[Avodah] Fasting on YK

[Zev Sero]

Chana Luntz wrote:

> But in the case RIS is bringing, the woman, at the start of Yom Kippur,
> cannot be said to be in the situation of a choleh sheyesh bo sakana.
> And, it would seem, if she does not run around after her children, she
> will not find herself in that state.  So if the man stays home from shul
> and instead does that running around after the children, he is
> preventing the woman from ever getting into the position of a choleh she
> yesh bo sakana, which would then force her to eat.  Only if he does not
> stay home, and she runs around after the children, will she put herself
> into the state in which she is then required to eat.  So is not this
> case if anything more like the case of al tamod al dam re'echa?  If the
> husband does not step in (or hire help, or whatever) he is letting his
> wife slip into a situation of being a choleh she yesh bo sakana (with,
> inter alia, the consequence that she will have to eat on yom kippur).
> It seems to me that mere tzar in this latter case would not be enough to
> allow the husband to patur himself from preventing such an occurrence -
> in a similar way that if she was at risk of being put in the matzav of a
> choleh she yesh bo sakana by a river or a rodef or whatever, mere tzar
> on behalf of the neighbour or husband would not be enough to patur him
> or them from acting.

In addition, doesn't his obligation to heal his wife extend to
preventing her from getting sick in the first place?  The principle that
"hakol cholim heim etzel tzina" allows us to get a goy to light a fire
on Shabbat so that we won't become sick in the first place.  That implies
that a person who is likely to become sick if something isn't done
already has a status of "choleh" for the purpose of getting that thing
done, at least when dealing with derabanans such as Amira Lenochri.
Surely then this woman is already a cholah, and he has the duty to
"heal" her by preventing her from getting so sick that she needs to eat.

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev at sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas