text
stringlengths 0
44.7k
| metadata
dict |
|---|---|
After proposing the utilization of a borrowed ring for kiddushin , Rosh continues: 35 Piskei ha-Rosh , supra n. 8. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.50",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 50",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
And if using terminology of a loan will not be effective then it should be in the language of a gift, minimally conditioned upon the groom returning the gift, she will be deemed married and he will acquire it from the woman and return it to him. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.51",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 51",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In accordance with the authorities who reject the validity of the act of kiddushin via the use of a borrowed ring, Rosh contends that there is an assumption that the lender intended to give the ring as a conditional gift. In other words, it is gifted for the kiddushin and afterwards the donor requests its return. Other decisors endorse Rosh's view. 36 Teshuvot Maharam of Padua 77 ; Teshuvot ha-Rashba 1:1000; Teshuvot Tashbetz 3:240; SA OH 658:5, EH 28:19–20; Teshuvot Shoeil u-Meishiv, Mahdura Tinyana 3:147; Teshuvot Hatam Sofer EH 1:106; Teshuvot Torat Hesed 2:24. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.52",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 52",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In a case where a donor gifts an item on the condition that it is returned, the item, i.e. the ring, belongs to the recipient, i.e. the groom, during the time it is in his possession, provided that he will subsequently return the gift to the donor, i.e. the groom's friend. And the donor allows the recipient to give the gift to a third party, contingent upon the third party returning the gift to the recipient. 37 MT, Nedarim 7:16; Bah, Tur HM 207:8. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.53",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 53",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In our case, it clear that the defendant's intent was to give the ring to the plaintiff for the purpose of the kiddushin and that subsequently the plaintiff will return the ring to the donor, namely the defendant's friend, or that she would return it to the recipient and he would then give it back to the donor. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.54",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 54",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As we know, due to the severity of incest ( arayot ), Halakhah establishes that the validity of giving a conditional gift is contingent upon the execution transpiring in accordance to the halakhot of conditions ( mishpetei ha'te'naim ), such as the principle that a condition, when stipulated, must be formulated as "a double condition" (a tenai kaful ). In other words, the condition must be stated in the affirmative (if he complies with the condition, he is entitled to the arrangement) and in the negative (if he does not comply with the condition, he is not entitled to the arrangement). Moreover, the affirmative must precede the negative ( hen kodem le-lav) . Furthermore, it is required that the condition must be stated prior to the actual transaction ( tenai kodem le'ma'aseh) . Finally, the condition must be possible to fulfill ( davar she-afshar le'kayyemo) . 38 MT, Ishut 6:1–13; Tur HM 241:16 in the name of Rosh; SA EH 38:1–4, HM 241:12. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.55",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 55",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In our case, it is clear that the donor and the recipient neither couched the gift in terms of the aforesaid four requirements nor did the donor stipulate that he was giving the gift for an expressed period of time or that it be returned after a prescribed time. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.56",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 56",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In the absence of implementing the aforementioned rules of conditions, there are legists who will impart validity to the arrangement of the gift in light of the circumstances which would indicate a clear expectation ( umdana ) that in fact the gift was given for a specific time and would be returned after the time had lapsed. 39 Tosafot, Ketuvot 93a, s.v. zavin ; Tosafot Kiddushin 6b; s.v. lo ; Teshuvot Terumat ha-Deshen 267. However, there are others who mandate the application of the rules of conditions to validate the transfer of a conditional gift rather than invoking an assessed expectation. 40 Hiddushei ha-Rashba Gittin 75b; Magid Mishneh, MT Ishut 6:14. In our case, as mentioned, the rules of conditions were not implemented. As such, the gift may not serve as a vehicle to establish kiddushin. Consequently, she is not married. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.57",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 57",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Another difficulty arises from another halakhah dealing with gifting. The recipient of the gift that executed a symbolic act of undertaking vis-à-vis an asset was unaware that the asset received was a gift; he acquires it because there is no duty that the recipient of a gift must intend to acquire it. And the reason for this halakhah is that the donor has the intent to transfer it to him ( da'at aheret makneh ). 41 Netivot ha-Mishpat 197:4; Teshuvot Avnei Nezer OH 342:2, HM 134; Teshuvot Hatam Sofer EH 1:107–108; Teshuvot Maharit 1:150. Lest one argue that in our case, given that the defendant's friend was ignorant concerning the halakhot of undertaking obligations, therefore one cannot assert da'at aheret makneh. There are decisors who contend that intent to transfer is determination, and a symbolic act of undertaking a duty need not be executed. 42 Hiddushei ha-Rashba Bava Kama 102b, s.v. who de'amar ; Taz SA OH 434:6. However, others claim that there is a requirement of executing a symbolic act of undertaking an obligation, though the defendant's friend is incapable of fulfilling this duty. 43 Teshuvot Hevel Ya'akov 1:8. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.58",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 58",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Moreover, in contradistinction to other authorities, upon return of the gift from the sub-recipient (the plaintiff), the recipient has to halakhically transfer the gift back to the donor, the defendant's friend. 44 Tosafot ha-Rid, Sukkah 41b; Teshuvot Ri Megas 42; Avnei Mi'lluim 28:53. In the wake of the absence of any formal halakhic transfer, the gift, the ring, remains in the possession of the groom, the defendant. 45 Hiddushei ha-Ritva Kiddushin 6b; Piskei ha-Rosh Sukkah 3:30; Teshuvot Maharam Schick OH 330 in the name of Hatam Sofer. On the other hand, there are decisors who do not mandate the execution of a kinyan upon returning a gift, due to the fact that the gifting was for a limited time or because the donor retained a residual right (known as a " shiyur" ) in the gift, that at the end of the agreed time the gift would be returned to him. 46 Ketzot ha-Hoshen 241:4; Teshuvot Shoeil u-Meishiv, Mahadura 3, 2:5. For examples of residual rights in a field and in a house respectively, see SA HM 209:7, 212:3. In our present case, the donor, the defendant's friend, was neither well versed in the halakhot of undertaking obligations in general nor in the entitlement to retain a residual right in particular, and thus there was no meeting of the minds regarding the length of time that the ring would be kept by the groom and the bride. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.59",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 59",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
One might challenge our conclusion based upon the halakhah that a person's hand ( kinyan yad ) can acquire an object even without his awareness. 47 Netivot ha-Mishpat 200:15; Ketzot ha-Hoshen 268 in the name of Tosafot; Teshuvot Havatzelet ha-Sharon 1, EH 61. Hence, if the recipient took the ring into his hand, his hand would acquire it without his awareness. However, in our case the ring was returned directly from the sub-recipient, the plaintiff, to the donor, the defendant's friend. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.60",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 60",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In short, the validity of the kiddushin with either a borrowed ring or a conditional gift is subject to a debate among the authorities, and this beit din panel arrived at the conclusion that construing the kiddushin ring as either a conditional gift or a borrowed one is halakhically ineffective, and therefore the kiddushin of the couple is void. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.61",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 61",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
3. Halakhic matrimony established by an exclusive conjugal relationship | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.62",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 62",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In the wake of the halakhic doubts regarding the transfer of the ring ( kiddushei kesef ) as a vehicle to establish the act of kiddushin , should we fear that marriage has been created via intercourse by living together ( kiddushei bi'ah ), based upon the Talmudic presumption that a man does not engage in sexual relations promiscuously (the hazakah of " ein adam oseh be'ilato be'ilat zenut ")? 48 Gittin 81b; Ketuvot 72b, 74a; Yevamot 110a. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.63",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 63",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
