Thursday, November 01, 2007

where is the romance???

the gemara discusses the laws of marriage and what right does the husband or the wife has and when they can force their legal obligations.

once again it struck me how different the gemara deals with issues. One can deal with issue based on facts or based on the emotions that are behind the facts. both here and in general when discussing monetary laws the gemara seems to only deal with the raw facts on the ground. is there room for the interpersonal emotional stuff in halacha? and if not why not?
for example, if a woman is מורדת are we to see why she is, maybe her husband mistreated her (even if its not in an openly abusive way) etc. or let's take for example the laws of when a husband can leave his wife to go out of town AGAINST her wishes. are we worried about the mental effects it will have on their marriage? on their kids? in short what seems to take up most of the energies in interpersonal relationships the gemara seems to totally ignore! we can put it this way, all these אמוראים that went to learn for 2-3 years while their wifes were so so about it, I would think that Rav Yisroel would've told them that they are thieves and all their Torah is for naught, no?
Interestingly, the רבינו בחיי in his introduction to חובת הלבבות starts off by saying that he found no book dealing with the issues of the heart and mind, still he proves from all of Torah that the sate of mind is crucial in עבודת השם still once again it seems that to an extent it is ignored in the gemara.

1 comment:

Avi Lebowitz said...

A couple of related points:
1. There is a machlokes Rishonim whether or not we accept or reject the statement of rav ada that a talmid chacham can disappear even without reshus for an extended period of time. Tosafos Ri"d says that the follow up story indicates that they were wrong for following rav adda and we don't pasken like that (RIF also). however, the rosh brings from the Ramah that we do pasken like that. On that the Rosh comments, even though the halacha is like r'ada, it is not appropriate to be meagen (aguna) her because since her tears are common, her pain is noticed by hashem. We find a similar concept on amud alef that even though talmidei chachamim can leave with reshus for an extended period of time, the gemara takes into consideration the emotional effect and therefore asks, even with reshus, how long is too long. meaning, that even with permission there is an eitzah tova not too.
2. all the cases in the gemara were likely similar to r' akiva that there was not only reshus, but their wives encouraged them, and in those cases tosafos says that they are not bound to the above "suggestion".
3. Ran asks why does the mishna make no mention of o'nas talmidei chachamim? He answers that they don't have a set o'nah because even though it is usually from erev shabbos to erev shabbos, sometimes they get involved in a sugya and it is understood that they will not be able to perform the mitzvah of o'nah. basically, talmidei chachamim really don't have an o'nah kavuah. See m"b o.c. 240 in biur halacha who deals with talmidei chachamin nowadays if they still maintain status of talmid chacham.