Free to republish with attribution
To watch the video, go here:
Note: Israel Kin said some of the same things in his video from a few days ago, which you can see here:
I. Feminists are misusing the term “agunah”
In classical halakha, an agunah was a woman whose husband disappeared—lost at sea, missing in war, presumed dead but without proof. The halakhic challenge was evidentiary: rabbis had to determine whether enough testimony or physical evidence existed to declare the husband deceased.
Rabbi Rahmanov invokes Rav Ovadia Yosef’s monumental work after the Six‑Day War and Yom Kippur War. Rav Ovadia reviewed battlefield reports, dog tags, dental records, and eyewitness testimony to free women whose husbands never returned. These were cases of genuine halakhic entrapment—women who could not remarry because the law required certainty of death.
Today, the term “agunah” is often applied to women whose husbands refuse to give a get during a contentious divorce. This is painful, unjust, and sometimes abusive—but it is not the same category.
II. The numbers are exaggerated
Rabbi Rahmanov estimates that out of 1,000 Jewish divorces, perhaps one or two are true halakhic agunah cases. Activist claims of “50,000 agunot” are, in his words, “ridiculous.” A typical Beth Din processes 100–130 gittin per year, and only a tiny fraction involve long‑term recalcitrance.
III. The problem is gender-neutral
The problem is real—but it is not systemic halakhic paralysis. It is the weaponization of divorce. One of the most striking aspects of Rabbi Rahmanov’s analysis is his insistence on symmetry. He does not deny that men sometimes use the get as leverage, but he argues that the public conversation has ignored the reciprocal dynamic.
When men use a get for leverage, why do they do it?
1. Financial concessions: To extract better financial terms.
2. Pressure the wife to drop civil litigation: To end or limit court actions.
3. Retaliate for perceived injustices: To “punish” the spouse.
4. Maintain control in a collapsing marriage: To preserve a sense of power.
How do women contribute to get recalcitrance?
1. They restrict visitation.
2. They block fathers from attending milestone events.
3. They weaponize custody to gain advantage.
4. They use civil court filings as a first strike.
When a father is barred from seeing his children, he often responds by withholding the get. The get becomes the only leverage he has left.
IV. Describing is not justifying
Rabbi Rahmanov lays out a predictable pattern:
1. The wife files in civil court first.
2. The husband feels ambushed and bypassed.
3. Custody becomes a battleground.
4. The husband withholds the get.
5. The wife escalates through public activism.
6. The husband digs in further.
Each step is a reaction to the previous one; each step makes resolution harder. His core message is simple: Neither the get nor the children should ever be bargaining chips. But in the absence of mediation, education, or rabbinic guidance, that is exactly what they become.
V. Why starting in civil court often backfires
One of Rabbi Rahmanov’s most controversial claims is that the order of filing matters—and that starting in civil court often triggers get refusal.
From the husband’s perspective, filing in civil court first feels like:
1. A legal ambush.
2. A bypassing of halakhic authority.
3. A hostile escalation.
4. A public declaration of war.
In halakhic terms, it can be seen as m’sirut—turning a Jew over to secular authorities.
The U.S. vs. Israel legal landscape
The U.S. system is structurally incapable of resolving halakhic divorce disputes. New York’s “get laws” can help, but only if the judge understands them. Most states cannot enforce religious divorce due to church–state separation.
Israel can imprison recalcitrant spouses for contempt.
Rabbi Rahmanov’s prescription:
– Go to Beth Din first.
– Let civil court follow, not lead.
This is not about patriarchal control; it is about preventing escalation.
VI. The nuclear option: Marriage nullification and its dangers
Some activists have proposed a radical solution: retroactively nullify marriages (hafk’at kiddushin) when a husband refuses to give a get. Rabbi Rahmanov calls this “dangerous.”
If the Israeli Rabbinate or major halakhic authorities do not recognize the nullification:
– The woman’s future children may be considered mamzerim.
– Those children may be barred from marrying within the Jewish community.
– Their ability to make Aliyah could be jeopardized.
– The woman may find herself halakhically married in one community and unmarried in another.
This is not theoretical. It is a generational catastrophe. Nullification is not a shortcut; it is a fragmentation of Jewish peoplehood.
VII. Social media activism: The illusion of power
Rabbi Rahmanov is deeply critical of modern activism around agunah cases—not because he denies suffering, but because he believes the tactics are ineffective and often halakhically prohibited.
Why public shaming doesn’t work:
– Public pressure hardens the husband’s resolve.
– Doxing escalates conflict.
– Online mobs drag extended families into the mud.
– Social media campaigns prolong the fight rather than resolve it.
Note: In medieval Jewish communities, cherem (excommunication) worked because Jews lived in tight, interdependent ghettos. Today, in a voluntary, pluralistic society, communal shaming has no teeth.
The halakhic problem: Lashon hara
Publicly defaming a man—or his mother, sister, or children—is a violation of:
– Lashon hara
– Motzi shem ra
– Ona’at devarim
There is no halakhic permission (heter) for this.
VIII. What actually works: Prevention, mediation, and education
The halakhic prenup: The best solution
He calls the prenup the single most effective tool for preventing get refusal:
– It designates a Beth Din in advance.
– It creates a binding arbitration agreement.
– In New York, it can be enforced under Article 75.
– It removes leverage from both sides.
– A prenup is not a sign of mistrust; it is a sign of maturity.
Mediation by logical, experienced people
He advocates for:
– Private negotiation.
– Calm reasoning.
– Hands‑on mediators who understand halakha and human psychology.
Financial education
Rabbi Rahmanov notes that financial mismanagement is a leading cause of divorce. Couples should take financial literacy courses and operate as a team rather than adversaries.
IX. Pastoral guidance
For men:
“The more you are connected to a woman who doesn’t want you, the less bracha you have.”
Give the get.
Move on.
Do not live in limbo.
For women:
Do not weaponize the mikvah, intimacy, or religious obligations.
He calls withholding mikvah access a “massive sin” that creates spiritual and emotional harm.
X. Who has the authority to declare an agunah?
Only a Beth Din can declare a woman an agunah.
Not activists, influencers, social media accounts, or organizations with fundraising incentives.
Unless a Beth Din has issued a seruv (a formal notice of non‑compliance), public campaigns are not only unauthorized—they may be halakhically prohibited.
Conclusion: A call for precision, humility, and halakhic integrity
The modern conversation about agunot is emotionally charged, morally urgent, and often shaped by viral narratives rather than halakhic reality. Rabbi Rahmanov’s perspective does not deny suffering; it contextualizes it.
He asks us to:
– Distinguish between historical agunot and modern divorce disputes.
– Recognize the mutual weaponization that fuels conflict.
– Reject public shaming as a solution.
– Embrace prenups, mediation, and financial literacy.
– Restore the authority of the Beth Din in matters of Jewish divorce.
In an age of outrage, his message is countercultural: Slow down. Get the facts right. Protect the halakhic system. And above all, protect families—even when they are breaking apart.
Writing by Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal 