The Trump-Musk Reconciliation and Machzir Gerushaso

by Rabbi Yair Hoffman In the world of political alliances, breakups can be as dramatic as any divorce court proceedings. But when President Trump extended an olive branch to his estranged “First Buddy” Elon Musk on Monday, the tech mogul’s response was a heart emoji.  This suggests that even the most acrimonious political splits might find their way to reconciliation. “We had a great relationship and I wish him well — very well, actually,” Trump told White House reporters in a moment that seemed to soften the bitter public feud that had erupted just days earlier. The president’s conciliatory tone marked a sharp departure from his previous characterization of Musk as having “gone crazy” and “lost his mind” over their policy disagreements. The dramatic arc of their relationship — from close allies to bitter adversaries and now, perhaps, back toward détente brings to mind the idea of Machzir Gerushaso.  There is a view that many express that no one holds that Machzir Gerushaso is a Mitzvah.  Respectfully, this author disagrees with the categorical statement that it is not a Mitzvah – but rather it should  be considered a Machlokes – a debate in halacha.

THREE POSITIONS

It seems that there are, in fact, three positions in the Poskim and/or commentaries:

• CATEGORY A -Those who hold that there is no Mitzvah at all. 
• CATEGORY B – Those who hold that it is a proper thing to do (occasionally), but not a Mitzvah. 
• CATEGORY C – Those who hold it is a Mitzvah – but an optional one.

One thing for sure is true – if it is a Mitzvah, it’s actual source is quite obscure.

THOSE WHO WRITE THAT IT IS NO MITZVAH – CATEGORY A

The Radbaz (Volume VIII #153) writes, “aval machzir gerushaso – aini ro’eh bah shum Mitzvah – but remarrying his ex-wife – I see absolutely no Mitzvah in it..”

Rav Yitzchok Tzvi Levovitz hy”d (1875-1944), author of the Shulchan HaAizer (p. 34a cited in the Otzar HaPoskim 10:4) writes, “shagur b’fi ha’Olam sh’Mitzvah lehachzir gerushaso” but he writes further that he found no source for it. 

THOSE WHO WRITE THAT IT IS A PROPER THING TO DO (BUT NOT A MITZVAH) – CATEGORY B

The Sefer HaChinuch in Mitzvah #580 writes,  “About this [if his ex-wife actually married another person in the interim] is it stated (Dvarim 24:4), “The first husband who divorced her may not take her to wife again.” And this is speaking about after she married another — as it stated first, “and becomes the wife of another man.” As if it is before she married [another], it is permissible to bring her back; and it is also appropriate to do so, if she is not an evildoer.  Most people understand that it is ra’ui to do so – a proper thing to do – but not an actual Mitzvah.

THOSE WHO WRITE THAT IT IS A MITZVAH – CATEGORY C

Rav Shmuel Vital (1598-1677), the son of Rav Chaim Vital,  in his comments on the Radbaz clearly writes, “machzir gerushaso – ain lecha Mitzvah Gedolah mimenah – But remarrying his ex-wife – you have no greater Mitzvah than this.”

Rav Shmuel Duran (1361-1444), author of the Tashbatz as well (Vol. III Siman 9 “V’hadvarim) writes that Machzir Gerushaso is a Mitzvah. He deal with a huband who made an vow not to remarry his ex-wife – does he have a means of re-examining the vow.  The Tashbatz answers that it could be re-examined even were it not the case of a Mitzvah and certainly in a case where there is a Mitzvah of remarrying one’s ex-wife. However there are those who suggest that he doesn’t really mean that and that the Tashbatz really belongs in Category B.  

Rav Avrohom Yitzchok Kook in Ezras Kohain #81(page 312) writes that it is a Mitzvah Rabbah to do so.

POSSIBLE SOURCES

There are a number of sources to CATEGORY B that can also be a source for those who hold it is certainly a Mitzvah.  The Gemorah in Yevamos 62b cites a pasuk regarding one who brings close his relatives – which would include an ex-spouse.  The Pasuk is found in Yishayahu 58:9, “Then shall you call, and Hashem will answer; you shall cry, and He will say: Here I am.”  Clearly if this is a result of such an action – it is a Mitzvah.

The Talmud Yerushalmi in Kesuvos (11:3) writes that one should be concerned about the sustenance of his ex-wife.  This is cited in the Ramah in  Shulchan Aruch EH 119:8.

CONCLUSION

There is no question that this topic is a matter of debate in the Poskim and Meforshim.  It is rather strange that the sources for it are rather obscure.  It is this author’s view that the Mitzvah may be viewed, in many instances, as a sub-category of the Mitzvah of v’Ahavta larayacha kamocha – no different than the Mitzvah of Bikkur Cholim – visiting the sick.  If this is the case – than any reconciliation would apply whenever V’ahavta laracha kamocha applies.

The author can be reached at [email protected]