Concern for the welfare of a person in crisis and a desire to do whatever possible to alleviate the plight, is something we would expect from all decent human beings. Many of us have heard and read about the the plight of the Agunah, a woman who is “chained” to her marriage, and desires freedom from her husband, but cannot. In Judaism there is no greater Mitzvah than trying to find a way, within the Halakhic system, to free the Agunah. Despite the fact that most cases are solved, many instances are not. The anguish of the chained woman is never to be ignored or forgotten and every singly case must be treated with utmost seriousness.
When rabbis try to resolve Agunah cases, they face challenges. Sometimes the challenges are circumstantial, other times they are Halakhic. Unfortunately it seems that there were some situations where politics became the great impediment. Such was the sad story of the Agunah of Odessa in 1884.
A thirty six years old man, described at the time as a person who suffers from madness, died of typhus. His name was Michel Alter Genner. After the period of mourning, his young wife Sarah began the process of rebuilding her life. A local rabbi informed her that since they were childless, if her husband had a brother, she was required to get a Chalitzah before she can marry anyone else. The Chalitzah itself is a ritual that involves the taking off of a brother-in-law's shoe by the widow, through which she is released and becomes free to marry whomever she desires.
Sarah informed the rabbi that she is confident that her husband was an only son. She noted that when they got married she heard rumors that Philip Duptchak, a well known converted to Christianity, is Michel Alter's brother. After approaching her fiancé regarding her concern that Duptchak would never release her, if indeed he is a brother, Michel Alter guaranteed that he is not.
Sadly, after some research it became clear that Duptchak was indeed a brother. Thus for Sarah Genner to gain her freedom she would need to get a Chalitzah from him. She turned to the local preacher and the official rabbi of the town, Rabbi Dr. Shimon Aryeh Schwabacher for help. After listening to Sarah and recognizing her predicament he got actively involved. He contacted Philip Duptchak who in turn informed Schwabacher that he cannot participate in a Jewish ritual without permission from the governing body of the Russian Orthodox Church. Schwabacher followed by contacting the officials of the church for permission to be granted to Duptchak. He was informed that since Duptchak is now a practicing Christian he cannot perform any ritual associated with another faith.
Believing that trying to get the Chalitzah from the apostate, was an exercise in futility, Schwabacher turned to a learned rabbi by the name of Avraham Yoel Abelson who was at the time living temporarily in Odessa.
Abelson after doing a few interviews and some research on his own, came to a conclusion that Sarah Genner is free to marry without a Chalitzah. Abelson rested his ruling on two consideration. 1. There is a minority opinion that the bond that prevents a woman from remarrying without Chalitzah does not exist when the living brother is an apostate. 2. Since at the time of Marriage Sarah made it clear that she does not want to enter into the relationship with her husband if indeed he has a brother who is an apostate, if indeed Philip Duptchak is a brother, the marriage to her husband was a “mistaken acquisition” and retroactively null and void.
Rabbi Abelson recognized that his ruling was a novelty and sent it to other great scholars for concurrence. The most recognized among the recipients was the rabbi of Kovno, Lithuania Rabbi Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor, who was considered the pre-eminent Halachic authority of his time.
In late 1885 Abelson informed Schwabacher that he had received several letters from prominent rabbis, including the most significant one from Rabbi Spektor, agreeing with the ruling and thus Sarah Genner is free to marry. Unfortunately our story does not end here.
Although Schwabacher was the official rabbi in Odessa, being that he originated from Germany, he was viewed with skepticism by the more traditional elements in town. When they got word of the lenient ruling regarding Sarah Genner, they were quite agitated. They claimed that prior to Schwabacher’s involvement they made contact with the apostate Philip Duptchak, who was willing to perform the Chalitzah if paid appropriately. Thus they argued that there is no need to seek leniencies when the issue can be solved with a few rubles. In addition they were unhappy that Rabbi Abelson, a rabbi with no local jurisdiction, was taking charge of an issue that was none of his business.
As a result, letters were sent from a group of rabbis in Odessa to all the great rabbis who agreed with Rabbi Abelson, demanding that they retract their decision. Their written communications argued on some of the legal matters presented by Rabbi Abelson and also questioned a few of the facts that he presented.
From published letters sent back to Odessa from rabbis responding to this group, it seems that several threats were included as well. For example; one of the recipients of the letters was Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin dean of the reknown Volozhin Yeshiva. Rabbi Berlin himself was willing to free the woman, provided that other great legal authorities concur. When responding to Odessa, regarding the view of the dissenting rabbis, he notes that he was threatened by specific parties, that if he does not reverse his view, he should expect financial repercussions on future fund-raising excursion for the Volozhin Yeshiva in Odessa. Rabbi Berlin noted that nothing external would ever stop him from sharing his legal opinion.
Those who disagreed with Rabbi Abelson were not satisfied with mere letters. Sources indicate that Abelson suffered verbal and even physical abuse from the parties who were against him. Yet the most significant blow to his cause was a letter of retraction from Rabbi Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor. The letter itself is addressed to Abelson colleague Schwabacher. Rabbi Spektor expresses his pain over the feud and hostilities that developed in Odessa over the issue. He goes on to explain that since the majority of rabbis do not agree with his ruling, he has no choice but to retract. He ends his letter with a prayer that the community of Odessa ends its bickering and settles in peace.
It appears that after getting conflicting reports regarding the case, coupled with harsh letters of objection from Odessa, Rabbi Spektor decided to reverse his involvement and recall his letter of approval.
At the end Schwabacher, in his capacity as the official rabbi, granted Sarah Genner a letter permitting her to remarry without a Chalitzah. The dissenting rabbis reacted by declaring publicly in the synagogues of town that according to Jewish law Sarah is prohibited from marrying. The saga continued with the differing rabbis being charged in court, and found guilty, for proclaiming a ruling against Rabbi Schwabacher the only recognized authority of Odessa.
Reviewing a sad chapter in history serves no purpose if we do not learn from it. Hopefully by looking back and being appalled by the fights of the past, we can inspire ourselves not to repeat such history.
