Talk:Jewish views on marriage

message: What's the basis of the argument that the Lieberman clause in a ketubah is contrary to halakhah?
:I haven't read it, but I believe the problem is that a forced get is not valid. So if the clause forces the man to give a get, even if he does, the get is invalid since it was under duress. 67.165.96.26 16:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this is anti-Chareidi propaganda. Of course Chareidim, like anyone else, believe that a court may, under <I>certain</I> circumstances, force a divorce. The problem (and this is a general statement, I do not know what the lieberman clause is) is that it MUST be a Beis Din doing the compelling, or a secular authority <I>enforcing the Beis Din</I>. Rabbis do this in Israel, although there is the issue that if the cause is not proper, then you have a forced - and invalid - get again, and many Rabbis are afraid. Rabbi Dochovsky, who was up for Chief Rabbi and a secular court position (he refused the latter), and is considered Chareidi, went through all of this in a recent interview in B'sheva, saying that Rabbis have to take responsibility. (He also mentioned the interesting opinion of Rav Kapach.) However, it would not be held constitutional in the U.S. to do this sort of thing. BTW, before I married I was asked to sign a pre-nuptual from the RCA. I thought it was inequitable, but I signed anyway.Mzk1 (talk) 19:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

text: The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 07:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lieberman Clause

message: *Support. Zargulon 00:04, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: These marriages are legally binding in Israel, though not recognized by the rabbinate as Jewish.
What is the benefit of marriage from israel authorities? Tax, social money, ..??--Stone 13:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: legally binding

message: Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 16:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice of CfD nomination 

message: It would be interesting to hear other opinions concerning this section. Does one controversial man's controversial proposal deserve a large separate section? Does it merit mention at all? Also disturbing is that the section does not even identify Steven Rosenberg as a controversial figure. I will edit the article to include the "proposal" in its correct context.38.117.213.19 07:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ger Toshav proposal

message: The article says that the word "Mekudeshet" means "Holy", but I remember hearing somewhere that the word "kadosh" from which the word mekudeshet derives means, in a way, "seperate" which in this context could mean exclusivity (This would also make sense grammatically). I'm not sure what the talmudic view on this is, anyone know or have any ideas?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.161.1.25 (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: mekudeshet literally means betrothed. It is etymologically related to the meaning of holy or consecrated or set aside for a purpose.  I have removed the statement that "Mekudeshet" means "Holy".  Jon513 (talk) 13:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For a source, look at Kiddushin 2b and Tosafot ad loc. The only place that it implies that Kiddushin means "holy" is in the Bothrothal blessing.Mzk1 (talk) 11:14, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of "Mekudeshet" 

message: After the conclusion of the respective Afd's had left Marriageable age in Judaism and Child marriage in Judaism unattended for several days, I have merged both into here. Please feel free to improve. Debresser (talk) 23:02, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nicely done, Debresser, thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:21, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for the praise. Always pleasant to receive, and to give. I also merged Arayot into Forbidden relationships in Judaism. Debresser (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merges 

message: User:Newman Luke has completely rewritten the Divorce section. As usual he has done so without any warning or consensus, but this time he made a nice job of it. He has omitted the parts about modern Jewish movements. Could somebody please have a look what should be done about this? Or perhaps it is ok the way it is now? Debresser (talk) 11:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Divorce 

message: The statement that matchmaking is Haredi is a mistake. Plenty of Modern Orthodox / Dati Leumi use the same method as Lithuanian / Yeshivish Chareidim. (For that matter, matchmaking is not limited to religious people.)
An article in the english Mishpacha (I think it was) a while back describes the Chassidic arranged marriage method. The interesting thing was that the author, who had (happily) gone through it, was explaining the custom to a chareidi magazine in a way similar to which she would have had explained in to a non-charedi magazine; that to the readers of Mishpacha it would be a strange, exotic custom.Mzk1 (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Matchmaking 