First, there is the view represented by Rabbi Yosef Rozanne and Rabbi Yosef Henkin that even if the parties did not intend to marry according to the prescribed form of kiddushin , nonetheless the above presumption applies equally to non-observant couples who engage in an exclusive conjugal relationship. 49 Teshuvot Tzofnat Paneah , (Dvinsk) 1–4; Perushei Ivra 1:4. Though numerous decisors reject this posture, authorities such as Rabbi Moshe Feinstein factor this minority view into consideration and mandate a Jewish writ of divorce as a stringency (a get le'humra ) due to the presumption of the woman being a married woman ( eishet ish ). 50 Iggerot Moshe EH 2:19. Clearly, in a case of igun , we should not invoke a writ of Jewish divorce for stringency if there is basis to free a woman without a get. See Teshuvot Nediv Lev EH 25; Teshuvot Moshe ha-Ish EH 6 in the name of Ma'sat Binyamin. Clearly, in our case, we are dealing with a couple who wanted to, and did, live together for years in an exclusive conjugal relationship and the above-named two rabbis would have viewed them as halakhically married based upon this presumption. As such, a get would have been mandated. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.64",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 64",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
An additional reason for mandating a get is that if a wife is released from matrimonial bonds without a get, we are concerned that the community will say she is leaving a marriage without a get . 51 Teshuvot Beit ha-Levi 4; Teshuvot Ahiezer 1, EH 27; Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak 1, EH 24. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.65",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 65",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Finally, even though at Mount Sinai, Jews were obligated to perform certain halakhot dealing with kiddushin , nonetheless, they still remained dutybound by the halakhot of marriage 52 In other words, the marital relationship between non-Jews is identified as a marriage (the undertaking of mutual duties and trust) rather than kiddushin with all its attendant halakhot . See Talmud Yerushalmi, Kiddushin 1:1; Rashi, Sanhedrin 52b, s.v. le'eshet aherim . and divorce (albeit different halakhot 53 Ridvaz , infra n. 54; Lev Shomeia le-Shlomo 1:11. ) mandated to the non-Jewish community. 54 MT, Melakhim 9:8; Ridvaz , ad locum; Yad Ramah , Sanhedrin 52b. See further Teshuvot Tzofnat Paneach, Warsaw collection, 26–27; Teshuvot Tzofnat Paneah , Dvinsk collection, 1–4; Perushei Ivrei 1:4; Lev Ibra 3; File no. 4276/03, Beit Din ha-Rabbani ha-Gadol, November 11, 2003 (Rabbi Daichovsky's opinion). | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.66",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 66",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Without addressing the halakhic history of this marriage in general and the improper kiddushin in particular, the common denominator of these three reasons for mandating a get is, in effect, that living together within the context of an exclusive conjugal relationship is to be construed either as a recognition of the establishment of kiddushei via intercourse or a marriage as mandated by Halakhah to the non-Jewish community ( bnei Noah ). | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.67",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 67",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As we will show, this posture reflects the opinions of a minority of decisors ( me'ut ha-Poskim ), and protects the institution of the Jewish family. Consequently, it is unsurprising to encounter the following posture of Rabbi Aharon Walkin, an early twentieth century arbiter. A sine qua non to create the act of kiddushin ( ma'aseh kiddushin ) is the presence of two adult Jewish males who are Torah observant, not blood relatives to either the groom or the bride, who witness the man's recitation of the kiddushin formula, " harei at mekudeshet . . .," observe the man transferring the ring to the woman and observe her acceptance of the ring. 55 SA, EH 42:2, 5. Addressing the case of an agunah who requests that her marriage be voided due to the fact that both witnesses during the kiddushin were disqualified since they violated the Shabbat and committed other sins, Rabbi Walkin, who resided in Pinsk-Karlin, Ukraine, responds to such a petition in the most trenchant terms: 56 Teshuvot Zekan Aharon 1:81. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.68",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 68",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
It is improper in my eyes to adopt this path, to criticize the act of kiddushin eight years after the wedding . . . you must understand that such advice can destroy the purity of Israel . . . to multiply halakhic bastards in the midst of a holy nation, as the marital bond from now will not be sustained . . . And the stringency of being married will be nullified. . . . Therefore, eight years after the wedding . . . we should not inquire for guidance to void the marriage. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.69",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 69",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Both Rabbi Walkin's opposition to voiding a marriage as well as the above legists who would obligate a get in circumstances that there is exclusive conjugal relationship in lieu of a proper kiddushin under the hupah are concerned about the stringency of a married woman and "the purity of Israel." | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.70",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 70",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Even though many decisors claim that traditionally, all strict views must be considered in matters concerning forbidden sexual relations, 57 Helkat Mehokeik, SA EH 17:31; Bi'ur ha-Gra, SA EH 17:61; Mahatzit ha-Shekel, SA EH 17:56; Teshuvot Kedushat Yom Tov 9 in the name of Rabbi Yom Tov Algazi; Arukh ha-Shulhan, EH 42:2; Teshuvot Sha'arei Rahamim Franco, EH 19; Teshuvot Pnei Yitzhak 1:10, 13. Cf. Taz, SA EH 17:15. nevertheless, in a matter of a husband's get recalcitrance, many hold that the lenient view ought to be adopted. 58 Teshuvot ha-Rosh 51:2, Teshuvot Zikhron Yehudah 92; Teshuvot Maharik, shoresh 121; Teshuvot Betzalel Ashkenazi 32; Teshuvot ha-Mabit 1:135; Teshuvot Ma'sat Binyamin 109; Teshuvot Tzemah Tzedek EH 103; Teshuvot Noda be-Yehudah EH Mahadura Kama 29, 57; Teshuvot Simhat Yom Tov 12; Teshuvot Hayyim ve-Shalom 2:110; Teshuvot Yabia Omer 8, EH 8 (19). Given that in our circumstances we are dealing with a woman who has been an agunah for over seven years, we have adopted the lenient approach, and will address the reasons for rejecting the validation of the couple's marriage based upon consummation of kiddushin via intercourse and the marital obligations of the non-Jewish community. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.71",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 71",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Regarding applying the laws of marriage of non-Jews to Jews, most authorities reject this posture. 59 Teshuvot Dvar Avraham 3:29; Teshuvot Helkat Ya'akov EH 74; Teshuvot Yabia Omer 8, EH 10. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.72",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 72",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Concerning the argument that kiddushin via intercourse should be effective, as Rabbi Uzziel aptly notes, if a groom assumes that the kiddushin was executed properly and he was unaware that there was an impropriety (such as ineligible witnesses or the use of a stolen kiddushin ring), why would he have intercourse for the sake of kiddushin when his intercourse is reliant upon the fact that the first kiddushin were valid! 60 Teshuvot Mishpetei Uzziel EH 57. See Ketuvot 73a (a man knows that kiddushin is ineffective with an item valued less than a perutah and had intercourse for the sake of kiddushin ). In other words, he was betrothed to her on the understanding that the first kiddushin under the marital canopy was effective rather than consummating the betrothal via intercourse. See Teshuvot ha-Rivash 5–6; Rema SA EH 26:1; Bi'ur ha-Gra, SA EH 26:9; Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak 2, EH 64; Iggerot Moshe EH 1:76, 5:11; Teshuvot Yabia Omer 8, EH 6, 10 EH 15. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.73",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 73",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
A similar line of reasoning is advanced by Rabbi Shalom Schwadron: 61 Teshuvot Maharsham 2:111. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.74",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 74",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
If we would be concerned that they lived together like husband and wife publicly, known by the world, it is similar to Rivash's dealing with marriage effected in civil court that fail to follow the religion of Moshe and Israel, that one is unconcerned that they lived together for a few years, as this was done with the intent of relying upon the first marriage (i.e. civil court – AYW) rather than for the sake of additional kiddushin . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.75",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 75",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Finally, the application of this principle based on the presumption that a man does not engage in sexual relations promiscuously is inapplicable in recent generations, since we do not establish a halakhic marriage via intercourse. As Sha'agat Aryeh observes: 62 Teshuvot Beit Ephraim EH 42 in the name of Sha'agat Aryeh. See also, Teshuvot Terumat ha-Deshen 209; Teshuvot Hatam Sofer EH 2:58; Teshuvot Beit Yitzhak EH 29 in the name of Rabbi Kutnah; Teshuvot Maharsham 1:29; Teshuvot Rav Pe'alim 3:3; Teshuvot Yabia Omer 6 , EH 1; Teshuvot Shema Shlomo 4, EH 2 (2). | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.76",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 76",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
