[Avodah] [Areivim] short marriage

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 12:40:15AM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: According to R Broyde's article, this is not the case.  Rather, the
: Rackman "beis din" relies on "mekach ta'us", but makes no attempt to
: ascertain the facts, and will always "find" grounds for annulment,
: whether they exist or not.

RERackman undid tav lemeisiv, saying it doesn't apply in the modern world,
and therefore opened the door for far more marriages to be declared ta'us
-- the minimum required for "had I known I never would have married him"
was lowered.

In the YU world, everyone remembers RYBS's statement that tav lemeisiv
isn't a pyschological observation but inherent in the nature of women
ever since "ve'el isheikh teshukaseikh". And the beauty of that thought
distracted people to objecting to the whole notion of turning tav lemeisiv
into a paruq rather than a measurable law of human nature.

In his shiur, RARakeffetR expressed RALichtinsteins's understanding that
RYBS didn't center his objection on the chazaqa of tav lemeisiv. Rather,
the majority and focus of his talk was on the idea that if hafka'as
qidushin were that easy, much of Mes Yevamos could have been reduced to
a single amud! If in any bad marriage the wife could say "had I known
it was going to turn out this way, I wouldn't have married the guy",
then so much of EhE goes out the window.

There is nothing relevent about the new female independence, since every
case under discussion, even back when women couldn't get jobs, was a
case where the woman came to beis din saying that she didn't find it tav
lemeisiv with the guy.

It's one thing to invent a new mechanism where it's easy to argue that
no one else bothered finding it before. It's another to start utilizing
a mechanism that simply could not have been missed by the millenia of
rabbanim before you. IOW, RYBS takes the implication from all the long
teshuvos RER's methodology would have made drastically simpler that
there is obviously something incorrect about it.

That something might be what RYBS said about tav lemeisiv, but that was
(in the opinions of RAL and RARR, who were there) just one example of
what may be hidden under all that precedent that makes it unignorable.

IOW, the real key line of the objection wasn't the clever bit about
"ve'el isheikh teshuqaseikh" but "Do you think you're brighter than
the Shagesaryei, Rabbi Aqiva Eiger, the Gra or Rav Chaim?" He saw the
approach as a denial of a basic element of mesorah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's never too late
micha at aishdas.org        to become the person
http://www.aishdas.org   you might have been.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                      - George Elliot