message: It looks like a little bit of OR / POV on the first sentence. Tosafot's point was that the exile meant it was hard to assemple a dowry. The fact that the postion of an unmarried woman was very difficult (still is) is part of the background, not the main point.Mzk1 (talk) 21:08, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I modified that section. (I was not the one who removed the large section.)Mzk1 (talk) 14:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To deBresser: Although I think if you look up the original you will see that it is not OR, I will not fight you on this one.Mzk1 (talk) 19:23, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Child Marriage 

message: After a lot of work, I improved most of the erusin article. I kept as much of NL's stuff as I could (so it is a bit cumbersome) and tried to keep to his idea to avoid being mono-cultural. I used the JE quite a bit, even though I think it is sloppy; NL seems to have missed the Betrothal article, which I did not so much as cite as to use to back up the works I did cite. Based on what he said, I assumed his early sources were not directly consulted, so I only looked at encyclopedias (for the most part) to see if what he said had a source.
I removed or modified the stuff that the original editor misunderstood or took beyond what was stated. For example, there is no proof there that a local custom to break the wine vessel is the source of the general custom to break a vessel. There is an interesting place at the bottom of the Marriage ceremonies article in JE where he seems to have missed the semi-colon. I changed anthropological-sounding language to something closer to normal English; I also modified past to present where it seemed warranted.
I added two main sources: Rabbis Maurice Lamm and Aryeh Kaplan. The former is a very popular handbook in print for a long time; the latter is a very scholarly work (10 cites where the JE has one), much better than the JE, except that it is not peer-reviewed. It also has some Sephardi information. (Note that Rabbi Kaplan himself is of Sephardi origin.)
I added a link to erusin at the bottom; I hope this is fine. We need some more stuff; perhaps someone would like to help (or use material from there here).
If anyone would like to help, we need more stuff:
* Material from good non-Orthodox sources, without prejorative comments or guesses as to who has the most marbles.
* Sources for Orthodox double-ring ceremonies, that make clear the halachic aspect.
* Sources for Israeli Secular Orthodox weddings, perhaps the most common kind. (What I have is OR.)
* A good non-Ashkenazi source.
Move breaking the glass to here; it is not specific to erusin.
Style improvement; I am not the best writer. The amount of detail is because I followed NL's lead; I would like discussion before something is removed just for that reason.
Change the part before the wedding to a general "before the wedding" section; move the Tenaim to there, and link to the related articles.
Sources for the last section.
May I link to there from the body of the article?
I would appreciate comments. I am willing to defend every change that I made.Mzk1 (talk) 21:21, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erusin article 

message: It seems to say that the only the wife has conjugal rights. I beieve this is untrue; both Nedarim and Ketubot appear to say otherwise. The difference is that the wife's are in the Torah. Of course Conjugal rights are monetary; they do not allow physical force.Mzk1 (talk) 22:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conjugal Relations 

message: Isn't there a responsibility for men to sire children, two at least?  If so, make sure to include the citation to Mishnah or Talmud.
4.249.63.148 (talk) 17:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Rambam or Shulchan Aruch would be better.Mzk1 (talk) 05:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is, and it is the subject of the first (and following) chapters of Even Ha'ezer. Debresser (talk) 14:49, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  responsibility for children 

message: Why is there no mention of gay couples or same-sex marriage, when same-sex marriages are recognized by two of the four main denominations of Judaism, including the largest in the United States? Why is the definition of marriage in this article so heternormative?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.166.173.174 (talk) 18:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are welcome to update the article with any relevant references you can find. Leegee23 (talk) 22:53, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of gay couples? 

