💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Divor… captured on 2024-05-10 at 12:20:52. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
8 [1] When [a man] divorces [his wife] according to a conditional arrangement, and the condition is fulfilled, the divorce is effective. If the condition is not fulfilled, the divorce is not effective. All the laws governing conditional agreements have been explained in *Hilchot Ishut*, Chapter 6.
There it is explained that when [a man] divorces [his wife] according to a conditional arrangement, and the condition is fulfilled, the divorce is effective from the time the condition is fulfilled, and not from the time the *get* is given to her.
As such, a husband may nullify a *get*, add to his conditions or add a further condition, until the original condition is fulfilled although [the woman] has already been given the *get*.
If the husband dies [before the condition is fulfilled], or the *get* is lost or consumed by fire before the condition is fulfilled, the divorce is not effective. *A priori*, [the woman] should not remarry until the condition is fulfilled. If, however, she has already married, she need not leave [her second husband], unless she is no longer able to fulfill [the condition]. [For since] the condition is nullified [the divorce is void.]
There it is explained that if [the husband] tells [his wife]: "You are divorced from the present time - or from today - on the following condition," or "You are divorced on the condition that this and this be done," when the condition is fulfilled the divorce becomes effective retroactively from the time the *get* reaches the woman.
Therefore, once the *get* reaches the woman's possession, [the husband] can no longer nullify the *get*, add to his conditions or add a further condition. If the *get* is lost or consumed by fire, or even if the husband dies before the condition is fulfilled, she should fulfill the condition after his death, and the divorce is considered effective from the time the *get* was given to her.
Instead, [all his dealings with her should be] in the presence of [at least one] witness. Even a servant or a maid-servant can serve this purpose, with the exception of her [private] maid-servant or her young son. For she is not embarrassed to enter into marital relations in the presence of these people.
It is well known that if [the husband] enters into privacy [with his wife] in the presence of two witnesses at the same time, the status of the divorce is doubtful, even if the condition was fulfilled. [We suspect] that he engaged in marital relations [with her], and nullified the *get*, as will be explained in these laws. [3] How should a man divorce [his wife] conditionally? He should not say: "Write a *get* for my wife on this condition," or "Write a *get* and give it to her on this condition." Needless to say, he should not write in the *get*: "So and so divorces so and so on the [following] condition."
What procedure should instead be followed? He should instruct the scribe to write [a *get*] and the witnesses to sign. They should write an acceptable *get* that does not mention any condition at all. Afterwards, he should give her the *get* and tell her: "This is your *get*..." or "Behold you are divorced on the following condition." Or he should tell [the witnesses] or his agent: "Give her this *get* on the following condition." [4] If [a husband] had a condition written in the *get* after the essential portion of the *get* was written, the *get* is acceptable, regardless of whether [the condition] was written before the signature of the witnesses or after their signature.
If, however, [the condition] was written before the essential portion of the *get* - even if he used the wording, "on the following condition" - the status of the divorce is doubtful, for the husband retains rights in the essential matter of the *get*. Similarly, if he verbally stated a condition before the essential portion of the *get* was written, the status of the divorce is doubtful. [5] [These rules apply when a man] divorces his wife and [makes the following conditions] whether verbally or in writing, after the essential portion [of the *get*] has been written,. If he tells her: "Behold, you are permitted [to marry] any man aside from so and so," or "...with the exception of so and so," [the ruling would depend on the identity of the individual specified].
If that individual is a gentile, a servant or a person with whom the woman is forbidden to engage in marital relations - e.g., her father, her brother, his father or his brother - the *get* is acceptable. If, however, the individual is one who could consecrate her [as a wife], the *get* is void, even if there is a negative prohibition [that is not punishable by death - neither at the hand of God nor the court - involved in such relations] or that individual is a minor. [The rationale is that by making such a condition,] the husband retained certain rights with regard to the divorce, and [the bond between the couple] is not [entirely] severed.
If [the individual mentioned] is the husband of the wife's sister, the status of the divorce is in doubt. For although at present relations between the wife and that man are forbidden, if her sister dies, she will become permitted to marry him. [6] The status of the divorce is in doubt when [a husband divorces his wife and] tells her: "Behold, you are permitted [to marry] any man, aside from a man who will be born in the future, who does not exist at present," "...aside from promiscuous relationships" - i.e., it is as if he said: "Behold, you are permitted to marry any man, but with regard to promiscuous relations, it is as if you remain forbidden like a married woman."
[This ruling also applies if he tells her:] "You are permitted to any man who will engage in relations with you in the ordinary manner, but with regard to anal intercourse, you remain prohibited," "You are permitted [to marry] any man, aside from one who consecrates you with a legal document" - i.e, the woman may be consecrated by [a gift of] money or via sexual relations, but if one consecrates her with a legal document, she is forbidden like a married woman - or "You are permitted [to marry] any man, with the exception of [the right to] nullify your vows" - i.e., [I] retain none of the rights of the marriage relationship except [the right to] nullify your vows; in that regard, it is as if you remained my wife.
[Similarly, if the husband desires that the woman be considered as if she were married with regard to her right] to partake of *terumah*, or with regard to his right to inherit her property if she dies [in his lifetime, the status of the divorce is in doubt]. [7] [If a husband] tells [his wife]: "You are permitted [to marry] any man aside from Reuven and Shimon," and then tells her: "You are permitted [to marry] Reuven or Shimon," the divorce is acceptable. For he has nullified his condition, permitting his wife [to marry] the men [concerning whom] the condition was made. [8] [If, after telling his wife that she is permitted to marry any man aside from Reuven and Shimon, the husband] tells her: "You are permitted [to marry] Reuven," the divorce is void, because he has not nullified the condition [preventing her from marrying] Shimon.
If he tells her: "You are permitted to [marry] Shimon," or "You are even permitted to [marry] Shimon," the status of the divorce is in doubt. We suspect that perhaps he permitted her only to Shimon, and she is still forbidden to Reuven. By saying "even to Shimon," he meant "to everyone, even to Shimon." [Nevertheless, the divorce is not void, for] perhaps he permitted her to everyone, and by saying "even to Shimon," he meant "to Shimon and also to Reuven." [This is plausible,] for Shimon was mentioned after Reuven in his condition. [9] If [a husband] makes a condition, saying; "Today you are not my wife, but tomorrow you will be my wife," the divorce is not effective. Although the connection between the couple is severed on the day [of the *get*, it is renewed afterwards]. For this reason, in the wording of the *get*, is written the phrase: "from the present day onward." [10] [If a husband tells his wife:] "This is your *get* on the condition that you never drink wine for the rest of your life," the divorce is not effective, for [the relationship between them] has not been severed.
If the condition states "for as long as I live" or "for as long as so and so lives," the divorce is effective, for the relationship between the couple is severed. When that person dies, [the woman] will no longer have any connection with [her previous husband]. [11] [If a husband tells his wife:] "This is your *get* on the condition that you do not go to your father's house for 30 days, the divorce is effective. "...That you never go to your father's house," the divorce is not effective, for [the relationship between them] has not been severed.
[Similarly, if a husband] tells [his wife:] "This is your *get* on the condition that you never eat meat," or "...that you never drink wine," the divorce is not effective, for [the relationship between them] has not been severed. "...[that you not eat meat or drink wine] for 30 days, the divorce is effective. [12] [If a husband tells his wife:] "This is your *get* on the condition that you never marry so and so," the divorce is not effective. To what can this be compared? to his telling her: "This is your *get* on the condition that you never drink wine," "...that you never go to your father's home," or "[that you not go to your father's home] for the rest of your life."
If, however, he tells her: "[This is your *get*] on the condition that you do not marry so and so for fifty years," the divorce is effective; she may not marry the person during the time specified. If she marries him, the divorce is nullified retroactively.
If [the woman] engages in promiscuous sexual relations with the man specified, any child born to her is legitimate, and the divorce remains acceptable. For [the husband's] condition mentioned only marriage. [13] [If a husband tells his wife:] "This is your *get* on the condition that you marry so and so," if she marries him [the divorce is effective], as it would be if other conditions were involved. Nevertheless, our Sages said that she should not marry either the man specified or any other man.
She should not marry the man specified, lest the people say: "They are giving their wives as presents to each other." Nor should she marry anyone else, for the *get* is effective only when the condition is fulfilled.
If she transgresses and marries the man specified, she need not be divorced. If she marries another person before she marries the man specified, the *get* is nullified, and she must leave her second husband. Any child she bears [the second husband] is illegitimate. He must, however, divorce her with a *get*. [14] [If a husband tells his wife:] "Behold, this is your *get*, but the paper belongs to me," the divorce is not effective, for [the relationship between them] has not been severed. "...On the condition that you give me the paper," the divorce is effective, [provided] she gives [him the paper]. [15] If he engraved a *get* on a plate of gold and gave it to her, telling her: "This is [both] your *get* and [the money due you by virtue of] your *ketubah*, [the divorce is] acceptable and she is considered to have received the money due her by virtue of her *ketubah*, provided the plate is worth the value of her *ketubah*. If it is not, he should compensate [for the difference]. [16] [The following rules apply when a man] divorces [his wife] conditionally, including a stipulation that causes the divorce to be considered void - e.g., that she never eat meat or drink wine for the rest of her life, or that she be free to marry any man with the exception of a particular individual, or that he mentioned other conditions before the essential portion of the *get* was written: If the condition was written in the *get*, and he rubbed it out and gave it to her, the status of the divorce is in doubt. If the condition was stated verbally, he should take the *get* from her and give it to her again without mentioning a condition, or mention a condition that is acceptable. [17] What is implied? [A man] gave a *get* to his wife and told her, "Behold, you are divorced with this [*get*] and are free [to marry] any man aside from so and so." If he took [the *get*] from her and gave it to her and said: "Behold you are free [to marry] any man," or "This is your *get*," the divorce is effective. The same applies in other similar situations. [18] When [a man] gives a *get* to his wife on the condition that she give him two hundred *zuz*, and afterwards establishes a second condition in the presence of witnesses that she serve his father for two years, his latter statement did not nullify his original one. Instead, it is as if he told her: "Fulfill one of the two conditions." If she desires, she may serve his father, or if she desires, she may give [him the money]. One of the witnesses to the first condition cannot join with one of the witnesses to the second condition [to testify that the *get* was given on a conditional basis].
If, however, [the husband] made a condition that the woman must give him 200 *zuz*, and afterwards made a condition in the presence of two [witnesses] that she must give him 300 *zuz*, the condition of 200 has been nullified, and she must give [him] 300 *zuz*. The same principle applies in all similar situations. [19] If [a husband] makes a condition that his wife must perform a specific activity without stating a duration of time, it is considered as if he stated that she should perform this activity for one day. For he did not specify any amount of time.
What is implied? If he told her: "This is your *get* on condition that you perform work for me," "...on condition that you serve my father," or "...on condition that you nurse my son," if she performs work for him or serves his father for one day or nurses his son for one day during the time when a child [usually] nurses - i.e., within his first 24 months [of life] - the *get* is effective.If the son or the father dies before she nurses him or serves him, the *get* is not effective. [20] If [the husband] tells her: "[This is your *get*] on condition that you nurse my son..." or "...serve my father for two years," [for the divorce to be effective] she must complete the time specified. If the son or the father dies within this period, or the father says: "I don't want you to serve me," the *get* is not effective, for the condition has not been fulfilled. The same principles apply in all similar situations. [21] [The following rules apply when a husband] tells [his wife]: "[This is your *get*] on condition that you give me 200 *zuz* within 30 days." If she gives him [the money] within 30 days with his consent, the divorce is effective. If she gives [it] after 30 days, the divorce is not effective. If she gives it to him against his will, and he refuses to accept it, the divorce is unacceptable until he willingly accepts it.
If he tells her within the 30 days, "I am willing to forego [the money on your behalf," the divorce is not effective, because the condition was not fulfilled. If he dies within the 30 days, since the 30 days are completed without her giving [him the money], the divorce is not effective. [22] If he tells her, "[This is your *get*] on condition that you give me 200 *zuz*," without specifying a time period, and he dies before she gives [him the money], she cannot give [the sum] to his heirs; the condition was that it be given to him. [In this instance, however,] the *get* is not nullified [by the husband's death], since a definite time period was not specified. Therefore, even if the *get* was lost or ripped before he died, [the woman] should not marry another man until she performs the rite of *chalitzah*. [23] [If the husband tells her:] "This is your *get* on condition that you give me this particular utensil," or "...this particular garment," and that utensil or garment is lost or stolen, even if she gives him 1000 *zuz* in compensation for [the desired object], the divorce is not effective until she gives him the specified utensil or garment, or until he nullifies the condition. [24] [The following rules apply when a woman] is divorced conditionally, and another man consecrates her before the condition is fulfilled. If the condition is fulfilled [afterwards], she is consecrated. If, however, the condition is not fulfilled and the *get* is nullified, she does not require a *get* from the second husband, for [in this situation] she cannot be consecrated. If, however, she marries [a second husband], the condition is not fulfilled, and the *get* is nullified, she must also be divorced by the second [husband], as explained above.
Version: Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007
Source: https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI
License: CC-BY-NC