Modesty and Marital Relations

 

The subject of marital relations is a very delicate one, one that our Sages admonish is not to be taught in a public forum (Mishna Chagiga 2:1.) However, today the subject of intimacy is an openly discussed issue that a frank though modest discussion is called for.

 

There is a popular idea of the Jewish approach to intimacy which is only partially correct.  Jewish tradition's positive attitude towards marital relations is occasionally contrasted with the negative, shameful attitude adopted by some other cultures.  This attitude must be placed in context. 

 

It is true that our tradition views marital relations as holy - but only because they are conducted in a framework of holiness – marriage – in fact called "kiddushin," meaning sanctity (as we learned in chapter 147).  It is true that it views these relations as pure - but only because they are conducted in a framework of purity, when the woman is free of any ritual defilement, as we will learn in chapter 153.  It is true that our tradition views these relations as healthy - but only because they are conducted in a healthy and uplifting way, as we learn in this chapter.

 

In chapter 145, we explained that the Torah views both marriage and procreation as basic human obligations - duties that are distinct yet inextricably linked.  Marriage is a way of augmenting and perfecting the Divine image of the individual, while procreation is a way of multiplying this image and giving it continuity into following generations.

 

Both of these obligations are inseparable from marital relations.  The essence of marriage is the framework it provides for marital relations.  Furthermore, marital relations are the most natural and formerly the only means of reproduction.  So we need to extend our explanation of marriage and children to encompass this aspect.

 

Since marriage represents the ultimate closeness between two human beings, it is appropriate that marital relations involve the greatest possible degree of physical and emotional closeness.  There must not only be a meeting of flesh, but also a meeting of mind and spirit.  This simple principle explains most of the laws of marital intimacy. 

 

Jewish law strictly requires that relations only take place in an atmosphere of mutual affection and consent.  Relations are forbidden if the couple is in a state of anger or animosity, for intimacy in such a state would be a purely physical act, and not an expression of emotional closeness.  It obviously follows that the husband may not compel his wife to have relations, and is required to attract and conciliate her before approaching her.  The ideal is that relations take place when the husband and wife are face to face, again expressing the greatest degree of emotional closeness.

 

Relations are forbidden in any open or public place.  Absolute privacy is necessary for the couple to have their attention completely concentrated on each other.  Ironically, a lighted room can also detract from closeness; this situation can encourage a certain detachment, in which the husband becomes a voyeur as well as a participant.

 

Although appropriate arousal of affection is an essential prerequisite for intimacy, various laws prevent this requirement from being exaggerated into the stimulation of animal lust.  Husband and wife should converse affectionately before relations but are forbidden to descend into coarseness; seeing each other at this stage is permissible but it is forbidden to descend into voyeurism.

 

THE SANCTITY OF RELATIONS

 

Our mystic works attribute the greatest sanctity to marital relations when they are performed with the proper spirit of purity. In these writings, the uniting of husband and wife is likened to the uniting of Divine holiness and the material world. The love which draws husband and wife together is an aspect of the love God bears for the material world which draws Him close to us and enables the revelation of the Divine in our mundane existence.  Just as marital relations bring new souls into the world, God's revelation in this world is not a sterile act but rather a fertile and life-creating event.

 

THE HUSBAND'S OBLIGATION TO THE WIFE

 

In Jewish law, the husband has a defined obligation to engage in marital relations in an atmosphere of affection.  This obligation is mentioned in the Torah, and is called the obligation of "onah," meaning: "a fixed period of time."

 

The husband's primary obligation to his wife in this mitzva is to be with her when it is most important to her.  Since feminine modesty is a paramount value in Judaism, the wife is not expected to be outwardly demanding, but every wife has her own ways of gently showing her husband that his attention is important to her.  Part of the sensitivity demanded of a husband is that he be perceptive of his wife's conduct so that he may recognize when this mitzva is incumbent on him.

 

In addition, this mitzva has fixed times, which are determined by the husband's occupation and hence his leisure and energy.  This gives expression to the fact that for women particularly, marital relations are valued as an expression of the husband's devotion - rather than as an inherent physical or emotional need (Igrot Moshe EHE III: 28.)

 

 

CHAPTER 151 - PROHIBITION ON WASTING SEED

 

Jewish tradition considers emission outside of marital relations to be a grave offense.  This disapproval is evident in the Torah in the story of Er and Onan (Bereshit 38:9-10, Nidda 13a.)  The objections are expressed in a quaint and archaic manner that on closer examination reveals a profound human insight.

 

There are two themes that are consistently mentioned in connection with this prohibition.  One is that the man's seed has its source in the brain (See e.g. Tanya 6b.)  The second is that within the seed is an entire human being in miniature.  It is facile to be amused at the physiological inaccuracies in these concepts, but they deserve closer examination. 

 

Man's emission is not a simple physiological reflex.  On the contrary, it can occur only through very involved mental processes and only with complete emotional engagement.  This engagement can take the form of affection, aggression, or of imagination.  This is the kernel of truth in the traditional view that the source of the man's seed is in the brain.

 

There is no need to dwell on the utmost abhorrence on arousal through aggression, which is shared by every enlightened culture.  To this, Judaism together with other traditional societies adds abhorrence of arousal through mere imagination. 

 

The ability of man and woman to join together in marriage and marital relations, is the most profound way we have of overcoming alienation.  The seemingly essential existential loneliness of humanity, the unbridgeable gap between people, is bridged in an intense coalescence of two complementary individuals.  "It is not good for man to be alone; I will make him a help appropriate for him."  When the remarkable mental and physiological processes which enable this coalescence take place in isolation, this is the ultimate frustration of the human aspiration for connection, and hence the ultimate expression of total alienation. 

 

Let us turn to the second "myth."  On a genetic level, each individual germ cell really is like an entire human being in miniature.  Almost all of the genetic material necessary for creating a new person is present in each such cell.  This is the kernel of truth in the tradition that inside the man's seed is found a complete human being.  Again, emission without the wife represents a frustration of the astonishing God-given potential a person has to bring into the world - in partnership with Hashem - an entirely new human being.  (The nature of this partnership was discussed in chapter 143.  The subject of the frustrated potential for reproduction is discussed further in chapter 153.)

 

Not only is each reproductive cell a complete human being - it is a human being uniquely derived from the man it came from.  Any child produced from this seed is genetically his offspring; they will resemble him and be his continuation.  Our tradition affirms that the child is the continuation of the parent (Eruvin 70b.)

 

When a man has relations with his wife, he is making a statement that in his eyes this woman is fitting to be the mother of his children, the person who in effect will mold his own future.  By contrast, promiscuous or fantastical relations seem to show that he has no regard for the amazing potential for his own unique endowment present in his reproductive capability (See Zohar Vayechi, I:119b.)

 

This accords with our instinctive impression, that promiscuity is a sign of self-contempt; the same principle applies with even greater force to wasting seed without having relations at all.

 

CHAPTER 152 - SECLUSION (YICHUD)

 

It is forbidden for a man and woman not married to each other to be in a closed or secluded place where they might be tempted to act immorally.  The Creator instilled in man and woman a mighty force of mutual attraction intended to create a powerful bond of affection between man and wife.  In addition, God well knows that this force can sometimes be directed in destructive ways, towards adultery or other forbidden relations.  Just as the Torah commands man and wife to take advantage of this attraction, so it commands us to keep it from going astray.

 

Our Sages found this prohibition alluded to in the Torah in a surprising context – the verse that teaches about resisting evangelizing.  The Torah recites a list of individuals who may tempt us into idolatry, and we are commanded to neither heed their word, nor have mercy on them.  The verse listing the individuals states that: "Should you be incited by your brother, the son of your mother, or by your son or your daughter or the wife of your bosom or your friend who is your soul-mate in seclusion, saying 'Let us go and worship other gods,' which you and your fathers have not known," (Devarim 13:7.) The Talmud infers that the verse supplies a list of those who we may be "in seclusion" with (Kiddushin 80b and elsewhere.)

 

The other common denominator between this verse and forbidden yichud is that in both cases the seclusion is something furtive, taking advantage of the intimacy of seclusion to tempt the other person into sin - either idolatry or license.

 

Note that we have emphasized seclusion as a state of mind, a sensation of intimacy.  It is true that another advantage of seclusion is that the transgressors are safe from being caught, but this doesn't seem to be crucial in the case of evangelical activities.  An inciter is unlikely to be caught "in flagrant delicto"; if someone enters the room suddenly it is enough to change the subject.  The Talmud's comparison between them seems to suggest that by yichud as well, the emotional closeness is no less a contributor to the transgression than the freedom from detection.

 

One halakha that seems to support this understanding of yichud is the rule that a married woman may be in temporary seclusion with another male as long as her husband is in town.  This is true even if the door is locked and (according to many authorities) even if the city is very large, so that it is most unlikely that the husband could drop in suddenly.  Our Sages say the she is in awe of her husband.  When the wife knows that her husband is in town, she simply doesn't feel alone with a visitor, and the state of mind necessary for temptation is not created.  (Of course the couple should be very careful about relying on this leniency, and if the husband objects, the wife should certainly not be in a closed room with another man.)

 

This also explains why this leniency does not apply for a man who is already very friendly with the other man's wife.  While the fear of detection is no greater, the potential for developing excessive romantic closeness is augmented.

 

Another expression of this idea is the rule that husband and wife may be in seclusion even when the wife is nidda, (ritually impure as a result of menstruation), and relations are forbidden.  We are not afraid of creating emotional closeness between man and wife; on the contrary, we are anxious to encourage it.  Indeed, the halakha rules that it is a grave offense to disrupt the privacy of a married couple - even when the wife is nidda.  During this period of time the intimacy between them is ordinary family intimacy, like that of the other relations mentioned in the above verse: brother, son, daughter, etc.  This is explained at length in the coming chapter.

