The causal relationship between matnos kehuna and Sotah

[Dani Schreiber]

There is a very popular theory called the “Broken Windows” theory. It was used to explain the rapid decline in crime in New York in the 1990s.

The theory states that maintaining and monitoring urban environments in a well-ordered condition may stop further vandalism and escalation into more serious crime. Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it's unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside. Or consider a sidewalk. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of trash from take-out restaurants there or even break into cars.

 

Before the introduction of this theory, Philip Zimbardo, a Stanford psychologist, arranged an experiment testing the broken-window theory in 1969. Zimbardo arranged for an automobile with no license plates and the hood up to be parked idle in a Bronx neighbourhood and a second automobile in the same condition to be set up in Palo Alto, California. The car in the Bronx was attacked by "vandals" within minutes of its "abandonment". Zimbardo noted that the first "vandals" to arrive were a family – a father, mother and a young son – who removed the radiator and battery. Within twenty four hours of its abandonment, everything of value had been stripped from the vehicle. After that, the car's windows were smashed in, parts torn, upholstery ripped, and children were using the car as a playground. At the same time, the vehicle sitting idle in Palo Alto, California sat untouched for more than a week. Then Zimbardo himself went up to the vehicle and deliberately smashed it with a sledgehammer. Soon after, people joined in for the destruction. Zimbardo observed that majority of the adult "vandals" in both cases were primarily well dressed, clean-cut and respectable whites. It is believed that in a neighborhood such as the Bronx where the history of abandoned property and theft are more prevalent, vandalism occurs much more quickly as the community gives off a "no one cares" vibe. Similar events can occur in any civilized community when communal barriers – the sense of mutual regard and obligations of civility – are lowered by actions that suggests "no one cares".

The Torah famously puts the parsha of Nazir after the parsha of Sotah because a person is supposed to take a lesson from seeing a sotah and refrain from wine (become a nazir). Less well known is that Chazal understood that the Torah also purposely juxtaposes Sotah right after the parsha of matnas kahuna.

Why does it do that? Rashi explains: אם אתה מעכב מתנות הכהן חייך שתצטרך לבא אצלו להביא לו את הסוטה. If you don’t give money to the kohen, your wife will cheat on you.

What? What is the message here?

[Maharal writes that it's punitive - you pretended to not need the kohen by not giving him his property, so the Torah promises that you'll need him to perform the Sotah ceremony. This is weird - what did your wife do to deserve it?]

The Vilna Gaon explains – the first thing that happens when you don't give terumah and maaser properly is that you will lose your money. Your wife will see that  and will assume that you’re doing something fishy with your money – Mishlei says that a person who gets involved with זונות loses his fortune (רועה זונות יאבד הון). Maybe that’s where you’ve been. Once she realizes that, she gets upset and she also realizes that she might be able to get away with adultery, since the gemara says that the מי סוטה do not work if the man has also committed adultery.

Now we have the causal relationship. But what's the message?

 Perhaps this is another version of the Broken Windows theory – when a person sees that someone else isn’t following the rules, that person is inclined to also not follow the rules. Everyone’s getting away with everything.

 There is an important message here. What we do, especially in public, has an effect on the environment we live in. Maybe I do something a little shady, but really fine – but does everyone know it’s fine? If not, then I’m contributing to a “shady environment”, and who knows where that might lead.