Page 104 - 20818_park-c_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 4 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:23 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 4 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:23 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 4 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:23 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 4 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:23 | SR:-- | Magenta
her mother died in childbirth and she was named for her mother.
This confirmed that she was not yet 41 years old. In other words, at
the time of the couple’s engagement three years prior, she had been a
child-bearing woman. Since he pushed off the marriage, she got old.
It says in Tractate Baba Basra (119b) that if she is not married by the
age of 40 she will be unable to have children.
#
In light of the words of Yaavetz, there is some additional explana-
tion as to why it is permissible to hide the fact that the groom’s father
is a gentile. The innermost desire of every Jewish girl or woman is to
fulfill the mitzvah of marriage, even to such a man.
We can bring yet another reason why it is permissible to hide from
the bride the fact that her groom’s father is a gentile. It says in the
Siddur of Rav Yaakov Emden (p. 259), in the berachah of Refa’einu
(Heal us O Lord, that we be healed”) that there is no healthy man
whose body does not have internal scars and wounds. Rather there
is a natural strength that causes him not to feel these pains, and
the person himself does not sense the miracle that is performed for
him. This applies all the more so, to we, who are stricken with the
sufferings of the Exile, and especially to Torah scholars, who are sick
(Nedarim 49b).
According to his words, being that one does not know what is
found in his own body, we are not obligated to reveal that the father
of the groom is a gentile. The same might apply to the question at the
beginning of our discussion about a patient with epilepsy. Perhaps his
marriage is not a mistaken transaction if he had epilepsy which is cur-
rently controlled, because even his bride does not know what illness is
in her own body. In fact, there was a recent case of a young man who
discovered he had cancer immediately after his wedding, even though
he had married under the assumption that he was healthy.

90 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
on another man and then free herself from her husband using this
claim that he disgusts her. (See Shulchan Aruch, Even Ha’ezer, 77b)
All this applies to her claim that he disgusts her. We still need to
rule, however, regarding what we learn in Tractate Kesubos (77a) and 4
Even Ha’ezer (#154:1): We do not force a man who developed blem-
ishes to divorce his wife. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel explains that
this refers to small blemishes, while for large blemishes, we do force
him to divorce her. The following are defects for which he is forced
to divorce her: boils, polypus (a person who develops intolerably bad
breath), a miser, etc.... And we would need to deliberate on whether
or not a colostomy is also considered a large blemish.
The Radvaz was asked (Vol. 4 #260) about a woman who claims
that her husband wets the bed and is not aware of it. Do we force
him to divorce her and to give her a kesubah, like a man with polypus?
He answered that, “We have a great principle from the Rishonim,
that we only force a man to divorce his wife for blemishes cited in
our Mishnah.” The reason for this is that if we start making a parallel
between other so-called blemishes, claiming that they are “similar”
to those cited in the Gemara, then all women, with one excuse or
another, would free themselves from their husbands. Moreover, this
is not similar at all to those things cited in the Mishnah since it is
like any other illness, which eventually passes. Moreover, why should
she care? When awake, he is like anyone else. Let him have marital
relations with her and then each can sleep in his own bed.
And from this we can learn for our case as well. Colostomy is not
included in the blemishes listed in the Mishnah. Not only when tem-
porary but even when it is permanent, we should not add it to the
blemishes listed in the Mishnah. [See also Beis Yosef (Even Ha’ezer
#39:4) and Darchei Moshe, ibid, and the Rama (#117:5) and Responsum
Beis Yitzchak (Even Ha’ezer Vol. 1, #127:9)]
The Radvaz adds (ibid) and says that bedwetting is not considered
to be a blemish if the woman claims it is a bother, but if she claims
that he disgusts her, the claim is valid, and it is probably the same in
our case.
Colostomies 2 107