There is a popular sefer titled What If? It is based on questions and stories in Rav Zilberstein’s sefarim which are organized according to the weekly parashah. The following story is in a similar format but is based on Rav Zilberstein’s sefer on Gemara, Chashukei Chemed. As of now the sefer is only available in Hebrew.
A chassan and kallah were planning their wedding. There were only a limited amount of kibbudim available at the wedding, and they needed to be properly apportioned. The chassan’s parents and the kallah’s parents wanted to be appropriate role models for their children, so they agreed to work out a plan that would entail compromises from both sides. In advance of the meeting, each side compiled a wish list. When they sat down together, the amicable horse trading began. A half-hour later, without any raised voices, a plan was formulated and put into writing. This was a powerful lesson for the chassan and kallah.
At the wedding, the chassan’s brother was charged with calling up the appropriate people for their kibbudim under the chuppah. As he scanned the crowd, he was understandably nervous because he did not see the rav who was supposed to be one of the witnesses for the Kiddushin. The brother was in a quandary. He waited until his father finished walking the chassan down the aisle and then approached him. The father was too emotional to think clearly and advised his son to pick anyone he felt would be appropriate. Someone from their shul was therefore chosen to be the replacement witness.
As the ceremony began, the mesader Kiddushin turned to the chassan and said, “Do you appoint these two people to be witnesses to the Kiddushin to the exclusion of all others?” The chassan responded in the affirmative. (This declaration is common in some circles.)
All of a sudden, there was a terrible commotion. A man from the crowd began screaming, “Ganav! Thief! Ganav!” The man walked up to the chuppah and said, “You choose this guy here to be your witness?! He ripped me off! He is a ganav. Your Kiddushin will be invalid!”
The new witness said, “Get out of here! We already settled this in beis din. How do you have the chutzpah to disturb the wedding?” The individual kept screaming “Ganav! Thief!” The witness was so offended that he wound up his arm to take a punch. Quickly, people intervened and the two were separated.
A group of people from the shul approached the mesader Kiddushin. They said that they were well aware of the background. Indeed, the business dispute between the two was adjudicated in beis din. There was a loss that was beyond anyone’s control and the witness was found not liable. The screamer is totally in the wrong here.
The offending party was led out of the room, and the ceremony proceeded without further incident.
Of course, this strange occurrence was on everyone’s mind at the wedding. As the guests sat down to eat their appetizer, Gedalya remarked to his friend Mattis, “I don’t think that the couple is halachically married.”
Matis replied, “Why not? Every Jew has a presumption of being a valid and kosher witness. The outburst from the screamer should be disregarded. For starters, he is only a lone individual. Why should we take his outburst seriously without corroborating testimony from a second witness? Moreover, there was a whole group of individuals who explained that the witness was kosher and that he was not a thief. The outburst was just sour grapes from the losing party in beis din.”
Gedalya responded, “Of course you are right in that regard. But didn’t you see that the witness wind up his arm to punch the screamer? The Gemara says in Sanhedrin (58b) that whoever raises his hand to hit someone is called a rasha! The witness is disqualified because he raised his arm to hit his fellow Jew!”
Mattis argued, “That is a nice piece of Aggadata and should be learned during mussar seder. Yes, the Gemara teaches us a powerful lesson. But what does that have to do with practical halachah?”
Gedalya: “Actually, this Gemara is quoted in the Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 420:1) The Shulchan Aruch rules that someone who raises his hand to hit his fellow Jew, even though he did not actually hit him, is called wicked.”
Mattis: “Perhaps the Shulchan Aruch is just teaching us a mussar lesson.”
Gedalya: “The Rema on that paragraph in Shulchan Aruch comments that the offending individual needs a beis din to permit his cherem (excommunication) to be counted as part of a minyan! This is clearly practical halachah.”
Mattis: “OK, you seem to be right that it is practical halachah. However, the very words you quoted are a reason that it doesn’t apply here. You see that beis din has to issue a cherem for the person who raised his hand to hit his fellow Jew. There was no cherem issued against the witness at this wedding.”
Gedalya: “The Sma makes an inference from the precise wording of the Rema. The Rema did not say that beis din has to put the offending individual in cherem. The Rema says that the individual needs a beis din to permit the cherem. The implication is that that person who raises his hand to his fellow Jew is automatically in cherem!”
Mattis: “You are beginning to convince me, but you still have not shown me a source that says the individual is actually invalid as a witness.”
Gedalya: “If the Shulchan Aruch calls him a rasha, he is certainly invalid as a witness. But if you still insist . . . the Beis Yosef in this siman (420) clearly states that the individual is rabbinically invalid as a witness. In fact the Shu’t Chut Hasheni disagrees and says he is invalid as a witness even biblically!”
Mattis “Wow. This is a serious issue. Why don’t we convene a beis din, permit the cherem, and the witness will be valid? We will then go into a side room and quietly redo the Kiddushin.”
Gedalya: “Good idea. But I seem to recall that to permit a Cherem D’Rabbeinu Gershom we require 100 people.”
Mattis: “On this point I can be of service. The Sma says that to obtain a permit to marry a second wife we need such a large beis din. But to permit a ‘run-of-the-mill’ cherem, a beis din of three suffices.
Gedalya: “OK, but we first have to approach the witness and he has to resolve from now on not to raise his hand to hit anyone. Furthermore, the Be’er HaGolah writes that he must declare that he is willing to accept whatever punishment beis din feels is appropriate.”
Mattis: “Before we actually go ahead with our plan, let’s call Rabbi Zilberstein to see if he agrees that the witness to the Kiddushin was invalid because he raised his hand to hit his fellow Jew.”
They manage to reach Rav Zilberstein on the phone and briefly tell him the story.
Rav Zilberstein, shlit’a, replied, “That is a very serious question. However, I feel that in this case the witness does not become invalid for raising his hand to strike his fellow Jew. The Pischei Teshuvah (421:3) discusses a case where someone disgraced and insulted someone. The victim of the verbal abuse raised his hand in anger to hit the offending party. The Pischei Teshuvah quotes the Maharshal that the person who raised his hand is required to do teshuvah; however, we do not label him as a rasha. It is a very difficult nisayon to hold one’s temper in check in the face of verbal abuse. Therefore, due to the mitigating circumstances, we do not label the person a rasha—and all the more so in this case, where the verbal abuse was in public. Therefore, the witness retains his presumption of being a valid witness. The newly married couple can continue their wedding without any more bizarre interruptions.
“However, this story is so fascinating that I will add it to my sefer.”
Maggid shiur and Rebbe at Yeshiva Ateres Shimon in Far Rockaway. He leads the Daf Yomi chaburah at Eitz Chayim of Dogwood Park in West Hempstead, and writes “Delving into the Daf” each week for The Jewish Home.