message: This article does a good job of discussing the historical, biblical, and talmudic views of marriage, but I added the globalize tag to the top of this page for two reasons:
#It does not highlight regional views of marriage (Ashkenazi views, Sephardic views, etc.)
#It does not highlight denominational views of marriage (Orthodox views, Reform views, etc.)  --GHcool (talk) 19:35, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the tag should be removed. The text is "a worldwide view". That is not what you say here. In addition, I don't think there is much of a Ashkenazic or Sephardic view of marriage. And Orthodox and Reform views 1. are only recent 2. doubt in how far they are existent. Debresser (talk) 20:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know very much about regional differences in views toward marriage, but I suspect that denominational differences exist and are worthy of inclusion here.  A quick search on Amazon for "Jewish marriage" reveals that whole books have been published by Orthodox presses on the subject of marriage.  There are fewer (but still worthy) books on modern Jewish marriage that seem to be intended for readers of any Jewish denomination.  Just a few days ago, The New York Times published an editorial that deals (peripherally) with the Orthodox view of marriage.  --GHcool (talk) 20:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Even if such different points of view exist, the Globalize template is not the right template, imho. In addition, I'd say that we should first be certain that other viewpoints exist before we start demanding them with a template. Debresser (talk) 22:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm happy to change the template to whichever the community thinks is most appropriate, but there is little doubt in my mind that there are subtle differences between Orthodox Judaism's view of marriage and non-Orthodox Judaism's.  Some of these differences are discussed in the Women in Judaism article.  --GHcool (talk) 02:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Globalize 

message: Why are all the citations of Torah directed to a Christian translation of "the Bible"? This is most inappropriate, and scholastically inaccurate. But it seems to be a WP-wide macro, am I correct? How can I have this changed to point to something like the JPS translation? http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/sacred/bib/jps/gen001.htm#028 Leegee23 (talk) 22:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: As you can see on the documentation of Template:Bibleverse, you can add the source code "HE" to refer to the JPS translation of Machon Mamre. Debresser (talk) 09:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Biblical" References 

message: Two points: 
1) Are we discussing same-sex civil marriage or religious ceremonies? The discussion about Reform in this article draws upon this distinction. If civil marriages are at stake, then we probably can find RS that mention various attitudes held by Orthodox leaders and organizations. 
2) The marriage of two gay men performed by Rabbi Steve Greenberg is mentioned. I have two questions about this:
:a) Even if Rabbi Greenberg is still considered an "Orthodox rabbi" (whatever that means), is this significant enough to be included. clearly, he is so far outside the Orthodox mainstream that I'm not sure if this specific ceremony should be mentioned. 
:b) I'm not sure about the RS involved, but in the comment section of this blog http://morethodoxy.org/2011/11/18/an-orthodox-gay-wedding/, Rabbi Greenberg himself admits that the wedding ceremony only counted as a civil marriage, and that it was not meant to be a halachic marriage. This would also seem to mitigate against including this as a counter example to the predominant Orthodox position.Scarletfire2112 (talk) 09:10, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the mention of that specific occasion confuses the point. I think it better to remove the second sentence. Debresser (talk) 18:05, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orthodox same-sex marriage 

message: I deleted the entire line about Women at festivities after looking up the citations and discovering they are completely inaccurate. The line was added by Maasharta11 in July of 2011 and cited from Encyclopaedia_Biblica. Marriage 4.Home. Although the Encyclopaedia_Biblica was cited in good faith and the article does cite the verses referenced, the fact is the citations are false and have nothing to do with the issue (festive events) regarding which they are cited. I realize WP's goal is not to provide truth or fact, but propagating misinformation is probably also not a good idea. --pikipiki (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: In the bible

message: Can we add a section about classes and what Jewish marriage means in modern society?  Examples form Rohr Jewish Learning Institute
* 
19:05, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Adamreinman, you are advertising the Rohr Jewish Learning Institute on Wikipedia. Please see WP:SPAM and WP:PROMO in this regard, or even WP:COI. At some point, this will start annoying people, like it already annoys me. Please be aware that at that time you risk that all your edits will be reverted, and you yourself will be topic banned or blocked. Please stop with advertising that institute here. There are so many other valuable contributions that still can be made to Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 22:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  education about Jewish Marriage 

message: Large parts of this article have no sources at all, and other large parts are only given primary sources such as Talmudic references. We even have Talmudic references for statements related to customs centuries following the Talmud. This is highly unsatisfactory and it is surely possible to do much better given the huge literature on the subject. Zerotalk 01:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing in this article 

message: Why on earth does the article say that "As for men who committed adultery (with another man's wife), Abba ben Joseph and Abba Arika are both quoted in the Talmud as expressing abhorrence, and arguing that such men would be condemned to Gehenna." The punishment for a man who commits adultery with another man's wife is exactly the same as for the woman - death. If this sentence is trying to say that the same conditions apply to executing a man for adultery as to a woman (consent, warning, and witnesses), and that the death penalty for adultery was abolished for men as well, it should say so, and then include this sentence. Otherwise, it is wildly inaccurate.Polymath49 (talk) 01:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that is indeed what the Gemarra says. To answer your question, apparently it means that even in case the man is not apprehended, he will still be sentenced to Gehenna. I'll leave it to you to clarify that in the article. :) Debresser (talk) 09:15, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punishment for male adultery 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Jewish views on marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041217072309/http://www.ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/respdisp.pl?file=8&year=5756 to http://www.ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/respdisp.pl?file=8&year=5756
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:23, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jewish views on marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071224153323/https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/448425/jewish/Why-Marry.htm to http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/448425/jewish/Why-Marry.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:00, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: POV tag was added for the lede which does not seem to summarize the article content. It uses language like "de-emphasize procreation" to describe the views of non-"Traditional" denominations. What is traditional Judaism? It places undue emphasis on this and concludes: "This view is considered as a diversion from the Jewish Law by the Orthodox denominations, rather than as a legitimate, alternative interpretation." This doesn't seem to be weighing how the subject is discussed by reliable sources.
Seraphim System (talk) 01:29, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 

message: There is an expression "Lead, follow, or get out of the way." (I'm not a former Marine, to whom that expression may belong) To accommodate what is currently in the article, and acknowledge the "Inadequate lead" HatNote, it seems that the current lead text can be defined as Pre-split and post-split (with reference to Orthodox Judaism). These two parts can form a nice overview, with a lead that introduces them. Pi314m (talk) 07:00, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Need for new Lead

message: To edit this section, I will be using the source Hoffman, Lawrence A. “The Jewish Wedding Ceremony.” Life Cycles in Jewish and Christian Worship, University of Notre Dame Press, 1996, pp. 129–153. Lawrence A. Hoffman has a doctorate and has served as a professor at the University of Notre Dame. I will add information about how the ketubah, or marriage document could be used in divorce as Orthodox Jews have started to build divorce standards into the document. I will also include the standards for creating the Jewish divorce document or the get, as it is a very detailed process to ensure that no mistakes occur. There is not much information in this section and I simply wish to add more. All together I will add around 100-200 words. If anyone wants to comment on these changes, please let me know on this Talk Page or on my Talk Page. Taylor0323 (talk) 02:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I have my reservations about how pertinent this information will be in this article. This might be most relevant in Ketuba. Debresser (talk) 20:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Debresser that it shouldn't be too ketuba focused. Can you make sure you're writing only about divorce, and mention ketuba only in that context. I do think the standards for the Jewish divorce document are important to put in this article, especially the get, because that's central to a section on Jewish divorce. Beware of too much detail, though, because there's a separate Wiki article that is just on the get (which you're welcome to edit too...). Brevity is key here. Thanks for making this article better! Chapmansh (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for your input! I will refrain from adding more details about the get as its function is already covered. In the second paragraph under agunah (under divorce) I will include the following information: One of such efforts by some Conservative Jews is that some are beginning to build provisions into the ketubah where if predetermined circumstances occur, the divorce goes into effect immediately. This is in reference to how Conservative Jews (not Orthodox, as I accidentally wrote before) are trying to combat husbands refusing a divorce to their wives. This edit will be less extensive as I previously thought. I will only be adding around 50 words. Let me know if you have any concerns about my additions.Taylor0323 (talk) 09:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Divorce section 

message: This article is missing a discussion of marriage in Haymanot and Karaite Judaism.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.77.179.20 (talk) 13:14, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing discussion of Haymanot and Karaite Judaism