Jewish Marriage part 10

In my last post, I spoke of the sad, but sometimes necessary, topic of divorce. A question must immediately occur to us. If we have destined mates (zivvug) how is it possible for it NOT to work?
The Biblical story of the creation of Adam and Eve is greatly expanded upon in the Talmud, Midrash, and especially Kabbalah. The first people created were actually two bodies joined at their backs, facing away from each other. When Adam requested a helper and companion, she was, in fact, there all along...unseen. G-d caused a deep sleep to fall, and he fashioned Eve from Adam's "tzela""; usually translated "rib" but which has an alternate meaning of "side". He was given what was already his, but couldn't see, and of which he was completely unaware. (There is a great deal about this in the Zohar and the writings of the Holy Ari, using this image to explain the deeper symbolism of Rosh HaShanah; the New Year). The Talmud informs us that forty days before conception, a Heavenly Voice rings out announcing whom this about-to-be child will marry; who is their other half. We live in the same world with our mates, perhaps even the same town, but we just don't see. Our backs are to each other, as it were. Then, one day, the two are made to face each other, and they know that this is the one!
But there can be situations where it is NOT the one, or we lose the one. The Talmud states that if one has found the right person, marry quickly "lest someone precede you with prayer".Another person may, with his or her prayers, draw our mates to themselves. But they will never be happy. The one who lost his or her mate this way may eventually marry someone else as well, but it will never be their "other half".
A very different approach to this question is suggested by Rabbi Nachman of Breslov. Our personalities, indeed, our souls, are not monolithic.The ARI (Shaar Hagilgulim) says that every person is made up of many souls. Just as white light contains all the colors of the rainbow, so do we possess a soul made up of many souls. We may even have souls of people who lived long ago, who came into us at birth to accomplish something as yet undone, or even during our lives, additional souls may join with ours in order to be "fixed" or to inspire us. Nevertheless, one soul with always be dominant. This is a basic concept in ARI. Rabbi Nachman said that each of these souls has a soul mate! As there are different degrees of "soul energy" within us from each soul, so the "zivvug" will be different. For example, if someone has a minute aspect of a particular soul, there will be a person "out there" who likewise has that minute spark, waiting to be joined. A neighbor, sitting at home with his wife, might make a remark "Hey, what do you think of introducing so and so to so and so?" The wife says "Oh, no! They aren't right for each other at all!" And that is the end of it. But actually, says Rabbi Nachman, that aspect has united with its "zivvug" on its appropriate plain. Nothing more can, or should be done. A person may have a somewhat larger "spark". The two actually meet, but nothing comes of it. That "zivvug": has been fulfilled! There will be cases of multiple meetings, engagement, even brief marriage. All these fulfill the sparks of souls. Then, one day, we meet, and hopefully marry, that special person who completes us.Our predominant spiritual selves are then fulfilled. The ultimate "zivvug" has been found. But the others were not for naught. Each one fulfilled part of us, paving the way to ultimate completion. Each "bad" experience did, nevertheless, mean something positive, and brought us closer to ultimate good. Rabbi Nachman called this "the hidden ways of He who knows all". May we all find, and appreciate, the right one, who will assist us in finding joy, love,  spirituality, and ultimately G-d..

