11

All homosexual behavior is forbidden among Jews, but some actions are clearly Torah prohibitions (e.g. mishkav zachar), while some might be Rabbinic in nature (e.g. lesbian relations). Are all of these forbidden for non-Jews, or may non-Jews perform some behaviors that are Rabbinically prohibited to Jews?

Here are my thoughts: On the one hand, I would have thought that Rabbinic prohibitions should not apply to non-Jews at all. On the other hand, the very fact that lesbian relations are looked down upon as maaseh Mitzrayim ("the way of the Egyptians") would seem to imply that it is bad for non-Jews to perform them as well.

In addition, for some homosexual relations there is an argument among the Rishonim about whether they are Torah or Rabbinic prohibitions (e.g. forms of male intimacy that fall under the prohibition of lo tikrevu). We hold by those who say that they are prohibited by the Torah, but I wonder whether non-Jews might be able to rely on those who say that they are only Rabbinically prohibited for Jews, and therefore possibly permitted to non-Jews.

  • I've looked at the following question but it doesn't answer my main questions here: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/16257/do-jews-need-to-care-about-non-jewish-homosexuality –  Nov 05 '13 at 17:02
  • The second paragraph seems like a duplicate of http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/30418/759 – Double AA Nov 05 '13 at 17:23
  • 1
    See Rambam (Hil. M'lachim, 9:6): וחייב על הזכור בין קטן בין גדול. As far as מעשה ארץ מצרים, "bad" ≠ strictly forbidden. – Fred Nov 05 '13 at 18:02
  • 1
    If the end of the question is referring to לא תקרבו, even if it is דאורייתא I don't think it applies to בני נח – wfb Nov 05 '13 at 21:02
  • @wfb Yes, that's what I was referring to. What is the mekor that it doesn't apply to bnei noach? –  Nov 06 '13 at 00:14
  • @Malper The prohibition for ב"נ is גילוי עריות, there is no source prohibiting קריבה. One does not need a source that it is permitted, but a source that it is prohibited. – wfb Nov 06 '13 at 01:19
  • @wfb Well, it's also called אבק דגילוי עריות and maybe ייהרג ואל יעבור... So the question is whether it is treated similarly to גילוי עריות for this purpose as well. –  Nov 06 '13 at 01:27
  • @Malper The לאו of לא תקרבו was said to the Jews, how would it apply to ב"נ? Once it is forbidden, it may be included in the category of אביזרייהו דעריות, but that doesn't affect the prohibition for ב"נ. – wfb Nov 06 '13 at 03:24
  • @wfb That begs the question -- how do we know it was said only to the Jews? We know that that's not true for all the lavin that apply to sexual relations. –  Nov 06 '13 at 03:27
  • 1
    I don't know what lavin you are talking about, but גילוי עריות means something very specific for Jews as well as for non-Jews and קריבה is not that – wfb Nov 06 '13 at 03:50
  • Related: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/8477/5323 (I think some of the answers there contain information that is relevant to this question) – MTL Jan 20 '15 at 03:08
  • Male homosexual acts may not be forbidden as arayot for a non-Jew, because the applicable verses may only apply to Jews. There is also a possibility that non-Jews are only forbidden to practice it in Israel, because the 7 Nations were thrown out of Israel by God due to sexual sins including sodomization. Nonetheless, there may be an inference from the verse in Genesis to 'cling' to a woman that a man not have intercourse with another male, but that may not put it on the level of the 7 mitzvot which potentially carries the death penalty in court. – Emet v'Shalom Jun 24 '16 at 19:20
  • Interesting article on the topic: http://rchaimqoton.blogspot.com/2006/01/abominable-relations.html – Emet v'Shalom Jun 24 '16 at 19:36

3 Answers3

2

Mesoras Moshe Vol. I (by Rabbi Moshe Feinstein's personal secretary), page 505. (Rabbi Feinstein was responding to a rather messy story ... I can't do it justice here ...)

Our teacher [Rabbi Feinstein] added that honestly, for women to "frolic" -- even for Jews is not a prohibition per se, rather something distasteful (mecho'ar). And perhaps for non-Jews it is entirely permissible, but it is understood that one who does this generally gets mixed up in other things, as the philosophy of this act fits with other acts, and therefore, it should be opposed.

Shalom
  • 132,602
  • 8
  • 193
  • 489
2

Homosexuality between two gentile males is forbidden. This is based on the gemara (Sanhedrin 58a), and codified by Rambam (Melachim 9:5; see also Issurei Biah 14:10).

שש עריות אסורות על בני נח. האם, ואשת האב, ואשת איש, ואחותו מאמו, וזכור, ובהמה: שנאמר 'על כן יעזוב איש את 'אביו' - זו אשת אביו, 'ואת אמו' - כמשמעה, 'ודבק באשתו' - ולא באשת חבירו 'באשתו' - ולא בזכור 'והיו לבשר אחד' - להוציא בהמה חיה ועוף שאין הוא והם בשר אחד

This refers to the specific act of intercourse.

In general, other sexual acts in a forbidden union are prohibited due to 'לא תקרבו לגלות ערוה' (either biblically or rabinically - subject to an argument between Rambam and Ramban). It is a dispute between the Poskim if this applies regarding mishkav zachar. The position of the Minchas Chinuch (178) is that peripheral sexual acts to mishkav zachar are also prohibited; however Tehillah Ledavid (EH 9:7) infers from Tosfos in Yevamos that it is permitted. Even according to the Minchas Chinuch, the prohibition of לא תקרבו לגלות ערוה does not apply to gentiles.

In reference to lesbian activity, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Dibros Moshe, Shabbos V2 Ch 59 cited in this answer, see also Mesores Moshe, cited by @shalom in this answer) opines that it is permitted for gentile women. However, R' Yaakov Breisch (Chelkas Yaakov EH 14) in a responsum written to R' Moshe Feinstein [regarding the permissibility of IVF treatment] assumed that lesbian relationships are forbidden even to gentiles.

chortkov2
  • 9,415
  • 12
  • 55
-1

The prohibition against prohibited sexual relations (which is a negative commandment and also includes all forms of homosexual practice) pertains to all mankind, both Jew (through the 613 commandments incumbent on the Jewish people) and non-Jew (through the 7 commandments of Noah which are incumbent on the complement of all mankind), men and women (who are equally obligated like men in all negative commandments, whether time bound or not) from the written Torah.

This is because the prohibition derives from the root commandment to be fruitful and multiply (Bereshit 1:28) which was the first commandment given to Adam HaRishon (even before the commandment concerning eating permissible food and prohibiting consumption of forbidden food, see Bereshit 2:16-17), who is the root of all humans, before his wife was taken from him (split off from his root soul and from his body literally) and built from him (Bereshit 2:22-23).

And Adam HaRishon was told that this commandment contains 3 dimensions, the central, single, general command (קו האמצעי) and its 2 branches, one positive (מצות עשה מפי החסד היינו ימין) & the other negative (מצות לא תעשה מפי הגבורה היינו שמאלה) (Bereshit 2:15).

This parallels the paradigm established at the very beginning of Creation, that there was a single light everywhere (Bereshit 1:3) and that light was then later manifest as two great and equal sources of light (Bereshit 1:14-16) which were further differentiated into a greater source of light and a lesser source of light. The lesser source of light was actually broken up and part of it was transformed to be the stars which is the allegory to having offspring, meaning to be fruitful and multiply.

For details and sources concerning this prohibition see the following answer beginning with the words, "The first source to review is Sifra", etc.

https://judaism.stackexchange.com/a/134257/7303

Yaacov Deane
  • 14,809
  • 22
  • 64
  • 1
    That's assuming the Sifra is a deorasya (in all its forms) and not an asmachta; that the Sifra is not differentiating between marriage and casual relations; and ignoring a whole lot of niglah poskim about the prohibition for women being less. – Shalom May 16 '23 at 01:42
  • 1
    @Shalom The d’Oraita is quoted and cited explicitly in this answer. The reference to the other answer is simply for additional information. That Adam HaRishon was commanded explicitly concerning “Be fruitful & multiply” from the written Torah as cited is undeniable. Similarly, that there are both elements of positive commandments (meaning do this), which is not obligatory upon women, & negative elements (meaning do not transgress & violate what is commanded) which are obligatory on both men & women equally is also d’Oraita as cited. It ignores nothing. – Yaacov Deane May 16 '23 at 03:22
  • 2
    ... is Pru Urvu one of the Sheva Mitzvos Bnai Noach? – Shalom May 16 '23 at 17:48
  • @Shalom The negative dimension of Pru Urvu is one of the 7 commandments of Noah. That is the prohibition against committing adultery or sexual immorality. And if you look at the further explanation found in Sifra, it also encompasses not worshipping idols, cursing G-d, murder and stealing. – Yaacov Deane May 16 '23 at 19:20
  • @Shalom Upon a little further reflection, the negative dimension of Pru Urvu also encompasses the Noahide mitzvah forbidding removing "a limb" from a living creature, meaning castration and/or sterilization. This also pertains to the story concerning the descendants of Kayin, who followed this practice. – Yaacov Deane May 16 '23 at 20:22
  • 2
    How do you know that the prohibition of homosexuality stems from the mitzvah of pru urvu? As @Shalom mentioned, non-Jews aren't commanded in pru urvu so you need a different angle to answer this question. I don't see how adultery is the negative dimensino of pru urvu. One can easily be fruitful and multiply with other people's wives...The two concepts are independent. How do you know that homosexuality is included in the forbidden relations for a non-Jew? That is the crux of the question here...which you totally ignore. – robev May 16 '23 at 20:42
  • 2
    The prohibition against prohibited sexual relations (which is a negative commandment and includes all forms of homosexuality) How do you know? That's their entire question... – robev May 16 '23 at 20:45
  • 1
    ... and are you certain that the poskim follow this Sifra at the deoraysa level? (Hint: many don't.) – Shalom May 16 '23 at 21:38
  • @Shalom You continue to suggest that I am saying everything discussed in the Sifra cited falls under the category of being d’Oraita. I am not. The d’Oraita categorization applies to the specific commandment given to Adam HaRishon. The Sifra, among other things, explains what the oral Torah understands that written commandment means. – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 00:03
  • @robev The plain meaning of Pru Urvu means reproduction of the species. Perhaps you are unaware that homosexual relations cannot result in reproduction of the species. As I stated clearly, the general commandment as written in the Torah is also divided into both positive & negative elements. The negative elements of that commandment apply to all Jewish women and also form the foundation for all the 7 Noahide commandments which are negative. – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 00:14
  • @Shalom As I read over your comments, it sounds repeatedly like you may not have a clear understanding of what d’Oraita means. It may be worth checking out volume 1 of the Handbook of Jewish Thought by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan (for example) on the subject of the commandments 5:22 and Authority 11:24. – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 01:42
  • 2
    Perhaps a homosexual is nullifying the obligation of pru urvu but that's not relevant to who is liable for homosexual relations or not. The negative elements of that commandment apply to all Jewish women and also form the foundation for all the 7 Noahide commandments. That requires citation for as far as I can tell you made that up. – robev May 17 '23 at 05:53
  • Thank you. Perhaps someone else will write a different answer with different sources. I'll cease at this point, as I think we are speaking different languages, with just enough overlap to cause friction. (Hopefully neither of us wind up clobbering Rabbi Bava ben Buta with a candlestick ... [whether in the Study, Billiard Room, or Conservatory].) Kol Tuv. – Shalom May 17 '23 at 10:10
  • @Shalom You are welcome, for certain & all communication from me comes only from a place of love and brotherhood. הנה מה טוב ומה נעים שבת אחים גם יחד. Only blessings of success in your continuing study of our Torah. – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 10:40
  • @robev It is the plain meaning of the written text and is precisely cited. It is not “made up”. Deliberate and careful study of the precise language of the Torah of Moshe, in general, and in particular the book of Bereshit is a lifelong labor. The words of the Torah form the foundational paradigms of everything which follows in all other areas of Jewish tradition and teaching. לך מחיל אל חיל (עיין מועד קטן כ״ט:א בשם רבי לוי ובשם רב חייא בר אשי בשם רב) – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 11:03
  • 1
    Again, "the negative elements of pru urvu apply to all Jewish women and form the foundation for all 7 noahide commandments" is the plain meaning of which written text? Which chapter and verse? – robev May 17 '23 at 15:56
  • @robev Please take out you Chumash and look at the sentences cited from Bereshit (preferably in Hebrew) and then look at the answer posted here. You will see exactly what I have written. If you aren't certain what the 7 commandments of Noah are, do a Wikipedia search. They are listed. – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 16:25
  • 1
    וַיִּקַּ֛ח יְקוָ֥ק אֱלֹקים אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֑ם וַיַּנִּחֵ֣הוּ בְגַן־עֵ֔דֶן לְעׇבְדָ֖הּ וּלְשׇׁמְרָֽהּ׃ does not show "the negative elements of pru urvu apply to all Jewish women and form the foundation for all 7 noahide commandments" nor does it show "The prohibition against prohibited sexual relations (which is a negative commandment and includes all forms of homosexuality)". Nor do any of your citations. I'm not saying you're wrong in anything you wrote. I'm saying you have failed to demonstrate its veracity. – robev May 17 '23 at 19:44
  • @robev You understand the general rule that women are obligated in regard to all negative commandments, like men are, correct? They are “pater” in regard to positive commandments that are bound by time. That is why that particular statement is significant. It sounds like you are missing the point. I’ll have to reflect on whether I can explain it differently for you. Interesting distinction, “not saying you’re wrong, but you haven’t demonstrated the truth of the statements.” Something to ponder… – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 22:26
  • @robev You might want to look at the commentary of Alshich to Bereshit 2:15-16. – Yaacov Deane May 17 '23 at 22:45
  • Yes women are obligated in negative commandments, but not "the negative element of positive commandments" that they are exempt from...If the Alshich is necessary for your answer then you should cite him. Also women are exempt from pru urvu not because it's timebound but rather because it's not their norm to conquer. – robev May 18 '23 at 18:06
  • @robev If you're commenting about women's exemption from the positive aspect of Pru Urvu, it is because the process is a physical danger to their life. It has nothing to do with "conquering". I pointed out Alshich, not because my answer requires it, but because he says most of what I state and over the same 2 posukim. The only distinction being that he is explaining how all the 7 commandments of Noah derive from the 2nd commandment commanded to Adam HaRishon concerning the prohibition of eating of the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. Not a surprise. It also evolves from the 1st commandment. – Yaacov Deane May 18 '23 at 18:24
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. – robev May 18 '23 at 18:40
  • According to the gemara (Sanhedrin 59b), gentiles are not obligated to be fruitful and multiply. According to Tosfos (ad loc), they are also not prohibited from wasting seed, which is derived from the obligation of pru urvu.
    [See also Yevamos 62a; see also Tosfos Chagiga 2b and Sheiltos dRav Achai 165] https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/18437/why-isnt-peru-urvu-one-of-the-7-noahide-laws?noredirect=1&lq=1     – chortkov2 Mar 05 '24 at 12:21
  • Where is the source for your assertion that homosexuality derives from the commandment to be fruitful? – TzaddikVekom Mar 05 '24 at 12:48
  • @TzaddikVekom I haven't made that assertion, so I am assuming that you are directing your question to someone else in the comment chain. – Yaacov Deane Mar 05 '24 at 15:19
  • @YaacovDeane - You wrote: This is because the prohibition derives from the root commandment to be fruitful and multiply. You wrote this in direct relation to: The prohibition against prohibited sexual relations (which is a negative commandment and also includes all forms of homosexual practice) pertains to all mankind – TzaddikVekom Mar 05 '24 at 18:34
  • @TzaddikVekom Yes, and you wrote, “Where is your source for the assertion that homosexuality derives from the commandment to be fruitful?”. I made no assertion about what the source of homosexuality, meaning homosexual practice or homosexual inclination, originates from. I spoke about the fact that homosexual practice is prohibited according to the written Torah and the oral Torah and that this prohibition applies to both Jews and non-Jews. – Yaacov Deane Mar 05 '24 at 20:05
  • @YaacovDeane - Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I meant to ask what is your source that the PROHIBITION of homosexuality derives from the commandment to be fruitful? – TzaddikVekom Mar 05 '24 at 20:30
  • @TzaddikVekom It is the plain meaning of the written Torah from Bereshit 2:14 which says: "וַיִּקַּ֛ח יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֑ם וַיַּנִּחֵ֣הוּ בְגַן־עֵ֔דֶן לְעׇבְדָ֖הּ וּלְשׇׁמְרָֽהּ׃ " That the paradigm that the commandments would be divided into positive & negative aspects (לְעׇבְדָ֖הּ וּלְשׇׁמְרָֽהּ), for the Noahides from the negative aspect only and for Israel from both negative and positive. So, for example, Be fruitful & multiply for Noahides is understood as, "do not fail to..do not transgress.." This is explained for Noahides as, "Not to commit adultery or sexual immorality." – Yaacov Deane Mar 05 '24 at 20:48
  • If that's your idea of plain meaning of the written Torah, you have a very innovative view of פשוטה של מקרה. – TzaddikVekom Mar 05 '24 at 20:52
  • I'm failing to understand how anything you wrote answers the question. Q: Which forms of homosexuality are forbidden to a Noahide? Your answer: All forms, as evident in the simple meaning of Bereshit 2:14. Am I missing something? – TzaddikVekom Mar 05 '24 at 20:54
  • @TzaddikVekom פשוטה של מקרה is a very high level of Torah. It means that through proper understanding of the Hebrew (all aspects of grammar, dikduk, etc), all the other levels of Torah (Remez, Drush & even the most esoteric aspects of Sod) are understood and derived from the plain meaning. This is one of the reasons why the Vilna Gaon always learned written Torah with dictionaries and grammar books at the ready. It wasn't because he didn't have a very good idea of the meaning. – Yaacov Deane Mar 05 '24 at 21:02
  • @TzaddikVekom Did you go to the link in my answer and actually learn the linked sources there? I didn't make that suggestion for nothing. I wrote a series of answers in relation to this subject over a few months dealing with different aspects of this general subject. In terms of "all forms" think in terms of the practices of Mitzrayim and all the nations that occupied the land of Israel before the Jewish people came there, like Sodom & Gemorrah, etc. The more you understand those historical cultures, the more you understand the comprehensiveness of the prohibition. – Yaacov Deane Mar 05 '24 at 21:06
  • @TzaddikVekom Upon reflection about your reaction to the subject of פשוטה של מקרה, it occurs to me that perhaps you don't appreciate how important this level truly is. That when, for example, Rashi emphasizes that his commentary is the Peshat, and yet if you read it, he is drawing from all areas of the Torah. That is because Peshat includes grammar and vocabulary, but also something much more rigorous, reading comprehension. To really understand this last idea, check these links out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_comprehension – Yaacov Deane Mar 05 '24 at 21:51
  • @TzaddikVekom https://online.ewu.edu/degrees/education/med/reading-literacy/reading-comprehension-on-learning/#:~:text=Reading%20comprehension%20is%20essential%20for,kind%20of%20student%20or%20professional. – Yaacov Deane Mar 05 '24 at 21:51