matsa or motse -- is the answer of motse ani isha mar memavet -- loshon hara

albert, new jersey

It is axiomatic that the Gemara is not recommending Lashon ha'Ra. It can be understood that they were not merely inquisitively asking the new Chasan a question for the purposes of gossip. If they were asking a question at all (which is unlikely, as will be argued below), it was for the positive purpose of assisting him in his future marriage.

There are 7 preliminary hurdles one has to overcome before one can speak negative words about another person, and it is Avak Lashon ha'Ra to do an action which is likely to provoke Lashon ha'Ra. In this case, the B'nei Ma'arava would be guilty only of Avak Lashon ha'Ra if their question would be likely to provoke the Chasan into saying Lashon ha'Ra about his wife. The 7 conditions are:

1. Absolute certainly of the fact

2. Have given the benefit of the doubt

3. Given Tochechah

4. It must be purposeful

5. Not exaggerated

6. To achieve the objective by different means if possible

7. Not to cause an overreaction

In our case, if the Chasan were to respond to the B'nei Ma'arava it would be in order to receive instruction as to how best to handle his wife, and all 7 of the rules would have been, and would have to have been, complied with properly, in which case it would be perfectly in order for him to receive the necessary instruction.

However, it seems to me that the B'nei Ma'arava were not asking a prying question, and indeed they did not expect a reply at all. The language used by the Gemara both in Berachos (8a) and in Yevamos (63b) is "b'Ma'arava... Amri Lei" -- i.e. they said to him, and not that they asked him. All they were doing was making a statement to draw to his attention to how essential it is for a Chasan to know how to handle his wife. In any event, after one day of marriage, it is far too soon to come to a decision as to the essential qualities of the other person.

There are very many explanations as to the intent of these two verses and the Matza/Motzei dichotomy, and, indeed, why only the B'nei Ma'arava posed this issue. (See the commentaries in the Ein Yakov, Ben Yehoyada, etc.). Some explanations relate the matter not to the quality of the wife, but to the attitude of the husband towards her. For example, if the husband "has found" ("Matza") and is satisfied with his acquisition and has ceased to look elsewhere, then he will have found ultimate bliss. If, however, he is still looking to find -- "Motzei" in the present tense, then this marriage is doomed to be worse than death. Following this explanation or similar explanations, the B'nei Ma'arava were merely pointing out to the Chasan how he should conduct himself and relate to his bride in order to cement his marriage to her.

This can also be worked easily into the Maharsha's explanation in Chidushei Agados in Yevamos. He says that the point is to establish who has the authority in the house. "Matza" -- if the husband takes control and directs the household in a spiritual manner, then all will be fine. But if "Motzei" -- if he allows her to take charge and accentuate the materialistic Gashmiyus elements of the household, then this will lead to a fate worse than death.

It is also quite possible that the B'nei Ma'arava gave this advice to the Chasan before he went into the Chupah. The Gemara says "b'Ma'arava, Ki Nasiv Inish Itesa Amri Lei," which translates as, "... when a man would marry a woman, they would say to him...." It does not make it clear when this was said. We naturally assume that this is afterwards, but I am not so sure of this. It could equally be beforehand. I subsequently was pleased to see this suggestion corroborated in a contemporary Sefer on Agadah called "Medrash Shlomo," written by my next-door neighbor in Israel, Rav Shlomo Zadok. He adds there that there would have been no point in putting such a question afterwards, especially as we ought to follow the view of Beis Hillel and praise every bride to her husband, "Kalah Na'ah v'Chasudah" (Kesuvos 17a).

In conclusion, though he describes this as a question, my strong preference is that this is not so, but rather an advisory and cautionary statement to guide the new Chasan in dealing with his new wife correctly.

Kol Tuv,

Joseph Pearlman