Jewish Marriage part 9

How I wish that we lived in a world where everyone lives "happily ever after". The reality is that we are human, with all the flaws that come with that status. The Torah, therefore, stipulates a  procedure of divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1). There is a debate in the Talmud as to what are the grounds for divorce. The conclusion is that if there is disharmony and a lack of willingness to stay together, that is sufficient. The wife is protected by the stipulations of the Ketubah, as I wrote previously. By law of the Torah, the divorce is in the husband's hands. However, if a wife is being abused or otherwise treated unjustly, the rabbinic court can, and should, force the husband to grant a Bill of Divorce ("get"). Sadly, the secular authorities do not grant the rabbinic courts the power to force the husband to give the "get", which often leads to the very tragic situation of "Agunah"; a "chained woman", who is bound to her former husband and cannot remarry. This is sometimes because of spite, sometimes as a means of extortion. A recent case of rabbis using strong-arm tactics to get a recalcitrant husband to grant a get, resulted in several rabbis being incarcerated in Federal prison. Even in Israel, the State does not grant the rabbinic courts the right to force a "get". People wind up blaming the rabbis, which, in my opinion, is most unfair and unjust. (I have described elsewhere a controversial possible solution to this problem, that is now being employed by some rabbis).
When there is mutual agreement for divorce, the couple will approach the Beit Din. If all financial issues have been resolved, it is a simple procedure. If not, arbitration will be necessary. In most cases, these issues have already been resolved in the secular courts. It is important to note that just as marriage is a spiritual, Torah concept, and we in no way recognize the state's civil union that they call marriage, so divorce is totally a religious procedure. As far as Judaism is concerned, a civil divorce has no meaning or efficacy whatsoever. Reform Judaism has no get ceremony. Conservative has traditionally had a valid get ceremony, but, sadly, an "alternative" ceremony is also now made available, in which the couple fill out a postcard, authorizing the giving and receiving of a get without either being present. Although a proxy get can be valid, there are numerous halachot surrounding this procedure, which are not met by the new ceremony.
The entire ceremony takes about an hour. The couple appears before the Beit Din, and express their desire for a divorce. The husband instructs the scribe to write a Bill of Divorce (called in the Torah "A book of dissolution", and in rabbinic literature a "get"). The scribe serves as his agent. The "get" clearly identifies the date of the divorce, the place of the divorce. (Country names are not included, as these often change after wars. The name of the city is written, with the names of the bodies of water that serve the city, so as not to confuse cities with similar or identical names.) The 'get" is written in the husband's name "I, so and so (all nicknames are included for positive identification, in this case, and in the case of all names in the "get") son of so and so, do hereby say to you who were my wife, so and so daughter of so and so, this is your book of divorce, scroll of separation, document of departure. This is being written without compulsion. You are hereby completely free, with full power over yourself, and may marry any man whom you shall choose, with no man having a right to object. This has full power and efficacy, in accordance with the Law of Moses and Israel". (I once was in a Beit Din for a "get" in which the husband was a former District Attorney. He asked me to translate it for him. He said "that is the most perfect legal document I have ever heard"..Two witnesses must hear the command to write the "get", see its writing, and sign below. They must also witness his presentation of the "get". The man then says to the woman "this is your "get". Receive this get, and be divorced from me from right now". He then places the "get" in her hand. She takes the get and walks out of the room, in order to show that it is her property. She then returns to the room. The rabbis check that it is the same document, and make a tear in it to show that it is already in force. The Beit Din will keep the actual "get" on file, while giving each party a document stating that they have gone through the appropriate procedure and have no further obligations to each other. Interestingly, the rabbis say "Mazal Tov" (congratulations!) to the former spouses, as the dissolution of an unhappy marriage is also a cause for celebration. The couple is reminded that the option of remarrying each other remains, unless the husband is a Kohen, for whom a divorcee is forbidden by the Torah. Although the divorce is efficacious immediately, the woman is instructed not to remarry for at least 91 days, in order to ascertain if she is pregnant, and establish paternity. Occasionally there are complications (for instance, if the two refuse to be in the same room, in which case proxies are appointed to give or receive the "get"). There is no religious stigma attached to giving or receiving a "get', although society is not always as kind. May all marriages be happy, with full love and respect!

