I Am Very Disturbed by This Gemara

haleyaskins

Tue, Aug 08 2017, 9:57 pm

Marina,

This is one of many, many strange gemaras (that are 5exual in nature) that are certain to upset/disturb the first-time reader. I won’t quote any others, as it seems the majority of the readers are unhappy with the idea of “mocking” Judaism and Jewish texts. I see it very differently than that. To me, it is not mocking when we question and challenge. Instead, we are striving to reach a truth (and by the way, when I say truth, I do NOT mean the truth with a capital ‘T’.) Delving into Judaism’s issues enables us to forge a deeper and more meaningful relationship with Hashem which in turn, enriches our lives and the lives of our children.

On to your question. Two relevant points:

1) Certainly, it is unfair to look back at history with our 21st century ideals of equality, etc. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t upset us, but it means time was, sadly, very different. Slavery existed as did misogyny. Would we get angry at Yaakov for marrying multiple wives? Or do we simply say, times were so different back then. Same thing for this. I know, I know, they are Rabbis…but that’s just the way it was.

2) Ruth Calderon, who is a member of Knesset and has a PhD in Gemara (gasp!) wrote a book that I once read entitled…get ready…"A Bride for One Night"! In this book she chose a number of strange gemaras and midrashim and she writes these interesting fictional narratives based on each gemara/midrash, and then her own analysis as a Talmud scholar of the sugya. Here are some of my recollections from that book:

She presented the idea that some commentators believe the women/wife went home with Rav or Rav Nachman and considers whether that made it any better. She wonders whether the women sought the marriage themselves for some reason—were they poor, for instance, or maybe had no other options of marriage? I remember she discussed the marriage ceremony in Judaism and how we don’t emphasize as secular weddings do “till death do us part”, that is, in Judaism, divorce is always an option. I can't remember everything, but I know she tried hard to spin the more challenging gemaras in a positive light. Go check out the book from the library. And believe me…this gemara is far from the strangest one out there.

marina

Tue, Aug 08 2017, 10:11 pm

haleyaskins wrote:

Thanks I will see if I can find it on google books. I'm pretty familiar with gemara and aggadta and I once read this whole Be'er Hagolah book where the Maharal tries to explain the weirder gemarot.

fiji

Wed, Aug 09 2017, 2:05 am

Your question bothered me because I know based on what I’ve learnt that of course one night stands are not what the Torah wants from us. Given that I dont learn Gemara, I asked my husband about the Gemara you are referencing. I am no Rebbetzin and my husband is not a pulpit Rabbi, but he did spend an entire year learning this entire mesechta with chavrusas and Rabbis trying to understand it, not in a progressive way, but rather in an authentic way. I still don’t think this is the right forum for these types of questions, but since the question has already been posed, I think it is important to share what I understood from my husband about the Gemara for those who will C”V be tempted to mock the Gemara from an otherwise improper understanding. I apologize if I don’t write this clearly enough, it is not meant to replace having actual conversations with Rabbis who know what they are talking about and do care to help.

Firstly, OP you are assuming that they actually had relations. Based on your assumption, you are naturally asking questions on the Amoraim and Judaism in general. The problem is, the Gemara just a few lines later explicitly says that they did not have relations. I’m not sure if you intentionally left that part of the Gemara out of your post or if you just didn’t learn/ understand the entire Gemara. The gemara says they only had yichud, which it then explains was a tactic towards fighting the yetzer hara, because of a concept of pas b'salo, which would thereby lessen their temptation. (Normally one cannot use a tactic like this because it may not work and they may actually end up having relations with the woman, having a child and then running into the issue which the gemara was discussing of their children inadvertently marrying their half-sibling.) It is also crucial to note that the first Tosfos on the page explains on the spot that because of the complex issue brought up of Tavua L’hinasei that by definition they clearly could not have consummated all marriages of this type because if they did, it would create a halachic issue which would render all the women as tamei Niddah for reasons that well surpass understanding and interest of most women here. In fact I’ve probably already gone too deep. (To be honest, it was a little too deep at that point for me to follow anymore also). The point is, if on the spot one of the primary two commentators on the page says they weren’t consummating the marriage, then CLEARLY they were proposing marriage for entirely different reasons and we are not discussing meaningless relations or one night stands AT ALL.

So to answer your question, the Torah does not endorse one night stands or meaningless relations.
The intention of the Rabbis was not to have a mutar one night stand. According to this explanation of the Gemara, they didn’t have relations with these women at all. So why marry them? Perhaps an answer is in order to prevent themselves from even thinking of having a one night stand outside of the kedusha of marriage. Also, the Gemara doesn’t even say they really even married these women. It just says they announced that they were coming and wanted to know if anyone would be interested in marrying them. (Knowing that they would have someone who would be happy to marry them that night would lower their temptation for forbidden relations.) The Gemara then discusses a technical difficulty that one cannot marry someone the night they meet them because the excitement for the marriage may cause her to menstruate… According to this, they wouldn’t even then have divorcees who can’t then marry Cohanim.

