Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site aecom.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!aecom!teitz From: teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Controlling one's ([homo]sexual) urges and Halakha Message-ID: <1594@aecom.UUCP> Date: Wed, 15-May-85 14:51:18 EDT Article-I.D.: aecom.1594 Posted: Wed May 15 14:51:18 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 17-May-85 02:49:49 EDT References: <411@oakhill.UUCP> <564@sfmag.UUCP> <1672@cornell.UUCP> Organization: Albert Einstein Coll. of Med., NY Lines: 74 > On the subject of homosexuality as a sin according to the Talmud, I > have several questions to the informed reader: > > 1. Presumption: other sexual sins which involve two consenting > individuals (marital infidelity, for example) require two > witnesses of the act itself in order to charge the persons > involved. What is the case here? Is self-incrimination > recognised (e.g., self-avowed homosexuality)? > There is a general rule in the Talmud, "ein adam mesim atzmo rasha", a peson cannot incriminate himself. This goes so far that we even believe part of a person's testimony but not all of it. The case discussed is in fact homosexuality. The g'mara says, If a man comes in and says, along with another witness, that he ( the man ) had relations willingly with another man, that we believe the person's testimony regarding his mate, but not regarding himself. This concept is called "palginan dibbura", splitting the statement. > 2. Discussions in the Talmud about the heterosexual act define > it (be-ila) very precisely. As to the homosexual one, the > only definition known to me is Rashi's, in his commentary to > the Torah: "ke-kandom bi-shfoferet" (anal sex, I suppose). > Does this mean that any other homosexual act, or even homose- > xual cohabitation without actual sex, etc..., do not fall into > that category (but yet may be sinful according to other criteria, > hence entailing a different punishment)? > The same term is used to desribe the heterosexual act. It is the t. I think it is properly "kimkachol bi-shfoferet", which is literally like a brush in a tube. Apparently in the days of the g'mara, eye shadow was kept in tubes and a brush was inserted in the tube to egt some eye shadow and it was then applied to the eyes. The idea of insertion is what is being discussed. The tosafot in Yebamot ( I think the ninth chapter, I don't have the exact location ) and the Rambam ( Issurei Biya [ illegal intercourse ] chapter 21, first halacha, see te Kesef Mishna ) discuss the exact definition of the heterosexual act. I don' remember off hand if tey discuss the exact definition of the homosexual act. I'll look it up when I get home. > 3. Why is it that other sins that require a punishment as harsh as that > that of homosexuality are looked upon with much greater indulgence > nowadays? The striking example is "'Hillul Shabat,'' (the desecra- > tion of Shabbat): according to orthodox rabbinic authorities it is > allowed to call such people to the Torah on Shabbat, have them > lead services, etc... One of the arguments in this case is related > to 1 above: as long as they don't do it in public ("befar'hersia"), > one does not presume about their private behaviour. Doesn't the > same kind of reasoning apply to homosexuality (i.e., the performance > of the homosexual act)? I really don't see why it shouldn't apply. In fact Shabbat might be even stricter than other laws, in that one who publicly desecrates the shabbat has the same laws as a non-Jew in certain cases. Observance of the shabbat is considered recognition of G-D's mastery over the world. Non- observance is a defiance of G-D's creation. Ramban says we are commanded to conquer the world, as the Torah says in Bereshit ( Genesis, ch. 1 ). Ramban understands that our job is to learn as much as we can about the way the world works, we are to go into science and other endeavors. Rambam says through science oe can come to a greater appreciation of G-D. However, G-D commanded us to stop our quest for knowledge one day a week. We are commanded not to burn a fire on the sabbath day. Ramban sees this as an injunction against scientific pursuit ( or work in general ). On Shabbat we are supposed to sit back and think about G-D, not work. By disregarding this command, we reject G-D's command of the whole world, and this might be worse than homo- sexuality as far as banishment from congregational duties. Eliyahu Teitz.