Modifying Halacha

Written by: admin

Recently, there was a very disturbing article written in the Canadian Jewish News in response to an event that took place this month in Montreal. The Supreme Court of Quebec had a hearing about a case where a husband refused to issue his wife a Get, and the Supreme Court of Quebec ruled in favour of the wife and placed a fine on th husband for causing his now ex-wife much emotional damage. The article in the CJN stated that this event should prove to the Orthodox community that we have failed as a religion in regards to this law, and in response to this event we should modify/change the Jewish Law to subscribe to this ethical dilemna of the husband having autonomy when it comes to Jewish divorce.

While I’m not disagreeing with the fact that this Halacha could potentially cause emotional damage to a woman, the approach that was taken, that the Jewish Law must be changed is a completely non Jewish concept. The reason that the Jewish people continue to persevere and survive is due largely to the fact that we, as a people value Oral, Rabbinical and Traditional practices to the extent that there are many laws we do just because G-d told us to and we might not understand them at all. This is not to say that there is no solution to this dilemna, but the solution is definitely not to change the law, and we have definitely failed as a religion. In ancient times the Beit Din had ways of “forcing” the husband into giving a Get to his wife but in modern times when Beit Din has no power the solution might not be as easy, but it could be as simple as making pre-nuptual agreements. Every couple can write on their Ketubah that in the event of disagreement they will follow the suggestion of Beit Din which legally binds the husband to giving his wife a Get. The point I’m trying to get across is that sometimes there is no quick and easy fix to our religious problems but when we do have a problem, we can’t view it as a failure of the religion but we must view it as a failure of our own to fully understand the religion.

You liked this post? Here is a list of related posts:

- Parshat Vayeitzei: The Wedding Well by Nathan Light
- Put On Your Yarmulke (Wear My Shoes) by Zemer
- Intellectual Property Law in Halacha by Dan Illouz
- The History of Eretz Israel - Eretz Israel and Itzhak Avinuhi by Dan Illouz
- Announcement - Big Changes Coming Up! by Dan Illouz
- There is Still Hope by Florence
- A Day of Good Deeds in Memory of those Murdered at Yeshivat Merkaz HaRav by admin

Derek Fields Says:
January 16th, 2008 at 9:32 am

I read through the article, admittedly quickly, but I did not see anything that suggested that Halacha must change. They cited quite a number of people who said that the decision in now way affected Halacha.

I am not sure that I agree that the courts should have gotten involved in a religious disupute; it is not at all clear to me that a religious document can rise the level of a civil contract.

after8 Says:
January 16th, 2008 at 12:01 pm

let me give you the point of view of a woman: halacha does not need to be changed but there are things that can be done, all in staying withing the boundaries of halacha.
In Israel, if the Bet Din tells a man to give his wife a get and he refuses, this man can be put into prison; so I do not see the big deal in the law, even if canadian, getting involved AFTER the man was told to give his wife the get.
unfortunately a lot of men take advantage of the situation and make their wife suffer before (if at all) she gets a get, while they go and remarry! lots of leniency is shown to men for them to remarry, while the woman is an haguna for undetermined time!
so yes, I certainly welcome the government getting involved when, after the bet din declared the get is justified, men still don’t comply.

Alisa Schlossberg

Unknown Says:
January 16th, 2008 at 6:32 pm

I read through the http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_conten...“>REL=”nofollow”>article, ” target=”_blank”>http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_conten...REL=”nofollow”>article, admittedly quickly, but I did not see anything that suggested that Halacha must change. They cited quite a number of people who said that the decision in now way affected Halacha.

Yosef Kurtz Says:
January 16th, 2008 at 7:12 pm

Derek, you’re absolutely right, that article did not suggest what I was referring to. There was a second article more of an editorial on this topic by Yoni Goldstein which was frankly quite un-Jewish of an article. Take a look if you get a chance, I can’t find it online, if I do I’ll definitely post it. And as for the woman who responded, unfortunately I think you might be right. Due to the fact that nowadays, Beit Din has little or no power based on where you live it might be necessary sometimes to get the secular courts involved.

David Elmaleh Says:
January 16th, 2008 at 7:37 pm

I think another interesting idea was touched upon in Yosef Kurtz’s post is…The role of the civil court in a religious contract…i.e. the ktubah and Get. While in this case, it seems that the Supreme Court ruled according to the way a Beit Din would have passed judgement, this seems to set a precident. Contemporary Jewry often embraces many of the ideas of Modern Liberal states, but there are fundamental areas of disagreement as well. We may embrace the civil court’s decision in this dispute, but I think finding other methods for conflict resolution would benefit us in the long run.

after8 Says:
January 17th, 2008 at 1:46 am

you all seem to forget that the civil law, did not replace the beth din!! it just ebforeced the beth din decision!
the point the civil law was making is not to replace the jewish court decision but to rather avoid unscrupolous men should take advantage of their position, after the beth din ruled against them

Anonymous Says:
January 17th, 2008 at 8:34 am

I think the point Yosef was making was less about the Aguna status.. he actually said many times that this problem needed to be dealt with. His issue was whether the courts should “fix” religion, or whether it should be let to religion to adapt itself through its own mechanisms.

The truth is that this particular decision of the court was not so crazy - it just said if you agree to give a get, it makes a contract which means if you decide not to afterwards you can be liable. I don’t think its really intrusive into religion. But I agree with Yosef when he says that this is a fine line and we should be careful.

What if the courts will soon decide that not allowing Gay Marriages is a discrimination and will want to force rabbis to perform some? I know this is very hypothetical right now but I think this is more the question that Yosef was trying to discuss.

after8 Says:
January 17th, 2008 at 9:55 am

i disagree because the state did not impose and will not impose anything to the religion and to the way of performing it: it was a personal matter against a man, who was making his life miserable!
I did not see any imposition in changing the jewish law or mixing into the religious law.
Alisa

Unknown Says:
January 17th, 2008 at 10:46 am

Unknown Says:
January 17th, 2008 at 6:55 pm

Anonymous Says:
January 17th, 2008 at 10:38 pm

“that the Jewish Law must be changed is a completely non Jewish concept.”
This has been done many times Judaism if you have any knowledge of the history and evolution of Halacha. Halcacha evolves, as does Judaism.

Unknown Says:
January 18th, 2008 at 7:38 am

Yosef Kurtz Says:
January 18th, 2008 at 9:43 am

Anonymous- In order to actually “change” Halacha in terms of modfiying a cetain law becuase of a specific circumstance; yes you’re right, this can happen under certain guidelines which Maimonides rights about in his Introduction to the Mishna. If you want specifics then I could go throught that gladly but it would take much time to go through all the details. However, for Halacha to evolve, maybe I’m not understanding you correctly but this is not in our hands to do today. Maybe, give me a specific example and we can address it directly but I do still stand by what I said that changing Halacha is un-Jewish.

after8- you are absolutely correct. The court’s decision was unfortunately necessary and it was the correct one. I was merely stating that the conclusions brought forth by the CJN editor were harsh and somewhat offensive to a religious Jew. We have not failed as a religion, but we do however have issues to deal with, within the confines of the law. That was all I was saying.

cyberdov Says:
January 18th, 2008 at 11:23 am

Perhaps it is just semantics to refer to ‘changing halacha’ or ‘change within halacha’.

It is absolutely our responsibility to ensure that halacha continues to uphold our values. And values do change over time - it’s just that conservatives take a lot longer to buy in to these changes.

R N Rabinovitch wrote an article many years ago called Darka Shel Torah which I believe was recently revised and republished - I remember the original being an eye-opener in this area, i.e. a traditional Orthodox viewpoint that understood that values change over time and that this is progress.

Yosef Kurtz Says:
January 18th, 2008 at 11:55 am

Dov- I hear what you’re saying. For example, it could be argued that women in Judaism are today looked at in a more respectful way than that of previous generations (although I don’t necessarily know if this is true, as it is documented in places all over Tanach that women were treated with respect by their husbands however it could definitely be argued)This could be an example of an added value in Judaism and there is nothing wrong with this however none of our “added” values can ever compromise on our “more ancient” values and traditions. This I feel very strongly about. And although you’re right that we must ensure that Halacha upholds our values, this can never compromise our Halacha or tradition. If we have a law that in our eyes seems sexist or racist I think we need to spend a lot more time studying that law to understand it and why we need to do this instead of jumping to the conclusion that the halacha is wrong. A great example was given earlier that it isn’t long before our religion starts getting challenged by other Jews/non Jews in regards to the forbidden act of homosexuality, and the marriage of homosexuals. This is an example of something that the world is becoming more accustomed to that we as Jews can NEVER be accustomed to it. It is a horrible sin. And even if we value “respecting people’s decisions” if someone decides to break the law, we can’t say that Halacha has to uphold our values. I don’t think you disagree with me, I just wanted to clarify to other readers what I thought you were aying, please continue to give me your feedback.