JUDAISM AND THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT!“An Analysis of 1 Thessalonians 4.1-8 In Light of 1st Century Messianic Theology” Zechariah 1.16; 2.14-17 Psalms 37.34 ק ו ה By Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham (John Mauritz Hummasti) President, Noahide Publishing, Jerusalem, Israel . Copyright 2004 A Ketuvah (Jewish Marriage Contract) is one of the most essential documents necessary for the perpetuity of halacha in the Jewish Community. The Ketuvah has moral and ethical values that stand as a bulwark against fornication and adultery. Without this document a marriage is not valid; children from a union lacking this document have no identity in the community and a divorce is not possible. The reverse is also true. It is only with this document that a marriage is considered valid, children from such a union are provided for in the event of death or divorce and such children have a perpetual identity in the Jewish community. The document has moral value in that a man and woman will enter into the covenant of marriage making a public commitment of their moral value as to the lasting nature of a marriage. It has ethical value in that this same couple will instill this moral value into their children by showing them that each person has a consideration about the future to make before entering into a contract or covenant. Ethically speaking, it is the proper (halachic) thing to do. That is, one should take this course of action or this path before consummating a marriage. Morally speaking, it the honorable thing to do before consummating a marriage. Religiously speaking, negotiating a marriage contract is the first step in the sanctity of the marriage union. The next step then, is the erusin (betrothal) and nissuin (marriage by yichud [seclusion of the bride and groom privately for a period of time sufficient so as to consummate the marriage by intercourse). This aspect of the nissuin (the bride and groom going into a private room) is witnessed by those formulating the minyan (quorum of ten Jewish men present during the chuppah (bridal canopy). In Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Ishut, Maimonidies writes, “Before the giving of the Torah, when a man met a woman in the city market, and they desired to marry, he took her into his home, had private relations with her and in this manner made her his wife. Since the giving of the Torah at Sinai, the Children of Israel were commanded to acquire a wife in the presence of wittnesses. Only subsequent to this does she become his wife. It [acquisition in the presence of (eyd) wittnesses] is alluded to in Devarim 22:13: “When a man acquires a wife and has relations with her....” Acquisition is formalized only by transfer of a document (ketuvah) or money (kesef, coinage or anything having a value of a p’rutah or more). The Sages have forbidden acquisition by conjugal relations. It has become the universal custom in Judaism to acquire a wife only by a ketuvah through the process of erusin (betrothal) or kiddushin (consecration) and chuppah (the Wedding Canopy), followed by nissuin (private seclusion of the Bride and Groom that was wittnessed; for a period long enough for the newly wed couple to have engaged in sexual relations). From what follows, it is apparent that the reason the Sages have forbidden acquisition of a wife by conjugal relations is to prevent a man from easily divorcing his wife and to prevent giving the public the impression that promiscuity in Israel is a common practice. Prior to the giving of the Torah at Sinai, when a man would meet a woman in the public market, and they desired, he could give her a fee, engage in relations with her in any place, and then she would go her way. He had no further responsibilities towards her and she was considered a prostitute. The Ra’avad and other authorities consider the prohibition of relations with a prostitute to be limited to a professional prostitute. The difference between the two, in Rambam’s and Ra’avad’s opinions is the severity of the prohibition. Both agree that the Torah forbids such relations outside marriage (with a prostitute). Devarim 23:18 In addition, most authorities agree that sexual relations outside the context of a sanctified marriage are forbidden. There is the status that a woman can acquire outside the context of marriage, where sexual relations are permitted but the woman does not acquire the status of a prostitute. She is designated as a sexual partner, “pilegesh,” without consecration. Hilchot Melachim 4.4 In this context, the pilegesh is a concubine with whom a man is permitted to have conjugal relations for the purposes of procreation; as was the case with Avinu Avraham and Yaacov. A careful reading of Megillah Esther in the Hebrew text reveals that Hadassah (Esther) was a concubine to Achashverosh. In the Torah, (VaYiqrah 18) there are primary forbidden relations “arayot”, such as with a person’s mother, sister, his daughter, and those close to him with blood ties, such as one’s neice. Each of these are called an “ervah.” In addition, there are secondary relations which are forbidden by Oral Tradition; and are enumerated as listing twenty. Those forbidden relations that are punishable by execution are discussed in Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah, Chapter 