The Three Sins That a Woman Dies for in Childbirth
Adapted from Rabbi Braun’s sermon in 5776
Last Wednesday on the 25th I taught a Mishna via podcast that I simply did not do justice to. It is a Mishna that we recite every Friday night containing the sins for which a woman dies during childbirth.
משנה מסכת שבת פרק ב משנה ו
על שלש עבירות נשים מתות בשעת לידתן על שאינן זהירות בנדה ובחלה ובהדלקת הנר
Women die during childbirth because of three sins, because they are not careful regarding niddah, challah and lighting candles.
Niddah refers to a menstruant, Challah refers not to the challah on the Shabbat table but to the commandment of separating a piece of the dough from a large loaf to give to the kohen, and lighting of the candles refers to Shabbat candles.
Taken at face value, the Mishna teaches us that if women are not careful regarding these commandments they die during childbirth.
Our gut reaction is – that is pretty cruel!
Not only is it harsh and cruel, it does not seem to be halachikally correct, at least with regard to two out of the three.
The punishment for having relations while in the status of niddah is karet or excision which some believe means dying early.
That could happen during childbirth.
Challah is a positive Torah commandment. Non performance of a positive commandment does not even warrant lashes, let alone death.
Shabbat candles, as nice and important as they are, are not even a Torah commandment! Our Mishna cannot be suggesting that non performance of a rabbinic positive command leads to death!
Thos are indisputable facts. What then does our Mishna mean?
The Gemara in Shabbat, commenting on the Mishna deals with the question in a roundabout way.
The Gemara is trying to answer 2 questions that on the Mishna, why these sins and why does death come at the time of childbirth.
The first answer that the Gemara gives seems to take the Mishna literally and attempt to answer both questions. Rabbi Yitzchak suggests that the punishment is actually quite appropriate and fits the crime, midah keneged midah. The woman who sins while impure from uterine blood dies in the midst of another uterine related activity.
The Gemara then asks – ok it makes sense by nidda but what about challah and shabbas candles? How does the punishment fit the crime?
Stumped the Gemara seems to change course entirely.
Rav Chisda suggests that these three are chosen because: I gave you a reviit of blood to give you life and thus warned you about blood, iow – gave you a commandment ensuring that you are careful about (nidda) blood. God called the Jews Reishit (first) and thus gave them a commandment about the first (reishit) of the dough, and the soul is called a candle, thus the commandment about the candle.
Why die at childbirth?
When the cow is down, sharpen the shechitah knife! Once you are in a dangerous situation bad things happen quickly.
According to this the death has no intrinsic connection to childbirth. It happens to be a time that a woman’s life in threatened and things can go wrong quickly. And maybe one could argue that violation of these sins does not cause death; God simply doesn’t save you.
That makes it a little bit better but I think we can do even better.
Rav Chisda seems to read these sins as categories or values or important things, life the Jewish people and the soul. Then you have to ask the question: does he mean that you die for violation of the sins that represent these ideals, or that you die for the violation of the ideals.
Rabbi Shmuel Eidels, the Maharsha in 16th century Poland, seems to have read it that way. It is a cryptic kabbalistic piece but he seems to suggest that failure to appreciate certain ideals leads to death of the soul.
We began with a Mishna that seems cruel and unfair and ended with a symbolic read of the Mishna that highlights the ideals of life, the soul and the Jewish people.
I have gotten to where I want to be but you still have to wonder? Is this really what the Mishna meant? Did the Maharsha not use a little creative license with the Mishna to get us where we want to be?
I don’t think so. Firstly, 16th century Poland was not a progressive time or place and I don’t think he would be motivated by some of the concerns that might motivate us is that regard.
Secondly, the gemara notes the difficulties in understanding the Mishna simply as quoted.
Thirdly, I think that the Maharsha and others are motivated by one more factor – observation of the reality in which we live. Our own experiences demonstrate that there are many wonderful women who die in childbirth and many great sinners who don’t. These types of proclamations never match our experience. It could not have matched the experiences of the authors of the Mishna and I think that demands that we acknowledge that when they wrote it they must or might not have meant it literally.
Now when you relearn the Mishna, don’t be bothered, simply understand that they were really emphasizing the values of life, the soul and the Jewish people.
