Ben Ish Chai (Torah Lishma 319): Question: Is a wife obligated to listen to her husband when he orders her to do ridiculous things? For example, does she have to listen when her husband demands with threats that she should ride on a broomstick in the courtyard like little children do or to bray like a donkey or bark like dog? She refused because of embarrassment. Does she in fact have an obligation to listen to her husband even for foolish things because a woman is obligated to honor her husband and to do what he wants because that is his happiness? Or do we say that she has no obligation to listen to foolish demands?
Answer: She is not required to listen to him when he says foolish things. It says in Kesubos (71b) that if a man takes an oath that his wife must fill up a bucket 10 times with water and empty it in the garbage dump – he is required to divorce her and give her the kesuba because doing so makes her look like she is crazy. So also in our case. Doing these foolish things makes her look like she is crazy and she is not obligated to listen to him in these things.
Rabbi Eiedensohn,with all due respect can't imagine why you would find it important to post these kind of SHAILOS,you certainly are not doing favors to the BEN ISH CHAI ,as a matter of fact in today's day and age such ridiculous questions and answers cause a big CHILLUL HASHEM
ReplyDeleteagain - you obviously aren't interested in halacha.
ReplyDeleteI guess we should talk about aguna,nida, bris mila, shechita, homosexualty, etc etc because it is a big chilul hashem?!
are you really embarrassed by yiddishkeit?
Come on Rabbi Eidensohn,please don't insult our inteligence,you know perfectly well the diference between discussing hilchon nidah,shchitac,milah etc,etc,and this ridiculous and embarrassing discussion
ReplyDeleteSorry if I came across as being overly critical but let me explain what's bothering me ,of the literally thousands upon thousands of TSHUVOS of the Ben Ish Chai,why did you pick this particular one ?
ReplyDeleteOf course the answer is a pretty obvious one it's precisely because in this day and age it is something which sounds childish and lletrally idiotic even to contemplate such a question you figured it would titilate your readers ,but it is at the expense of the Ben Ish Chai.
To compare this to questions about agh an,bris Mila homosexuality is ludicrous
No actually - it raises an important question. There are halachos that we just know don't apply today - even though they might be doreissa ones. On the other hands there are halachos which we defend strongly - even though they are also not in tune with the times. Why is it acceptable for the first category but not in the second?
ReplyDeleteRav Eidensohn is 100% correct.
ReplyDeleteMy intelligence is not insulted. If I am naive, help me out. What is the difference between discussing nida, shchita, and mila, on the one hand, and the marriage relationship, on the other? Why is the marriage relationship a ridiculous and embarrassing discussion?
ReplyDeleteMy dear friend,if you don't see the difference between discussing hilchos nidah,shchita,and mila or a question whether a woman has to listen to her obviously mentally deranged husband who orders her to bark like a dog,then you have a problem,the fact that this IS even a SHAILOH that we have a halachik discussion on is a big CHILLUL HASHEM.
ReplyDeleteThis discussion more likely would be appropriate for an IMAM in a Saudi Arabian mosque
I agree with those critical of this post and your response. Where there are mitzvos that may not be in sync with secular values, of course we will defend them proudly. I have no idea what that has to do with this shaila and teshuva. What we have here is basically a klutz shayla that leaves the erroneous impression that ploini sh'lomad torah, kama m'gunaim ma'asav when in fact the impetus for the shaylah was more likely the norms of the surrounding bnei yishmael.
ReplyDeleteMy dear friend Jack, when you put words into the mouths of others and insult them for an opinion that exists only in your own imagination, you only insult your own intelligence.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the value of posting this item of the Ben Ish Chai is this: He clearly implies that a wife is generally obligated to obey every order of her husband that does not make her look crazy. Is this normative Halacha today? This is an extremely important and relevant question. I am very interested to hear everyone's reasoned opinions.
My 2cents - we are talking about honoring the other spouse. Honoring someone is an autonomous act , motivated by a deep desire to show apprecaition , respect etc. A person can do the same act , be compliant , but the underlying motives are fear and obedience, not quite an autonomous or self-determined act of honoring someone else.A man may enjoy his wife acting like a clown and she may be willing to do , since ke'vodo ze r'tzono , we say since it compromises her honor , she should not comply - maybe she can in private
ReplyDeleteI can appreciate where Jack is coming from but I don't agree with him. Let me explain. Jack is ultimately saying that this post is the frum version of clickbate. It asks a ridiculous question and the reader, thinking it entertaining, clocks on it and is ultimately disappointed that it wasn't as exciting as he would have hoped.
ReplyDeleteThis ofcourse is assuming the question is ridiculous to begin with. But what if it is a legitimate question. One that might be distasteful to our modern sensibilities but a legitimate question nonetheless. If that is the case, then it is no longer click bate.
Jack may not be familiar with certain ideologies within the Jewish world but believe it or not, there are people out there that believe that she would have to listen. Case in point, I recently had a debate with someone whether, under Jewish law, one is allowed to hit his wife. The man in question would never hurt a fly but he argued that in theory, he doesn't see a halachic issue with it. He was wrong of course but the fact is, one still needs to clarify the halachic ramifications of even the most extreme cases. Arguably, the extreme examples are the best ones to learn from
Of course it is still normative halacha. The halacha didn't change. The Ben Ish Chai himself lived not all that long ago. The halacha preceded the Ramabam, is included in the Rambam and numerous piskei halacha seforim hakedoshim up to and including recent poskim such as the Ben Ish Chai and others.
ReplyDeleteAnd most importantly no one disagrees. There are no poskim who say anything different on this halachic issue.
This shaila has nothing to do with living among the bnei yishmael any more than the psakim in the Chasam Sofer, Tosfos, Rabbeinu Gershom, Maharam Rottenberg, and others are a result of living among the bnei eisav/Christians.
ReplyDeleteThis is a normal typical shaila even if it doesn't jive with the Western values you've been exposed to all your life. And the teshuva the Ben Ish Chai gives is the normative expected response, and based on normative halachic assumptions.
Your first paragraph is flawed in that you contrasts my opinion of the genesis of the shayla with the psokim of gedolei harishonim vacharonim. I am not claiming that the BIC's psak is based on bnei yishmael culture, the psak is obviously based on torah and not sociological concerns. My complaint was that the SHAYLA is not indicative nor representative of how bnei Avrohom Yitzchok vYaakov treat their wives (as confirmed by the BIC in his response) and as such serves very little purpose in demonstrating anything other than someone, somewhere, at some point in time, thought that he can treat his wife like a donkey.
ReplyDeleteRead this more than once and still don't understand it.
ReplyDeleteIf a husband, within the framework of halacha, orders his wife to talk less, spend less, be machmir less, spend less time on her activities of choice, how to interact with the children or other people, what to wear or how to dress, is she obligated to comply? If, in the presence of company or the children, he communicates to her (in the most respectful way available) that he wishes that she stop talking, would she appear "crazy" if she complied?
ReplyDeletein the presence of others is disrespectful and humiliating. What should guide us is what the Steipler said to his daughter - You need to honor to me , but my job is not to impose myself on you. We need to go beyond halacha and live by the guiding principles and mussar statements of the Torah - then we will try and work with our spouses taking into account their perspectives and concerns to find a mutually satisfying solution to a problem
ReplyDeleteParents need to recognize that their married daughter's first obligations are to her husband, not her parents.
ReplyDeleteYou assume that I asked my question from the husband's perspective. I did not. My question remains unanswered: As far as her obligation to Heaven is concerned, to what extent must a wife fulfill the wishes of her husband?
ReplyDelete