Jewish wedding (illustration)
Jewish wedding (illustration)Flash 90

The Daf Yomi cycle of Talmud story in Jewish law is reaching the notoriously difficult tractate Yevamot, and to gain further insight into the matter Arutz Sheva spoke with ITIM Director Rabbi Seth Farber, who helps Israelis navigate the official Rabbinate system.

Yevamot concerns itself with the unfortunate situation of a childless widow, and the system by which she automatically enters a pseudo-engagement to her late husband’s brother. The Torah allows for the former brother-in-law and recent widow to break that bond with a ritual called halitzah.

It is supposed to be a humbling affair, where the widow who would otherwise be married and cared for by her late husband’s brother removes his shoe and spits in front of him. The ritual is extremely rare - however, there have been 200 such ceremonies in Israel over the last ten years.

Rabbi Farber details that of the average 20 ceremonies the Rabbinate oversees every year, he gets several complaints from the women involved. One in particular is an unnecessarily crowded room.

“It shouldn’t be that the family comes in and they’re surprised, as if to say, ‘oh wow,' when they see 50 people in the room," he reasoned.

The rabbi described that he “once went to one as a yeshiva student with a couple hundred people. And looking back on it, I think that must have been very humiliating for the woman – and for the man!"

When asked if women have made any complaints to the Rabbis presiding at the event, or if they were simply unaware that that many people did not need to be in the room, Rabbi Farber was not certain. However, he says the issue here is a much simpler one: sensitivity.

“You have to remember that these women have just lost their husbands. The entire procedure is very awkward. The process involves her prostrating in front of her former brother-in-law to remove his shoe, then a spitting ritual. Now, they will say ‘I am willing to go through this because that is what Halakhah (Jewish law - ed.) demands of me,’ but not with so many people in the room," he adds.

Regarding complaints, he stated "we haven’t checked the Rabbinical court records to see if they got any complaints, but we get two or three calls a year. Many of them feel frustrated or offended or alienated because of what happened or what’s happening.”

One case he described involved a fight between the widow and the officiating rabbis because she insisted on bringing someone to make her feel more comfortable.

“Our hope is that the Rabbinate will take it seriously. The three areas we’re trying to push the Rabbinate on are allowing women to bring people for support, making sure that no one else is invited unless the family agrees, and to appoint a woman to accompany the widow and explain what is going on so that she understand how it works. Otherwise, the whole thing is just men," he notes.

He says that Jewish law only demands the presence of the widow, the brother-in-law and three members of a Rabbinical court to oversee the ritual. But the Rabbinate has a requirement to also include a minyan – a prayer quorum of ten men – something he has yet to find a legal source for.

Still, the novelty of the event seems to attract a number of people who otherwise do not have to be there, as Rabbi Farber highlights with his own experience in the 1980s.

“With halitzah, the only thing we’re talking about is the change of status when a beit din (Jewish rabbinical court - ed.) is in the room," and beyond that, he says privacy needs to be taken into account.

“I think this needs to be balanced today with sensitivity to the norms of society. It always has to be weighed on the scale with other factors.”

When asked if he had ever received comments or complaints from the former brothers-in-law involved in these ceremonies, he says he hasn’t, though he speculates since the “only difference is that the environment of the beit din is actually a male environment,” then by virtue of the situation “the woman might feel more vulnerable.”

Rabbi Farber does note one important thing to the Rabbinate’s credit that he contrasts with other services the Rabbinate offers.

“They have demonstrated a certain degree of sensitivity in this area because unlike other files opened in the Rabbinical court where you have to pay, here you don’t have to pay. They’ve demonstrated a certain degree of sensitivity to a woman in a very vulnerable situation and they’re saying, ‘No. There’s no way we’re going to take money from a woman who has just lost her husband.’”