The introduction to the law of the Sotah (the suspected wife) is “Any man (ish ish), whose wife shall go astray and commit treachery against him” (Bamidbar 5:12). The Medrash comments that we learn from here that a person should be easygoing (‘vatran’) in his household.
This would seem to be a strange pasuk (verse) on which to attach the advice that one should have a “live and let live” attitude. Surely, the Medrash is not suggesting that if a man’s wife is unfaithful to him, he should be easygoing about the matter and overlook it. If a man discovers that his wife is being unfaithful, he is biblically prohibited from continuing the marriage.
So why then, in this pasuk, where apparently the wife is the problem, does the Medrash give advice to the husband about how he should conduct himself? Bear in mind that even if the woman is found to be ‘innocent’ and has not committed the offense of actual adultery, she still is far from being fault-free. In order to have become a Sotah, the woman must have gone into seclusion with a man with whom her husband had already warned her not to be alone.
The Medrash is prompted by the pasuk’s strange use of the terminology “ish ish” (literally, ‘a man, a man’) to describe the husband in this situation. It would certainly have been sufficient to write “ish” once to get the point across. The redundancy apparently alludes to the fact that this husband was too much of an ‘ish.’ He was perhaps too assertive, too particular, too overbearing. He was the type of husband who ruled his house as a type of dictatorship. He was abusive and oppressive. The result of there being too much of the ‘ish’ was the wife going astray.
The woman may, in fact, have sinned and be deserving of punishment. But the Medrash is pointing out that such things do not happen in a vacuum. Of course, if a husband is abusive, the wife is still not justified in being unfaithful. Heaven forbid. People are obviously and ultimately responsible for their own actions. But a contributory cause of the sin might have in fact been that the husband was “ish, ish” – he was too oppressive.
There is no greater assault on the peace and tranquility of a marriage relationship than to have one of the partners in that marriage commit adultery. But the Medrash reminds us that adultery is only the culmination of the tension in the family. The problem started with smaller things. There are many impediments to a peaceful and serene home setting.
The Torah is telling us that a person must look at himself and ask, “Did I have a part in this?” “Is this totally her fault?” Did underlying problems with the lack of sholom bayis (domestic tranquility), perhaps related to the husband being too overbearing and not easygoing enough, contribute to the situation?
Saying Sorry Doesn’t Help
“They shall confess the sin that they committed...” (5:7) The Torah describes the process of atonement for an individual who unlawfully withholds money that belongs to another and then compounds his iniquity by swearing falsely. A crucial element of his atonement is known as viduy, confession. The Rambam cites this verse as the source for the general commandment of repentance. The Rambam concludes with the words, “Kol hamarbeh lehisvados haray zeh meshubach” – “Anyone who confesses exceedingly is worthy of praise.” The secular notion of confession conjures up images involving admission of guilt and expiation, a person psychologically beating and berating himself for his unworthiness. It is difficult to consider a person who indulges in this type of behavior as one who is worthy of praise. On the contrary, such behavior usually encourages a person to violate the same prohibition again. He either views the self-flagellation as atonement for his actions and would be willing to endure this type of atonement if tempted again by the same actions, or he reaches a point where his opinion of himself is so low that he feels justified in committing the violation again for he feels he is worthy of nothing more. What, then, is the Jewish definition of confession?
The Rambam uses a similar expression on one other occasion. Concerning the mitzva of recounting the exodus from Mitzrayim on Pesach night, the Rambam states, “Kol hamarich bedevarim haray zeh meshubach” – “Anyone who recites exceedingly is worthy of praise.” The recitation of the Haggadah on Pesach night is a fulfillment of this precept. The passage describing the bringing of the first fruits, which contains a brief sketch of Jewish history, forms a major part of the Pesach Haggadah. The Talmud refers to this passage as “viduy bikkurim.” In the entire passage, there is no mention of guilt or confession. Why would Chazal describe this recitation as a viduy?
The term viduy has the same root as the word todah, thanks. This comparison is emphasized through the following Midrash: When Adam repented for his sin, he composed the Psalm “To v lehodos” – “It is good to give thanks.” The Midrash relates that lehodos should be read as lehisvados, to confess. What is the connection between giving thanks and confession?
When a person offers gratitude for a positive action that has been performed for him, he acknowledges the benefit that he has received. The word todah stems from the word modeh, acknowledge. Confession forces a person to verbalize his acknowledgement of the benefits Hashem has granted him and to show that he realizes that transgressing one of Hashem’s mitzvos is, in essence, self-destructive, for adhering to the mitzvos is beneficial to him. Therefore, it is praiseworthy to continuously acknowledge the benefit Hashem has bestowed upon us, for this will ensure that our commitment to adhere to the precepts is strengthened. Similarly, on Pesach night, we recount the multitude of miracles that Hashem has performed on our behalf throughout history and express our gratitude for His kindness. There is no limit that can be placed upon acknowledging our obligations toward Hashem because of the great kindness He has shown.
RABBI YISSOCHOR FRAND
RABBI YOCHANAN ZWEIG