It seems to me that the logic is that the presumption that a man does not engage in sexual relations promiscuously, and for the purpose of kiddushin he engaged in intercourse, applies only to the early generations, that they were accustomed sometimes to marry via intercourse, which was impossible without witnesses who attested to the seclusion of the couple, and this halakhah was clear and known by all. However, in our times and in these countries, there is no practice to marry through intercourse and this halakhah is only known by Torah scholars who are proficient in the halakhot of kiddushin . In contrast, this particular man, one can expect to find that he does not know and is not versed in hilkhot (Jewish laws – AYW) kiddushin that we would say that he had intercourse for the purpose of kiddushin and witnesses to the seclusion are not proficient at all. Would that, I wish that the majority of the arbiters in our times knew hilkhot kiddushin . . . . Therefore, in our case we do not fear that kiddushin transpired. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.77",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 77",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
We will conclude with the words of Rabbi Yitzhak Taib: 63 Erekh ha-Shulhan EH 34:10. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.78",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 78",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
There is nobody who believes that the kiddushin are proper when a man engages in intercourse for the sake of kiddushin except for the Rashbatz (3:47), and he stands in opposition to the Talmud and the authorities. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.79",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 79",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
A fortiori in our present case, where the couple clearly did not know of the concept of establishing kiddushin via intercourse, that we cannot say that their intent in living together was for the sake of kiddushin . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.80",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 80",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As we mentioned, the validity of the kiddushin with either a borrowed ring or a conditional gift is a subject of debate among the authorities, and this beit din panel arrived at the conclusion that construing the kiddushin ring as a conditional gift or as borrowed is halakhically ineffective, and therefore the kiddushin of the couple is void. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.81",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 81",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Alternatively, there are grounds to void the marriage based upon invoking a double doubt as to what the Halakhah ought to be ( sefek sefeika de'dina ) in a biblical prohibition including a matter of personal status ( ishut ). Based upon the foregoing, various doubts have emerged regarding the act of kiddushin . The first uncertainty is if a borrowed ring may be used to establish the kiddushin, and as we have demonstrated, this is subject to halakhic debate. The second doubt is whether one can use a ring for kiddushin which is a conditional gift, and as we have shown, this is equally a matter of halakhic controversy. When the creation of the kiddushin is viewed as a doubtful marriage, there are numerous early authorities as well as other decisors who argue that we reinstate the original presumption of the wife, namely that she has the presumption ( hazakah ) of being a single woman, and she is permitted to remarry without a get . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.82",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 82",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As such, we are dealing with a series of halakhic doubts ( sefeik sefeika de'dina ). As we know, if there exists a double halakhic doubt in regard to an act of kiddushin , we may permit her to remarry without a get in a case of a husband's get recalcitrance. 64 Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak, 1 EH 24 (48) (release from a levirate marriage- halitzah ); Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak 1, EH 22 (18), 62; Teshuvot ha-Ranah 1:68; Teshuvot Pnei Moshe 2:51; Teshuvot Hikrei Lev 1, YD 130, EH 59; Teshuvot Maharashdam EH 33; Teshuvot Maharbil 21, 33, 48, 62, 64; Teshuvot Ba'ei Hayyai, YD 216; Teshuvot Maharash 5, 8, 35, 48; Teshuvot Perah Shushan EH 3:2; Teshuvot Sha'ar Asher , EH 1:29, 31; Get Pashut Gittin 129:13; Teshuvot Rabbi Akiva Eiger , Pesakim 37, Mahadura Tinyana 45; Teshuvot Beit Shlomo EH 37; Teshuvot Shem Aryeh EH 111; Kereti u-Peleti , YD 110; Pri Hadash , YD 110:5, 16; Teshuvot Yismah Lev 12; M. Yerushalamski, Teshuvot Minhat Moshe EH 11; Knesset ha-Gedolah, EH 65, ha-Gahot Tur 22–23 in the name of a dozen decisors; M. Yerushalamski, Teshuvot Be'er Moshe , Kuntres Binyan Yerushalyim 18; Teshuvot Nediv Lev EH 8; A. Makovsky, Teshuvot Ohalei Aharon 1:19; Teshuvot Ahiezer 3:19 (release from levirate marriage- halitzah ); Teshuvot Rav Pealim EH 3:11 (end); Teshuvot Yabia Omer 3 EH 18, 6 EH 3 (8), 6, 8; Teshuvot Shema Shlomo 1, EH 6; S. Messas, "A doubt in coercion of a Get ," (Hebrew) 23 Tehumin 120, 123–124 (5763); Teshuvot Minhat Osher 1:73; PDR 21:10; File no. 1126792/1, Netanya Regional Beit Din, 11 Tishrei 5778; Teshuvot ha-Rishon le-Tzion 2:8 For additional authorities who endorse this posture, see numerous responsa, Ashkenazic and Sephardic alike cited in Sefer Rav Berakhot , 126; Mishpat ha-Get , vol. 3, 495–499; Teshuvot Yabia Omer 1, EH 3 (14), 6, EH 3 (9, 14–15), 6 (5) and this writer's Rabbinic Authority , vol. 4, 159, n. 47. See the addendum. For the halakhic underpinnings of invoking a double halakhic doubt to void a marriage, see supra chapter 2. In the wake of these various doubts regarding the efficacy of the kiddushin , lest one contend the fact that they lived numerous years together as husband and wife should be sufficient justification that the act of kiddushin was established by intercourse ( bi'ah ); concerned with the promotion of licentiousness, most arbiters disagree. See Darkhei Moshe, Tur EH 31:2–3 in the name of Mordekhai; Teshuvot Maharam Mintz 49; Rema, SA EH 31:9; Teshuvot Binyamin Ze'ev 30; Teshuvot Maharsham 1:29. For another rationale for invalidating intercourse as a vehicle to establish kiddushin, see also supra text accompanying n. 62. Cf. Teshuvot Rashi, Elfenbein ed., 198; File no. 94289/8, Be'air Sheva Regional Beit Din, February 3, 2011. Cf. the position of those few authorities ( me'ut haposkim ) such as Rabbi S. Steinberg, Ohr ha-Ner , end of Tractate Gittin in the name of Hazon Ish, Rabbi Y. Rozanne, Teshuvot Tzofnat Paneach 1:1–4 (Dvinsk ed.) and Tzofnat Paneach, 26–27 (Warsaw ed.), Rabbi Y. Henkin, Perushei Ibra 1:4, Rabbi M. Ratta, Teshuvot Kol Mevaser 1:7, 2:18 and Rabbi A. Walkin, Teshuvot Zekan Aharon 2:10 who mandate the execution of a get due to stringent considerations (a get le-humra ) in a situation of a civil marriage where the parties are establishing ties of conjugal exclusivity with each other for the purpose of establishing a family (rather than a relationship of philandering – zenut ), albeit in variance with halakhic requirements would agree in our case dealing with a halakhically improper kiddushin that a get ought to be given. In fact, addressing the case of a common law marriage where the parties agree between themselves to be married, present themselves to the community as husband and wife and live together for a significant period of time, concludes Rabbi A. Sherman should the relationship be terminated, a get as a stringency ought to be executed. The rationale for his judgment is based upon the need to execute such a get should a civil marriage be dissolved. See File no. 448866/3, Tel Aviv-Yaffo Rabbinical Court, ha-Din ve-ha-Dayan 35, February 2014; Teshuvot Kol Mevasair 2:18 and many other Israeli Rabbinical Court rulings. (A special get ought to be required in such a situation. See Tzofnat Paneach 1:1–4) In other words, in his mind there should be no difference between a common law marriage and a civil marriage in so far as the seriousness of the couple's engagement in conjugal ties exclusively with each other. As such, in the wake of dissolution of the common law marriage, a get for stringent reasons ought to be executed. See File no. 7247/67, Beit Din ha-Rabbani ha-Gadol, 16 Shurat ha-Din 89 (Rabbi A. Sherman's opinion). As such, the woman has the halakhic status of a divorcee (a gerusha ) and therefore she is prohibited to marry a kohen . See Rema SA EH 6:1; Taz, SA EH 6:2. (Adopting such a posture of a get being given for stringent reasons regarding a common law marriage and civil marriage is problematic in light of the numerous decisors who argue that dissolution of a common law marriage does not require of the man to give a get to his partner. See MT , Gerushin 10:19; Teshuvot ha-Rosh 32:1; SA EH 26:1, 149:5; Teshuvot Terumat ha-Deshen 209; Helkat Mehokeik, SA EH 13:6; Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak EH 47; Teshuvot Avnei Nezer EH 121–122; Teshuvot Heikhal Yitzhak EH 