Rob,
Surely, if all you need to effect marriage is biya and kosher witnesses, a couple of Jews who begin to live together and procreate, in a frum jewish community, under any guise, would ultimately require a get when they split. I know in Israel some Sephardic rabbis will require a get after a couple that had been living together without chupa splits. This is to remove safek, but it's a get nonetheless.
Avi
END QUOTE

This I find interesting...again we see a different avenue of approach to things I thought most all the Rebbes have settled upon. The belief here was always (since I was a child) that the couple (even if halachicly married) cannot even RESIDE IN THE SAME HOUSE so long as the ketubah is misplaced. So if that is so of a halachic marriage, I don't see how a get would be required of a couple that never was in halachic standing in the first place. It seems counter-intuitive to me, that the get should be acquired to remove safek. I would think the burden of proof would be upon the couple to prove marriage legitimacy (as with a Ketubah) rather than to prove divorce. The emphasis seems misplaced. Can you explain the logic to me Avi?

quote:

cannot even RESIDE IN THE SAME HOUSE so long as the ketubah is misplaced.

I've seen in the Gemara that there is discussion about a case where a lost kesuba was replaced with another, and laws having to deal with if someone finds a kesuvah whether it can be returned to the husband or the wife (Bava Metzia) -- thus it seems unlikely that the couple is not permitted to live in the same house with a misplaced kesuvah.

Yocheved,

My understanding is that once biya has occurred and there are witnesses, it's very good grounds to consider them married. However, most opinions say that there has to be "intent". If they actually live together and procreate, it establishes intent for most people and it is legitimate according to halacha....even without a ketuba. It's for this reason that Jews married by the justice of the peace are considered married by most Jewish authorities. It is not that they recognize the marriage certificate, but that the process they went through satisfies the basic halachic requirements of biya, witnesses and intent. Their living together as a family creates a "virtual ketuba", so to speak, which needs to be canceled by a get. A Jew can get married in a legitimate way or in a "not so legitimate" way and still be recognized halachically. Sure, there would be machlokes as usual.

Avi

quote:

Their living together as a family creates a "virtual ketuba", so to speak, which needs to be canceled by a get.

On what basis are you saying this?

By a virtual ketuba do you believe that upon any divorce he would have to pay her some specified amount of money? What proof would he have when it is paid so that she doesn't come back repeatedly demanding her virtual ketuba price, perhaps even changing it each time (and not as a COLA)?

And do you think this defacto marriage would still work in a place where there were no civil marriage laws which respected their living together as a "common law marriage"?

Perhaps halacha only recognized them as married because there is a civil authority which affords them some rights?

Or perhaps halacha is only worried about whether they seem enough married that her children with any future husband would be considered mamzer?

Can you think of anyplace within halacha that they get something other than a "get" responsibility by virtue of being recognized as de-facto married by a civil authority?

Rob,

quote:

By a virtual ketuba do you believe that upon any divorce he would have to pay her some specified amount of money? What proof would he have when it is paid so that she doesn't come back repeatedly demanding her virtual ketuba price, perhaps even changing it each time (and not as a COLA)?

I'm not even sure whether this is a defacto marriage or not. All I know is that, for the woman to remarry and have children without them being mamzerim some sort of get needs to be issued for their sake.

All the issues about price of ketuba etc....I don't know. But originally, one could marry a woman by consent, without a piece of paper. I don't know how they resolved the ketuba price those days.

Also about common law marriage; I think there is a place in halacha for common law marriage. I'm not sure whether pelagash qualifies or not. I think these are questions for Rav Chaim

Avi

Rob,

quote:

Perhaps halacha only recognized them as married because there is a civil authority which affords them some rights?

I'm not sure about this one because if that were the case, marriage to goyim would also be recognized.

I don't think our marriage system has anything to do with that of the goyim. I believe the civil authority's ruling is recognized only when it fulfils and complies with our halacha. In the US, when 2 Jews get married, there is a chupa and ketuba, which are and could be performed separately from the civil process.

Indeed, a person can be married through chupa without the local certificate. This person would be Jewishly married but not married according to the state. This couple could remain in this state forever. In some states they would eventually be considered "common law"....according to the state.

For a Sephardic, this is one way he could have 2 wives legally....i.e. 2 wives Jewishly married under chupa, but unmarried and "shacking up" according to the state.

Avi

Avi --I would like to hear more on this. There seems to be a discrepancy and I trusted my source, (claiming that a ketubah, chuppah, witnessses and ring were necessary). Maybe all these aren't necessary (?)

quote:

if that were the case, marriage to goyim would also be recognized.

Not necessarily... since a goy may not have any kesuba rights.

