Never underestimate the power of your presence - in our lives! Can I forward your story to Rabbi Kosman, myself?
He'd appreciate it!
Love, sarahb
>
People who are offended by this are not likely to be significantly less so because it is limited to Kohanim.
-- I was the only one there who knew to argue that she was incorrectly applying a rule for Kohanim to all Jews. --
VBF-
True, but she was *somewhat* less offended, even if not *significantly* so. And at least I prevented an inaccuracy from being spread to and through my classmates.
It's interesting what some people can grasp and others can't. Some of the most non-observant people can still intuitively understand how and why it is that Kohanim are in a different category. You never know what another person might absorb.
I'm going to take a wild guess. The story's from Savyon Liebrecht's 'Apples in the Desert.'
Did I get it right?
What some people can grasp? Hmmm....well, suppose YOU were that wife? Really, sit there and try to imagine it as though it really were you. And suppose that YOU were brutally raped? And suppose that it was now YOU that was going to be divorced, left to raise children alone, your entire life destroyed, after you were already raped (through no fault of your own. And let's just leave aside the discussion on what are the chances that you will ever be able to get remarried, as a divorced, violated woman in a religious community. So your life is pretty much over...and all because you are a Cohen. (And what if you didn't have kids yet...no kids for you, perhaps).
I don't know about you, but for all I can grasp the theory, if this were the future I were looking at, I think I would have a problem with it too. If imagining it were you does not work, think it out as though you were writing a book from her point of view, and wanted it to be completely credible. Sometimes, just sometime
our non-observant brethren have a point. In this case, I think they are definitely on to something.
Daphna-
You misunderstood my point.
And I have friends married to kohanim and this very point is very much on their minds a lot. It's something they and their husbands spoke about at length before they got married, and continue to speak about.
As I've said before, this law more often serves to make life difficult for the kohanim, who are harder pressed to find women willing to marry them under these conditions. And it's not as if their lives wouldn't be ruined, either. After all, their WIFE, whom they love, is being taken away from them because of the violence of some other man.
Being raped can ruin ANYONE's life. This just makes it even worse.
I do not know how often the law is applicable, or what Kohen couples do about it when it is (chas v'shalom).
Miriam-
Bing bing bing! You are . . . . rrrrright! You're the lucky winner of this beautiful! stupendous! Um . . . um . . .
Daphna-
I've been thinking more about what you wrote, and for me it boils down to this:
This halacha is really sucky for anyone who has to apply it. But what are you going to do? Change the law? I'm sure there are many rabbis who would be very interested in doing so, if there were a way of reinterpreting it. So it boils down to: when the going gets really, really tough, when keeping halacha SUCKS, do you do it anyway because you believe that it's your responsibility as a Jew to do so, or do you walk away from it because in that moment, or for that particular law, it sucks?
That is the $64,000 dollar question for Orthodox Jews. If you aren't Orthodox, the answer is clear: you walk away, because why shouldn't you? But if you believe that halacha as we know it is an expression of God's will for the Jewish people, then you have a serious, practically existential, problem.
And that's why the Jews are called Yisrael. We're the people who struggle with God.
No one ever s
(Continued)
No one ever said that halacha is always pretty.
But I can safely say that in my life, it usually is. Usually. Very.
Sarah:
You have "friends married to kohanim and ... it's something they and their husbands spoke about at length ... and continue to speak about"??? They sit around discussing the possible rape of the wife? And "continue" to? What, before or after kiddish? This is a topic to be spoken of often? Do you live in such a neighborhood? I must be missing something.
Sorry to be a damper, but I think (admitting in advance that I may be wrong) that the law applies to all couples and NOT just Kohanim. Which is not to say that I, as a Kohain, a Jew, and a human being (although some might take issue with that last point) think the law is good or bad.
I base this assertion on my understanding that if any married woman sleeps with a man other than her husband (volitionally or otherwise), she may not return to him. The problem with a Kohain is that she is not supposed to have been previously married (which some rabbis interpret as having slept with anyone, ever) and may not be a "zonah", which for purposes of this law, almost all Ortho rabbis interpret as having slept with a non-Jew.
If someone has a different or better understanding of the rules, I would be eager to hear them.
I hve to think that practically speaking this is an irrelvancy. Because unless you have two witnesses, and so on, this is academic, and never happens in practice.
Or are you actually aware of a Kohanite couple that seperated because the wife was raped, and the law needed to be followed?
Hi, I really like your blog a lot. That class you're taking sounds very interesting- Hebrew lit for immigrants. Would you happen to know if these classes exist in any other cities? I live across the country from you, in the Sharon region.
Bronco -
You're wrong - quite wrong (thank God) (sort of). A woman who is NOT married to a kohein and has a CONSENSUAL AFFAIR may not return to her husband, and also may not marry the man with whom she had the affair. If that woman is raped, she MAY stay with her husband. It is only a woman who is married to a kohein who must get divorced in the event of a rape (God forbid). I'm somewhat frightened by the fact that our system has somehow allowed a Modern Orthodox adult such as yourself, who (I think?) has been through the various "systems" of Jewish education, and who remains committed to talmud Torah, to believe such a serious misconception. Yikes.
"And let's just leave aside the discussion on what are the chances that you will ever be able to get remarried, as a divorced, violated woman in a religious community."
Daphna - First of all, I do plan on responding to your email, thanks so much for writing! Second - I have no doubt that in some religious communities out there, such a woman would be ostracized - but please believe me that there are also plenty of religious communities out there wherein she would not be ostracized, and wherein she would very likely not have any more difficulty in finding someone than any other divorced woman. That is, assuming she would ever want to get married again after TWO such horrific, unimaginable traumas.
As Sarah said - this particular halacha is not one of my favorites. I've actually said before that I think it would be the one I would change if God appeared to me and told me I could change one. Agunah would be next, and Yom Tov Sheini after that. 
(oops - I didn't mean to do that - sorry)
"So it boils down to: when the going gets really, really tough, when keeping halacha SUCKS, do you do it anyway because you believe that it's your responsibility as a Jew to do so, or do you walk away from it because in that moment, or for that particular law, it sucks?"
In a case like this, you do everything you can to find a way around it. As wildly creative as the Rabbis have been in building fence upon fence around the Torah and making things far more strict...they cannot apply some creativity to what can only be called an injustice?
GGGGGGRRRRRR...there shouldn't be a law like this AT ALL, ANYWHERE in halacha. When a person commits a crime as horrible and brutal as RAPE, the only person that should have to be punished AT ALL is the CRIMINAL.
Isn't there some sort of provision where the kohen can stay married to his wife if he gives up his kohen status? Sort of like the king renouncing his throne to marry Wallis Warfield Simpson. Or maybe I'm confusing the two.
"As wildly creative as the Rabbis have been in building fence upon fence around the Torah and making things far more strict...they cannot apply some creativity to what can only be called an injustice?"
Who says they can't??? And who says they DON'T?? And who exactly are you referring to when you say "the Rabbis?"
Never assume that everything "the Rabbis" do in individual cases approaches anything close to what can be called public knowledge. I promise that none of us know even half of what goes on behind the study doors.
"The Rabbis" don't always love every halacha either. And just to give some perspective, in some of the cultures that were contemporary with the Torah, the punishment meted out to a rapist is that HIS wife was turned over to be raped, as a punishment to HIM.
The requirement for a kohein to divorce his wife if she were, God forbid, raped is not in place as a "punishment" to anybody. It is in place to uphold the particular status and function
(cont.) of the kehuna, which is something I'm not sure any of us today can really understand.
I can't fathom how horrific it would be for someone to have to go through something like this, and I hope to God it never happens, ever. Not even once.
My understanding has long been that notwithstanding the technical halacha, R. Moshe Feinstein held that in almost all cases in which a Kohen's wife is raped, leniencies can be applied to avoid divorce.
I may be slightly misremembering this, but I believe if a cohen's wife says she was raped, if the husband says that he doesn't believe her, then they don't have to get divorced.
Another Sarah: there's no such thing as renouncing your cohen status.
RenReb: whatever reason there is for the "requirement" to be "in place," it is not reason enough. And yes, it does indeed act as a punishment to the wife who was raped.
If she admits she was raped, then she loses her whole family. And if she can't face that, then she must live with the agony in secret and the rapist goes free. How is that not a punishment?
"yes, it does indeed act as a punishment to the wife who was raped."
Of course it acts as a punishment. I didn't mean to imply that it doesn't act as a punishment. However, the term "punishment" implies that those made to suffer have done something wrong. Halacha in this case does not hold the wife or the husband to have done anything wrong, so the requirement that they get divorced is not, as I said, in place as a "punishment" to either of them. They suffer in this case in spite of having not done anything wrong, because of the (apparently greater, as much as I can't imagine that) need to uphold whatever it is about the kehuna that needs to be upheld.
"whatever reason there is for the "requirement" to be "in place," it is not reason enough."
I certainly see why you say that, and there are times when I feel the same way, about other halachot as well as this one. But I do hope we're wrong, and that God, at least, understands wh
(cont.)
...understands why.
"So it boils down to: when the going gets really, really tough, when keeping halacha SUCKS, do you do it anyway because you believe that it's your responsibility as a Jew to do so, or do you walk away from it because in that moment, or for that particular law, it sucks?"
That is, indeed, what it boils down to. And BOY, does this halacha fit that category.
you know, if anyone at this point could actually quote the Rabbis who made this Halacha, whether it be from the Mishnah, or Gemorah, or whatever, I think that would help. Maybe, like that teacher, we are ALL basing this discussion on some wrong assumptions. I hope so.
Here's my thinking, to put it very simply: there are prohibitions that come from God, right? And there are prohibitions that come from Rabbis that are there to "protect" the laws of God, right? So if this halacha is a prohibition from the Rabbis, then one could argue that the Rabbis were wrong, and that (someday) this law could be changed, or explained away. But if this a prohibition of God, then the laws of God can never be changed, and they should not have to be explained away somehow (like, the husband refuses to believe she was raped, or two witnesses have to come forward, etc), because they should be inherently (sp?) just and right, not obviously sucky.
"So if this halacha is a prohibition from the Rabbis, then one could argue that the Rabbis were wrong"
Good point! So, is this d'rabbanan (including--"well, the Torah says X so we are going to expand on that to exclude XYZ) or d'oraisa (Torah says explicitly that if the wife of a Cohen is raped, out she goes)? Just so I know how to view it in my brain.
Geez, Louise, my internet is down (apparently due to a faulty router) for about 15 hours, and when I get back there are 33 comments to this post! Don't you guys have anything else to do.
Shelley-
I'm not aware of similar courses elsewhere, but I'm sure they exist. Call your local ulpan and university/college for referrals. I'm taking this course at Milah- The Cultural Ulpan.
Regarding the Kohen law: Thank you, RenReb, for keeping up the explanations while I was sleeping(and my internet was down). And thanks to Daphna, Rivka, Another Sarah, et al for keeping up a lively -- and surprisingly respectful-- discussion.
I'll leave it to RenReb or another knowledgable reader to provide the source for the law, unless I *happen* to decide to procrastinate from my work by researching it. In other words,I promise nothing, but welcome someone who knows more than I do to post the relevent information.
RenReb, I stand corrected. Thanks for the clarification.
Debbie and Another Sarah, While a Kohain cannot "renounce" his status, if he marries a woman he is not allowed to (e.g., a divorcee or a convert), he is no longer allowed to participate in the services as a Kohain (he is not entitled to the first aliyah, and may not participate in the Priestly Benediction) for as long as he is married to the woman. However, if he stops being married to her (via divorce or G-d Forbid, death) he resumes his rights as a Kohain. Additionally, any male children from a marriage between a Kohain and a woman he was not allowed to marry are NOT kohanim, and daughters from that union are also not allowed to marry a Kohain (and have the same status as a divorcee, etc. as noted above).
All,
Practically speaking, in my experience, you can usually find an Orthodox rabbi who is clever enough to discern a heter for almost anything, including these very difficult and emotional issues. Not to imply
Not to imply this whole thread is moot, or that the letter of the law is not diffiuclt (or even abhorrent), but the Law and the rabbis who interpret it are not necessarily completely blind to the overwhelmingly difficult emotional circumstances that a rape would give rise to.
Bronco -
Thanks for saying that - I know at least one rabbi who loves to be reminded that people know that.
Re the source for and deoraisa/d'rabbanan status of the law, I was in the middle of double-checking with my husband that I understand it fully before I post about it, and he got whisked away on another matter (grrr). Without finishing the conversation, I can definitely tell you that it's d'oraisa, and he promised to call me ASAP to finish the rest.
He also pointed out (and I'm not sure why I didn't think to point this out myself - guess that's why he's the rabbi and I'm not, lol) that this halacha is not particular to a woman who's already married to a kohein. That is, there are certain women (as Bronco pointed out), such as a divorcee or a convert, whom a kohein is forbidden to marry, and a rape victim - any rape victim, which would unfortunately (and perhaps unfairly) include a woman he is already married to, should she become a rape victim - is
(cont.) one of them.
I promise to explain the background and sources as well as I can just as soon as my husband becomes free to talk to, oh, his wife - and of course, assuming nobody else has beat me to it.
CS - thanks for letting us use your blog for this purpose - and thanks for reminding me of all the other things I have to do.... :-(
Bronco-
It's so true. In my research for an article about Orthodoxy and homosexuality, for example, I found that there is a big difference between the letter of the law, and what an Orthodox rabbi might counsel a person behind the study doors.
This might be another post for the future . . .
Oh, and there's the story (urban legend?) about the woman who told her rabbi "Rabbi, I committed adultery and the law is that I cannot return to my husband, even though I've ended the affair and want to improve my marriage. What should I do?"
The rabbi says "come back tomorrow."
The next day she says "so, rabbi, what is your answer" and he says "about what?" and she says "about the adultery that I committed." And he says "I'll have to think about it. Come back tomorrow."
The next day again she says "What is your answer?" And he says "About what?" and she says "How could you forget? I committed adultery!" And he says "You did? Oh. I'll have to think about t
(continued)
that, come back tomorrow."
This goes on until the woman gets the point.
sorry, but I really don't like that story. What you're insinuating is that in order for halachot to work in an organized society, a society whose laws are based strictly on Torah, then some policies have to be simply ignored. If there is a halacha that is so wrong that Rabbis must constantly and continually (sp?) ignore it, or find away around it, then the halacha should be permanently changed.
The source for the halachah being discussed is on Y'vamot 56b. There is a disagreement there as to the precise nature of the halachah, but all seem to agree that it is d'oraiyta.
RenReb -
I take your last statement to mean that a woman who was previously raped (while single) can no longer marry a kohen. I believe you are incorrect. See the top of Ketubot 9a (and Rashi), which strongly implies that a woman who was raped when she was not "engaged"/married is permitted to a kohen.
See also Rambam Issurei Bi'ah 18:8-10 (and surrounding halachot), who seems to confirm all this (and, incidentally, sides with the opinion in the gemara that a kohen who remained married to his wife in this scenario would actually receive lashes). Also note, however, that halachah 9 provides a loophole large enough, I would imagine, for just about anyone to fit through.
(Sorry for not being more explicit with the sources, but there's only so long I can have Hebrew up on my screen without my co-workers getting curious.)
Hi, everyone -
OK. Further discussion with the hubs has convinced me that in terms of the technicalities, this topic is much more complex than I realized, and there is no way I would be able to both understand it and explain it without screwing up. So I have - I think - convinced my husband to write it up himself, which hopefully should happen by tonight.
The rabbi's first blog post... I knew he'd cave sooner or later... hahahahaa (insert wicked cackle here)
RenReb and Reuven, thank you.
rivka -
You're welcome. As for your general issues with having to explain things away, I'm bothered by that as well. On the other hand, here's a quote from Shmuel Strauss, who works at the Institute for Science and Halacha:
If the lawmaker is human, sometimes he makes mistakes. If you see a loophole in the law, don’t take it, respect the intent of the lawmaker. But if the Lawmaker never makes a mistake and never overlooks anything, and still there’s a loophole, then what’s it there for?
I'm not sure whether or not I agree with that, but it's certainly interesting to ponder.
This is a very troubling area and even more complicated. I believe the following page will give you a better understanding of some of the issues:
http://theawarenesscenter.org/
ma...yingkohain.html
And if the lawmaker isn't human? What then? If the law is d'oraita (as more informed people here state), then there should be no loopholes. Otherwise, one could argue that there are loopholes for all halachot, be they kashrut (keeping kosher), shabbat, etc.
Look, I'm sorry I'm harping on this. The fact is, I'm not even Orthodox, so yeah, you could say I DID walk away from all these halachot that suck, and maybe that means that I don't even have an argument to stand on. But I would like to think that when Jews say "we want Mashiach now," it's because they believe that when Mashiach comes, the world will be a better place, for all Jews.
If I were a Cohen, I think I would be praying for Mashiach half-heartedly. They seem to get a bum rap.
Rivka-
Reuven's quote is actually very interesting. It's suggesting that if God makes a rule AND a loophole for that rule, then it means we need the rule, we have things to learn from the rule, but also that we are MEANT TO USE the loophole.
And there ARE loopholes for Shabbat. Look at eiruvs. Major loophole, that. Meant to use it. Being able to keep warm or reheat food that is already cooked- also a loophole.
Kashrut is different because so many of the laws are d'rabanan.
When you say that "the rule should be permanently changed," you're forgetting that --again-- in Orthodoxy we don't believe we CAN change the rules, particularly not one that is d'oraita.
Lo Bashamaim hi . . . The Torah is not in the Heavens. It was given to us to live with and figure out, but not to change.
Glad I'm not the only one commenting here, because other people are doing a much better job than I am!
