Death of a Giant, obituary of Rabbi Rackman by Rabbi Broyde), also supports Rabbi Berkovits's proposal, citing in the name of Rabbi Weinberg. See "An Unsuccessful Defense of the Beit Din of Rabbi Emanuel Rackman: The Tears of The Oppressed by Aviad Hacohen" (review essay by Rabbi Broyde of Aviad Hacohen's The Tears of the Opressed). This essay is Rabbi Broyde's refuting a different (more controversial and ambitious) proposal of Rabbi Rackman's, before Rabbi Broyde offers his own proposal, namely the same Rabbi Weinberg-Berkovits proposal put forth above by Rabbi Rackman. (See also the follow-up response, with replies from the author of The Tears of the Oppressed, at http://www.edah.org/backend/JournalArticle/5_1_Continued.pdf)
Unfortunately, I only have the old 1970 edition of Rabbi Rackman's book; I didn't know the 2000 edition had additional content, including this passage (which I read on the Amazon.com book preview tool).
Posts
2 comments:
Lets get to the root of the issue. The current agunah problem is not caused by 9/11 type scenarios where you can't find a body, but just cruel men who want to punish their wives even after their relationship is over.
I think an important area of work that has not been mentioned is education. We should educate /indoctrinate these future husbands from an early age not to be cruel to their wives. When a relationship unfortunately reaches the stage of divorce (even if it is only one partner that wants it) after all alternatives have been exhausted, you just have to give a get. This sick attitude of denying a person the right to move on with their lives, even many years after is the real cause of the problem. Solve that, make people less selfish and then you will not have to worry about halachic arguments for annulment, etc.
What are your thoughts on that?
Rael, certainly. If I had my way, everyone would read Rabbi Yom Tov Schwarz's Eyes to See, to learn what authentic Haredi Judaism is. Everyone would also learn Rav Hirsch and Rav Uziel/Halevy, to learn what a true universalist and intellectually courageous Orthodoxy is. We may add Rabbi Angel's book to this.
But until then, situations require takanot. As Professor Marc B. Shapiro notes at http://www.jewishideas.org/articles/moroccan-rabbinic-conferences, the Moroccan rabbis didn't try to change the life conditions; rather, they took the life conditions at face value, and used takanot to change the halacha accordingly.
So men are abusive - face it - change the ketuba so as to compensate. Until the men change (please G-d), we have no choice but to accept this, and change halacha accordingly.
Post a Comment