Ketubot 4: Balancing Joy with Mourning; Balancing Women's Rights with their Victimhood

The rabbis attempt to accurately interpret the Mishna that began Masechet Ketubot.  What do they figure out through their conversations?

• if the mother of the kalah, bride, or father of the chatan, groom, dies on the day of the wedding,
• the couple is married immediately
• the couple is secluded and has intercourse
• the couple separates; women sleeping with the women and men with the men for fourteen days
• the first seven days are days of rejoicing
• men are not considered to be in 'acute mourning'; they can bathe, adorn themselves, etc.
• women are permitted to be adorned with jewellery 
• the second set of seven days is mourning
• the first thirty days of mourning are not as strict as usual: the kalah is adorned so that her new chat an continues to desire her

The rabbis wonder about calling off the wedding.  One reason to postpone is based on the absence of, in particular, the mother of the bride.  She would have been the one to oversee the feast and the celebration; her daughter's adornment and her special body/skin treatments.  Thus her death could mean that no one is capable of adorning the bride.  

The rabbis also wonder about spoiled food: has the meat for the feast touched water by the time that the death occurs?  If it hasn't, it should be able to be resold - particularly in a city where there is demand for meat even after its preparation has begun.  But if the meat has begun to cook, the wedding plans continue.  This consideration is a practical one.  But did these halachot preclude the needs of the individual kalah and chatan?  More on the emotional needs of these young people soon.

The rabbis look to menstruation as a comparable interruption of a wedding.  Rav Yosef says that Rava teaches that when a kalah begins to menstruate before intercourse, she retreats to sleep with the women and the chatan goes to the men until she is out of niddah.  But if she begins to menstruate after intercourse, they are permitted to sleep together that night.  

The rabbis then examine some of differences between the a couple whose parents have died and a couple where the kalah begins to menstruate on the day of the wedding.  

First, they note that while a wife is menstruating, she is not obliged to help her husband with the usual markers of intimacy: washing his face, hands and feet; preparing the bed; to paint her eyes blue or use rouge; to pour wine into his cup.  Our commentary tells us Rashi's interpretation: these actions could lead to intercourse, which is forbidden when in mourning.  

But when a wife is in mourning it is different than when a husband is in mourning.  The rabbis suggest that his sexual urge is strong and that he might not be as sensitive when in mourning.  This would not lead him to a transgression if he is in mourning.  But if she is in mourning, he might still insist that she have intercourse with him.  This transgression on her part would not be a serious transgression, for she as innocent in her desire and her action.  

Le's not be pretty about this - we are talking about marital rape.  And we are reminded that this concept was impossible to even imagine two thousand years ago.  But today, we can imagine the powerlessness that women experienced in their worst moments; when mourning her mother.

The rabbis are convinced that young couples will not take mourning lightly, thus it is permitted for them to keep the mitzvah of intercourse after the wedding.  In ordinary situations, however, the rabbis are concerned that couples will not take mourning seriously.  Further, they note that when one's husband or wife is in mourning, s/he must behave as if s/he is in mourning while in the presence of his/her partner.  Even if the partner might hear about inappropriate behaviour, behaviours of mourning should be practiced.  In this way, the rabbis demonstrate the importance of being sensitive to the needs of one's partner.

Our daf ends with the beginnings of another consideration.  We have learned when examining possible wedding dates that couples could not marry on Friday night nor Saturday lest the break the halachot of Shabbat by preparing for the wedding.  As well, bleeding after intercourse could be considered to be a form of 'cut'; inflicting a wound is forbidden on Shabbat.  Certainly the rabbis will continue this conversation tomorrow.

In part, we learn about ways in which women's rights are protected: women can adorn themselves while in mourning; their husbands must behave as if he is in mourning if women's mothers die, etc.  At the same time we learn that women's rights are almost non-existent; their husbands are their masters and their owners.  Women can be raped, hurt, misunderstood - there is no consequence for men who behave disrespectfully.  I watch myself bouncing back and forth between being impressed with the progressive views of the rabbis and being mortified by the realities of antiquity.