חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם

Q&A: Deliberately Bringing Invalid Witnesses to a Secular Wedding

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

Deliberately Bringing Invalid Witnesses to a Secular Wedding

Question

Hello Rabbi,
In your third book in the trilogy, you wrote that the view of most halakhic decisors in our generation is to reject deliberately bringing invalid witnesses to the wedding canopy for a secular couple so that the betrothal will not be valid.
 
Why would we want it not to be valid?

Answer

So that if the woman commits adultery, the prohibition will not be as severe and the children will not be mamzerim.

Discussion on Answer

Shahar (2021-05-12)

So it’s as if the discussion takes place on the assumption that secular society is relatively promiscuous, to the point that people are debating whether it’s preferable that they not really be married according to the law of Moses and Israel in order to prevent mamzerut?

Michi (2021-05-12)

Yes. At the same time, the value of a halakhically valid betrothal is also unclear when the couple is secular.

Shahar (2021-05-19)

A. How accepted is this assumption (that secular society is relatively promiscuous and there is reason to be concerned about infidelity) among halakhic decisors? How would I even check that?
B. Can you briefly explain why the value of a halakhically valid betrothal is unclear when the couple is secular?

Michi (2021-05-19)

A. I haven’t checked, but I estimate that it’s very widespread. I don’t know how to check, other than anonymous surveys, and even there the reliability would be fairly limited.
B. Betrothal is not a moral matter but a halakhic one. There is no value in a secular person behaving according to Jewish law. Commandments require faith, even according to the view that they do not require intention. See my article on causing a secular person to stumble in a transgression:

בעניין הכשלת חילוני בעבירה

Leave a Reply

Back to top button