web analytics
April 25, 2015 / 6 Iyar, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Home » Judaism » Parsha »

May One Transgress To Restore Shalom Bayis?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

In this week’s parshah, Parshas Naso, the Torah discusses the halachos of a sotah. The Torah’s prescribed process includes grinding a scroll that has the parshah of the sotah written on it, mixing it with water, and having the sotah drink from it. Hashem’s name is included in the parshah. Generally there is an issur de’oraisa to erase Hashem’s name, but here the Torah explicitly permits it.

The Gemara says that Hashem allows His name to be erased for the sake of peace between a man and his wife. The Gemaras in Makkos 11a and Sukkah 53b relate that when Dovid HaMelech began to lay the foundation for the Beis HaMikdash, the waters of the deep began to flood the world. Dovid HaMelech was unsure whether it was permitted to write Hashem’s name on a plank and throw it into the waters so that they would subside. Achitofel then made this kal vachomer: if, for the sake of peace between a man and his wife Hashem allows His name to be erased, then surely He would allow his name to be erased for the sake of saving the entire world. Dovid HaMelech did so and the waters subsided.

The question has been raised whether it would be permitted to transgress other prohibitions for the sake of restoring peace between a man and his wife. The Rashba (Teshuvos 1:854) discusses whether one who swore that he would divorce his wife must keep his oath, or may he break it in order to restore peace between himself and his wife. The questioner argued that since we see that the Torah allowed one to transgress the prohibition of erasing Hashem’s name for the sake of peace in the home, perhaps other prohibitions would similarly be permitted as well.

The Rashba answered him this way: only regarding a scenario relating to a sotah is it permitted to erase Hashem’s name for the sake of restoring peace between a man and his wife. Permission is not granted to violate any prohibition in the Torah – including erasing Hashem’s name – under any other scenario that would bring about peace between a man and his wife.

The Rashba explains that this exclusive permission is granted because the Torah is “removing doubt and preventing issur.” Conversely, in the case whereby one swore to divorce his wife, we would enforce his oath and compel him to divorce his wife.

The Rama (Teshuvos, siman 100, os 10) quotes from Rav Hai Gaon, who says that it is only permitted to erase Hashem’s name in the cases of 1) a sotah and 2) saving the world, while it is impermissible to transgress any other aveirah in the Torah. Rav Hai Gaon uses the same terminology as the Rashba: by sotah it is “removing doubt and preventing issur.”

The Rama explains this as follows: According to some, the prohibition of erasing Hashem’s name only applies when it is done in a destructive manner. According to these views, one may erase Hashem’s name in order to fix it, for this is not destructive. Erasing Hashem’s name in order to restore peace between a man and his wife, or to save the world, is a constructive purpose. Therefore, under these circumstances, erasing Hashem’s name does not even fall under the prohibition. But one may never transgress any other prohibition, even if it will restore peace between a man and his wife. Thus one may not defy his oath in order to restore shalom.

In a different Teshuvah (11), however, the Rama says that we may apply this logic to transgress the aveirah of motzi shem ra (slander) in order to restore peace between two communities. In other words, one may disobey the aveirah of motzi shem ra if it will result in restoring shalom between others. He explains that this is because erasing Hashem’s name is a greater aveirah than motzi shem ra – and since one may erase Hashem’s name for the sake of shalom, he can surely transgress the aveirah of motzi shem ra. This seemingly contradicts what the Rama wrote explaining Rav Hai Gaon.

Perhaps the Rama does not rule in accordance with Rav Hai Gaon. Additionally, I would add that the Gemara in Chullin 141a applies this logic in order to give preference to performing one assei instead of another. The Gemara says that since we see that the Torah allows Hashem’s name to be erased for the sake of restoring shalom between a man and his wife, the assei of a metzora should outweigh the assei of shiluach hakan – since the performance of the metzora’s assei will constitute shalom bayis.

This Gemara indicates that the explanation of the logic behind why the Torah allowed Hashem’s name to be erased is not because the erasing is constructive; rather, it is because restoring shalom between a man and his wife is superior to other mitzvos.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “May One Transgress To Restore Shalom Bayis?”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
"Killing Jews is worship that draws us closer to Allah." That's his Jihad. What's yours? - An ad campaign sponsored by  the American Freedom Defense Initiative.
MTA Hopes to Change Rule, Ban ‘Killing Jews’ Anti-Jihad Ad
Latest Judaism Stories
Torat-Hakehillah-logo-NEW

In her diary, Anne Frank wrote words that provided hope for a humanity faced with suffering.

Leff-042415

The Arizal taught this same approach, making the point that the Torah would never mention wicked people and their sins if there was not great depth involved from which we are to learn from.

Staum-042415

Humility is not achieved when all is well and life is peachy but rather when times are trying and challenging.

In order to be free of the negative consequences of violating a shvu’ah or a neder, the shvu’ah or neder themselves must be annulled.

“I accept the ruling,” said Mr. Broyer, “but would like to understand the reasoning.”

He feared the people would have a change of heart and support Rechavam.

Ramifications Of A Printers Error
‘The Note Holder’s Burden of Proof’
(Kesubos 83b)

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

In this case one could reason that by applying halach achar harov we could permit the forbidden bird as well.

“What a way to spend a Sunday afternoon,” my husband remarked. “Well, baruch Hashem we are safe, there was no accident, and I’m sure there is a good reason for everything that happened to us,” I mused.

The answer to this question is based on one of the greatest shortcomings of man – self-limiting beliefs.

Myth that niddah=dirty stopped many women from accepting laws of family purity and must be shattered

In every generation is the challenge to purge the culture of our exile from our minds and our hearts

Rabbi Fohrman connects the metzora purification process with the korban pesach.

The day after Israel was declared a State, everyone recited Hallel and people danced in the streets.

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

In this case one could reason that by applying halach achar harov we could permit the forbidden bird as well.

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

The Netziv answered that there is a difference between a piece of bread that was cut already in front of you, and one that was cut from beforehand.

Why is it necessary to invite people to eat from the korban Pesach?

The Ran asks why the Gemara concludes that since we are unsure which two of the four we must recline for, that we must recline for all four.

The Chasam Sofer answers that one of only prohibited from wearing a garment that contains shatnez if he does so while wearing the garment for pleasure purposes.

The Aruch Laner asks: How can Rashi say that the third Beis Hamikdash will descend as fire from heaven when every Jew prays several times a day for the rebuilding of the Beis Hamikdash?

The Ohr Hachayim rules that one may not manipulate the system; rather he must state his opinion as he see the ruling in the case; not as he would like the outcome of the verdict to become.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/may-one-transgress-to-restore-shalom-bayis/2014/05/29/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: