Return To TorahWeb.org Homepage
In Parshat Ki Tetze, the Torah (Devarim 24:5) records that a chatan is exempted from military service (milchemet reshut) not only in the immediate aftermath of his marriage, but for the entire first year: "ki yikach ish ishah chadashah lo yeze ba-tzava velo yaavor alav le-kol davar; naki yihyeh le-beito shanah echat ve-simach ishto asher lakach". Apparently the marriage triggers not only a seven-day personal yom tov for the husband and wife, but has extended and wider impact, as well. The Ritva (Ketuvot 8a), among others, suggests that the practice to recite the introductory zimun formula of she-ha-simchah be-meono in meals devoted to celebrating the presence of chatan and kalah during the entire first year (if not for the decline of joy due to the churban) stems from this source. Properly understood, this law perhaps presents a fascinating insight into the character of Jewish marriage.
The fact is that this conscription exemption is quite remarkable, as it evidently asserts the primacy of marital bliss over national duty and responsibility. It is even more striking given the authentic scope of this law. The Gemara (Sotah 44b), noting the seeming ambiguous and superfluous phrase "velo yaavor alav le-kol davar", extends the chatan's exclusion to home front assistance ("lesapek mayim umazon le-achav"), as well. This significant expansion of the chatan's disengagement for the sake of marital bonding precludes the likelihood that this law derives from obvious utilitarian considerations. One could have postulated that the participation of a distracted party endangered fellow soldiers and jeopardized the mission itself, militating against the chatan's conscription. Alternatively (or additionally), one could conceive that this law was designed to safeguard against particularly demoralizing tragedy of casualties incurred by those in the fullness of their promise and potential. Neither of these factors, however, accounts for the preference of marital concentration over that of secure albeit time-consuming national contribution.
Instead, this halachah reflects the urgency and high axiological value of a strong marital bond itself. Sefer ha-Chinuch (no. 582) explains that the ambition of a spiritually suffused marriage relationship requires undistracted focus and concentration. The couple needs to invest time and singular effort in the tone-setting and fragile first year to cultivate and foster an existential bond, forging the core unit of a bayit neeman be-Yisrael. The development of this mutually defining connection is not merely a romantic fantasy or admirable abstract ideal, but constitutes a halachic category and even, imperative. Torah law recognizes that the transition from and continued balance between mesameach chatan ve-kalah (of the sixth sheva berachah) and mesameach chatan im ha-kalah (final berachah) demands ample time and focused effort. The disruption or suspension of this critical process of relationship-building is not justified even by the noble and urgent cause of a just war (milchemet reshut).
Moreover, the compelling character of shanah rishonah should not be perceived as a competing, divergent force vis-a-vis the national obligation, but as an internal factor or calculus in the attainment of Klal Yisrael's objectives. The Radvaz (responsum 1:238) rejects the view (see Rambam, Sefer Hamizvot, no. 311 and Chinuch op cit.) that the chatan is prohibited even from traveling absences beneficial to and approved by his wife. He argues that the exemption from public-interest involvement is the exclusive focus of the Torah's naki yihyeh le-beito mandate. Evidently, the halachah specifically intends to underscore that the chatan's obligatory marital focus benefits and therefore fulfills the public interest.
Investment in the marital bond constitutes a core investment in Klal Yisrael, as it is its essential building block. The wedding is undertaken "kedat Moshe ve-Yisrael", with the aspiration that it produce a "bayit neeman be-Yisrael". R. Hai Gaon notes the unusual formulation of birchat erusin which concludes with an emphasis on the sanctity of the Jewish nation - "mekadesh amo Yisrael al yedei chupah ve-kidushin". The first of the birchat nesuin, "asher barah le-kevodo", is, as Rashi notes (Ketuvot 8a) a berachah that focuses on the presence of the tzibur. While Rashi posits that it is more of an independent introductory theme than a substantive birchat nesuin, others (see Shita Mekubezet, ad loc) dispute this conclusion. Perhaps one may posit that the most appropriate first berachah is one that accentuates the link between every marriage and the motif of Klal Yisrael. [There are quite a number of other indications that marriage is fundamentally conceived as a national institution. I hope to expand upon this them elsewhere. It should also be noted that there is a discussion in halachic literature whether the broader exemption from national service extends also to one who recently cultivated his vineyard etc. See Sotah 44b, the Rambam, Hilchot Melachim, and the Sefer ha-Chinuch and Minhat Chinuch previously cited. The sources that fully equate marriage with its parallels require further clarification.]
The fact that the marriage bond is perceived both as a parallel and paradigm of the relationship between Klal Yisrael and Hashem is surely significant to this theme, as well. The connection is transcendent and defining; it urgently demands serious investment of time and a single-minded focus and effort. There is no room for complacency in a bond that must be suffused with kedushah, and which is the foundation for all extended relationships and obligations. During the month of Elul, famously characterized by the Abudraham as precisely reflecting (as an acronym) the theme of ani le-dodi ve-dodi li that encapsulates that intense existential bond, we can particularly appreciate the demands and opportunity reflected in the unusual mandate of naki yihyeh le-beito.