1. Those that are punishable by karet and lashes are discussed in Hilchot Sanhedrin Chapter 19. From a Biblical perspective, the erusin was followed by a period of one year from the finality of the marriage contract being negotiated before the nissuin took place. From the time of the sixteenth century, the two ceremonies have been combined in Rabbinical Judaism. Erusin, or betrothal, in a Biblical sense, unlike the Western sense of the word; is the act of kiddushin (consecration or sanctification) which is binding on both the bride and groom. The two are married in every sense of the word. If the engagement (erusin) is broken off before the nissuin, the offending party must pay a fine (kenas). The terms of the marriage contract are: 4) ketuvah – this defines the legal contract or document outlining the marriage settlement, the duties of the husband to work and provide for, honor, support and to maintain his wife. These duties are Biblically mandated as, “he shall not diminish her food, raiment, or conjugal rights.” In a stricter sense, it defines the amount of money the husband agrees to pay the wife in the event of death or divorce. 5) erusin – this refers to the betrothal of the bride. In every sense of the word, the bride is married to the husband and a divorce with a valid get (document of divorce) is required for dissolution of the marriage. 6) nissuin – this refers to the consummation of the marriage. 7) kiddushin – this refers to the solemn nature of the marriage being sacred in the eyes of HaShem. 8) sheva brachot (birkath chathanim) – this refers to the seven benedictions said under the wedding canopy (Chuppah) with two cups of wine. 9) Chuppah – this refers to the canopy under which the new couple pronounce the sheva brachot. It is held aloft by four men, usually with poles and was once done under the stars at night, signifying that a new home (tent) has been opened in the Jewish Community. 10) minyan – this refers to the quorum of ten men necessary to witness the marriage as a community act. 11) tenaim – this refers to the document listing the conditions of the dowry (nedunya) entered into by the parents and any other matters such as the kenas in the event that the engagement is broken off before the marriage. 12) nedunya – this refers to the dowry that the father of the bride agrees to provide the bride with as she enters the marriage so as to enable her to be provided for during the first year of marriage and becomes a debt against the bridegroom. 13) nikhse tzon barzel – this refers to “iron sheep property” the wife brings into the marriage separate from the dowry and may or may not be stipulated in the ketuvah, and may refer to property that the wife brings into the marriage years after the wedding ceremony. It is referred to as iron sheep property because it is not movables (i.e. it may be real property), and cannot be destroyed. This property refers to that which the husband has assumed responsibility for and which he derives benefit (profit) from. 14) nikhse melog – this refers to movable property such as sheep, grain, woven cloth, etc. and for which the husband derives profit but for which the husband has no liability in the event of loss or damage. In the event that the husband has not assumed responsibility for the nedunya, it is termed nikhse melog. Other property the wife receives during the marriage such as a gift or an inheritance after betrothal are nikhse melog. The only property is stipulated in the terms of the ketuvah are that of the “bride price,” either one or two hundred zuz and the additional dowry. 15) mohar ha-betuloth – this refers to the bride price given to a virgin in the event of a divorce or death of the husband. 16) mohar ha-almanah – this refers to the bride price given to a widow in the event of the death of the husband. It is given weather the marriage ceremony took place or weather there was merely a betrothal. 17) zuz – this refers to the bride price stipulated in the ketuvah; either one hundred zuz for a widow, divorcee or a doubtful virgin, (one whose hymen was accidentally injured) or; two hundred zuz for a virgin. 18) tosefeth ketuvah – this refers to any additional sum stipulated in the ketuvah by the bridegroom in addition to the bride price to be given to the bride in the event of divorce or death. In that case, it could refer to the amount of maintenance to be provided to the bride, together with her children or separate from the children altogether. 19) kenas – refers to a fine resulting from the marriage being broken off before the nissuin ceremony took place. 20) get – this refers to the divorce document and attending regulations required before a divorcee can become remarried. In a strict sense, the get is not effective until it has been delivered into the hand of the wife (divorcee); and the stipulated conditions must be met as Biblically mandated. The reverse is true about a marriage. For a marriage to be valid, a husband must acquire a wife, by handing her a ketuvah, he must take her into his home and he must provide for her, support her and honor her above his own soul. Her needs come before his own. (“Husbands, Love your wives, even as Moshiach gave himself for the Yachad/Kehillat/Ekklessia.”) She is entitled to all the rights mandated in the Torah and in the event that these rights are not met, or the husband is unable to meet these rights, a divorce is mandatory under rabbinical law. For instance, the Torah exempts a newly-wed groom from going out to war so that he can make his wife rejoice. If he cannot make his wife rejoice in that period, does the Torah mandate that he divorce her? In respect to the Jewish Community, the Construction of the Mishkan (Tabernacle) and the Temples of Solomon, Ezra and the final Dwelling Place of the Shekinah fits nicely into the Ketuvah concept. Isaiah 1.26, 66.10,12 With regards thereto, Y’shua said, “I go to prepare a place for you, that where I am, there you may be also!” This promise, from a Biblical point of view represents the aspect of a bride-grooms obligation to go and prepare a home for the betrothed bride (nissuin) and after that year is up to bring her into his newly established home. It is the bringing of the bride into his home that fulfills or completes the required halachah (law, or literally, the proper path in which one is to walk) of the Torah. So, when HASHEM told the Children of Israel to ask of their neighbors in Mitzraim for gold, silver, gems and other wealth, HASHEM was providing for the Mishkan, as well as giving His bride her mohar ha-betuloth! In the words of Maimonidies, the obligations a man “acquires” by marriage are ten and the rights a man acquires when married are four. Of his obligations, three have their origin in the Torah. (Exodus 21:10) They are sha’arah, kesutah, v’onatah. These three are described as follows: sha’arah means providing the wife with subsistence; kesutah, means supplying her with garmets; and, v’onatah means that he must fulfill his conjugal obligations towards her. The ketuvah itself is the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract. The responsibilities ordained by the Rabbis, are statutory conditions of the Ketuvah; they are referred to as, t’na’ei ketuvah: 21) to provide medical treatment if she becomes sick; 22) to redeem her if she is held captive; 23) to bury her if she dies; 24) the right for her to continue living in his home after his death, for as long as she remains a widow; 25) the right for her daughters to receive their substance from his estate after his death, until they become consecrated; 26) the right of her sons to inherit her ketuvah, in addition to their share of the inheritance in her husband’s estate (if she dies before he does). 7) the right to inherit her property stipulated or mentioned in the ketuvah. The wording of the husbands obligations stated in the Ketuvah are specific: “I will honor thee, work for thee, provide for thee, maintain thee, and I will set aside for thee ____ zuz as is the custom of faithful Jewish Husbands in Israel, according to laws of Moshe and Israel.” The four privileges that a man acquires are all rabbinical in origin: 27) the right to the fruit of her labor; 28) the right to any ownerless object she finds; 29) the right to benefit from the profits of her property during her lifetime; 30) the right to inherit her property if she dies during his lifetime. His right takes precedent over all other rights. The Bride’s Ketuvah is read while the couple stand under the Chuppah. One modern entrepreneur Reuven Prager (Beged Evri) has tried to restore the Biblical wedding where the bride is (was) carried by men (as was Sarah) in an ark dressed in all her finery, decked with a veil of 1000 pieces of silver; [the veil] is still customary among Temani [Yemenite] Jews. This must remind one of the passuk, “Behold the Bride has prepared herself for the wedding feast of the lamb.” In 1 Thessalonians 4:1-8 we find specific wording which clearly mandates, once properly analyzed, that a Messianic couple solemnize (by which, I mean sanctify) their marriage with a ketuvah. The passuk reads, “For the rest, then, brothers, we beg you and we exhort in the Lord Y’shua, even as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please G-D, that you abound more. For you know what injunctions we gave you through the Lord Y’shua. For this is G-D’s will, your sanctification, for you to abstain from fornication, each one of you to know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honor, not in passion of lust, even as also the nations not knowing G-D do; not to go beyond and to overreach in the matter of his brother; because the avenger concerning these is the Lord, even as we told you before and solemnly testified. For G-D did not call us to uncleanness, but in sanctification. Therefore, the one who despises does not despise man, but G-D, even He giving His Holy Spirit to us.” Some pertinent wording in this context relates: “how you ought to walk,” “what injunctions we gave you,” “G-D’s Will (connected to injunctions and ought to walk),” “your sanctification,” “possess,” “(his) vessel,” “in sanctification and honor,” “defraud,” and “matter.” In defining these terms, it necessary to rely upon, The Interlinear Bible, Jay P. Green, Sr. (Sovereign Grace Pub. Lafayette, Indiana) and, The Expanded Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, W.E. Vine, (Bethany House Publishers, Minneapolis, Minnesota). Ktaomai – to procure for oneself, acquire, obtain – akin to ktema – denotes a possession, property). Skeuos – a husband and wife, 1 Peter 3.7; of the wife, probably 1 Thess. 4.4; while the exhortation to each one, “to possess himself of his own vessel in sanctification and honor” is regarded by some as referring to the believer’s body [….], the view that the “vessel” signifies the wife, and that the sanctified maintenance of the married state, is supported by the fact that in 1 Peter3.7 the same word time, honor, is used with regard to the wife, again in Heb.13.4 timios, honorable (R.V. “in honor”) is used in regard to marriage; further, the preceding command in 1 Thess. 4 is against fornication, and the succeeding one is against adultery. In Ruth 4.10, Septuagint, ktaomai, to possess, is used of a wife. Hagiasmos – of separation to G-D. [….] Sanctification is also used in In the N.T. of separation of the believer from evil things and ways. [….] It must be pursued by the believer, earnestly and undeviatingly. [….] The H.S. is the Agent in sanctification. [….] The sanctification of the elect is associated with choice, or election of G-D; …. [ This reminds us of the saying that, “since the creation of the world, HASHEM has been making marriages.” That is, HASHEM is the Great SHADKAN (Matchmaker)]. Time – primarily a valuing, hence, objectively, (a) a price paid for or received. (c) in the sense of value, of human ordinances, valueless against the indulgence of the flesh, or perhaps of no value in attempts at asceticism. Timao – (6) the respect and material assistance given to widows, 1 Tim. 5.3. Entimos – The comparative degree, entimoteros, is used […] of degrees of honor attached to persons invited to a feast, a marriage feast…. Pleonekteo – translated “defraud” in [….] , the latter part being in reference to the Tenth Commandment. In this context, we can see how Y’shua rightly said, “Whoever looks upon a married woman to lust after her has already committed adultery [with her] in his heart.” For covetousness (coveting another man’s wife) leads to the “finished” actions of the flesh. Pragma – akin to prasso, to do, denotes (a) that which has been done. A deed, translated “matters” [….] “matter;” (b) 1 Cor. 6.1, in a forensic sense, a law- suit [….] the matter under consideration, which, as the preceding words show, is here the sin of adultery. Obviously, the phrase “to abstain from fornication,” necessarily implies that there is more than one person involved in the act of fornication, and therefore, the passage cannot be referring to the individual believer as some posskim assert. It must be referring, therefore, to two people maintaining sanctification and not merely to personal (individual) prenuptial chastity, or personal self control. The context demands reasoning that is consistent with the halachic terms used in the text and not reasoning that has some celibate (e.g. priory or convent “Catholic”) overtones. Additionally, usage of the term, or phrase, “to know how to possess....” “according to G-D’S will” obviously implies acquisition of something, that is, knowledge of (properly) acquiring a wife. The Kehillat of Thessalonians at one time clearly lacked the knowledge of “how to” acquire a wife. Paul possessed that previously imparted knowledge as he stated, “For you know what injunctions we gave you.” He wrote further, in 2 Thessalonians 3.6 for the Kehillat to follow or imitate “us” and to observe the tradition (transmitted oral law,) or precepts that were delivered to them. Since Paul commanded them to know how to acquire or possess a wife then there must have been some specific knowledge of how to (walk) acquire a wife in sanctification and honor as it existed at the time in which Paul wrote the above ordinance. The term, “know” ([Greek] eido), means that one has seen, or perceived from “observation” and not just from having an intuitive, or [spiritual] word of knowledge. Clearly, without question, the text is in reference to self control and sanctification, but its context is in regards to fornication and acquisition of a vessel. If a vessel can become unclean then it requires transmission of the tumah from another party. The use of the term uncleanness, (“For G-D did not call us to uncleanness, but in sanctification.”) clearly implies a physical state or status (tumah, rather than tahor), the opposite of sanctification (holiness). In the context of the verse, without sanctification, sexual union transmits a certain degree of tumah. With sanctification, in honor, sexual union becomes a state of holiness. (Hebrews 13:4) Holiness, in the context of the passage necessitates separation even as Paul wrote of in 2 Thessalonians 3.6, 15. (Note: Matthew 18.15-20, 21-35, 2 Corinthians 2.5-8;7.8-12.) In Jewish tradition, of the Brachot said during the modern wedding ceremony, (which combines erusin and nissuin into one ceremony,) one specifically mentions separation: “Blessed Art Thou, Ad-noy, King of the Universe, Who has sanctified us through Thy Commandments, commanding us concerning sexual propriety, prohibiting to us (women) who are merely betrothed, but permitting to us (women) who are married to us through chuppah and kiddushin. Blessed Art Thou, HaShem, Who makes your people Israel Holy through Chuppah and Kiddushin.” By the Bridegroom maintaining separation from the one betrothed, (who, in the context of the above Brachah was prohibited to the bridegroom,) he remained in a state of sanctity. In the context of fornication, one literal translation of B’rashith (Genesis) 34:5 is that Dinah had been defiled (id. 34:13). The immoral and emotional nature of the incident aside, we learn from the passage that without a dowry, (nedunya), she was timay ([Hebrew:] defiled). Now I pose a question, were the brothers defrauded by the actions of Shechem? The Torah speaks for itself. The answer is self evident! Clearly, Shechem and Chamor (non-Jews or non-Hebrews, [B’nai Noach]) knew the cultural custom of a dowry and gift (matan or additional sum [tosepheth]) given to the bride prior to the marriage. If we examine B’rashith 24: 47, 53, we see that the same custom was followed by Eliezar when taking Rivka (Rebecca) as a wife for Yitzchaq (Isaac). Perhaps the strongest argument that can be made for, as opposed to against, the case of 1 Thess. 4:4 referring to a ketuvah is Paul’s treatment of the subject of marriage and divorce in 1 Cor. 7:10-15. In this context, a woman departs from her husband’s house according to the laws of divorce set forth in the Torah ( ). It is not the custom for a man to depart from his wife’s house; as the husband has to bring the wife into his house. This is why we celebrate the custom of Chuppah! Paul’s emphasis in 1 Cor. 7, is that “the wife should not depart....” as “the Lord commanded” (7:10) [in the Torah]. Granted, Paul is making a concession to the wife, (a novel thing for his time), that she could divorce her husband (something that, in Judaism, did not occur until Rabbanu Gershom allowed it in the Century; see below, section . Also, note that a wife could initiate a divorce under the ruling of Maimonidies in the Mishneh Torah; but Jewish Law has consistently held that a husband must willingly and freely grant the get.). Here, the whole point is that Paul’s emphasis is the departing wife (mentioned two times) who is in a marriage union, “in the Lord” (7:39); in contrast to the unbelieving husband who departs (“for the sake of peace” 7:15). Those who wish to argue against the position taken here and wish to marry (acquisition by intercourse) a woman in dishonor should be placed under a ban, or kerem, (until they repent) as they have despised the commandment of HaShem. (1 Corinthians 5:1-7:40) In Jewish tradition, one under a kerem, (communal ban), was classed as belonging in the category of am ha’aretz (people of the land; a commoner, or ignoramus, who did not know the law). He was in a distinct class kept separate from the Chaverah (group) or Kehillah (Community) because he or she did not follow the traditions or customs (oral law) transmitted by the elders. This was one who refused to follow the customs and traditions, or oral law. One was prohibited from eating bread with him, (e.g.1 Corinthians 4.11; 2 John 1.10) or eating in his house, as he or she did not maintain Levitical purity. By not maintaining ritual purity sufficient to be able to offer sacrifices in the Temple; or to invite Kohen or Levites into one’s home for a meal meant that one was in a ritual state of tumah and was “put out of the synagogue (John 9.22).” A Kohen or Levi was given first honor in the meal and was to offer (say) the Brachah “hamotzi” (Blessing over Bread), as the Table was considered an alter to HASHEM! (Hebrews 13.10) He (Paul) even writes, “he who despises, despises not man but G-D!” (“Therefore, the one who despises does not despise man, but G-D,....”) How can one despise the Will of G-D, in the context of the Torah? By doing that which is presumptuous! (V’Yiqrah 26.43; Devarim 17.8-13; 29.1720;). THE JEWISH WEDDING In describing the Jewish Wedding, we might first begin by saying that the wedding is a public ceremony of a private commitment, or contract between two individuals. THE KETUVAH IN CONTEMPORARY LIFE AND LAW Contemporary Law – Marriage and Divorce: Within the Jewish community, there are various opinions about the use of a ketuvah relevant to the different branches of Judaism. Orthodox Jews will not marry without a ketuvah; Conservative Jews generally marry with a ketuvah although the text of the ketuvah will vary from the strict adherence to the Orthodox text; Reform Jews generally do not use the ketuvah. Without a ketuvah, an Orthodox Jewish bet din (Jewish Religious Court) will not issue a Get (Divorce Decree). American Law: New York Get Laws In New York, several laws have been passed called “Civil Get Laws” in order to grant a divorce according to the will of a wife to either remarry or be completely separated under Jewish law from a husband in which there has been a complete breakdown in the marriage but the reluctant husband does wish to grant a get (divorce) because he does not wish to pay the monetary sum stipulated in the ketuvah. This has caused several problems in the Jewish Community because, according to the Torah as clearly stated in Jewish law (halacha), a husband must willingly grant the get. One of the reasons a bet din will not issue a get is because a husband has been promised something that influences the husband’s decision to grant the divorce; such as dropping the civil divorce action; or monetary settlement of the divorce. Arizona Law California Law Oregon Law Suit for Enforcement as a Contract Israeli Law Value in Law: Ancient Law Modern Views Conclusions: