Yes, she knew it was forbidden, and she was traditional, and her husband was secular, and they didn’t get along and hadn’t had relations for over two years.
And he told her, “I’m not jealous over you, be with others,” and he too was, and then after a year in which he was with women she started going out with others until she fell in love with me, and I saw that it hurt her that we had relations and I didn’t understand why; only afterward did I understand when I discovered everything.
Today she is becoming stronger religiously because of me, and there is great love between us and we want to get married, but we’re afraid there will be a curse on us if this is forbidden.
And the truth is that we are not capable of separating; we went through many hard things together and didn’t separate.
If we separate it will wrong both of us. I already won’t want to build a home and neither will she, and I’m capable of hurting myself because I can’t live without her.
I know there are those who permit marriage if the husband was not jealous over her, and also because on my end it was unintentional. If I had known in advance I wouldn’t have gotten into this from the start. When I discovered she was separated, my world collapsed. I tried to commit suicide because on the one hand I want us, and on the other hand I can’t be with her until she gets a divorce, and I waited and we observed everything and did not have relations during that period.

Hello.
I don’t know of anyone who permits the woman to the adulterous partner when the husband is not jealous over her. Such a line of reasoning did come up here on my site: https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%94-%D7%A9%D7%96%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%94-%D7%91%D7%94%D7%A1%D7%9B%D7%9E%D7%AA-%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94-2/
But no source was brought there, and it doesn’t seem convincing to me. And even if you were unintentional, it is still forbidden (see Beit Shmuel, Even HaEzer sec. 11, subsec. 3). If you have a written source that states this reasoning, I’d be glad to see it.
It may be necessary to examine the marriage to the first husband; maybe a flaw can be found there that invalidates it (such as an invalid witness—someone who publicly desecrates the Sabbath and the like). If the marriage to the first husband is void, then she is not forbidden to you.
As for your description as though you won’t be able to go on living without her: first I’ll say that people can get over love for a woman and find another partner. There is a difficult period after separation, but usually people recover from it. If you feel that you won’t be able to overcome it, I would recommend going to a psychologist who can help you with this.
To conclude, I’ll just mention in passing the saying of Rabbi Ilai (Moed Katan 16): if a person sees that his inclination is overpowering him and he cannot withstand it, he should dress in black, go to a distant place, and do what his heart desires. This is not a halakhic permission, and I certainly cannot permit you on that basis. It is guidance for minimizing damage, and most halakhic decisors did not rule in accordance with his words in practice. But I am mentioning it so that you are aware of it.
I’ll also note that there are no curses or dangers here or anything like that, only a halakhic prohibition.
Be strong and courageous.

Presumably she is forbidden on the basis of a scriptural decree…
For if she committed adultery and sinned in the interpersonal sense, why is the husband to blame that she is now also forbidden to him? And yet she is forbidden even if he forgives. It would seem that there is no difference, apparently.

In the halakhic authorities there are grounds to permit if she had relations first with another adulterous partner, and when she had relations with the second she was already forbidden to her husband. However, for this she would need to have become definitely forbidden to her husband through the other adulterous partner, meaning through witnesses or by clear knowledge through a person he trusts.

How can I check her marriage? And are you sure that the fact that her husband wasn’t jealous over her and released her, and even that today we’re good friends and everything, it’s still forbidden?

You can try to check whether a rabbi officiated at the wedding canopy ceremony. Who were the witnesses (Sabbath-observant, related to one another or to the groom or to the bride). Under the circumstances you described, unfortunately I do not see a halakhic possibility to permit it.

How can I find out? Whether the witnesses were valid or invalid?
And what happens if we get married—is it really a prohibition, and will things be bad for us because of it?

You need to check who the witnesses were and find out whether they were relatives or not religious. I assume the woman knows who they are. They are also signed on the ketubah, and I think they are also registered with the rabbinate.
I don’t know what you mean by “things will be bad for you.” It is a transgression. I’m not one of those who believe in curses and bad luck and such.

I answered who the rabbi and witnesses were. My question is only whether if people do such a prohibition, then things won’t be bad for us together, that’s all.

I don’t know how to answer questions like that. They aren’t related to Jewish law. Personally I’m not inclined to believe in magic and curses. What is bad is the fact that this is a transgression (and perhaps the punishment given after 120 years for the transgression. About that I don’t know).

Michi,

Were you hinting to B. that he could, in the name of an extra-halakhic principle, bypass Jewish law and perhaps should even preferably do so… (provided that he “dresses in black,” etc.)?

True, you qualified it by saying that this is only “minimizing damage,” but my suspicion was aroused that you meant something deeper.

Could that be?

It reminds me of the case of Rabbi David Eisenstein, who found “permissions” for wife-swapping with his friends, and claimed that there was no prohibition because there was no trespass against the husband. He presented the same arguments to the religious court. It should be noted that this was a learned and brilliant man.
This story sounds a bit strange.
https://www.bhol.co.il/forums/topic.asp?cat_id=4&topic_id=3106821&forum_id=771

From what I read there, that’s nonsense. There is certainly a prohibition of a married woman here. At most, one can discuss the prohibition to the adulterous partner, which depends on trespass against her husband, and that is what I wrote here. Rabbi Wosner’s ruling is not relevant to the matter at all, because there the discussion is about the woman acting unintentionally, and a married Jewish woman is not forbidden to her husband, and in any case also not to the adulterous partner when she transgressed unintentionally or under coercion.

But in the case under discussion, isn’t there unintentional action or coercion on the woman’s part? After all, the husbands of those women misled them into thinking there was no prohibition in it, and not only that, they also claimed that she was committing a transgression if she did not agree. The women were also under pressure from powerful figures in Haredi society.
It’s not certain that there wasn’t unintentional action here, or at least coercion on the women’s part.
It reminds me a bit of the case of “she committed adultery in order to give birth to the messiah.”
https://www.bhol.co.il/forums/topic.asp?cat_id=24&topic_id=1027245&forum_id=1364

Of course. That’s what I wrote (although it still requires discussion according to Maharik). But in the case before us, she acted intentionally.

Doron,
You understand that even if the answer is yes, he can’t say it…

By the way, there are other cases in history in which halakhic decisors hinted to people to bypass Jewish law. I read about the Rif, who would recommend that “lethal” women (those whose three husbands died one after another) find a fourth man to betroth them, and he would then arrange a wedding canopy for the couple, even though according to the Talmud such a woman is barred from marriage (because of the danger).

Doron and Y.D., any answer can be said. I oppose esotericism. My clear halakhic answer is that it is forbidden. However, there is Rabbi Ilai’s recommendation for someone who sees his inclination overpowering him, in order to minimize damage. I mentioned it so that he would be aware of it. But one has to understand that this is not a halakhic ruling; rather, if his decision is to commit a transgression, it is preferable to minimize it. But it is clear that if he does so, he is committing a transgression. Therefore my words should not be seen as an implied halakhic permission. If I thought there were permission, I would say so.

Y.D.,
Naturally it is clear to me that a rabbi—or really anyone who believes in the binding force of Jewish law—cannot permit something that contradicts it. I also believe Michi when he says the truth as he understands it best.
In any event, the moment someone introduces the consideration of “minimizing damage,” there is room to suspect even the most upright and decent person that perhaps absentmindedly he exposed a real tension/contradiction and afterward—again, in good faith—tried to cover it up.

It’s also not clear to me how Rabbi Ilai’s recommendation can be applied in the context of this case. But maybe it can…

You can always suspect, but here I don’t see any basis for suspicion, especially since as a matter of policy I write everything and oppose all concealment.
By the way, I just saw now:

A word is worth a coin.

I also agree with every word written in the link.

So if her husband proposed it and wasn’t jealous over her,
and she also really regretted her actions and cried over it day and night,
and I didn’t know about any of this at all and it was unintentional, and when I found out we kept everything until the divorce,
then why wouldn’t they permit us and just let us suffer in life?
Also, thanks to this relationship she became stronger religiously—keeps the Sabbath, is willing to cover her hair, modesty, things she didn’t do in the past—and that will stop if we separate, because she’s doing it for me.
If you have the possibility to look more deeply into the matter, I’d appreciate it, even with a rabbinical judge.

Unfortunately, at the moment I do not see a halakhic way out.
Without making a vow, I will look further and consult more, and if I find something I’ll let you know.
Good news,

All right, thank you very much. In any case update me next week. I’d be happy. Your answer right now is that one can marry and everything will be fine except for the prohibition itself, and there won’t be a curse in our lives, right?

I didn’t say that one can marry. One cannot, because there is a Torah-level prohibition here.
Nor did I say there won’t be a curse. I said that personally I do not believe in curses, and in my view these are baseless inventions. But that is belief, not knowledge. Just as I don’t know that there will be one, I also don’t know that there won’t be.
I also added that in tradition it is accepted that punishment (in heaven) for such a transgression is indeed given, although here too I cannot say that I have knowledge of this. But this is at least a more grounded tradition than matters of curses.
I’m sorry. Good luck and all the best,

Okay, thank you very much. Look into it deeply next week and update me. Good news, Sabbath peace, and thank you for the time you devoted to me. I really appreciate it.

Sorry for the intimate questions. When you did this, was it with a condom? I mean every time without exception.

Sometimes with, sometimes without.

http://halacha.co/A married woman who was unfaithful to her husband and married the other man/#_ftn3

Hello.
Sorry for the delay (Tisha B’Av).
I looked, and there is no lenient opinion here. The responsum deals with a situation where there was a previous adulterous partner and the second one was unintentional, and even about that there is a dispute. That is why I previously asked you whether there had been a previous adulterous partner, and you answered no.
In the meantime, unfortunately, I have not found a way to permit it.

Good morning, thank you for the answer, Rabbi. If you have a possibility to consult with a rabbinical judge or other additional rabbis, I’d appreciate it. Update me. Have a good day.

I sent a question to a few of my friends, but in the meantime I haven’t received practical suggestions (the matter of the condom was a suggestion from one of them). If something comes up, I’ll update you.

All right, thank you very much, update me in any case. We really already want to get married and have children, and thanks to me she will keep Sabbath, modesty, family purity, everything.

Hello Rabbi, how are you? I found some more things that I’d be glad for you to look at

https://www.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/38390

http://halacha.co/Marriage to the paramour/

In the first link it says that without the husband’s knowledge she is not forbidden to the adulterous partner.
What does “without the husband’s knowledge” mean—until the divorce, or also afterward?

If the husband was not jealous over his wife, she is permitted—that’s true only when she secluded herself with another and it’s uncertain whether she sinned,
that’s what Maimonides writes, so we can just not admit it and then it’s only a doubt, and then yes it can work and there’s no prohibition.

The husband’s lack of knowledge is accepted by almost no halakhic decisor. The Rashash says this as an explanation of Tosafot’s opinion, which was rejected by all the halakhic decisors (and even when this is said, it is said in order to permit marriages that have already taken place, not to permit marrying in the first place). Beyond that, I understand that in your case he already knew at the time it happened, since he even gave her permission for it. I assume the husband also believes her, and therefore even if he says verbally that he does not believe her, that would just be a formal statement.
Unfortunately I do not see a basis for permission here.

Regarding your first question, I checked with her again in depth and the answer is that at the time it happened she was secular, no longer religious, so she was not observant and not believing, but she did know that relations and all that were forbidden until the divorce. But she did not know how severe it was. Meaning that on her side too it was unintentional.
Her husband even told her, “Go freely with whoever you want,” proposed an open marriage, partner swapping, etc…

I still do not see a possibility to permit it. The Maharik, cited by the Rema, wrote that the rule that if a woman commits adultery unintentionally she is not forbidden to her husband applies only if her mistake was that she thought the adulterous partner was her husband; but if she knew who it was and only thought it was permitted, she is still forbidden. Beyond that, here she was not really unintentional; at most she did not know the severity of the prohibition.
I’m sorry.

If she didn’t know the prohibition and was really far from religion, then it’s a kind of unintentional act.
Some rabbi on one of the halakhah phone lines heard the whole story and said she is permitted because her husband released her and because she really didn’t know the prohibition and really regretted her actions.
Did you get a chance to consult with several other rabbis or a rabbi who sits on a rabbinical court?
And I’d be glad to know what you suggest I should do, because I really love her and intend to marry her, I’m just afraid we’ll have a life without luck that way. Some rabbi told me that and scared me. He said, “You’ll live without luck, and it’s a shame for you and for our children.” That’s what he told me, and I really cried. I can’t be without her.

Hello B.,
I wrote you my opinion. Even if she falls under the category of acting unintentionally (which is highly doubtful), this is not the kind of unintentional action that permits her. I asked others too and did not hear anything that could help here. If there is a rabbi who told you it is permitted, and you rely on him—good health to you. I’m no holier than anyone else, but that is my opinion. I cannot tell you something that in my view is not correct.
I explained to you the options that stand before you in my opinion, and also my view about matters of luck and so on. Unfortunately, I have nothing more to add about it.

What are the options? And regarding the issue of luck, what do you think? I’d be glad to know again. I’m already confused and going crazy.

I told you that in my opinion there is no halakhic permission. I mentioned Rabbi Ilai’s saying regarding minimizing damage. And I told you my opinion about bad luck in marriage and the like. Look again at the earlier emails.

And what does minimizing damage mean? I also didn’t understand.

Read one of the earlier emails I sent. I brought there the saying that if a person sees that his inclination is overpowering him, he should go to a distant place and wear black and do what his heart desires. I said that this is not a halakhic permission, but rather a suggestion for minimizing damage when one reaches the conclusion that the sin is unavoidable.

Give me a practical example because I don’t understand the saying—what does it mean to distance oneself and wear black? This isn’t an evil inclination, it’s true love. We went through a lot together. If she weren’t my destined match, we would have broken up long ago with everything we went through.

A person who wants to commit some transgression and feels he cannot withstand it and is going to commit it—our sages recommend that he go to a distant place and wear black, and only then do what his heart desires. It is important to understand that there is no permission here to commit a transgression, only a suggestion to minimize harm: if in any case you are about to commit the transgression, at least try to avoid a desecration of God’s name (do it in a place where people do not know you).

You didn’t answer my last question (regarding the nature of the first marriage).

I answered you—the rabbi of Ramat Gan married them.
What other questions do you want to know? I’ll answer, dear Rabbi.

In my last email I asked you whether the first marriage was made on the understanding that the couple permitted one another to have open relations with others already at the time they married, or whether he “released” her only from the time they decided to divorce.

He only released her when they decided to separate, about 3 years ago, and not at the time of their wedding.
Because he told her, “Either an open marriage or a divorce,” because he wasn’t capable of being only with her, and she did not agree to an open marriage under any circumstances.
He’s really not religious at all, completely secular. He even took her to partner-swapping gatherings so that maybe she’d agree to have relations in front of him while he was with another woman. She went, but only he had relations and she did not.
She’s not that kind of woman.

Understood.

Regarding desecration of God’s name, people don’t know that we had relations and such, or that she was separated. And as for the answers I gave you, do they help at all?

Unfortunately not.

If there’s anything else that could help, tell me and I’ll check everything. I really want us to get married and everything, and to build a kosher and faithful home among the Jewish people.

Unfortunately at the moment I don’t see anything else. If there is, I’ll update you.

Dear Mr. B., forget this nonsense. The Torah was not given by God, which means there is no need to obey its instructions. Live your life according to your own judgment and stop believing in the nonsense of the world to come.

I read the whole discussion and would be glad to know what you ended up doing. Did you eventually get married? Did you receive permission? And if so, are you living a happy life? Thanks!

So what happened in the end?