 

HOMOSEXUALITY

 

One of the laws of yichud is that a man is permitted to be in seclusion with another man, because Jews are not suspected of the temptation to homosexuality.  This reminds us that homosexuality is considered a grave offense in the Torah.  The word used to describe this practice is "to'eva" or "abomination" (Vayikra 18:22, 20:13), a word which is primarily used to describe idolatry (Devarim 7:26, 13:15, 17:4).  What is the connection between these two transgressions?

 

The answer is that both idolatry and homosexuality involve a tragic misdirection of man's capacity for transcendence.  Man is a material creation, made of flesh and blood, atoms and molecules.  Yet the Creator endowed us with the remarkable ability to transcend our materiality, to know God and to bear His image.

 

It is sad that some people have no awareness of this capacity, and they go through life eating, sleeping, and working without ever trying to raise themselves out of the depths of mere materiality.  Such people have succeeded only slightly in raising themselves above the level of beasts.  But even more tragic is the fact that many people who have a vital spiritual nature, and who strive to raise themselves above the mundane, are tempted into negative spirituality. 

If the Torah and prophets are repeatedly and urgently insistent about the threat of idolatry, it is not because idolatry is mere nonsense.  There is genuine spirituality in pagan worship, but it is of a negative nature.  Whereas man, as created in God's image, has thereby the ability to form a connection with the Infinite God, the pagan worshipper uses this ability to connect himself to limited, base forces.

By attributing power and divinity to material forces or to psychological principles belonging to the world of humanity, the pagan is in effect worshipping man, not God.  He is misdirecting his Divinely-given ability to create a transcendental spiritual connection.

We can make a similar statement about forbidden sexual relations, including homosexuality.  The Torah's condemnation of these relations is not limited to the problematic issue of hedonism - licentious pursuit of pleasure.  On the contrary, the problem is most serious when such relations are elevated above hedonism and are domesticated and respected as marriage, and the participants devote their higher emotional and spiritual faculties to them.  In one place the Torah uses the root "kadosh," usually meaning "holy" to refer to male or female prostitutes, thus recognizing that such relationships can be used as an outlet for spiritual powers (Devarim 23:18.)

As we explained in chapter 150, man and woman are existential complements.  The creation of Eve didn't solve Adam's loneliness because he had a companion, but because he had a complement, creating a pair who together complete the Divine image.  When man and woman join together in forming a new family, they are transcending themselves, going beyond the singularity of male and female to create a new and perfect whole.  This is what gives this union its spiritual fertility, the ability to join together with the Creator to bring new souls into the world - a spiritual fertility reflected in material fertility, the ability of the natural sexual union to produce children.

Homosexual relations, and even more so homosexual marriage, are a frustration and misdirection of this power of transcendence.  Like the pagan who worships powers that are not really beyond him, the homosexual loves a partner who is much like him, creating a love relationship that is not transcendent.

This parallelism between homosexuality and paganism can throw light on another very important element in the confrontation between the sexual revolution and Jewish sexual norms.  It is pointed out as a defense of homosexual behavior that many individuals have powerful, indeed irresistible, homosexual urges.

Our Sages tell us, that in an earlier stage of our history the pagan urge was also irresistible.  It is hard for us to understand today with our advanced spiritual sensitivities how this could be true. How the worship of assorted idols and forces of nature could have constituted such a powerful attraction to the Jewish people; however the narratives of the Bible certainly attest to the existence of an irresistible temptation.

Indeed, the Talmud itself compares the two instincts.  During the time of the second Temple, the religious leadership sought to uproot the desire for pagan worship from the Jewish people.  It occurred to them to also try and uproot the sexual impulse, but they reached the conclusion that this would undermine family life.

It would seem that by the same token that the destruction of the pagan urge should tend to undermine religious devotion - and this is exactly what the Talmud states.  At the moment that pagan worship was uprooted, a "fiery lion" escaped from the Sanctuary.  Our leaders realized that the pagan urge itself dwelt in the Holy of Holies!  The "fire," or enthusiasm of transcendent religious worship is inseparable from the drives which can draw us towards a more degraded form of worship (Yoma 69b, Sanhedrin 64a).

This narrative constitutes a powerful precedent for maintaining a religious imperative in the face of an overpowering desire of many Jews to breach it.  The very power of the impulse is evidence of its spiritual power and of the necessity to harness it in the most exalted way possible.

It is exactly the incomplete sanctity that falls short of the ultimate Source of holiness that Judaism abhors.  Judaism recognizes and even embraces the realm of the secular, when it stands in its proper relation to the transcendental.  But it makes no compromise with paganism: a secular spirituality, which is not fully subjugated to the imperatives of the Absolute.