<HTML>Regarding Shmuel Afek's comment: "I do believe, and it is important for me
to emphasize in class, that in my opinion hazal were radical for their
time .. and I would expect hazal of today to be similarly radical."
What exactly is meant by being "radical" in this context? Was Jesus
radical for closing the door on divorce, or was R. Akiva radical in
offering a broad menu of reasons for divorce?
Hazal state that the sotah water stopped being efficacious because the
husbands weren't worthy. From a liberal perspective, for which the
institution of Sotah is an embarrassment, this can be called "progress."
From a perspective steeped in a sense of the holiness of marriage, it is a
tragedy and cheapening of human relations, a concession to the lowering of
moral standards.
Please note that this point is distinct from the question of whether Sotah
functions (or should function) as a way of punishing a loose woman or
defusing a husband's unjustified jealousy. It is also distinct from the
problem that troubles many women (and men) about the apparent disparity of
power between men and women in marital relationships.</HTML>
