Rethinking Women: Jewish Feminism - Adler and marriage as partnership

Kiddushin, acquisition and agunah

Traditional kiddushin establishes a binding marital relationship through a legally recognised act, commonly a groom's giving a ring with a declaration before witnesses, with the bride's consent. Its legal framework uses acquisition, or kinyan. Rachel Adler argues that this unilateral structure gives the partners unequal legal positions. That criticism does not mean that traditional law treats a wife exactly like saleable property in every respect or that her consent is irrelevant.

The ketubah records obligations and protections associated with marriage; it does not itself perform the kiddushin acquisition. Protection within an asymmetric structure and removal of that asymmetry are different achievements. Adler's criticism asks whether safeguards are enough when the relationship's constitutive form remains unequal.

The agunah, literally a chained woman, is unable to remarry under the relevant halakhic rules because the marriage has not been validly ended. The term includes circumstances such as an absent husband; modern discussion often focuses on a husband withholding a get, the religious divorce document. A civil divorce does not automatically dissolve the religious marriage for an authority that requires a get. Legal coercion and possible remedies involve specific rules, not a simple assumption that any compelled document is valid.

This creates a worked ethical problem: two people obtain civil divorce, but the husband refuses a get. If the wife's religious community still regards her as married, her autonomy and future relationships can be restricted despite the civil decision. The existence of contractual protections does not alone remove that problem. A traditional response seeks remedies within halakhah; Adler questions whether the underlying marital structure itself should change.

Brit Ahuvim: formation and dissolution

In Engendering Judaism (1998), chapter 5, Adler develops Brit Ahuvim, the Lovers' Covenant. It reconstructs marriage through partnership rather than one partner's acquisition of the other. It is not simply two opposite acquisitions performed in turn. The partners make a mutual agreement and establish a shared undertaking through a partnership-based ritual, expressing reciprocal obligations and a common future.

The reconstruction draws on Jewish legal and covenantal resources: equal partners can bind themselves responsibly without turning either person into the object acquired. The theological change concerns the relation's meaning, not only the words used in a ceremony. Shared commitment remains serious; equality does not mean that promises disappear whenever someone finds them inconvenient.

Dissolution is essential to that equality. Adler's published account permits either partner to initiate an end to the covenant. A court of three knowledgeable Jews addresses the partnership and obligations; mediation and a written dissolution witnessed by two people provide accountable closure. The procedure is not dependent on one spouse's unilateral power to withhold a get. Nor is it a claim that separation requires no procedure or consideration of responsibilities.