Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
הרב יוסף גבריאל בקהופר
Not taking sides here. But how do you respond to Marc Shapiro's recent article with numerous examples where poskim are totally OK with a man not giving a get?
The articles is based on a mistaken premise - viz., that just because BD cannot compel a divorce, it follows that Judaism views it as ethical to refuse to issue a get.
I agree that that premise is mistaken - not forcing a divorce does not justify not giving a get in many circumstances.However, if you look at the language the poskim use in those discussions, in a bunch of those cases they seem to be totally fine with the man not giving a get - "and let the woman be an aguanah for the rest of her life" - saying that without any form of censure implies, to me, and i think to an objective reader, that they thought the man would be justified in never giving a get.
Yes, there was such an approach. But only in a case in which a woman committed outright adultery. And it is certainly a minority approach.
I have another question about the Shapiro article. He seems to assume that there is a "Shem/Chalos Agunah" in halacha. He then assumes that this Shem only exists if we're Kofeh a get. (See his contention with JOFA's definition of agunah.) But I thought that there is no particular halachic category of an agunah; it's just how we label anyone who experiences "Igun." At most, the halachic category of agunah only has relevance in the old-fashioned cases at the end of yevamos, but even there it isn't referred to as agunah but as "Eidus Ishah." So his (an a lot of commenters on the other blog's) obsession with who gets a "Shem Agunah" would just be Am Haaratzus. Am I off base?BTW I'm not the original Anonymous poster
Fully agree! I wouldn't be so harsh as to call it am ha'aratzus, but the premise is definitely incorrect.
Rabbi, it's incredible that you have the fortitude and patience to take such abuse in these discussions! Especially since what you are saying is so sensical...
Thanks. "It's a dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it." I have talmidim who get confused - and even demoralized - when it seems that everyone has lost their moral or ethical compasses. Particularly when it comes to Ba'alei Teshuva, who - most understandably - get the gnawing doubt, "Is this really what I signed up for." I see it as essential that someone come out clearly stating that right is right and wrong is wrong. It is not to convince the other side, but to reassure our side.
Thank God we have Rabbi B to stand up for Jewish morality!
If a man's wife is diagnosed with cancer that will be incredibly costly to treat, the Shulchan Aruch says he is within his halachic rights to weigh the cost of the kesubah against the treatments and divorce her. Yet morally, we follow the Sifrei ("veshilachta lenafshaH") that such a thing is despicable behavior!So if I understand correctly: if a beis din hasn't gone all-out and said "chayav to give a Get now", what sanctions are you comfortable with? Can/should we go all the way to Harchakos of Rabeinu Tam?
Essentially, yes. But it must be done with reputable rabbinic approval, such as ORA is supposed to get on all its activities from Rabbi Schachter.
Rabbi Bechofer, now that I find that you are a secret radical feminist, is there a din of "sefarim chitzonim" chal on your blog, thus rendering it assur to read? :)
For sure. Unless you're reading it als da ma she'tashiv. :-)
If you're a radical feminist I want someone to introduce me to a moderate feminist