[Avodah] Non-Jews Begin to Embrace Ketubah Wedding

[Zev Sero]

On 1/03/2011 8:29 PM, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:
> My understanding is as you say - he cites the Yam Shel Shlomo BK in
> other places where the issue is that an act will cause the halacha to
> forgotten or misunderstood in the future.

What do you mean by "in the future"?  That on some future occasion people
will do something wrong?  That's explicitly *not* what he's saying.  What
he's saying is that people will develop a false understanding of halacha.
If you allow a woman to be mekadesh a man, both of them will naturally
conclude that such a thing is possible.

On 1/03/2011 8:47 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:34:24PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>>> He speaks of future weddings. That's others.

>> Where does he speak of future weddings?  Where do those words appear?

> I quoted them four times now. The majority of RMF's teshuvah is about
> how allowing it now can lead to error of halakhah in the future!

Quote the words.  They're not there.  RMF's concern is explicitly *not*
about an actual error of halacha happening in the future, i.e. that
someone will one day do something wrong, but that they will have a false
understanding of halacha.  He's clear that the error will have no
practical consequences; the fact of the error is itself the harm to be
prevented.

>> From the port you're replying to:
>>>>>        ... yeish leesor mitzad zeh atzmo
>>>>>        af im lo yavo lidei qilqul kelal
>>>>>        shelo yit'u lomar shesagi raq beqidushin shelah...

>>>>> And "hu issur gamur uvarur mitzad shikhechas hadin veshinui hadin."

> Or
>      "Al yedei zeh osin sheyishkach meiharbeih din qiddushin..."

Exactly.  The din will be forgotten.  Not that future weddings will
somehow be done wrong, but that people will have a false understanding
of what is going on.  People will think that when she is "mekadesh" him
there is a kiddushin going on, when in fact it's all a joke.

> Or RMF's comparison to the gezeira against ba rasha verubo bemayim
> sho'avim, "... shehu mishim debitechilah hayu tovelin... umikol maqom
> ba mizeh she'amru..."

Exactly.  Read it again, and read it carefully, since you obviously
haven't done so yet.  There is *no practical takalah*, since they're
going to the mikveh anyway; the only problem is that their understanding
of what is happening is wrong.  They think the dirty water is symbolic
of their tum'ah, and the shower is what makes them tahor.  At this point
in the proceedings we are explicitly *not* concerned that they will skip
the mikveh -- that concern comes later.  All we're concerned about is
that they'll misunderstand.  And it's not outside observers that we're
worried about, it's the tovlim themselves.

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
zev at sero.name                 eventually run out of other people’s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher