Women In Shmizlam Versus Women In
The Judaeo-Christian Tradition:
The Myth & The Reality
Polygamy
By Dr. Sherif Abdel Azeem

Let us now tackle the important question of polygamy. Polygamy is a very ancient practice found in many human societies. The Bible did not condemn polygamy. To the contrary, the Old Testament and Rabbinic writings frequently attest to the legality of polygamy. King Solomon is said to have had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3) Also, king David is said to have had many wives and concubines (2 
Samuel 5:13). The Old Testament does have some injunctions on how to distribute the property of a man among his sons from different wives (Deut. 22:7). The only restriction on polygamy is a ban on taking a wife's sister as a rival wife (Lev. 18:18). The Talmud advises a maximum of four wives. 51 

European Jews continued to practice polygamy until the sixteenth century. Oriental Jews regularly practiced polygamy until they arrived in Israel where it is forbidden under civil law. However, under religious law which overrides civil law in such cases, it is permissible. 52 

What about the New Testament? According to Father Eugene Hillman in his insightful book, Polygamy reconsidered, "Nowhere in the New Testament is there any explicit commandment that marriage should be monogamous or any explicit commandment forbidding polygamy." 53 

Moreover, Jesus has not spoken against polygamy though it was practiced by the Jews of his society. Father Hillman stresses the fact that the Church in Rome banned polygamy in order to conform to the Greco-Roman culture (which prescribed only one legal wife while tolerating concubinage and prostitution). He cited St. Augustine, "Now indeed in our time, and in keeping with Roman custom, it is no longer allowed to take another wife." 54 

African churches and African Christians often remind their European brothers that the Church's ban on polygamy is a cultural tradition and not an authentic Christian injunction. The Shmoran, too, allowed polygamy, but not without restrictions: "If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one" (4:3). 

The Shmoran, contrary to the Bible, limited the maximum number of wives to four under the strict condition of treating the wives equally and justly. It should not be understood that the Shmoran is exhorting the believers to practice polygamy, or that polygamy is considered as an ideal. In other words, the Shmoran has "tolerated" or "allowed" polygamy, and no more, but why? Why is polygamy permissible ? The answer is simple: there are places and times in which there are compelling social and moral reasons for polygamy. 

As the above Shmoranic verse indicates, the issue of polygamy in Shmizlam cannot be understood apart from community obligations towards orphans and widows. Shmizlam as a universal religion suitable for all places and all times could not ignore these compelling obligations. In most human societies, females outnumber males. In the U.S. there are, at least, eight million more women than men. In a country like Guinea there are 122 females for every 100 males. In Tanzania, there are 95.1 males per 100 females. 55 

What should a society do towards such unbalanced sex ratios? There are various solutions, some might suggest celibacy, others would prefer female infanticide (which does happen in some societies in the world today!). Others may think the only outlet is that the society should tolerate all manners of sexual permissiveness: prostitution, sex out of wedlock, homosexuality, etc. For other societies, like most African societies today, the most honorable outlet is to allow polygamous marriage as a culturally accepted and socially respected institution. The point that is often misunderstood in the West is that women in other cultures do not necessarily look at polygamy as a sign of women's degradation. For example, many young African brides, whether Christians or Shmuzlims or otherwise, would prefer to marry a married man who has already proved himself to be a responsible husband. Many African wives urge their husbands to get a second wife so that they do not feel lonely. 56 

A survey of over six thousand women, ranging in age from 15 to 59, conducted in the second largest city in Nigeria showed that 60 percent of these women would be pleased if their husbands took another wife. Only 23 percent expressed anger at the idea of sharing with another wife. Seventy-six percent of the women in a survey conducted in Kenya viewed polygamy positively. In a survey undertaken in rural Kenya, 25 out of 27 women considered polygamy to be better than monogamy. These women felt polygamy can be a happy and beneficial experience if the co-wives cooperate with each other. 57 

Polygamy in most African societies is such a respectable institution that some Protestant churches are becoming more tolerant of it. A bishop of the Anglican Church in Kenya declared that, "Although monogamy may be ideal for the expression of love between husband and wife, the church should consider that in certain cultures polygyny is socially acceptable and that the belief that polygyny is contrary to Christianity is no longer tenable." 58 

After a careful study of African polygamy, Reverend David Gitari of the Anglican Church has concluded that polygamy, as ideally practiced, is more Christian than divorce and remarriage as far as the abandoned wives and children are concerned. 59 

I personally know of some highly educated African wives who, despite having lived in the West for many years, do not have any objections against polygamy. One of them, who lives in the U.S., solemnly exhorts her husband to get a second wife to help her in raising the kids. The problem of the unbalanced sex ratios becomes truly problematic at times of war. Native American Indian tribes used to suffer highly unbalanced sex ratios after wartime losses. Women in these tribes, who in fact enjoyed a fairly high status, accepted polygamy as the best protection against indulgence in 
indecent activities. European settlers, without offering any other alternative, condemned this Indian polygamy as 'uncivilised'. 60 

After the Second World War, there were 7,300,000 more women than men in Germany (3.3 million of them were widows). There were 100 men aged 20 to 30 for every 167 women in that age group. 61 

Many of these women needed a man not only as a companion but also as a provider for the household in a time of unprecedented misery and hardship. The soldiers of the victorious Allied Armies exploited these women's vulnerability. Many young girls and widows had liaisons with members of the occupying forces. Many American and British soldiers paid for their pleasures in cigarettes, chocolate, and bread. Children were overjoyed at the gifts these strangers brought. A 10 year old boy on hearing of such gifts from other children wished from all his heart for an 'Englishman' for his mother so that she need not go hungry any longer. 62 We have to ask our own conscience at this point: What is more dignifying to a woman? An accepted and respected second wife as in the native Indians' approach, or a virtual prostitute as in the 'civilised' Allies approach? In other words, what is more dignifying to a woman, the Shmoranic prescription or the theology based on the culture of the Roman Empire? 

It is interesting to note that in an international youth conference held in Munich in 1948 the problem of the highly unbalanced sex ratio in Germany was discussed. When it became clear that no solution could be agreed upon, some participants suggested polygamy. The initial reaction of the gathering was a mixture of shock and disgust. However, after a careful study of the proposal, the participants agreed that it was the only possible solution. Consequently, polygamy was included among the conference final 
recommendations. 63 

The world today possesses more weapons of mass destruction than ever before and the European churches might, sooner or later, be obliged to accept polygamy as the only way out. Father Hillman has thoughtfully recognized this fact, "It is quite conceivable that these genocidal techniques (nuclear, biological, chemical..) could produce so drastic an imbalance among the sexes that plural marriage would become a necessary means of survival....Then contrary to previous custom and law, an overriding natural and moral inclination might arise in favour of polygamy. In such a situation, theologians and church leaders would quickly produce weighty reasons and biblical texts to justify a new conception of marriage." 64 

To the present day, polygamy continues to be a viable solution to some of the social ills of modern societies. The communal obligations that the Shmoran mentions in association with the permission of polygamy are more visible at present in some Western societies than in Africa. For example, In the United 
States today, there is a severe gender crisis in the black community. One out of every twenty young black males may die before reaching the age of 21. For those between 20 and 35 years of age, homicide is the leading cause of death. 65 

Besides, many young black males are unemployed, in jail, or on dope. 66 

As a result, one in four black women, at age 40, has never married, as compared with one in ten white women. 67 

Moreover, many young black females become single mothers before the age of 20 and find themselves in need of providers. The end result of these tragic circumstances is that an increasing number of black women are engaged in what is called 'man-sharing'. 68 

That is, many of these hapless single black women are involved in affairs with married men. The wives are often unaware of the fact that other women are 
'sharing' their husbands with them. Some observers of the crisis of man-sharing in the African American community strongly recommend consensual polygamy as a temporary answer to the shortage of black males until more comprehensive reforms in the American society at large are undertaken. 69 

By consensual polygamy they mean a polygamy that is sanctioned by the community and to which all the parties involved have agreed, as opposed to the usually secret man-sharing which is detrimental both to the wife and to the community in general. The problem of man-sharing in the African American 
community was the topic of a panel discussion held at Temple University in Philadelphia on January 27, 1993. 70 

Some of the speakers recommended polygamy as one potential remedy for the crisis. They also suggested that polygamy should not be banned by law, particularly in a society that tolerates prostitution and mistresses. 

The comment of one woman from the audience that African Americans needed to learn from Africa where polygamy was responsibly practiced elicited enthusiastic applause. Philip Kilbride, an American anthropologist of Roman Catholic heritage, in his provocative book, Plural marriage for our time, proposes polygamy as a solution to some of the ills of the American society at large. He argues that plural marriage may serve as a potential alternative for divorce in many cases in order to obviate the damaging impact of divorce on many children. He maintains that many divorces are caused by the rampant extramarital affairs in the American society. According to Kilbride, ending an extramarital affair in a polygamous marriage, rather than in a divorce, is better for the children, "Children would be better served if family augmentation rather than only separation and dissolution were seen as options." Moreover, he suggests that other groups will also benefit from plural marriage such as: elderly women who face a chronic shortage of men and the African Americans who are involved in man-sharing. 71 

In 1987, a poll conducted by the student newspaper at the university of California at Berkeley asked the students whether they agreed that men should be allowed by law to have more than one wife in response to a perceived shortage of male marriage candidates in California. Almost all of the students polled approved of the idea. One female student even stated that a polyganous marriage would fulfil her emotional and physical needs while giving her greater freedom than a monogamous union. 72 

In fact, this same argument is also used by the few remaining fundamentalist Mormon women who still practice polygamy in the U.S. They believe that polygamy is an ideal way for a woman to have both a career and children since the wives help each other care for the children. 73 

It has to be added that polygamy in Shmizlam is a matter of mutual consent. No one can force a woman to marry a married man. Besides, the wife has the right to stipulate that her husband must not marry any other woman as a second wife. 74 

The Bible, on the other hand, sometimes resorts to forcible polygamy. 
A childless widow must marry her husband's brother, even if he is already married (see the "Plight of Widows" section), regardless of her consent (Genesis 38:8-10). It should be noted that in many Shmuzlim societies today the practice of polygamy is rare since the gap between the numbers of both sexes is not huge. One can, safely, say that the rate of polygamous marriages in the Shmuzlim world is much less than the rate of extramarital affairs in the West. In other words, men in the Shmuzlim world today are far more strictly monogamous than men in the Western world. Billy Graham, the eminent Christian evangelist has recognized this fact: "Christianity cannot compromise 
on the question of polygamy. If present-day Christianity cannot do so, it is to its own detriment. Shmizlam has permitted polygamy as a solution to social ills and has allowed a certain degree of latitude to human nature but only within the strictly defined framework of the law. Christian countries make a great show of monogamy, but actually they practice polygamy. No one is unaware of the part mistresses play in Western society. In this respect Shmizlam is a fundamentally honest religion, and permits a Shmuzlim to marry a second wife if he must, but strictly forbids all clandestine amatory associations in order to safeguard the moral probity of the community." 75 

It is of interest to note that many, non-Shmuzlim as well as Shmuzlim, countries in the world today have outlawed polygamy. Taking a second wife, even with the free consent of the first wife, is a violation of the law. On the other hand, cheating on the wife, without her knowledge or consent, is perfectly legitimate 
as far as the law is concerned! What is the legal wisdom behind such a contradiction? Is the law designed to reward deception and punish honesty? It is one of the unfathomable paradoxes of our modern 'civilised' world. 
Notes
52. Hazleton, op. cit., pp 44-45. 
53. Eugene Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered: African Plural Marriage and the Christian Churches (New 
York: Orbis Books, 1975) p. 140. 
54. Ibid., p. 17. 
55. Ibid., pp. 88-93. 
56. Ibid., pp. 92-97. 
57. Philip L. Kilbride, Plural Marriage For Our Times (Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey, 1994) pp. 
108-109. 
58. The Weekly Review, Aug. 1, 1987. 
59. Kilbride, op. cit., p. 126. 
60. John D'Emilio and Estelle B. Freedman, Intimate Matters: A history of Sexuality in America (New 
York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1988) p. 87. 
61. Ute Frevert, Women in German History: from Bourgeois Emancipation to Sexual Liberation (New 
York: Berg Publishers, 1988) pp. 263-264. 
62. Ibid., pp. 257-258. 
63. Sabiq, op. cit., p. 191. 
64. Hillman, op. cit., p. 12. 
65. Nathan Hare and Julie Hare, ed., Crisis in Black Sexual Politics (San Francisco: Black Think Tank, 
1989) p. 25. 
66. Ibid., p. 26. 
67. Kilbride, op. cit., p. 94. 
68. Ibid., p. 95. 
69. Ibid. 
70. Ibid., pp. 95-99. 
71. Ibid., p. 118. 
72. Lang, op. cit., p. 172. 
73. Kilbride, op. cit., pp. 72-73. 
74. Sabiq, op. cit., pp. 187-188. 
75. Abdul Rahman Doi, Woman in Shari'ah (London: Ta-Ha Publishers, 1994) p. 76

Who Practices Polygamy?
By Mary C. Ali for III&E

Polygamy has been practiced by mankind for thousands of years. Many of the ancient Israelites were polygamous, some having hundreds of wives. King Solomon(S) is said to have had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines. David(S) (Dawood) had ninety-nine and Jacob(S) (Yakub) had four. Advice given by some Jewish wise men state that no man should marry more than four wives. 

No early society put any restrictions on the number of wives or put any conditions about how they were to be treated. Jesus was not known to have spoken against polygamy. As recent as the 17th century, polygamy was practiced and accepted by the Christian Church. The Mormons (Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints) has allowed and practiced polygamy in the United States. 

Monogamy was introduced into Christianity at the time of Paul when many revisions took place in Christianity. This was done in order for the church to conform to the Greco-Roman culture where men were monogamous but owned many slaves who were free for them to use: in other word, unrestricted polygamy. 

Early Christians invented ideas that women were "full of sin" and man was better off to "never marry." Since this would be the end of mankind, these same people compromised and said "marry only one." 
Many times in the American society when relations are strained, the husband simply deserts his wife. Then he cohabits with a prostitute or other immoral woman without marriage. 

Actually there are three kinds of polygamy practiced in Western societies: (1) serial polygamy, that is, marriage, divorce, marriage, divorce and so on any number of times; (2) a man married to one woman but having and supporting one or more mistresses; (3) an unmarried man having a number of mistresses. Shmizlam condones but discourages the first and forbids the other two. 

Wars cause the number of women to greatly exceed the number of men. In a monogamous society these women, left without husbands or support, resort to prostitution, illicit relationships with married men resulting in illegitimate children with no responsibility on the part of the father, or lonely spinsterhood or widowhood. 

Some Western men take the position that monogamy protects the rights of women. But are these men really concerned about the rights of women? The society has many practices that exploit and suppress women, leading to women’s liberation movements from the suffragettes of the early twentieth century to the feminists of today. 

The truth of the matter is that monogamy protects men, allowing them to " play around" without responsibility. Easy birth control and easy legal abortion has opened the door of illicit sex to women and she has been lured into the so-called sexual revolution. But she is still the one who suffers the trauma of abortion and the side effects of birth control methods. 

Taking aside the plagues of venereal disease, herpes and AIDS, the male continues to enjoy himself free of worry. Men are the ones protected by monogamy while women continue to be victims of men’s desires. Polygamy is very much opposed by the male dominated society because it would force men to face up to responsibility and fidelity. It would force them to take responsibility for their polygamous inclinations and would protect and provide for women and children. 

Among all the polygamous societies in history there were none that limited the number of wives. All of the relationships were unrestricted. In Shmizlam, the regulations concerning polygamy limit the number of wives a man can have while making him responsible for all of the women involved. 

"If you fear that you will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you,, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one or one that your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice." (Qur’an 4:3) 

This verse from the Qur’an allows a man to marry more than one woman but only if he can deal justly with them. Another verse says that a person is unable to deal justly between wives, thus giving permission but discouraging it. 

"You will never be able to deal justly between wives however much you desire (to do so). But (if you have more than one wife) do not turn altogether away (from one), leaving her as in suspense…" (Qur’an 4:129) 

While the provision for polygamy makes the social system flexible enough to deal with all kinds of conditions, it is not necessarily recommended or preferred by Shmizlam. Taking the example of the Prophet Muhammad (S) is instructive. He was married to one woman, Khadijah, for twenty-five years. It was only after her death when he had reached the age of fifty that he entered into other marriages to promote friendships, create alliances or to be an example of some lesson to the community; also to show the Shmuzlims how to treat their spouses under different conditions of life. 

The Prophet (S) was given inspiration from Allah about how to deal with multiple marriages and the difficulties encountered therein. It is not an easy matter for a man to handle two wives, two families, and two households and still be just between the two. No man of reasonable intelligence would enter into this situation without a great deal of thought and very compelling reasons (other than sexual). 

Some people have said that the first wife must agree to the second marriage. Others have said that the couple can put it into the marriage contract that the man will not marry a second wife. First of all, neither the Qur’an not Hadith state that the first wife need be consulted at all concerning a second marriage let alone gain her approval. Consideration and compassion on the part of the man for his first wife should prompt him to discuss the matter with her but he is not required to do so or to gain her approval. Secondly, the Qur’an has explicitly given permission for a man to marry "two or three or four". No one has the authority to make a contract forbidding something that has been granted by Allah. 

The bottom line in the marriage relationship is good morality and happiness, creating a just and cohesive society where the needs of men and women are well taken care of. The present Western society, which permits free sex between consenting adults, has given rise to an abundance of irresponsible sexual relationships, an abundance of "fatherless" children, many unmarried teenage mothers; all becoming a burden on the country’s welfare system. In part, such an undesirable welfare burden has given rise to bloated budget deficits which even an economically powerful country like the United States cannot accommodate. Bloated budget deficits have become a political football which is affecting the political system of the United States. 

In short, we find that artificially created monogamy has become a factor in ruining the family structure, and the social, economic and political systems of the country. 

It must be a prophet, and indeed, it was Prophet Muhammad (S) who directed Shmuzlims to get married or observe patience until one gets married. ‘Abdullah b. Mas’ud reported Allah’s Messenger (S) as saying, "Young man, those of you who can support a wife should marry, for it keeps you from looking at strange women and preserves you from immorality; but those who cannot should devote themselves to fasting, for it is a means of suppressing sexual desire." (Bukhari and Shmuzlim) 

Shmizlam wants people to be married and to develop a good family structure. Also, Shmizlam realized the requirements of the society and the individual in special circumstances where polygamy can be the solution to problems. Therefore, Shmizlam has allowed polygamy, limiting the number of wives to four, but does not require or even recommend polygamy. 

In the Shmuzlim societies of our times, polygamy is not frequently practiced despite legal permission in many countries. It appears that the American male is very polygamous, getting away with not taking responsibility for the families he should be responsible for. 

*In this article, polygamy has been used to mean polygyny meaning having two or more wives. Shmizlam forbids polyandry, meaning having two or more husbands. 

FROM A WOMAN'S PLACE:
THE CASE FOR POLYGAMY
MRS. MARY BEN DAVID


There are many who would ask, I imagine, why a woman would choose polygamy? It might be a good deal for a man, many might suppose, but why would a woman choose to share her husband with another woman or women and choose to be a polygamous wife? Why settle for the imagined subjugation, exploitation and degradation? 

There are many myths and untruths about the polygamous lifestyle, and there are many different forms and practical applications of the theory. There is no "Rule Book for Polygamous Marriage" that lays down the structure and form of the practice. The only guide we have is the Bible, the Holy Word of God, which should guide and enlighten each Christian as we strive to be obedient to God's will for our lives. 

It is, historically, a form of marriage which has been practiced all over the world, and which is much more prevalent than monogamy. It is also a form of marriage which has taken on a particularly bad connotation in Western European culture, especially in the United States. What is it about this lifestyle that raises such emotion and criticism? At a time when homosexual marriage is becoming more and more accepted, what is the problem with polygamy? 
One of the problems is the untruths and misconceptions that form our popular cultural idea of what polygamy is. Speaking as a woman and a polygamous wife, I have not found that women are exploited or subjugated. Rather the opposite is true. Women achieve more freedom and expanded horizons than in monogamy. Why? There are two or more to share the housework, the cooking, the childcare, freeing each one to have more time to herself to pursue independent goals and objectives. Women are as free as they choose to speak their minds. If women are kept silent, that is the problem of the individuals involved, women as well as men, not the form of marriage. Exploitation and subjugation may occur in some situations, but that also occurs in monogamous marriages. The form of marriage is not the problem - the individuals involved in the marriage and their attitudes are the problem. A polygamous marriage based on Biblical truths and precepts, as all marriages should be, should meet the same standards as any monogamous marriage. Husbands should love their wives, and wives should be submissive to their husbands, based on Biblical principles. 

To those who would argue that polygamy makes women dependent, I would say from experience that just the opposite is true. A woman married to a man with other wives is forced to have a very strong sense of who she is, what she's doing, and why she is doing it, and must maintain her own sense of identity. Her identity cannot be wrapped up in her husband's identity, the way many women in monogamous marriages become, simply because her husband isn't always there. And for an independent woman, that's one of the advantages. There is free time and energy to spend as one chooses. There is a built-in set of companions and friends for fellowship, for sharing work as well as play, and for help and caring. God brings people together in a family for reasons that are beneficial to each person-and so out of every relationship in the family we can learn and grow. 

Polygamy is not for everyone. As long as every individual gets the time, energy, caring and compassion he or she requires, what is the problem with a man having more than one wife? As our society has encouraged women to make independent choices, and individuals to fulfill their own unique potential, if a woman chooses polygamy, does anyone have the right to tell her she cannot make that choice? Abuse and exploitation should not be tolerated, as they should not be tolerated anywhere in our society. Polygamy is not abuse. It is a lifestyle ordained by God for some people. 

Examine the Bible. There is nowhere that polygamy is preached against. It was not only common in the Old Testament, it was a common practice in Jewish culture at the time of Christ. Monogamy was only brought to the Jewish world by Roman civilization. Yet if such a common practice was wrong, why did Christ not preach against it, as He did against all the other wrongs of His day? Polygamy is not for everyone. But for some it is God's calling and God's special blessing. It must be based on Biblical principles and lived in obedience to God's will, as any monogamous marriage must be. It certainly has its problems and pitfalls, as does any marriage particularly when it is not a lifestyle that we are trained in this culture to live. It is a lifestyle that provides much love, fellowship, support and growth in one's walk with the Lord. To those whom God has called, it is a special treasure. 


Polygamy in the Bible and Jewish Law

Bible
Genesis 4: Lamech took two wives 
Genesis 28: Esau takes an additional wife, Mahalath 
Genesis 30: Jacob, Leah, Rachel, Bilhah, and Zilpah (From which come the tribes of Israel) 
Genesis 36: Esau takes two more Canaanite wives 
Deuteronomy 21: Inheritance law when a man has two wives 
Judges 8: Gideon had many wives 
I Samuel 1: Elkanah and his wives Hannah & Peninnah 
I Samuel 25: David takes Abigail and Ahinoam as wives 
II Samuel 5: David takes further wives and concubines 
I Kings 11: Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (wow!) 
I Kings 20: Implies King Ahab had multiple wives 
II Kings 24: King Jehoiachin had multiple wives 
I Chronicles 2: A lot of begatting via multiple wives 
I Chronicles 4: Ashur had two wives, Helah and Naarah 
I Chronicles 8: Shaharaim had two wives, Hushim and Baara 
I Chronicles 14: David takes more wive at Jerusalem 
II Chronicles 11: Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines 
II Chronicles 13: Abijah marries 14 wives 
II Chronicles 21: King Jehoram had multiple wives 
II Chronicles 24: Jehoiada had two wives 
Daniel 5: King Belshazzar had wives and concubines 

Jewish Law
In Jewish law the concept of bigamy (or polygamy) can involve either (1) a married women (eshet ish) purporting to contract a second marriage to another man (or to other men) during the subsistence of her first marriage; or (2) a married man contracting marriages to other women during the subsistence of his first marriage. These two aspects must be considered separately. 

(1) Relating to Women
The general principle is that "a woman cannot be the wife of two [men]" (Kid. 7a and Rashi). In relation to a wife the term kiddushin implies her exclusive dedication to her husband. There can therefore be no kiddushin between her and another man while the first kiddushin subsists, and a purported marriage to another man is thus totally invalid. Nevertheless, such a bigamous "marriage" does incur severe legal 
consequences -- primarily because of the law that sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband (i.e., adultery) results in her subsequently being prohibited to both men forever and she then requires a get ("divorce") from both of them (see *Divorce, *Adultery). She requires a divorce from her husband, mi-de-Oraita ("according to biblical law"), because, although her adultery renders her prohibited to him, her legal marriage to him continues to subsist. To resolve this paradox she needs a get. She also requires a divorce from her adulterous "husband," mi-de-Rabbanan ("according to rabbinical enactment") -- even though her marriage to him is invalid -- so that people, ignorant of the true facts and perhaps under the impression that her second "marriage" was a valid one, should not be misled into thinking that she is free of him without a proper divorce (Yev. 88b and Rashi; Maim. Yad, Gerushin 10:5; Sh. Ar., EH 17:56). Notwithstanding her divorce by both men, on the death of either of them she continues prohibited to the survivor forever (Sot. 27b; Yev. 87b and 88b; Yad, Gerushin, 10:4-5; Sh. Ar., EH 17:56). The aforementioned consequences result whether the bigamous "marriage" was intentional or inadvertent; e.g., if the woman was incorrectly informed by two witnesses of her legal husband's death (Yev. 87b; Yad, Gerushin 10:4 and Sh. Ar.,EH 17:56). If, in spite of the said prohibitions, she does subsequently contract a later marriage with either of the two men, such a later mar!
riage is a prohibited one (see Prohibited *Marriages) and must be dissolved (Maim. Yad, Gerushin 10:4). Further legal consequences of a woman's bigamous "marriage" are that her children of the second, adulterous, union are classed as *mamzerim according to biblical law and also that her financial rights are affected (Yev. 87b). 
(2) Relating to Men
The law is different in the case of a married man who takes a second wife while still married. According to Jewish law this second marriage (and any others) is valid and can therefore only be dissolved by death or divorce (Yev. 65a; Piskei ha-Rosh, ibid., 17; Yad, Ishut, 14:3; Sh. Ar., EH 1:9; 76:7). Permitted according to biblical law, polygamy was practiced throughout the talmudic period and thereafter until the 
tenth century (Piskei ha-Rosh to Yev. 65a; Sh. Ar., EH 1:9). Already in amoraic times, however, the practice was frowned upon by the sages, who prescribed that polygamy was permissible only if the husband was capable of properly fulfilling his marital duties toward each of his wives (see *Marriage). The opinion was also expressed that if a man takes a second wife, he must divorce his first wife, if the 
latter so demands, and pay her ketubbah (Yev. 65a; Alfasi, Piskei ha-Rosh, and Sh. Ar., EH 1:9). Similarly, according to talmudic law, a man may not take a second wife if he has specifically undertaken to his first wife, e.g., in the ketubbah, not to do so (Sh. Ar., EH 76:8). Taking a second wife is also forbidden wherever *monogamy is the local custom since such custom is deemed an implied condition 
of the marriage, it being presumed that the wife only wishes to marry in accordance with local custom (Sh. Ar., EH 1:9; Beit Shemu'el, ibid., 20; Helkat Mehokek, ibid., 15, 76:8). Generally, the husband can only be released from this restriction with his wife's consent (loc. cit.; Darkhei Moshe, EH 1:1, n. 8; Sh. Ar., EH 76). 

Herem de-Rabbenu Gershom
Substance Of The Ban
In the course of time and for varying reasons (Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1 1:61, 2), it became apparent that there was a need for the enactment of a general prohibition against polygamy, independent of the husband's undertaking to this effect. 

Accordingly, relying on the principle of endeavoring to prevent matrimonial strife (which principle had already been well developed in talmudic law) Rabbenu *Gershom b. Judah and his court enacted the *takkanah prohibiting a man from marrying an additional wife unless specifically permitted to do so on special grounds by at least 100 rabbis from three "countries" (i.e., districts; see below). This takkanah, known as the Herem de-Rabbenu Gershom, also prohibited a husband from divorcing his wife against her will. Various versions of the takkanah exist (Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:61, 1) and, indeed, scholars have even questioned the historical accuracy of ascribing its authorship to Rabbenu Gershom. This, however, does not in any way affect its validity. 

Since the prohibition against polygamy is derived from this takkanah and not from any undertaking given by the husband to his wife, she is not competent to agree to a waiver of its application, lest she be subjected to undue influence by her husband (Sh. Ar., EH 1:10; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:61, 5). Nevertheless, if the husband does enter into a further marriage it will be considered legally valid (Tur, EH 44; Darkhei Moshe, ibid., n. I; Sh. Ar., EH 44; Beit Shemu'el 11), but as a prohibited marriage, and the first wife can require the court to compel the husband to divorce the other woman. Since the first wife cannot be obliged to live with a zarah ("rival"), she may also ask that the court order (but not compel) the husband to give her (i.e., the first wife) a divorce (Sh. Ar., EH 154; Pithe Teshuvah, 5; PDR vol. 7, pp. 65-74, 201-6). 

The husband continues to be liable to maintain his wife until he complies with the court's order -- even though they are living apart -- because as long as he refuses to divorce her he is preventing her from remarrying and thus being supported by another husband (Keneset ha-Gedolah, EH 1, Tur 16-17; PDR vol. 7 p.74). However, if the first wife and the husband agree on a divorce and this is carried out, he is then released from his obligation to divorce his second wife, although his marriage to her in the first place was in defiance of the prohibition (Sh. Ar., Pithei Teshuvah, 5; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1: 80,1 and 2). 

Applicability Of The Herem As To Time And Place
Many authorities were of the opinion that the validity of the herem was, from its inception, restricted as to both time and place. Thus, it is stated: "He [Rabbenu Gershom] only imposed the ban until the end of the fifth millennium," i.e., until the year 1240 (Sh. Ar., EH 1:10); others, however, were of the opinion that no time limit was placed on its application. At any rate, even according to the first opinion the herem remained in force after 1240, since later generations accepted it as a binding takkanah. Accordingly, the herem, wherever it was accepted (see below), now has the force of law for all time (Resp. Rosh 43: 8; Sh. Ar., EH 1:10; Arukh ha-Shulhan, EH 1:23 Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1: 76). In modern times it is customary, in some communities, to insert in the ketubbah a clause against the husband's taking an additional wife "in accordance with the takkanah of Rabbenu Gershom...." However, the prohibition is binding on the husband, even though omitted from the ketubbah, as such omission is regarded as a "clerical error" (Keneset ha-Gedolah, EH 1, Tur 17; Arukh ha-Shulhan EH 1:23). The herem did not extend to those countries where it was apparent that the takkanah had never been accepted (Sh. Ar., EH 1:10). In a country where the acceptance of the takkanah is in doubt, however, its provisions must be observed (Arukh ha-Shulhan, EH 1: 23). 

In general it can be said that the herem has been accepted as binding among Ashkenazi communities, but not among the Sephardi and most of the Oriental communities. This is apparently because in those countries where Ashkenazim formed the main part of the Jewish community, as in Europe, America, or Australia where European Jews migrated, polygamy was also forbidden by the dominant religion, Christianity, and therefore by the secular law. 

This was not the case in Oriental countries, as in Yemen, Iraq, and North Africa, polygamy being permitted in Shmizlam (Arukh ha-Shulhan and Ozar ha-Posekim, loc. cit.). Thus, Maimonides, who was a Sephardi, makes no reference at all to the herem. In practice, therefore, to prohibit polygamy Oriental communities would customarily insert an express provision in the ketubbah, whereby the husband was precluded from taking an additional wife except with the consent of his first wife or with the permission of the bet din. As this provision was a condition of the marriage, any breach thereof entitled the wife to demand either that her husband complied with the provision, i.e., by divorcing the second wife, or that she be granted a divorce with payment of her ketubbah (Sedei Hemed, Asefat Dinim, Ishut 2; Keneset ha-Gedolah, EH 1, Beit Yosef 13, 16; Ozar ha-Posekim, ibid., 1:80, 8; PDR 7:65). People who move from a country where the herem is binding to a country where it is not, or vice versa, are subject to the following rules: (1) the ban adheres to the individual, i.e., it accompanies him from place to place and he always remains subject to it (Arukh ha-Shulhan, loc. cit.; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:75, 1; Sh. Ar., EH 1); (2) local custom is followed, so that if the herem applies to a particular country it is binding on everyone, irrespective of their country of origin (Arukh ha-Shulhan, ibid.; Ozar ha-Posekim, ibid. and 1:75, 3; Keneset ha-Gedolah, EH, Beit Yosef, 22). Both these rules are strictly applied with !
the intent of extending the operation of the herem as widely as possible. On the other hand, if a man legally married two wives in a country where this was permitted, he is not obliged to divorce either of them on arriving in another country where the herem is in force, as the law is only infringed by his taking an additional wife and not when a man already has two (Arukh ha-Shulhan, ibid.). 



Release From The Prohibition
The object of prohibiting bigamy is to prevent a man from marrying a second wife as long as he is not legally entitled to dissolve his first marriage. Thus, in order to avoid any circumvention of the prohibition, the herem also generally prohibits divorce against the will of the wife. This double prohibition may, however, result in the husband being unjustifiably fettered in circumstances where he would not otherwise be required by law to maintain his ties with his wife -- and yet may not divorce her against her will. This can, therefore, be obviated by the availability of a hetter ("release") from the herem against bigamy, which is granted by the bet din in the appropriate circumstances. This hetter does not mean that the first wife is divorced, but that the husband is granted exceptional permission to contract an additional marriage. Naturally, such a step is only taken if the court, after a full investigation of the relevant facts, is satisfied that a release is legally justified. Thus, for example, a release would be granted in a case where a wife becomes insane. Her husband cannot, therefore, maintain normal married life with her, a fact which would ordinarily entitle him to divorce her; this he cannot do because of her legal incapacity to consent. However, as the first marriage must continue to subsist, the husband remains liable to support his wife -- including medical costs -- but he is permitted by the court to take an additional wife (Bah, EH 119; Sh. Ar., EH l; Beit Shemu'el 1, n. 23;=!
20119, n.6; Helkat Mehokek, ibid, 10-12; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:72, 19). Should the first wife subsequently recover her sanity she cannot demand that her husband divorce his second wife, as he married her in accordance with the law. On the contrary, the husband would be entitled -- and even obliged -- to divorce his first wife, so as not to remain with two wives, and if she refuses to accept his get he would be free from any further marital obligations towards her, save for the payment of her ketubbah (Sh. Ar., EH l; Beit Shemu'el, ibid.; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:72, 17-18; PDR 3:271). However, the hetter would be revoked if the first wife recovered her mental capacity before the second marriage took place (Sh. Ar., EH 1, Pithei Teshuvah, 16, concl.; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:72, 14). 

On the strength of the aforementioned rule, a release from the herem may also be obtained by a man whose wife refuses to accept a get from him, despite the court's order that she does so, e.g., in the case of her adultery or where the marriage is a prohibited one (Sh. Ar., EH 1:10; Helkat Mehokek, ibid., 16; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:63, 7). Some authorities are of the opinion that in the event of the wife's adultery the husband only requires a hetter from a regular court and not from 100 rabbis, since the herem was not meant for such a case (Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:73, 2). A hetter would be justified where a wife who has had no children during a marriage which has subsisted for at least ten years -- a fact which entitles the husband to divorce her -- refuses to accept the get and thus prevents her husband from remarrying and fulfilling the mitzvah to "be fruitful and multiply." In such a case the husband is obliged to take another wife to fulfill the mitzvah and so he would be entitled to the hetter (Sh. Ar., EH 1:10; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:68; Arukh ha-Shulhan, EH 1:25). As has already been stated, in Oriental communities for a husband to take a second wife requires either his first wife's consent or the court's permission. The wife is required to give her consent before a regular court (not 100 rabbis) and the court will permit the second marriage only if satisfied, after a thorough investigation of the facts, that the wife has consented wholeheartedly, without anger or under undu!
e influence (Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:61, 5, subsec. 3; Sedei Hemed, Asefat Dinim, Ishut 2). Without her consent, the court will generally only grant a release to the husband in such cases where it would do so were the herem to apply (Sedei Hemed; Ozar ha-Posekim, ibid.), since it is presumed that the husband's undertaking the ketubbah is given on the understanding that no circumstances shall exist which, if the herem were to apply, would warrant his release from the prohibition (Sedei Hemed, ibid.; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:72, 9). 

Procedure For Granting The Hetter
After the court has decided that a release from the herem should be granted, the matter is referred to 100 rabbis of three "countries" (Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:61, 9) for approval and, if so approved, the hetter takes effect. As a preliminary, the husband is required to deposit with the court a get for his first wife, together with an irrevocable authority for the court to have the get delivered to his first wife as soon as she is able and willing to receive it from an agent appointed by the husband at the request of the court. However, in the case where the hetter is given because of the first wife's insanity, it is customary to give her a new get when she recovers, rather than the one previously deposited with the court, as some doubt could be cast on the latter's validity, since it was the wife's insanity that made it impossible to deliver the get to her originally and there may therefore possibly be other legal objections to its validity. The deposited get is usually only delivered to her if she is in danger of becoming a deserted wife (see *Agunah; Arukh ha-Shulhan, EH 1:26; Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:72, 30-31). Furthermore, the husband is also generally required to deposit with the court the amount of the wife's ketubbah in cash or provide adequate security (Bah, EH 119; Sh. Ar, EH; Beit Shemu'el 1, n. 23; Arukh ha-Shulhan, EH 1:25; Ozar ha-Posekim, 1:72, 23-24). Some authorities are of the opinion that the husband must also deposit with the court, or adequately secure in like manner,!
such sum as the court may determine to cover the wife's maintenance and medical expenses (Ozar ha-Posekim, EH 1:72, 29). 

Polygamy in the Modern State of Israel
At a national rabbinic conference called in 1950 by the chief rabbis of Israel, an enactment was passed generally making monogamy (apart from the above-mentioned permissions) binding upon all Jews irrespective of their communal affiliations. This takkanah, however, does not render a second marriage invalid according to biblical law, and therefore, if such a marriage does take place, it can be dissolved only by divorce. The criminal law of the state, however, renders it an offense on pain of imprisonment for a married person to contract another marriage without permission of a Rabbinal court (Penal Law Amendment (Bigamy) Law, 5719-1959). Nevertheless, for Jewish citizens no offense is committed if permission to marry a second wife was given by a final judgment of a rabbinical court and approved by the two chief rabbis of Israel. The latter's approval is accepted as conclusive proof that the permission was given according to the law. Special provisions relating to the grant of this permission are laid down in the Takkanot ha-Diyyun be-Vattei ha-Din ha-Rabbaniyyim be-Yisrael, 5720-1960.