Page 360 - EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.1A
P. 360

Pg: 360 - 12-Front 21-10-31

         ments that the best solution for a girl who has been seduced is that
         her seducer should marry her for he thereby rectifies her situation.

                                                   

        A Staged Marriage, Rendered Null in Advance

                    by Designating Invalid Witnesses

         Regarding a person who wants to stage a marriage in order to deceive
         the woman, his intention being to designate invalid witnesses in order
         to later nullify the marriage by showing that the witnesses were inval-
         id – according to that which the Rema states (Even Ha’ezer 42:4) it is
         clear that he instead of deceiving others this groom is really deceiving
         himself and the marriage bond has taken full effect through being
         witnessed by other witnesses who were present at the ceremony. The
         Rema writes: “Even if he designated [specific] witnesses, others who
         witnessed the incident can testify.” The Pis’chei Teshuvah (ibid., 11)
         cites a case mentioned by the Chasam Sofer where witnesses were
         designated and it then became known that one of them was a relative
         [of the bride and as such was disqualified from testifying] and the
         Chasam Sofer ruled that it is clearer even than the most straightfor-
         ward ruling possible that the marriage bond is valid, see there. The
         Chasam Sofer writes in conclusion, “Even without this, it seems to
         me that any testimony regarding something that is generally known
         to have taken place does not require the laws of testimony and will
         not be invalidated by having been witnessed by relatives or invalid
         witness etc.” See also the Beis Shmuel (ibid., 8) who writes, “I then
         saw that according to the Rosh’s opinion this is unnecessary but even
         though [when] they intended to testify and have already testified we
         hold that the testimony is null and void, that only relates to beis din’s
         inability to rule on the basis of that testimony. Here however, at the
         moment when the marriage bond was contracted their testimony was
         not yet null, so the marriage bond is valid etc. see there.”

                                                   

344  1  Medical-Halachic Responsa of Rav Zilberstein
   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   363   364   365