2:33; Rabbi G. Felder, Nahalat Tzvi 2:293–294.) Consequently, such a posture ought to be equally adopted in our case where we are dealing with a couple who chose to engage in conjugal ties exclusively with each other and were interested in establishing a Jewish family rather than unintentionally opting out of matrimonial ties grounded in executing an act of kiddushin . See MT , Ishut 1:1–2. In the wake of the absence of eligible witnesses under the wedding canopy, argues Rabbi Osher Weiss that the kiddushin may be validated based upon the notion that "the admission of the litigant of his own liability ( ho'do'at ba'al din ) has the power of one hundred witnesses", a concept applicable to a matter of personal status. See Kiddushin 65b. Namely, the acknowledgment by the husband that in fact the kiddushin transpired. See Minhat Osher, Bereshit 101, Yerushalayim, Sivan 5779. Rabbi Weiss's approach requires further deliberation. In short, based upon the foregoing view, despite the fact that in our case the kiddushin was invalid due to the absence of eligible witnesses, nevertheless, they will be considered married in the eyes of some decisors . Said conclusion would be equally applicable in a case where a couple married in accordance to Halakhah , divorced and subsequently decided to rent an apartment and lived together. Should such a couple ever separate, a get for stringency would be mandated. See File no. 1042070/1, Tel Aviv- Yaffo Regional Beit Din, May 8, 2017 in the name of Rashba and Ohr Sameah. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.83",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 83",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Therefore, the plaintiff is permitted to remarry any Jew, including a Kohen . In short, in the wake of a get recalcitrant husband, we deem the matter as "an hour of emergency" ( sh'at ha-dehak ) and a priori ( le-hatehillah ) we can void the marriage based upon a double halakhic doubt. 65 See Sedei Hemed , Ma'arkekhet Get 30(6) and ha-Sameah 30(3) in the name of Rashba and Ridvaz. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_c)_The_wedding_ring;_A_borrowed_ring_or_a_gift_on_the_condition_to_return_it?.84",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), c) The wedding ring; A borrowed ring or a gift on the condition to return it? 84",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
D. A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (" onah ") | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").1",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 1",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Facts | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").2",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 2",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In April 2010, Sara Cohen (the plaintiff) and Avraham Cohen (hereinafter: the defendant) were married in accordance with Halakhah . During the course of their marriage, a son was born. The couple separated in the summer of 2014. We summoned the defendant to appear at the Beit Din in order to address the matter of the get . However, he refused to appear for a hearing. In July 2017, we ordered the defendant to give the plaintiff a get . To this day, he refuses to do so. The issues of maintenance and custody of the child have not yet been resolved, nor has there been a civil divorce. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").3",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 3",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Let us discuss whether there are grounds for releasing the plaintiff from the chains of a husband's get recalcitrance ( igun ) by invalidating the kiddushin (loosely translated: the marriage). | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").4",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 4",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Discussion | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").5",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 5",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
One of the reasons that the plaintiff left her husband was the absence of "intimacy" between the couple during the act of intercourse. The plaintiff claims that when the defendant had intercourse with her, he refrained from talking to her or from demonstrating any affection such as embracing or kissing (in halakhic parlance such conduct is known as " kiruv basar "). In the eyes of the husband, the duty (the mitzvah ) of marital relations (" onah ") was fulfilled by the physical act alone. The defendant had intercourse with the plaintiff once or twice a month. Outside of the bedroom, the defendant almost never embraced or kissed his spouse. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").6",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 6",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
One of the halakhic obligations of a husband towards his wife is the wife's right to conjugal relations. 1 Shemot 21:10. Although the source of the husband's obligation is in the duty of intimate relations, Rashba opines: 2 Hiddushei ha-Rashba, Nedarim 15b, s.v. ve-amar rav kahana . See also, Teshuvot Beit Yitzhak, EH 1:32 in the name of Rosh, File no. 113995/3, Be'air Sheva Regional Beit Din, January 4, 2018. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").7",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 7",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
It would appear that it is not merely a matter of performing a religious duty ( mitzvah -AYW); there is also an element of mutual commitment to sexual gratification, which is implicit in their agreement to marry. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").8",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 8",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In other words, in addition to this obligation, the husband has a commitment vis-à-vis his wife, as pointed out: "The sexual aspect of marriage goes to its essence and therefore the obligation is a very strict one." 3 Shitah Mekubetzet , Ketuvot 63a, s.v. beshlamah . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").9",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 9",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The scope of the obligation to engage in marital relations varies in accordance with the husband's physical ability and the requirements of his daily work. 4 SA EH 76:1–2; Beit Shmuel , ad locum 5. In view of this defendant's occupation, his obligation is to have intercourse with his wife twice a week, provided his wife is not a menstruant. 5 SA EH 76:2. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").10",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 10",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As Talmud states: 6 Ketuvot 48a. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").11",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 11",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
A husband who said: I will not (perform conjugal relations) unless she wears her clothes and I mine, must divorce her and also give her her ketubah . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").12",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 12",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Subsequently, this ruling is crystallized in Shulhan Arukh, 7 SA EH 76:13. accompanied by the identical Talmudic mandate by Rema for the wife, that she cannot say I am unable to have intercourse unless I wear clothes and he wears clothes. 8 Rema SA EH 76:13. For the wife's duty to engage in conjugal relations accompanied by caressing and kissing, see Teshuvot Meishiv Davar 4:76. Such behavior will equally result in her being divorced without receiving the value of her ketubah . 9 Ibid. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").13",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 13",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As Ritva teaches us, such conduct demonstrates the absence of love, and as other decisors note, such behavior engenders pain for either spouse and/or is deemed to be rebellious (a moreid / moreidet ) due to such inappropriate conduct. 10 Hiddushei ha-Ritva, Ketuvot 48a; Teshuvot ha-Rashba ha-Hadashot 176; Bah, Tur EH 76; Helkat Mehokeik, SA EH 76:20; Beit Shmuel , ad locum, 19; Hazon Ish Ketuvot 69:20; Piskei Halakhot Yad Dovid, Ishut 14:26. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").14",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 14",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In the present case, the defendant would have intercourse with his wife twice a month, and even then, it was unsatisfactory. In other words, plaintiff's description of the defendant's behavior during intercourse was that even when she was aroused and there was penetration, it would end extremely quickly. To state it differently, on the one hand, there was an actual act of intercourse and not only first stage coitus (insertion of the corona of the male organ into the vagina). It is well-known that this duty cannot be fulfilled by first-stage coitus alone 11 Sha'ar ha-Melekh , Issurei Bi'ah chap. 3; Teshuvot Maharsham 5:48. and in the present case, the defendant completed the act of intercourse with the first stage of coitus, but on the other hand, after penetration, the act of intercourse was over very abruptly. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").15",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 15",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Rabbi David ibn Zimra (known by the acronym: Ridvaz) provides an apt description of a situation, similar to ours: 12 Teshuvot ha-Ridvaz 4:118. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").16",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 16",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