Jewish Marriage part 8

When we discuss situations in terms of halachah, the situation of people marrying in non-halachic ways (such as civil marriage),, or even marrying "accidentally" (there can be several situations in which this can occur), we are faced with a dilemma. One the one hand, at least where there was an intent of marriage, we would like to declare the couple married. However, marriage comes with many obligations. One of these is, that in the event of the couple eventually splitting up, there is a Torah obligation of a "get"; a Jewish divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1). This is a ceremony much more complicated than a marriage, requiring great expertise on the part of the rabbis performing it. If there is a binding, valid marriage, but no "get" the marriage stands, with terrible consequences for the great sin of adultery, besides the far reaching consequences for the offspring of any future union. As a result, the direction rabbis take in these matters is to seek ways of invalidation these marriages, rather than face the far more serious situation of a possible (likely?) future adultery. I will discuss the process of "get" in a future post.
In a previous post in this series, I spoke of "Kiddushin", the part of the wedding ceremony in which the groom, in the presence of valid witnesses, gives the bride an article of value, declaring her consecrated unto him. This forbids her to every man in the world. Surprisingly, however, this is not the only way that "kiddushin" can exist. The Oral Torah stipulates three methods. One, is "kesef". This is literally "silver", but is understood to mean any article of some value. The second is "Shtar". This means a document, declaring her consecrated. The third is "Bi'ah". This means sexual intercourse. If the groom takes two witnesses, and declares to the bride that he is consecrating her with this act, after which they depart to a private room and have relations, this would effect a binding marriage. Although this is a part of the Oral Torah, a great third century rabbi banned this practice as immodest. Nevertheless, if done, it would be valid.
The Talmud relates an interesting scenario. A couple decides to divorce, and they travel to another city where there is a Beit Din (rabbinic court) that performs the "get" ceremony. Friends accompany them on their journey. Afterwards, on the way back to their own city, the friends notice that the divorced couple have actually gone alone into a shared room. The Talmud states that they have thus reestablished their marriage, as the witnesses, even in the absence of a declaration of intent, may assume that they have reconciled, and that cohabitation was meant to be "kiddushin". Why should they assume this? "We assume that a man does not have sexual relations for immoral purposes". What?!?! Sex for immoral purposes DOES occur! Many rabbis limit this statement to the above case. A couple that has been married MUST share some level of mutual respect. He would not make his former wife into a "one night stand". But can we apply this principle to any couple that has had relations, while others merely knew about it? There were some views that this is, in fact, the case. There was an incident in the 1960s in which a young woman living in a Jewish commune ( a "havurah"; a shared group house, quite popular at that time) wanted to get married, and a very famous rabbi required her to receive a "get" from every male member of the commune. Most rabbis disagree, and say that in most cases couples having a brief encounter, or even living together for any length of time, cannot be assumed to be doing so for the purpose of marriage. But what if they are living together for a long time, presenting themselves as husband and wife? What if they have undergone a civil wedding, which, under Jewish law, has zero validity, but is perhaps, in fact, a public declaration of a desire to be married, with neighbors aware of the situation? Would this be like a situation of a man declaring that he is having intercourse with a woman for the purpose of "kiddushin" thus constituting a valid marriage, with the neighbors serving as witnesses? There were, in fact, many rabbis who considered this to be the case. Today, the consensus is that this does not constitute a marriage. Why? We only make the assumption of such intent in the Talmud's case of the newly divorced couple. Otherwise, we have no reason to assume such an intent unless openly declared..
But isn't a civil marriage a declaration of intent? Most rabbis say "no". The legal and halachic concepts of marriage are light years apart. Jewish religious marriage (and this is true of most religions) see marriage as a union of two souls. The State sees a contract of financial and social obligations. The State simply does not deal in "souls", "consecration" or even "love". So, is a civil marriage a declaration of a desire and willingness to merge two souls? The State would be the first to laugh at this. Every civil marriage is, in essence, a "civil union", not a marriage. (Interestingly, I am informed by a friend who is a Catholic Priest, that they recognize Jewish marriage as binding, but not civil marriage). Indeed, some rabbis require a "get" "just in case", but would not consider the lack of one to constitute adultery.
I am frequently called upon to perform Huppah and Kiddushin for couples who have been together for many years, but now wish to truly unite their souls. This is a happy event for them, as well as for me. It is converting an "arrangement", into something holy. Isn't that what Judaism is all about?