While parts of various decrees still remain in force, the majority of the
Takkanot Shum are no longer considered in force by most
Ashkenazic Jewry. The decrees were instituted to deal with specific religious and sociological problems of the time, and were not considered to be placed in force for perpetuity, but for only as long as such issues existed. However, there are two specific decrees still considered active today: the Dowry takkana and the
Chalitzah takkana. Combined with childhood diseases and a high general mortality rate this meant that it was not uncommon for young people to die within a short time of marriage, before their spouses had formed lasting relationships with their families. Under Jewish
inheritance law, a husband is his wife's sole heir, but a wife does not inherit from her husband. Thus, no matter who died, the dowry, which represented a substantial sacrifice by the wife's parents for their daughter's happiness, would end up with the husband or his family. As a result, parents became reluctant to give their daughters large dowries, which in turn led to difficulty in finding them husbands. While Rabbenu Tam rescinded this decree before his death, it was reaffirmed by his students in the first synod of SHUM. Even if it is not explicitly referenced at all, or if there is no contract, it is assumed that the parties consented to it unless it is explicitly excluded.
Chalitzah takkana When a husband died childless, there is a
mitzvah for a surviving brother to perform either
yibbum or
halizah. Already in the times of the
Talmud, performing
yibbum was deprecated in favor of
halitza for various reasons. The decrees enacted in the various synods of SHUM dealt with the time span allowed and the disbursement of the deceased's property after halitzah. The original decree, discussed at all three synods of SHUM, instituted a time limit of three months after the husband's death within which to perform yibbum or halitzah (although yibbum was rarely, if ever, performed) and after the halitzah, a beth din would decide upon the disbursement of the estate, with no recourse for the brother performing halitzah to subsequently sue. This decree was yet again re-affirmed 60 years later by
Meir of Rothenburg. However, in 1381, another synod was held in Mainz that changed the disbursement—instituting an even split between the widow and all surviving brothers. This was a change from previous tradition in which, most often, the brother performing the halitzah would receive the
ketubah monies, as well as usually receiving most, if not all, of the surviving estate. This version is the second of the decrees still enforced today. == See also ==