Now if a civil authority would afford communal property or other rights to a common law marriage to two Jews living together would a Beis Din recognize any civil monetary liability in a case of a dispute in or after a divorce?

Yocheved,

quote:

Avi --I would like to hear more on this. There seems to be a discrepancy and I trusted my source, (claiming that a ketubah, chuppah, witnessses and ring were necessary). Maybe all these aren't necessary (?)

From my understanding, originally only one of the following 3 are necessary to effect marriage in front of witnesses;
1. biya
2. contract (ketuba)
3. Specific gift that she accepts (ring, apples, bike, car, gold etc)

Today, things are more formalized and all 3 are done by the rabbis....to cover all bases.

Rob;

quote:

Now if a civil authority would afford communal property or other rights to a common law marriage to two Jews living together would a Beis Din recognize any civil monetary liability in a case of a dispute in or after a divorce?

I doubt it. My suspicion is that virtual ketubot are only invoked to remove safek for the protection of future children. They have nothing to do with "palimomy" lawsuits.

Avi

I see, Avi. Thankyou.

quote:

Originally posted by Avi d'Israeli:
Yisroel,
Are you saying that if the woman converted and then "remarried" her husband, her conversion would become void, after the fact, because she converted
knowing she would marry a kohen?

Yes, Avi, that is exactly what I am saying. Her conversion is treated as if it were not valid at the outset.

quote:

Originally posted by Avi d'Israeli:
A new found friend is a Kohen. He married a Conservatively converted shiksa. She has come a long to being a real frumy and now she wants a halachic conversion. Is this possible, since he is a Kohen?
Avi

To all the gang,

It sounds to me as though the aforesaid woman, when she opted to marry a Kohen, did not know initially that she was prohibited to marry the man (not knowing the halachic prohibitions regarding marriages between a Kohen and a proselyte). Afterall, she has grown to become more "frum" throughout the years, which seems to reflect about her true intentions from the start, and now she seeks a fully-recognised orthodox conversion.

The question is, again, whether or not her conversion was valid? A geyr (proselyte) is, at first, only taught a few laws in Yiddishkeit, and is not expected to know everything about Yiddishkeit. In her case, however, she was expected to have a willingness and desire to perform all of the Mitzvos once she comes to know them.

As for Rob's doubts about the three Jewish men who converted the woman, obviously, those Rabbis who officiated over her conversion did not know that she would go off and marry a Kohen. As far as their being qualified judges (i.e. competent witnesses, &c.), this is only for G-d to say. Maybe they were, maybe they were not. The validity of her conversion is still a grey area. Let's not forget that King Solomon married foreign women who had been converted, according to Rambam, in Batei Din Hidiyosos. (Conservative Rabbinic Courts???) While they turned away his heart, this woman who married the Kohen seeks to go straight!

One more thing: This forum seems to have bona fide representatives of the two schools of thought - Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel. When a man approached Shammai asking him to convert him on the condition that he become a Kohen Gadol (a thing which was not lawful, neither possible to ever perform for the man), Shammai rejected him and pushed him away with his measuring-rod. Hillel, on the other hand, accepted him despite his warped views on Yiddishkeit! At length, Hillel convinced the man of his errors, and he became a proselyte to Judaism.

Or what about the man who didn't have the time to engage in much study, and wanted to know everything in a nut-shell? Shammai thought he was not serious enough, and therefore rejected him. Hillel, on the other hand, said to him: דעליך סני לחברך לא תעביד

"Whatsoever is hateful unto you, do not do the same to your neighbour."


David

quote:

Originally posted by David Ben-Abraham:

To all the gang,

It sounds to me as though the aforesaid woman, when she opted to marry a Kohen, did not know initially that she was prohibited to marry the man (not knowing the halachic prohibitions regarding marriages between a Kohen and a proselyte).

Of course she didn't; she had a Conservative "conversion" and they probably have done away with that particular Halacha.

quote:

As for Rob's doubts about the three Jewish men who converted the woman, obviously, those Rabbis who officiated over her conversion did not know that she would go off and marry a Kohen. As far as their being qualified judges (i.e. competent witnesses, &c.), this is only for G-d to say. Maybe they were, maybe they were not. The validity of her conversion is still a grey area.

I think you'll find it pretty black and white as far as recognised Orthodox Batei Din are concerned.

There is also the question of Kabalat Ol Mitzvot [accepting the yoke of ALL the Mitzvot) which there certainly wouldn't be with a Conservative "conversion".

B"H

Rebbe Yisroel,

Don't be so quick to judge the woman. Perhaps she had sought first an orthodox conversion, but because of the long wait involved and their giving her the traditional "run-around" (as they are required to do in order to test her true motives), she decided that she would make do with the second best thing - a conservative conversion. There are many people like this. (Yet, as far as you and I are concerned, I suppose, someone who has consistently been antagonistic to my views, it was only forthcoming of the Rebbe to protest strongly my own remarks. No offence intended.) Doesn't the Rebbe know that the conversion classes set-up here (in Israel) have, both, orthodox and conservative supervision, or instructors, whatever you'd like to call them? The orthodox Rabbis have not ruled them out altogether, and work alongside them. The problem, rather, is with the Reform Rabbis. Moreover, this Rebbe has ignored totally what Rambam has explicitly stated, videlicit, the conversions of Solomon's wives being all conducted in בתי דין הדיוטות , according to that most highly esteemed opinion of Rambam.

I remain your faithful friend,
David

quote:

As far as their being qualified judges (i.e. competent witnesses, &c.), this is only for G-d to say.

Dear Reb Dovid:

Apparently we must have an earthly standard for determining competent witnesses, otherwise we could not have any functioning Beis Din with witnesses in any case, and we could not rely upon the kashrus of anyone else's cooking!

What do you think is the Halachic standard for whom is eligible to be a witness for a conversion?

I quoted what I have learned the standard to be for a kosher witness... that their community perceives them to be Shomer Shabbos.

Rob,
I never thought I'd ever say this; but to be fair to David, the few Conservative Rabbis I know are all machmir and live like orthodox Jews although their congregants don't. Why do I bring this up? Well, the Lubavitch are the same way. The Rabbis are very frum but they usually run a Conservative shul and in many cases without even a community standard. In reality, what the Lubavitch and the Conservative are doing is no different, but their tenets and the authority to which they subscribe are different. And we are willing to judge the two communities differently. In this context, David has a point.

Avi

B"H

To our friends,

As I premised in one of my earlier posts on this thread, "conservative conversions" is a discussion in itself.

"Yephtach bedoro, ke-shemuel bedoro. U'shemuel bedoro ke-moshe bedoro." Each generation has its own qualified Rabbis, yet this is not saying that all judges have the same intellect. Still, whenever three Jewish male persons come together in order to pass judgment, they become a "Beis Din." Even two people can form a "Beis Din," but they are called "Beis Din Chatzuf" (an impudent court). Today, our courts and judges are not "samuch" - ordained by the laying-on of hands. Rather, he that has become outstanding on account of his learning can officiate as a rabbinic judge in his place. So have judges (דיינים) been determined all throughout world Jewry since the end of "smichah" (ordination).

Even among the orthodox community, there are differences in belief, ideology and religious affiliation. The דתי לאומי consider themselves orthodox, but will stress an active military service in Israel, and settlement of Eretz Yisroel. Other mainstream orthodox Jews will shun military service, yet will they force a man to divorce his wife when she no longer wants to be married to him, a thing which runs contrary to the opinion of the majority of our poskim. The conservative Rabbis may also carry certain misguided beliefs, whether based on ignorance or ill-founded ideologies, but is this saying that they cannot prudently rule over a conversion issue when asked to do so? Orthodox Jewry's profound hatred over the institution of Conservative Judaism does not necessary eradicate any decision the other makes regarding conversions that might come to them. Only G-d knows the intentions of these people. It is, as I said, a grey area.

David

David,
Ultimately it is a matter of authority, not whether the conversion was carried out according to halacha or not. The orthodox beit din does not feel that it can confidently accept Conservative courts and rightfully so. On a case by case basis, however, a case could be made for your argument.
Avi

Quote "From my understanding, originally only one of the following 3 are necessary to effect marriage in front of witnesses;
1. biya
2. contract (ketuba)
3. Specific gift that she accepts (ring, apples, bike, car, gold etc)"

The Kesuva is separate from the document that someone makes Kiddushin on. that document would be just a document that says they're marrying through this document, like a Get is a document saying they're divorce. There is no monetary thing to it.

The Kesuva is a Takunas chachumim (could be from the Torah for B'sulim) to make it difficult to divorce the women. Even without the document there is a Takuna to pay, but the woman should have the document, because without it the woman wouldn't feel she could collect it. the Rabanan said that you can't live together only if she has a Kesuva in a way she'll feel confident that she would be able to collect i.e. she has the document in her hand.

quote:

Doesn't the Rebbe know that the conversion classes set-up here (in Israel) have, both, orthodox and conservative supervision, or instructors, whatever you'd like to call them? The orthodox Rabbis have not ruled them out altogether, and work alongside them.

R' David, is this what you are talking about?

Article about Conversion Courts