It makes sense to argue that since the husband is not fulfilling the duty, he is obliged to divorce her and pay her (the value of – AYW) her ketubah . This applies even when the wife's claim is that there is erection and penetration, but immediately upon penetration the erection fails and the organ becomes flaccid: she is believed, according to this opinion. The reason is that if she is lying, then her husband will immediately refute her, and the rule is that in relation to an immediately-refutable claim, a person is not suspected of lying. Now, it is arguable that she should not be believed because she is not under any obligation to procreate. This argument, however, is incorrect, since a woman is entitled to request "a staff [a child] to lean upon in her old age and someone to use a spade to dig a grave." In any case, even if there is no such duty, she would still be believed because the husband is in breach of this obligation, and therefore her pain is especially great. Even though, in halakhic terms, penetration is treated as intercourse in many areas of Halakhah , it is not sufficient for the purpose of fulfilling the duty . . . because it is entirely lacking in affection. Therefore, even if penetration is considered to be intercourse for the purpose of fulfilling the duty, in this case, the element of affection in performing conjugal relations is absent. . . . The woman in this case is not claiming that her husband is impotent, but merely that she is unable to enjoy intercourse as it is normally thought of with her husband, and this is the gravity of her claim. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").17",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 17",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As ruled by an Israeli rabbinical court, such conduct exhibited on the part of a husband towards his wife constitutes grounds for divorce. The Beit Din states: 13 PDR 12:96, 100–101. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").18",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 18",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
When he was aroused there was penetration, but it would be over abruptly, and clearly this cannot be called "impotence." (It is indeed possible that in cases in which "it is over abruptly" and she has no sexual gratification, there is a ground to obligate him to give a get , as appears in Tosafot Yevamot 65a, s.v. she'beino: "Because she derives little pleasure from intercourse, similar to the case of a man who does not ejaculate with sufficient force," and further investigation is required. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").19",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 19",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In short, fulfillment of the duty of engaging in intimate relations is not limited to the act of intercourse, but it includes the sufficient duration of the act in order that a wife derives sexual gratification. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").20",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 20",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The Talmud and the early authorities ( Rishonim ) note the importance of sexual gratification. For example, Rashi writes as follows: 14 Ketuvot 61b. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").21",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 21",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Mishnah: One who takes a vow prohibiting his wife to have marital relations – for example, he said that he would be forbidden to enjoy the marital relations with her [he is within his rights], but she was not forbidden to enjoy the marital relations with him [as this is not within his rights], for he is committed to her as is written, "He shall not withhold her sexual intercourse" . . . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").22",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 22",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The early legists by and large agree with Rashi, and in our context, Rashba's words are instructive: 15 Hiddushei ha-Rashba , Nedarim 15b. Cf. MT, Nedarim 12:9 who argues that a husband's commitment ( shi'abud ) is derived from the Biblical commandment to engage in conjugal relations and the wife's commitment to engage in intimacy is based upon the essence of marriage. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").23",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 23",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
And the same applies to one who says to his wife: I take an oath that you will derive no sexual pleasure from me, namely, we force him to engage in full sexual intercourse with her, since he is duty-bound to provide her with sexual gratification, and this oath is in effect depriving her of that which is legally hers. The point is not only that the mitzvah is not being fulfilled, but that he is in breach of a mutually-undertaken obligation at the time of marriage. In this light it is clear that the objection raised by the Talmud is not framed in terms of the duty of intimacy, in the same fashion that if a man takes an oath not to have any benefit from a tabernacle (a sukkah ), the oath is critiqued on the grounds that residing in a tabernacle entails the performance of a duty, and the rule is that commandments are not defined according to one's enjoyment of them. In this case, however, the commandment itself is not as relevant as the mutual commitment to sexual gratification. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").24",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 24",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In other words, a woman gets married with the intention of finding sexual gratification. The commandment and mutual commitment are not limited to the technical aspect of marital relations, but include the duty to induce the wife's pleasure from their relationship of intimacy. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").25",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 25",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Implicitly relying upon earlier authorities, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein states: 16 Iggerot Moshe , EH 4:66. For earlier decisors, see Teshuvot ha-Rosh 42:1; Teshuvot ha-Rivash 127; Beit Shmuel SA EH 154:9; Teshuvot Maharit 1:113. "Expressions of affection such as embracing and kissing are also part of the obligation of sexual intercourse." In the wake of the absence of proper conjugal relations, in the mind of Rabbi Feinstein, the Talmudic presumption,"it is better off to be married to anyone rather than be single" ( tav le-metav tan du me-le-meitav armelu ), which sometimes appears in decisors' writings as "she is satisfied with anyone" ( niha lah be-khol de-hu ) is inapplicable. 17 Iggerot Moshe EH 1:79, 3:48, 4:52, 113. For the interchangeability of these two formulations, see Teshuvot Beit ha-Levi 3:3; Teshuvot Tzitz Eliezer 15:34. For other arbiters who concur that the presumption is applicable only when intimacy is possible or where there exists kissing and embracing between the couple, see Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak EH 1:24 (31, 34); Teshuvot Shevut Ya'akov 1:101. Whether the presumption is applicable in a situation where it is prohibited to live intimately with a married man (e.g. living with an apostate Jew) is subject to controversy. See Teshuvot Maharam of Rothenberg , Prague edition, 1022, Bloch edition, 4:564; Teshuvot Yakhin u-Boaz 1:179; Teshuvot Be'air Yitzhak EH 3; Teshuvot ha-Re'em 68; Teshuvot Heikhal Yitzhak EH 2:20, Teshuvot Ahiezer 1, EH 27; Iggerot Moshe, EH 1:79, 3:48, and Teshuvot Radakh , Bayit 9, Heder 6, 11. However, should the wife be lax in Torah observance, the presumption may be applicable to a husband who became an apostate. See Teshuvot Helkat Ya'akov EH 85; Teshuvot Minhat Yitzhak 7:122; Teshuvot Iggerot Moshe EH 4:83 | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").26",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 26",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Rabbi Ya'akov Yisrael Kanievsky (known as "the Steipler") elucidates: 18 Iggeret ha-Kodesh 3:2, Bnei Brak, 5746. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").27",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 27",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
If the husband performs the duty [of onah ] abruptly without intimate contact with his wife, if he withdraws just as soon as the act is over and keeps his distance from her, he may think that he has thereby ascended to a high [spiritual] level. . . . His wife has experienced no pleasure at all. On the contrary, she is distressed and humiliated. . . . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").28",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 28",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Rabbi Yitzhak Shor, head of the Slobodka Yeshiva in Lithuania, teaches us in a similar vein: 19 Kedushat Yisrael , 23. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").29",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 29",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
It is forbidden for the husband to withdraw from his wife in the middle of sexual intercourse, since this causes her great distress and constitutes a great torment. The talmudic rule in relation to a woman who is subject to coercive sexual relations is that initially the intercourse is unwanted, however, by the end, it is desirable. Nevertheless, the entire act is considered coercive, since it was forced upon her, and it is her nature that makes it ultimately desirable. How much more does this apply where the intercourse begins voluntarily, but her husband ceases abruptly and causes her distress after having brought her to a state of arousal? Clearly, had she known at the outset that this would be the result; she would never have consented to the intercourse in the first place. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").30",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 30",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In a somewhat different context, Rabbi Kolitz notes: | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").31",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 31",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
"Even if he is erect, but he finishes abruptly, this does not constitute the fulfillment of the duty of conjugal relations; on the contrary, she is more distressed." 20 PDR 12:103, 115–116. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").32",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 32",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As opposed to those who think that such a husband is acting with piety, Ra'avad writes that ascetic conduct by the husband requires the consent of the wife. 21 Ba'alei Nefesh, Sha'ar Kedushah. In the present case, it is clear that the defendant did not receive the plaintiff's consent to withhold his affection from her. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").33",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 33",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Rabbi Yehezkel Abramsky observes that "the whole essence of marriage is for the purpose of marital relations," and "all are aware why a bride is getting married:" 22 Hazon Yehezkel on Tractate Zevahim and Likkutim on the Talmud EH 8, 278. Similarly, others argues that the performance of conjugal relations is the primary purpose of marriage. See Hiddushei ha-Ramban, Bava Batra 126b, s.v. harei zu mekudeshet ; Shitah Mekubetzet, Ketuvot 70a in the name of Ra'ah; Bnei Ahuvah, Ishut 17:2. As noted by various arbiters, the performance of the duty of intimacy is grounded in halakhic logic ( sevara ). See Birkat ha-Netziv, Mekhilta de R. Yishmael 3 ed. Horowitz- Rabin, 258–259; Teshuvot Shevet ha-Levi 5: Kuntres ha-Mitzvot, 23. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").34",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 34",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
"All are aware" and nobody needs to explain (Rashi, Shabbat 33a), and a marriage that is devoid of marital relations is undoubtedly a mistaken marriage, since she did give herself over to marriage with this in mind. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").35",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 35",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In the present case, fulfillment of this duty was not realized and she had no sexual gratification, but he also caused his wife distress due to his limited involvement both in terms of frequency and in terms of the scope of his performance in the duty of intimate relations. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").36",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 36",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The significance of this determination is that suppression of sexual desire after it is aroused entails suffering for the person whose desire is suppressed. It is true that the modes of sexual arousal and their expression differ between men and women and differ between one woman and another one, but it is clear that when either a man or a woman is at the stage following physical contact and desire has already been aroused, termination of the act and suppression of the desire by the one partner constitute suffering for the other partner. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").37",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 37",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The question arises as to whether engaging in the act of intercourse in the absence of affection in the bedroom, as in the present case, is a consideration in determining the Halakhah . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").38",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 38",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
We will cite two responsa in order to demonstrate the halakhic importance of demonstrating affection in performing this obligation. One example is found in a ruling of Rabbi Ya'akov Reischer, a renowned 18th century legist , whereby it was known that the husband was impotent prior to the kiddushin but the wife had no knowledge of this fact, and she claimed that her kiddushin were invalid due to being a mistaken kiddushin . 23 For an analysis of this technique to void a marriage, see further this writer's Rabbinic Authority , vol. 3, 134–157, 294–327, vol. 4, 176–298. According to Rabbi Reischer, she is not to be released without a get . The reason for this conclusion, according to the respondent, is that "although he is not capable of having intercourse, nevertheless she is satisfied with physical contact and embracing and kissing, and ‘a woman prefers one kav of food and physical intimacy". 24 Teshuvot Shevut Ya'akov 1:101. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").39",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 39",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Rabbi Reischer cites the Talmudic maxim that "a woman is satisfied with a small measure," which is an expression equivalent to the maxim that "it is better to live as two together than to be alone." 25 Yevamot 118b; Ketuvot 75a; Kiddushin 7a, 41a; Bava Kama 110b–111a. See supra n. 17. In other words, although there is no possibility of bringing children into the world due to the husband's impotence, the wife wishes to stay with her husband on condition that the normal trappings of intimacy are maintained, i.e. "physical contact and embracing and kissing." Therefore, in his opinion, there are no grounds for accepting the wife's claim and for voiding the kiddushin . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").40",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 40",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The following incident occurred in the twentieth century. These are the facts, as described by Rabbi Yitzhak Weiss: 26 Teshuvot Minhat Yitzhak 7:122. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").41",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 41",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
A man married a woman in accordance with the Halakhah. Several months later, the woman turned to the beit din and claimed that her husband was impotent and that she could not and did not wish to live with him any longer. After she was examined by a doctor, and it was discovered that she was still a virgin and had never had sexual intercourse, she received a civil divorce . . . the judgment stated that the marriage was voided . . . She subsequently asked her husband for a get . The son's parents convinced him not to give her a get unless she gave him three hundred pounds sterling. The woman was poor and could not agree to this. They separated and the woman married another man in a civil ceremony . . . she had two boys and a girl with him. The woman has now come to the beit din . . . and begs us to remove the taint of mamzerut ( halakhic bastardy- AYW) from her children . . . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").42",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 42",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The woman's argument is that the kiddushin ought to be voided on grounds of mistaken transaction, since she did not know prior to the marriage that her husband was impotent. Rabbi Weiss's response was that a claim of mistaken transaction can be raised on condition that when the true situation was discovered (i.e., awareness of the husband's impotence), she was ready to leave him. However, if she complains "about the situation" but does not leave her husband after a certain time, the kiddushin are unassailable. As Rabbi Weiss states: | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").43",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 43",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In the present case, when she was in intimate contact with him for approximately four years, in the knowledge always that he was incapable of coitus, one must say that she accepted the situation, due to [the maxim] "it is better to live together . . ." | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").44",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 44",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In other words, due to the fact that there was intimacy (i.e. caressing and kissing) albeit only through "physical contact," in addition to other reasons, the respondent refused to remove the taint of halakhic bastardy ( mamzerut ) from the children. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").45",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 45",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
From the above it emerges that according to both Rabbi Reischer and Rabbi Weiss, intimacy through "physical contact" constitutes a consideration for refraining from invalidating kiddushin and removing the taint of halakhic bastardy. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").46",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 46",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Above we have seen two examples in which intimacy (i.e., physical contact) leads to the conclusion according to two authorities that the marriage is valid . 27 For a third example, see Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak 1, EH 24. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").47",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 47",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As opposed to the above, there are several decisors who contend that if there is no sexual intercourse, the presumption that "it is better to live together . . ." is overruled, and the kiddushin are invalidated. 28 Ein Yitzhak , supra n. 27 ( halitzah case); Teshuvot Beit Av , 7, 28:3; Teshuvot Yabia Omer 7, EH 7; Iggerot Moshe , EH 1:79. See supra n. 17. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").48",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 48",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
The common denominator of all the above halakhic sources is the significant weight and importance attributed towards the promotion of intimacy in marital relations. In the present case, there was virtually no intimacy. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").49",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 49",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Rabbi Kanievsky teaches us: 29 Iggeret ha-Kodesh 3:2. See also Iggeret Hatanim . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").50",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 50",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
With regard to the element of mating in the commandment of marital intercourse, we find in the Siddur Ya'avetz in the section dealing with the halakhot of Friday night – and the relevant passage ought to be read with great care – that close union between a man and wife is a halakhically binding obligation. Indeed, according to Torah law, it is forbidden to engage in sexual intercourse in such a way that the wife has no emotional gratification and therefore the husband is required to please her by the intimacy of embracing and kissing so that she is brought to a state of desire. . . . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").51",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 51",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As Rabbi Shor expounds: 30 Kedushat Yisrael , 6. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").52",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 52",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
One who performs intercourse without a significant measure of desire transgresses the prohibition against depriving one's wife of sexual gratification. Note the following in Ramban's Commentary on the Torah: "Food, raiment and sexual gratification – this [last] means physical intimacy and the raiment refers to the bed covering, and food to the arousal of passion. According to the Torah, none of these are to be withheld, etc." In other words, the food is in fact the husband's flesh: see there. Here it is made quite clear that just as it is forbidden to abstain from the sex act, it is forbidden to abstain from loving physical intimacy, for the wife desires the closeness of her husband's body, and this is above and beyond the actual act of intercourse. The husband is therefore commanded to satisfy his wife's physical yearning: see Talmud Yevamot 62 and Pesahim 72, where it explains that the term sexual intercourse ( onah ) refers to physical desire only, and this may occur even if she is not in the fertile phase of her cycle. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").53",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 53",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Hence, we see that there is a prohibition against withholding desire in general and the absence of physical contact in particular, in the intimate relations between a husband and his wife. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").54",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 54",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Moreover, Rabbi Hayyim Sofer furnishes an incisive example in our context – an example that has significant halakhic consequences. In clear and trenchant terms, Rabbi Sofer elucidates: 31 Teshuvot Mahaneh Hayyim 2, EH 41. See also the words of Bah, Tur YD 184, SA YD 184:2; Rema SA YD 184:10, Shakh , ad. locum. 27; Be'air Hetev , ad. locum. 14; Beit Shmuel, SA EH 76:18; Helkat Mehokeik, SA EH 76:20; Hazon Ish , Ketuvot 69:20; Hilkhot Yad Dovid , Ishut 14:26 and File no. 1004627/1, Tel Aviv-Yaffo Regional Beit Din, December 7, 2016 where one may infer that various types of embracing and acts of love are components of the mitzvah of intimacy ( onah ). | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").55",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 55",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In my humble opinion, in understanding the words of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Ketuvot, Perek af al pi - A.Y.W.), that the mutual commitment of a husband and wife in the mitzvah of onah lies in two matters: (a) the Torah understood human nature, that marital relations are made pleasurable by lying in close physical contact, by embracing and kissing . . . such pleasures are part of intimacy and . . . (b) the essence of intercourse . . . that each husband has an obligation to have sexual intercourse with his wife which involves actual coitus, even if she is pregnant and even if he has already fulfilled the duty of procreation, since this entails physical pleasure, and there is a duty to complete the act of intercourse in a loving fashion, in accordance with the husband's individual obligation . . . And if a person does not fulfill either of these two obligations, he is considered to be rebellious, both if he desires to have intercourse but does not wish to have intimate contact or if he wishes to be intimate through embracing and stroking but does not desire actual intercourse. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").56",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 56",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In other words, a husband who refrains from having intercourse with his wife according to the timetable set by the Sages is labeled a rebellious husband (a moreid ). A husband who refrains from providing his wife with sexual gratification, namely he neither prolongs the act of intercourse nor engages in "acts of physical contact," is labeled a rebellious spouse. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").57",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 57",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya, twentieth century authority elucidates: 32 Teshuvot Yaskil Avdi , 6, EH 106 (1). | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").58",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 58",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In this context, there is another argument concerning tormenting the person in relation to onah itself: that he lives with her but he does not live with her in the normal fashion, then . . . this is similar to the case of a husband who demands that his wife turn over immediately after intercourse so that she does not become pregnant, in relation to which the Shulhan Arukh Even ha-Ezer 76:12 that he is compelled to divorce her and to pay out her ketubah . A fortiori this ruling is applicable where she derives no satisfaction whatsoever from the intercourse . . . and she is greatly distressed by the fact that her husband does not remain lying on her stomach as he ought to and has not satisfied her thirst for intimacy. This is a clear-cut case of a sexual rebel who fails to perform the mitzvah of onah in the required manner. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").59",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 59",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As we know, a husband who is rebellious vis-à-vis his wife in matters of sexual intercourse is compelled to give her a get . Contrary to what is advanced amongst some decisors, 33 Tosafot Ketuvot 70a and Tur EH 154 in the name of Rabbeinu Hananel; Teshuvot mi-Ba'alei ha-Tosafot 75 in the name of Maharam; Rema, SA EH 154:21; Pithei Teshuvah , SA EH 154:7 citing Gevurat Anashim. many authorities decided in accordance with Shulhan Arukh that a get ought to be compelled. 34 MT Ishut 14:15; Tur EH 77, 154; Tosafot Rid, Ketuvot 63a; Piskei ha-Rosh 5:32; Teshuvot ha-Rashba 693; Hiddushei ha-Ritva, Ketuvot 63a; Teshuvot ha-Rashbash 46; Teshuvot Maharah Ohr Zarua 126; SA EH 76:1; Beit Shmuel , ad locum, 5; Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak 2, EH 72 (63). Refusing to engage in conjugal relations due to taking a vow (a neder ) is another issue which is subject to dispute as to whether a get ought to be compelled due to his rebelliousness, and that issue is beyond the scope of this decision. Such conduct means that the defendant has transgressed a negative commandment, and is rebellious in matters of cohabitation. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").60",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 60",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