-Even if we were to assume that these great Rabbis were to marry these women in the plain sense of the words and have children with them, this still is not a one night stand. It would be marriage. Albeit marriage to two women, but marriage.
The Gemara isn’t bothered by having two wives. Its bothered by having two wives in two different cities where the children may not know of each other and then end up marrying each other. But if they have famous parents, they won't marry each other. Similarly if both women lived in the same city, the Gemara would have no problem of them marrying and setting up homes with both women. PS. The line “(This was done in order to protect him from sinning)” is not actually found in the Gemara, Rashi or Tosfos to describe that part of the Gemara.
So even with this understanding that they would actually marry the women and have children with them, the Gemara is not discussing one night stands or meaningless relations. It is discussing having two families, each in the spirit of Kedusha, in two different cities.

(I think your trouble, as well as mine, stems from the inability to understand how a man can marry two women. How can they have a special relationship? How can he treat her like his other half if there's another half in the equation?! In fact, if we really want to start asking questions, how could Yaakov Avinu marry two sisters?! But these are fundamental questions well before this Gemara even starts. This Gemara is neither a source nor a support. It has nothing to do with such questions.)

Nowadays, however men are no longer allowed to marry two women because of Cheirem D'Rabbeinu Gershom. So clearly something has changed since the times of the Tannaim and Amoraim. Perhaps men were greater people back then who were more capable of giving loving personal attention. Important to note that most people even then did not marry more than one wife, and it can be interpreted as a bad idea for most couples based on the title "tzara" for a co-wife describing the amount of trouble and harrassment they will cause each other. As well, Marbe Nashim Marbe Kshafim, because women will turn to even witchcraft to win the sole love of their partners. But perhaps there were individuals, great men who were capable of providing love and support for more than one wife. Nowadays with the divorce rate, it seems many men are struggling with the capacity to provide love and support for even one wife R”L.

Hope this helps shed the clarity and insight you were looking for.

haleyaskins

Wed, Aug 09 2017, 10:18 am

Fiji,

Your answer is apologetics at its best. That's not to say that your approach is wrong, it's just not going to assuage everyone's concerns. My sense it that while most readers on this site will be very pleased with your research (seriously, kudos on that...though I have some comments below re: your analysis), people like me and, I'm guessing people like marina will not be as enthusiastic about that type of apologetics. Again, nothing wrong with it. Just some people appreciate that type of reasoning more than other people.

Regarding your excellent gemara shiur, I have a few comments:
You wrote: "The problem is, the Gemara just a few lines later explicitly says that they did not have relations. I’m not sure if you intentionally left that part of the Gemara out of your post or if you just didn’t learn/ understand the entire Gemara."

You are correct that the Gemara suggests that they didn't in fact consummate the marriage and that they only were bi'yichud, but this is only 1 of the opinions in the gemara. The gemara questions how Rav and Rav Nachman could have married these women if, prior to a wedding a woman must wait shiva nik'iim because of Dam Chimud, as is the common practice. The first opinion in the gemara is that Rav and Rav Nachman would alert the town of their trip with enough notice that the woman could wait 7 days so they would be able to have relations. The NEXT opinion is that they only were bi'yichud.

However, Tosfos discusses this answer at length because it also poses a problem. As anyone who was a chupas niddah knows, you can't be biyichud with your husband at the wedding. So, how did these Rabbis get around it? The rishonim have their answers for this question, but I'm not sure that's important here.

To be honest it bothers me less to say that Rav would frequent the town and have a second wife (which was allowed at the time). It bothers me more to think that the Rabbis were so concerned that they wouldn't have self control while away from their wife that they needed to marry someone (whether for relations or simply for yichud) lest they succumb to their temptations.

Anyway, sometimes it's not about finding THE answer, it's about having a conversation about Torah and considering the many different answers we can propose to a given problem. It's not kefirah to question unsettling gemaras and to engage in an open and respectful dialogue about how Judaism has evolved over time.

marina

Wed, Aug 09 2017, 10:24 am

fiji wrote:

So let's go through this one by one.

1.

Quote:

The problem is, the Gemara just a few lines later explicitly says that they did not have relations. I’m not sure if you intentionally left that part of the Gemara out of your post or if you just didn’t learn/ understand the entire Gemara. The gemara says they only had yichud, which it then explains was a tactic towards fighting the yetzer hara, because of a concept of pas b'salo, which would thereby lessen their temptation.

First, the gemara explicitly states that this is one opinion only- some say. But it really makes no difference. And makes no sense. They secluded themselves with these women so they wouldn't have 5ex with them? Then why ask ahead of time plse go to mikvah and who wants to marry me? Just so you have that option? But they never availed themselves of it? They just sat around with the door closed? Pas B'salo isn't even going to work if you know you won't use that option.

But even so, let's assume it was yichud only. My question is still the same. Can you imagine Rav Shteinman asking who wants to marry him for the night? So he won't be so tempted b/c pas b'salo? it seems unbelievable even to imagine such a thing. It makes zero difference to me if there was actually peni5 in v@gina 5ex or not. They thought it was acceptable to even consider this kind of intercourse. A completely meaningless coupling.

2. Also like I just realized, on the next page, this idea of yichud and not consummating the "marriage" makes ZERO SENSE in the gemara's context. The gemara is talking about knowing who the dad is. If these people never consummated anything, there's no point to this example.

Last edited by marina on Wed, Aug 09 2017, 10:36 am; edited 1 time in total