If A Bochur Agrees and Signs Not to Start Shidduchim for X Number of Years, So That He Can Get Accepted Into a Certain Yeshivah, Must He Listen?
In many yeshivos, the Rosh Yeshiva makes a condition with the bochurim, that they are only accepted into the yeshiva if they don’t listen out for shidduchim or get married before a certain age (the idea is so that they can learn in the yeshiva for 5 - 6 years settled and undisturbed), and if they do get married before then they are going to be thrown out, and the Rosh Yeshiva and bochurim from the yeshiva won’t attend the chasunah. The question is, does such a condition have any halachic basis, and if a bochur agrees and signs such an agreement is the bochur bound by it?
Machlokes: It is clear that according to the Chofetz Chaim and those who follow his opinion, that a bochur can wait until turning 25 before getting married if he is busy learning Torah, that such a condition is certainly not מתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה- a stipulation against something written in the Torah, where we normally say that the stipulation isn’t binding at all. However, the question is, according to the Chazon Ish and those who follow his opinion that it is forbidden to wait past the age of 20 even for purposes of learning Torah, if perhaps such a condition isn’t binding as it is מתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה – a stipulation against something the Torah doesn’t allow?
The truth is, it is written in Ma’aseh Ish (Vol. 1, pg. 290) that one of the gedolei mashgichim asked the Chazon Ish, about a certain yeshiva that was making bochurim sign before being accepted into the yeshiva that they wouldn’t be busy with shidduchim until the age of 24 and the Chazon Ish said, bochurim are allowed to sign, however, they also don’t need to listen to what they sign, as it is מתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה – a stipulation going against the Torah.
They also say over from R’ Chaim Kanievsky zt”l that a bochur who agreed not to listen out for shidduchim before a certain age isn’t bound by it, as a stipulation that goes against the Torah is automatically nullified.
Bochur vs. Rosh Yeshiva: The question is, however, what if the Rosh Yeshiva holds it is okay to wait, and it is not מתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה, however, the bochur holds that it is forbidden and that it is מתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה, do we follow the Rosh Yeshiva, or do we perhaps follow the bochur?
A Matter of Money (דבר שבממון):
R’ Tzvi Weber shlita points out, that staying in yeshiva is dinei mamonois, a question regarding money, as the yeshiva provides food, boarding etc. and the halachah is that when it comes to cases of money, even if the stipulation goes against the Torah, it is still binding.
Our Case Is Worse:
The truth is, our case is better than a case involving money. The halachah is, that if one gives his friend a present on condition that he violates Shabbos, and if he doesn’t, he must return the present. And then the friend doesn’t violate Shabbos, the halachah is that he must return the present and if he doesn’t, he is a thief. It was given on condition he violates Shabbos, and he didn’t. Therefore, in our case as well, even if the Torah says one should get married, the bochur has no right to take money from the yeshiva if he doesn’t do what they tell him to do.
Additionally, it’s clear from the Gemara (Gittin 84b), Rambam (Hilchos Ishus 6:10) and Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 38:5) that the principle that a stipulation that goes against the Torah isn’t binding, is only when the stipulation definitely goes against the Torah, i.e., one gets married and stipulates that he isn’t going to fulfill the mitzvah of oinah, in such a case the stipulation is nullified and the act is binding. However, if one divorces his wife with a stipulation that she eats chazar, it doesn’t definitely go against the Torah, as she can refrain from eating it and not accept the divorce, therefore, in such a case if she doesn’t keep the stipulation, the stipulation remains, and the act is nullified.
Postponement Not Annulment:
The Rosh Yeshiva doesn’t ask from the bochurim that they never get married, he simply tells them to push it off for a number of years. Therefore, it could be that such a thing isn’t considered making a stipulation against the Torah, as ultimately, he lets them do what the Torah says.
Authority:
Some have commented that the discussion is fundamentally wrong, and in truth it is nothing to do with making tanoim [stipulations] and completely unrelated to the question of מתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה, as the Rosh Yeshiva has the authority (halachic, legal, moral, managerial) to expel a bochur at any stage, and there is no problem in informing the bochur as soon as he gets engaged that he has no place in the yeshiva. The hanholah are not obligated to be mesader kiddushin for someone who is not a bochur in the yeshiva, and the bochurim don’t have to attend the chasunah or sheva berachos, for a bochur who is not part of the yeshiva.
When the bochur is accepted in the yeshiva, the Rosh Yeshiva informs him that as soon as he gets engaged before the agreed time, he will ‘get flung out of the yeshiva’, [this is only ‘from now on’ and not ‘retroactively’, and there is no fear of theft, for all the years that the boy has benefited from the yeshiva's funds, because if so, the yeshiva must return the 'tuition' for all the years as well].
Others respond, on the contrary, the Rosh Yeshiva has no authority to compel the bochurim in the yeshiva to violate the obligation of a mitzvah from the Torah, and there is no theft or condition in this matter regarding finances, because the yeshiva was founded to do the will of Hashem, and it is not possible to use the yeshiva's finances to compel the bochur to do the opposite of the Torah. Therefore, the bochur is permitted to do the opposite of what he agreed to.
(The above write-up was based on the wonderful gilyan Oimek HaPeshat #152, and the wonderful sefer Higiah Zeman (הגיע זמן) written by R’ Avud Eliyahu shlita (see right). I highly recommend this sefer for anyone who is busy in the parsha of shidduchim.)