Wow, for me this is a fascinating conversation. I've never really wanted to marry a Cohen (should I even get married...long story that), but regardless of that...this is a topic I can see myself needing to know more about both personally and professionally. (One of the things I do and would like to find a way to reconcile with Judaism in specific is volunteer for a hotline.)
I'll certaily be keeping an eye on this, and responding. Thanks again!
the issue of the ayruv is mitzvah bain adam l'makom, a commandment between Man and God. We are talking about a mitzvah bain adam l'havaroh, a commandment between man and man. Commandments regarding conduct among people should always err on the side of mercy and compassion, not harm and punishment. It seems to me that if the wife of a Cohen is raped, then any loophole would also result in the criminal not be punished for that rape, since he cannot be punished for something that ended up going through a loophole and therefore did not "really" happen. Again, if he is prosecuted and punished for rape, the wife still ends up divorced.
>Again, if he is prosecuted and
>punished for rape, the wife still
>ends up divorced.
No. You're confusing the criminal justice system with the beis din system. A conviction in the 1st does not necessarily mean sufficient evidence for a forced divorce in the 2nd.
I've been doing some research. I can't find any reported case or anyone who has heard of a forced divorce due to rape. The only case I found was discovered to be a hoax concocted by a reporter in Israel.
This may be more theoretical than practical.
The real problem may be marrying a cohen to begin with.
again see: http://theawarenesscenter.org/
ma...yingkohain.html
JWB,
Gee Thanks. are you saying no woman should marry me? That may be reasonable for a whole host of reasons, but hopefully not because I'm a kohain; rather because of my numerous character flaws.
>Gee Thanks. are you saying no woman
>should marry me?
Never said anything remotely like that.
>That may be reasonable for a whole
>host of reasons, but hopefully not
>because I'm a kohain; rather because
>of my numerous character flaws.
My comment was that this "forced divorce" issue may be overstated and more theoretical than practical (because of witness/evidence problems). On the other hand there are situations with marrying a cohen to begin with where similar issues may be more problematic.
again see: http://theawarenesscenter.org/
ma...yingkohain.html
Excerpts:
...
If there was intercourse, and she was three years old or older and he was nine years old or older and it was someone whom she is not allowed to marry (such as a non-Jew or a close relative (see below)), she may not marry a Cohen.
If she was married, and the molester was nine years old or older she may not marry a Cohen whether it was rape, mistake or voluntary.
In any case where there is doubt as to who the perpetrator was or whether or not there was sexual intercourse, an expert Rabbi must be consulted.
...
A Cohen is forbidden to marry a divorcee, a chalalah or a zonah Rambam Issurei Biah 17:1.
A divorcee includes one who was divorced after erusin Rambam Issurei Biah 17:18 even though she didn't yet have nissuin, even if she is still a virgin. Erusin is the first part of the wedding ceremony where the groom gives his bride the ring and declares "harei at m'kudeshet li etc." Nissuin is the second part, which is either the reading of the sheva b'rach
JWB:
I value many of the comments you've made on my blog, but wish you would refrain from posting multiple comments in a row, especially exerpts of a site to which you've already provided a link. Try to be more succinct, OK? If you see that you have lots to say about something, maybe it would be better for you to post about it on YOUR blog, and then provide a link to that post.
in re bronco quote:
"The problem with a Kohain is that she is not supposed to have been previously married (which some rabbis interpret as having slept with anyone, ever) and may not be a "zonah", which for purposes of this law, almost all Ortho rabbis interpret as having slept with a non-Jew.
I have seen this idea only once before,
and it distressed me then too. I understand your rabbi told you this, so an anonymous poster probably won't change your mind
but nonetheless i feel like i must say:
this is not a good thing to say in a public forum, because it is not true!
kohanim may marry
widows for instance, who have obviously been married before. Kohanim may marry non-virgins.
they are not permitted by halacha
to marry someone who 1.has ever been
divorced or 2.slept with a non-Jew.
this is the pretty universal understanding. (for instance, it is a pasuk in torah
that a kohain gadol may not marry a widow. obviously "shma minah" all other kohanim may). (by the
betting casino keno online betting casino keno online betting casino keno online. home las loan mortgage vegas home las loan mortgage vegas home las loan mortgage vegas.
for the record while according to the halacha a the woman cannot return to her husband, the scenario is highly improbale if not virtualy impossible in todays day and age, given several halachic requirements which would be very difficult to meet today.
any rabbi worth his salt would most likely permit nay instruct the couple to remain married.
Commenting by HaloScan
