- This topic has 38 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I am trying to understand the sugya where if a man attacks a woman he is required to marry her. How is that a punishment?
are you serious Englishman,
I guess you’re not married 🙂
It is only if the father wants it.
Let’s put this in the correct perspective. For starters, she is under absolutely no obligation to marry him. If she chooses not to marry him, his punishment instead is to give her a full year of support, in addition to any other damages that Bais Din asseses. We are discussing only the case that she wants to marry him.
Let’s envision the following scenario: a man, in a moment of weakness, abuses her. It’s an erratic occurance, and he feels true remorse. She, however, now is likely to have a difficult time finding an appropriate shidduch. The Torah obligates him to make up for the difficulty that he caused her by forcing him to extend to her an offer of marriage. Again, if she has any reason to refuse, it’s her choice.
if she has any reason to refuse
Hee hee. Like let’s say, if he’s a rapist?
That’s the second kushya on the whole din. I suspect that this was one of those that never ended up happening like the ihr hanidachas.
BTW the torah refares to both someone who forces and someone who convinces, (I guess you can call it statuary rape) so in that case it might be a little easyier to understand why she should want to marry him.
It makes sense to me, in the most simple way, because he would then have the chance to correct his damage, be nice to her, learn to give and love her, its a tikkun for the aveira. Be nice to the one you hurt! What better way.
deiyezooger-I agree- I was thinking along the same lines. If it is s/o who seduces she may even be familiar with him, he may be s/o decent who had a moment of weakness, plus her prospects for a good shidduch are now diminished as BaalSechel mentioned.
Its not just a ponishment, it a deterent. (Like “you think you can controll others, keep in mind that the other party will be in total controll of your life and you will be at her mercy”)
And if she has a big rolling pin uch in veiy
similar question…the vindicated sotah’s reward is having a son with him; why would she want to be married to & have a child with someone who doesn’t trust her & caused her such public humiliation?
ayc,
If she hadn’t secluded herself with him, she never would have had to drink.
The vindicated sotah was still doing something wrong by being in a yichud situation with someone alse after being told in front of eidim not to do so.
ayc: It is brought that often (like with Chana from the Chanuka story) that a husband would “accuse” his wife (with her cooperation) of being a sotah, in order that they should receive the blessing of having children, if they had trouble having children till then.
Also, she can’t demand a get for being (falsely) accused of being a sotah, as it isn’t one of the valid halachic reasons that would entitle her to demand one.
dy&dz, understood, but the question still remains
“she can’t demand a get for being (falsely) accused of being a sotah”
shlishi- so let her scorch the dinner…surely that’s worse
And what if he dosent mind the scorched dinner?…
so let her scorch the dinner…surely that’s worse
ayc: She still couldn’t demand a get. Scorching the dinner only gives him the right to give one, not for her to demand one.
“As far as this punishment being equally applicable in a case of seduction, is that the case anytime a man has any relationship with a woman outside of wedlock? “
We are talking about a youngster. (a “naarah”).
“she can’t demand a get for being (falsely) accused of being a sotah”
“…only gives him the right to give one (get), not for her to demand one.”
sounds like she’s a prisoner in her own home
I guess the women’s libbers weren’t around in time to influence the Gemorah.
I think it is worthwhile mentioning that the case presented here is where she is unmarried. If he did it to a married woman c”v, the penalty would be misa.
Also, even if she is unmarried she would presumably be tameh (nida), and he would incur the penalties resulting from that fact.
sounds like she’s a prisoner in her own home
Why do you ask this about sotah more than any marriage?
The difference between being able to demand a get is whether or not he pays the kesubah.
Also, even if she is unmarried she would presumably be tameh (nida), and he would incur the penalties resulting from that fact.
In the times of the Bais Hamikdash, even unmarried women would become t’horah when possible in order not to be m’tamei food.
The difference between being able to demand a get is whether or not he pays the kesubah.
She can demand a get at will at any time, assuming she is willing to forgo her kesubah?
a punishment of decades in prison
The same question can be asked about any non mortal violent act, for which the Torah only imposes financial penalty (ayin tachas ayin, etc.).
She can demand a get at will at any time, assuming she is willing to forgo her kesubah?
No, I was unclear; what I meant to refer to was his right to give one.
Yes, she can demand a Get. However, that deems her a Moredess, if she doesn’t have a valid reason to repel him.
Englishman, our society is actually somewhat hypocritical on this issue. On the one hand, they’ll throw the guy into jail for decades. On the other hand, real infidelity is just something to tease someone about.
Modern society punishes based on the need to deter, not what is actually earned. You can get a harsher punishment for borrowing too much from the bank than for a murder. In times of Beis Din, when they saw the need, they were also capable of punishing extra harsh punishments for a deterence.
Okay, but even if he doesn’t marry her, that is the only punishment provided for what he did.
And why would she (or her father) want such a marriage, that that forced penalty is made available to her (or her father)?
<.>
doesn’t the Torah give a chiyuv momonus as well (like a motza shame ra)
HaLeiVi: A moredes can demand a get at will, even with no valid reason (i.e. she wakes up on the wrong side of the bed that morning) even if he doesn’t wish to provide it and beis din will force him?
Daas Yochid (in his clarifying comment) seems to indicate otherwise.
The Torah’s penalties are far more just than any passed by a legislature.
He is not able to divorce her.
The financial penalty is not “one year of support”. The attacker is obligated to pay the difference in value between a kesubah of a besulah and a kesuba of a beula. This is appropriate because he caused her “marriageable value” to decrease by that amount.
The actual punishment is that if her father so chooses, the attacker must marry her and forfeits his right to divorce her. If the father does not exercise this option, seemingly there is nothing further. Obviously, there is dinei shomayim.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.