LEV168 The Torah, in a number of places, describes the notions of tu'mah (ritual impurity or unfitness) and toharah (ritual purity or fitness). The state of tum'ah is contracted in a variety of ways: eating non-kosher animals, coming into contact with a corpse, becoming ill with a disease often translated as leprosy (that was most certainly not like the leprosy we know today), or having particular body emissions. One could also contract tum'ah by coming into certain forms of contact with someone else who was tameh (the mail adjectival form of the noun tum'ah) or te'mei'ah (the female adjectival form). Generally speaking, this state was of little consequence, except for the critical fact that, during the biblical era, one who was in a state of tum'ah was unable to offer sacrifices at the ancient Jerusalem Temple. Menstruation was one of a number of general emissions that could cause a person to contract tum'ah; male ejaculation and either male or female irregular "flux" emissions (from illness, miscarriage, and so forth) also did so. Tum'ah could be contracted from another person, and though in Leviticus 15 the consequences of this contraction are described in the simple language of cause-and-effect, the Torah (Leviticus 18:19; 20:18) twice explicitly prohibits sex with a menstruant. During the Rabbinic era, normal menstruation and irregular "flux" states became conflated, as the Rabbis decreed that a woman must--as the Torah commands for a woman with an irregular "flux" [this verse]--wait an extra week after the cessation of her regular menstrual period (B. Niddah 66a). By the time of the Mishnah, it is also simply presumed that a menstruant must immerse in water before she would once again be permitted to engage in sexual relations, as the Torah obligates one who experienced an irregular "flux" emission from illness, miscarriage, or some other non-typical occurrence to immerse in water before resuming sexual relations.(Leviticus 15). As such, according to post-Rabbinic traditional practice, a couple does not engage in sexual relations while a woman is menstruating (which, according to Ashkenazi practice, lasts a minimum of five days) and for seven days thereafter. At the end of this period, she immerses in the ritual bath and is once again permitted to engage in marital relations with her husband. This practice of sexual separation during menses has been controversial among many feminists. There are those who repudiate the practice entirely, such as Rachel Adler… other feminists, such as Haviva Ner-David, find beauty and "spiritual power" in the notion of ritually marking the body's cycles and the sexual ebb and flow in her marriage. (By Danya Ruttenberg, "Jewish Sexual Ethics")

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV240 See [[LEV168]] Leviticus 15:28 discharge OXFORD 389-90

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV250 The Torah [this verse] states, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination". In another verse (Leviticus 20:13), the Torah repeats the injunction, but specifies that "the two of them have done an abominable thing; they shall be put to death--their bloodguilt is upon them." Rabbinic and later halakhic sources generally interpret these verses to prohibit male same-sex relationships. Lesbian sexual activity is not mentioned in the Torah and is forbidden almost as an afterthought in later sources. Specifically, the Talmud describes female same-sex activity as "mere obscenity" that does not disqualify a woman from marrying a member of the priestly class (B. Yevamot 76a), and Maimonides states that though female same-sex sexual activity is technically forbidden, "there is no specific biblical prohibition, and it is not called 'intercourse' at all." [M.T. Laws of Forbidden Intercourse (Issurei Biah) 21:8]. In other words, though lesbians today must also contend with a discouraging textual tradition, the strength of the prohibitions against them are much lighter and easier to address from a legal standpoint than those regarding gay men. (By Danya Ruttenberg, "Jewish Sexual Ethics")

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV256 The Dorff et al. responsum [one of two mutually exclusive December 2006 legal rulings approved by the Jewish Committee on Laws and Standards (Conservative Movement] hinges on the rabbinic principle that a person's dignity is so important that it supersedes biblical prohibitions (see, e.g., B. Shabbat 81b).  The Talmud, however, immediately qualifies that statement to refer only to the biblical commandment in Deuteronomy 17 to obey the judges of each generation. The authors of the Dorff et al. responsum therefore argue that this halachic principle allows them to suspend rabbinic, although not biblical, prohibitions that would prevent homosexuals from enjoying loving, committed relationships. The authors contend that although the biblical prohibition of anal intercourse remains in place [this verse], in the name of preserving the dignity of homosexuals contemporary rabbis should use their authority to suspend the rabbinic restrictions involving other acts of same-sex physical intimacy. (The responsum makes clear that bisexuals who were able to have fulfilling sexual relationships with members of the opposite gender are not permitted to engage in homosexual activity.) The conclusion of the responsum is that homosexuals may engage in acts of physical intimacy, although not typically prohibited anal intercourse, and be eligible for all honors and privileges available in the community. ... Dorff later acknowledged that he is bothered by maintaining the restriction against anal intercourse, since he knows full well that such a condition is likely to be widely ignored. For the Love of God and People: A Philosophy of Jewish Law (Philadelphia: JPS, 2007), p. 235). Indeed, much earlier in Dorff's career he wrote that "we should not engage in overdoses of legal fictions, as we have been wont to do in the past." "Towards a Legal Theory of the Conservative Movement," Conservative Judaism, 27:3 (1973), p. 75). Nevertheless, since Dorff feared (correctly) that he would not have had the necessary votes from the Committee on Jewish Laws and Standards were he and his co-authors to argue for notifying the biblical prohibition, he did "what [could] be done and [took] satisfaction from the progress that a partial step in the right direction [achieved]." (For the Love, p. 235) … Wisely silent rabbis would refrain from asking invasive questions about… gay men's sexual activity, thus conniving in the halakhic charade. (By Shai Cherry, "Ethical Theories in the Conservative Movement"

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV262 See [[LEV795]] Leviticus 19:34 love OXFORD 46-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV279 See [[DEUT296]] Deuteronomy 6:18 good OXFORD 256

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV281 See [[EXOD325]] Exodus 19:6 holy OXFORD 39-40

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV314 See [[LEV694]] Leviticus 19:18 love OXFORD 37

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV316 The Bible and later Judaism understand th[e] fundamental, divine value of each person and related values to require support to meet the needs of the poor. The Torah mandates practices in the context of a farming community. The corners of one's fields, cleanings, and forgotten produce are to be left for the poor to take, in addition to a tithe for support of the needy [this and following verse]. Rabbinic Judaism developed the Hebrew Bible's value of justice (tzedek) and institutions for support of the needy into tzedakah. That which is to be given to the poor never simply belonged to the giver, but was God's, and was owed to the needy as their right. Codifying traditions that go back to the Talmud and beyond, the Shulhan Arukh, the authoritative 16th century code of Jewish law, states that "each individual is obligated to give to the poor.… If one gives less than is appropriate, the courts may administer lashes until he gives according to the assessment, and the courts may go to his property in his presence and take the amount that it is appropriate to give." S.A. Yoreh De'ah 248:1 (Continued at [[DEUT743]] Deuteronomy 15:8 needy OXFORD 346). (By Aaron L. Mackler, "Jewish Bioethics: The Distribution of Health Care")

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV329 See [[LEV795]] Leviticus 19:34 love OXFORD 46-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT