Chinam and Arayos: The Taking vs Giving in Marriage

Full Summary

This shiur provides a profound analysis of a Talmudic passage (Yoma 75a) that discusses the Israelites' complaint 'zachranu es hadag asher nachalnu b'Mitzrayim chinam' - remembering the fish we ate in Egypt for free. The Gemara (גמרא) presents a debate whether 'dag' refers to actual fish or to forbidden sexual relationships (arayos). The speaker focuses on resolving several difficulties with this passage. The first major question addresses why forbidden relationships would be described as 'chinam' (free/for nothing). The Maharsha suggests it refers to not paying a dowry when marrying relatives, but this answer is problematic since the same kesubah obligations would apply regardless. A second difficulty is understanding why both interpretations (fish and forbidden relationships) appear in the same verse, creating an awkward transition from discussing forbidden marriages to listing various foods. The analysis explores why this complaint emerged specifically after leaving Sinai, approximately a year after receiving these prohibitions. If these laws were so fundamental, why weren't they given immediately, and why didn't the people complain earlier? The speaker suggests that while camped at Sinai, the overwhelming presence of the Shechinah created a state of bitul (self-nullification) that prevented these self-centered complaints from emerging. The core insight draws on the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s explanation in Moreh Nevuchim for why the Torah (תורה) forbids marrying close relatives. Unlike the Ramban (רמב"ן) who focuses on genetic concerns, the Rambam argues that relationships with those constantly around us (sisters, aunts, etc.) naturally become taking relationships rather than giving ones. People take such relationships for granted, failing to show proper respect and courtesy. This connects to the fundamental purpose of marriage as described by Rashi (רש"י) on 'lo tov heyos ha'adam levado' - it's not that man is lonely, but that he shouldn't be completely self-sufficient. Marriage was designed to counter self-centeredness by creating relationships requiring genuine giving and respect. The prohibition of arayos reinforces this by eliminating relationships that would naturally default to a taking dynamic. The speaker explains that 'chinam' in this context means getting something for nothing - a taking rather than giving relationship. When the people complained about losing access to arayos, they were essentially lamenting the loss of relationships where they could simply take without having to give, respect, or work to build the relationship. This same selfishness explains why they complained about foods that pregnant or nursing women couldn't tolerate - they wanted their wives to handle all difficulties without any accommodation from them. The Gemara in Shabbos (שבת) (130a) supports this interpretation, stating that mitzvos accepted reluctantly continue to cause problems. Since arayos were accepted with complaints and crying, every marriage contract still involves fighting (d'leis kesubah d'lo rami b'tigra), as people retain that underlying desire for taking rather than giving in relationships. This teaching provides crucial insight into proper marriage dynamics, emphasizing that healthy relationships must be built on mutual respect, consideration, and giving rather than selfish taking and demanding.