Saturday 17 January 2015

Yevamot II 106: Comparing Getting a Get and Performing Chalitza

Leniency surrounds chalitza.  As long as the intention is there, chalitza is almost always granted ab initio, even when the rituals  are done incorrectly.  The rabbis compare this with the halachot surrounding the get.  When obtaining a get, for example, coercion is permitted.  If a man does not want to give his wife a get, he can be coerced.  However, the get is invalid if he does not intend to get divorced, or if something is done unlawfully and he is not breaking a declaration made earlier. 

It would seem natural that the rabbis compare the procedures for chalitza and divorce.  Both are legal processes that end a couple's bond together.  One regards the end of an ordinary marriage, what the other regards the circumstance when a childless husband dies and his wife is permitted to enter a marriage with one of his brothers.  Chalitza is like a 'divorce-before-the-fact'.  And though it breaks that bond between two people, it makes sense that it is not considered with the same stringency as divorce.  Divorce ends an actual marriage, which involves family members, including children.  

In their comparisons, the rabbis look at factors including intention, whether witnesses are required, whether witnesses recognize the yevam/a, whether the three tasks: reciting verses (Deuteronomy 25:7-10), removing the shoe, and spitting, are done in the proper order, and whether or not the spittle travels in a reasonable trajectory in front of the yavam.

When they look at intention, Abaye tells of a woman whom he helped trick her yavam into performing chalitza.  Even in that circumstance, the chalitza was valid.  This tale is followed by the repetition of a baraita where an escaped convict offers extra money (five dinars) to the ferry driver to help him escape.  The ferry driver is only entitled to his usual fee, however, as the escaped convict never intended to pay the exorbitant fee.  

This seems bizarre; if one intends to make empty promises to another person, s/he is not held to account.  How could the rabbis conclude that such verbal contracts are not legally valid?  I'm sure that I will learn more about the deliberations of the rabbis in future learning.

We are told that Abaye was impressed with Rav Pappa's quick connection between mistaken agreements for chalitza and the baraita on the ferry driver.  He asked about Rav Pappa's parents - both lived in the city.  Abaye then stared at these parents and they died.  Our commentary teaches that Abaye was overcome with jealousy when he compared these parents, devoting their lives to their son's study, with his own very negligent parents.  This particular passage does not portray Abaye in a very positive light.

Again it seems that the rabbis were not particularly invested in maintaining the practice of levirate marriage.  They are making chalitza as simple as possible to perform, especially in comparison to the get, which continues to leave far to many women as agunot, unable to remarry, because their husbands refuse to participate in the process of attaining a get.

No comments:

Post a Comment