As we know, when there is no possibility of compelling the get in the Diaspora, there are grounds for invoking the mechanism of "She did not give herself over to marriage with this in mind" (a clear expectation - umdana de'mukha ). 35 Teshuvot Tzal'ot ha-Bayit 6; Teshuvot Zikhron Yehonatan 1, YD 5; Teshuvot Sho'eil u-Meishiv , Mahadura Kama, 198; Teshuvot Ramatz OH 15; Teshuvot Ahiezer 27(4) in the name of Maharshal and Noda be-Yehudah. In the present context, the couple lives in the United States, and therefore it is legally impossible and consequently halakhically inappropriate to compel the get . Therefore, invoking a clear expectation is justified. The nature of the clear expectation, "She did not give herself over to marriage with this in mind" is noted by Rabbi Abramsky – "The main reason for marriage is for the purpose of cohabitation, and we know for what purpose the bride entered the wedding canopy." 36 Hazon Yehezkel , supra n. 22. For further elaboration of this point, see this writer's Rabbinic Authority , vol. 4, 228–236. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").61",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 61",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In the present case, the defendant did not fulfill his duty of intimate relations properly, "he penetrated and withdrew," i.e., he withdrew himself from her abruptly, and also had intercourse only once or twice a month. Furthermore, he refrained from fulfilling the second aspect of the obligation, namely, the intimacy of "embracing and kissing until she desires to be joined". | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").62",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 62",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In other words, the failure of the defendant to fulfill the duty appropriately is equivalent to a husband who stipulates that the kiddushin is conditional upon being exempt from the duty of conjugal relations, which constitutes making a condition, and such a condition which undermines Halakhah is void. 37 Rashi , Kiddushin 19b; Hiddushei ha-Ritva, Kiddushin 19b; Hiddushei Ramban, Bava Batra 126b; Shitah Mekubetzet, Ketuvot 56a in the name of Rashba; Tosafot Ketuvot 56a-b in the name of Rabbi Elhanan; MT , Ishut 6:10, 12:7; SA EH 38, 5, 69:6; Bi'ur ha-Gra , SA EH 93:6. Numerous decisors mandate that a condition must comply with the halakhoth of conditions ( mishpetei ha-tena'im ) in matters of marriage and divorce due to the fact that we are dealing with a matter of prohibition (i.e. the prohibition of being a married woman). See Teshuvot ha-Rif 31; Rashbam, Bava Batra 137b, s.v. ve'im lav; Tosafot Kiddushin 49b, s.v. devarim she'belev ; Mordekhai, Succah 758; Teshuvot Ein Yitzhak 2, EH 37(4). Nevertheless, in certain circumstances Halakhah will validate an implied condition. See Tosafot Ketuvot 97a, s.v. zavin; Tosafot Gittin 75a, s.v. le'afukei; Teshuvot Iggerot Moshe EH 4:121(end); B. Lifshitz, Promise: Obligation and Acquisition in Jewish Law (Hebrew), Jerusalem: 1988, 138, n. 106. In other words, despite the fact that we are dealing with the prohibition of "a married woman", nonetheless, in accordance to Rabbi Rozin we may invoke here, the mechanism of the clear expectation and void the marriage based upon an implied condition (rather than an explicit condition formulated in pursuance with the halakho t of conditions) of marriage. On the other hand, voiding a marriage based upon "an error in the marriage"( kiddushei ta'ut ) is grounded upon the notion that Halakhah mandates a meeting of the minds( gemirat da'at ) which is consummated with the act of kiddushin which is executed by an act of undertaking an obligation (a kinyan ). See Teshuvot Beit ha-Levi 3:3; Hazon Ish EH 56 (9); Teshuvot Helkat Yoav EH 25; Rabbi Shimon Shkop, Shiurei Roshei Yeshivot Lita , page 90; Rabbi Y. Abramsky, Dinei Mamonot , Bnei Brak, 5729.The emergence of an error in the kiddushin due to the husband's failure to disclose a major flaw to his prospective wife prior to the marriage effectively prevents "a meeting of the minds". See Hazon Ish, EH 56:9, 77:6. For a contemporary adoption of this approach and the application of the concept of a sale in error to "an error in marriage" see Moreshet Moshe , Bava Metzia 60:4 and Teshuvot Beriti Shalom 5:15. Cf. Rabbi Akiva Eiger who contends that a sale in error ( mekah ta'ut ) is grounded in the violation of a condition ( tenai ) rather than intrinsically linked to the performance of undertaking a duty. See Teshuvot Rabbi Akiva Eiger 2:51, 106. To state it differently, despite the fact that we are dealing with the prohibition of "a married woman", nonetheless, in accordance to Rabbi Eiger we may invoke here, the mechanism of "an error in marriage" and void the marriage based upon an implied condition (rather than an explicit condition formulated in pursuance with the halakho t of conditions) of marriage. For other decisors who view "a sale in error" through the prism of a violation of a condition, see Rashi, Ketuvot 73b, s.v. ve'omar and Yevamot 89a, s.v. seifa; Ohr Sameach, Ishut 10:2, 11:11; Hafla'ah, Ketuvot 73a. Due to the fundamental breach of this condition, as twentieth century legist Rabbi Rozin argues, the clear expectation that "She did not give herself over to marriage with this in mind" should be implemented, and therefore the kiddushin may be invalidated. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").63",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 63",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Furthermore, as Rabbi Rozin expounds: 38 Teshuvot She'elot Moshe , EH 2 (28, 36, 42). Though Rabbi Rozin's ruling deals with a case of levirate marriage ( yibum ), nevertheless one can analogize from a matter of levirate marriage to a matter of marriage. See Teshuvot Terumat ha-Deshen 250; Teshuvot Noda be-Yehudah Mahadura Tinyana EH 66 (Cf. Noda be-Yehudah Mahadura Kama OH 21; Teshuvot Har Tzvi EH 1:95, 99. See further this writer's Rabbinic Authority , vol. 3, 154, n. 44. In fact, Rabbi Y. Nathanson explicitly argues that if in a case of levirate marriage one can free without halitzah , a fortfiori one may in a case of voiding a marriage due to an error in the marriage ( kiddushei ta'ut ). See Teshuvot Shoeil u-Meishiv , Mahadura Tlita'a 61; Teshuvot Iggerot Moshe EH 3:46. On the one hand, some decisors have attempted to offer definitional guidance for establishing a precondition such as the infrequency of the husband's improper conduct which permits one to invoke the clear expectation standard. See Torat Hayyim, Bava Kama 110b; Imrei Tzvi, Bava Kama 110b; Teshuvot Mahari ha-Kohen EH 13. Nevertheless, other authorities argue that invoking such a standard entails the exercise of halakhic -judicial discretion (see Teshuvot Meishivat Nefesh, EH 73). Consequently, relying upon such discretion, arbiters have voided marriages and halitzah cases alike utilizing the employment of this standard. See Teshuvot Shoeil u-Meishiv, Mahadura Kama 198, Mahadura Tlita'a 61; Teshuvot Maharsham 7:95; Teshuvot Avnei Hefetz 30; Teshuvot Har Tzvi EH 1:133, 201; Iggerot Moshe EH 4:121; Teshuvot Sha'arei Tzion 2, EH 20.Generally, I have adopted this approach in my decisions. | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").64",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 64",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
In light of all this, it is abundantly clear that the husband has no intention of taking upon himself the obligations of marital life – and this is tantamount to the husband admitting to us ab initio that he is unwilling to take upon himself the biblical obligation of food, clothing and sexual intercourse. And even though it is established Halakhah that a man who marries on condition that he is exempt from the duty to provide his wife with food, clothing and sexual intercourse is nevertheless obliged to fulfill those functions, since the condition is contrary to the Torah and therefore invalid, this is only relevant to an actual condition. However, when a husband simply states at the outset that he refuses to carry out his biblical obligations, then his refusal may not constitute a breach of established law. Indeed, Tosafot ad loc . pose this very question and answer it by pointing out that marriage is a package deal and none of its constitutive elements can be removed without negating the entire institution. Hence, once the husband says, "You are betrothed to me," he is committing himself to the institution of marriage in its entirety, including the element of sexual intercourse and gratification. As a result, the above distinction between a condition and a statement of refusal is irrelevant since the sexual element is an inseparable part of marriage. And indeed, in the present case, it is clear that he has no intention of fulfilling the marital obligation, since as far as he is concerned, sexual intercourse poses a danger to his health and possibly to his life, and therefore, it is as if he had stated from the outset that the marriage will be bereft of all sexual gratification, thus emptying the marriage of all emotional content. Moreover, it is stated, "See life with a woman whom you love," and this is a loveless life for the wife and is not considered a marriage under Torah law. By way of illustration, consider a case of a man on death row being led out to his execution and at that very moment contracting a marriage. Clearly there is no way that this would be considered a valid marriage. In our case too, it is absolutely clear that the husband never obligated himself to fulfill his marital duty – a clear expectation – and as has often been stated, a clear expectation is certainly superior to any condition that the husband makes. . . . | {
"url": "https://www.sefaria.org/Rabbinic_Authority_V,_Part_2;_Rabbinic_Authority;_The_Reality,_Chapter_4;_Case_studies_of_a_wife's_claim_for_voiding_a_marriage_and_levirate_marriage_(\"yibum\"),_d)_A_husband_who_does_not_engage_in_conjugal_relations_(\"onah\").65",
"ref": "Rabbinic Authority V, Part 2; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 4; Case studies of a wife's claim for voiding a marriage and levirate marriage (\"yibum\"), d) A husband who does not engage in conjugal relations (\"onah\") 65",
"versionTitle": "Rabbinic Authority: The Vision and the Reality, Urim Publications. Jerusalem, 2013",
"lang": "en",
"docCategory": "Halakhah",
"dataQuality": "professional",
"pagerank": 0.04000000000000001
} |
Subsets and Splits