Civil Courts vs Rabbinical Courts: Understanding the Legal and Religious Divide

At first glance, a Civil Court and a Rabbinical Court may seem similar. Both are judicial bodies whose purpose is to settle disputes and deliver rulings. In practice however, the difference between them is vast.

A civil court in Israel rules according to a mixed legal system that developed from Ottoman law, British Mandate law, and Israeli legislation. In contrast, a rabbinical court rules exclusively according to Torah law. Civil law regulates the lives of citizens based on human legislation, created and adjusted by people. Rabbinical law, however, issues judgments not from human reasoning but strictly according to the guidance of the Torah, which Judaism views as divine.

Different Systems, Different Outcomes

Because the two systems are fundamentally different, they often reach contradictory verdicts in identical cases. For example, a civil court may determine that a plaintiff is entitled to financial compensation, while a rabbinical court may rule in the exact same case that the plaintiff is not entitled to receive money. According to halacha (Jewish law), if someone accepts funds through the civil court system against Torah law, it is considered theft, and they will be held accountable in the “Heavenly Court.”

Civil court rulings do not necessarily align with Torah law. This means that, from a religious perspective, they operate based on human concepts of justice, which vary across countries, eras, and cultures, rather than what Judaism sees as eternal divine justice.

The Torah’s Command for Justice

The Torah explicitly commands the Jewish people to establish courts: “Judges and officers shall you appoint for yourself … and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment” (Devarim 16:18). In the rabbinical court system, justice and morality are defined by God, and the role of the judges is to uncover and apply God’s law.

By contrast, filing a claim in a civil court is considered by traditional Jewish sources not just a procedural matter but a declaration of rejecting the authority of halacha, and elevating human law above Torah law. The Sages even described this as a desecration of God’s name, because it undermines the honor of the Torah.

The Halachic Ban on Civil Courts

The Talmud teaches on the verse “These are the ordinances that you shall set before them” (Shemot 21:1): “before them, and not before non-Jewish courts” (Gittin 88b). This prohibition applies even when the judges are Jewish but ruling within a non-Torah legal framework. The problem therefore is not the judge’s identity, but the legal system itself.

Jewish law states that anyone who brings a case to a court not governed by Torah law is considered as if they have “raised their hand against the Torah of Moses” (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 26:1). This is prohibited unless a rabbinical court itself gives explicit written permission in situations where civil authorities must be involved.

Do Rabbinical Court Rulings Have Legal Force in Israel?

When both parties sign a binding arbitration agreement and the rabbinical court issues a ruling, that decision is legally recognized by the civil court system. A case cannot then be retried in civil court.

In practice, this means that rabbinical court rulings do carry full legal weight. However, when enforcement requires tools only available to state authorities — such as police action in cases where a defendant refuses to pay, rabbinical courts may issue authorization to bring the matter before a civil court for enforcement purposes only.