In recent years there seems to
have been a constant spotlight on the attitudes of public figures to
‘alternative lifestyles.’ Generally (non-charedi) politicians have faced
criticism from only one direction, when their views have been deemed by some to
be primitive.
When rabbis and other religious
leaders have expressed their positions, the reactions have been more varied. Some
have faced similar criticisms of being ‘unenlightened,’ some have been labelled
as dangerous or accused of compromising on halacha, and others have faced the
wrath of both sides of the spectrum. As one friend told me, for those
interested in avoiding this, it seems that the best thing is to keep quiet.
For a long time my inclination
was also not to write about this topic, as in terms of halacha there is not
much to speak about. However, over time I have realised that there are
questions that we need to address, mainly philosophical ones. As in my view the
standard answers one can find are not sufficient, I have decided to present things
the way I see them. Hopefully the net result will be positive.
Ideals and necessities
The question that bothers many
people is what exactly the Torah expects from a person whose only sexual drive
is towards people of the same gender. I believe that in order to answer this
question, we first need to clarify something about the Torah attitude to
physical desires for things that are permitted.
It is well known that the Ramban
explains that the command to be holy is a general instruction to be abstinent.
He understands that without this mitzvah, it would be permitted to eat
uncontrolled quantities of kosher food, and to conduct marital relations
constantly with an unlimited number of wives (as long as the wife is not in her
menstrual state).
Although the Rambam does not
count this command as a mitzvah,[1] the same
principle appears in his writings in even stronger terms. The importance of
distancing oneself as much as possible from pursuit of all forms of physical
pleasure is a recurring theme in Moreh Nevuchim. He writes that it is a
necessity for one who wishes to achieve wisdom, closeness to Hashem and
certainly prophecy.[2]
The Rambam explains further that sexual
pleasure is (spiritually) lower than all other physical pleasures. In no fewer
than four places, he quotes the statement of Aristotle that this part of our
existence is a disgrace to humanity.[3] While
eating and drinking for a human can be qualitatively different than for
animals, intercourse is purely animalistic.[4]
However, the lowliness of this
human instinct is something the world cannot manage without. Obviously without
procreation humanity (and all life) would die out, and without animalistic
desire there would be no procreation. When the Knesses Hagdola experimented
removing this desire, the result was that even chickens stopped laying eggs.[5]
For this reason, the Torah not
only obligates men to engage in procreation.[6] Even
when procreation is impossible, under normal circumstances man and wife may not
withhold marital relations from each other (unless there is mutual consent).[7]
Without this, marriages could break down and there would be no firm basis for the
birth and raising of children.
At the same time, we are urged
not to let our lives revolve around animalistic acts. We are told about how the
Chachamim did all that they could to limit the physical pleasure involved, and
that everyone should try to emulate them on their own level.[8] If we
lose sight of this, the results can be disastrous.
Extraneous desires
The Rambam explains that the
purpose of many of the mitzvos of the Torah is to keep our animalistic instincts
in check. The most obvious is the prohibition of intimate relations with a
single woman, limiting such activity to a framework with obligations.[9]
We also cannot marry whoever we
want. Many family members, even some without any blood relationship, are
forbidden as they are often at close quarters. This prohibition helps ensure that
the relationships which inevitably exist between opposite genders within a family
do not get out of control.[10]
According to the Rambam the
purpose of circumcision, the positive mitzvah kept by the highest percentage of
Jews today, is to limit physical pleasure during marital relations.[11]
With all of this in mind we can
start to explain what the Torah was addressing when it forbade homosexual
relations. This prohibition certainly applies both to those who are attracted
to the opposite sex and those who are not, but since the nature of the action
is so different for these two types of people, we need to ask which group this
command was designed for.
As we have
written before, although there is a tangible, perceivable benefit to the
performance of mitzvos, this can only be true for the majority of people, times
and places.[12] It
therefore makes sense to say that at least the prime purpose of this
prohibition is for the heterosexual majority. If constraining our natural
desires is important, refraining from pursuing unnatural ones is critical. Thus
the prohibition of homosexual relations is similar in nature to the prohibition
of bestiality.
Variation or
Disorder?
We now need to
address the issue of the minority of people who have no attraction to the
opposite gender. Based on what we have written already, it is clearly
impractical to expect people to marry without this attraction. The question we
must ask is if anything can be done to engineer such an attraction, and if not,
is there any way that these people can develop intimate relationships within a
halachic framework.
First we must
state some scientific information, based on research done by professionals:[13]
1) Unlike
disorders like paedophilia, homosexual orientation is not associated with any
other disorder (i.e. homosexuals are not more likely to have mental or physical
defects).
2) It is
believed that homosexuality is caused by a combination of factors, one of which
is genetics. However, no explanation has been found for the ability of ‘homosexual
genes’ to survive the obvious reproductive disadvantage.
3) A person’s sexual
orientation can change, but there is no evidence that any human treatment can
influence this.
Because of
this, most of the modern world views any attempted corrective treatment in a
very negative light. The argument is that not only will such treatment fail, in
the mind of the patient it will reinforce the idea that there is something wrong
with him, causing unnecessary psychological problems.
This position
is also accepted by some orthodox religious Jewish movements for homosexuals, who
want to keep halacha and complain that they get no sensible answers from rabbis
about how to do this. They concede that there is no way to allow homosexual
intercourse, but demand that guidelines should be given about what exactly is
permitted and what is not.[14]
I partially
accept these complaints. Irresponsible statements made by those ignorant of the
basic issues can cause untold damage, creating the impression that people who
are different to the majority have no place in Judaism. It is also unhelpful to
give people false hopes by prescribing treatments with no evidence of success.
However, I also
believe that it is a mistake to fully accept the position of those who do not
share our faith in the Torah. For them, there is no reason to place any constraints
on animalistic desires and thus no point in trying to facilitate normal family
relationships.
When people are
convinced that there is a problem, there is no way of telling what creative
solutions can be found. Over the last hundred years scientists have found
successful treatments for conditions that few would have believed possible. And
psychologists continuously search for better ways to treat a wide range of
mental conditions, even when there are no clear scientific rules.
In our case the
first step is to recognise that homosexual orientation is a problem, even if it
is unrelated to other mental disorders. If the lack of drive for reproduction
was more widespread, the human race would be an endangered species. And as
scientists already know that sexual orientation can change, there is a clear
opportunity to research what can cause this change.
Temporary
solutions
The likelihood
is that even if the whole world would accept that this phenomenon is a problem,
it would take some time to find an effective solution. We still need to provide
guidance to those who recognise their problem, and want to know how to live
their lives while there is no known solution.
The halachic question
of what exactly is forbidden and permitted for homosexuals is not
straightforward. As many of the prohibitions of contact between people of
opposite gender are preventative measures, without a good understanding of
homosexual desires it is hard to extrapolate.
Perhaps the
more significant question here is non-halachic (or meta-halachic). Although we
need to care for and sympathise with everyone, we must put the needs of the majority
before those of the individual. For communities to accept the legitimacy of
same-sex ‘couples’ would reinforce the perception of most of the modern world
that already has somewhat permeated into our society, with many negative
effects.
There is no
uniform answer that we can give here for all people. Religious leaders need to
understand both the ethos of the Torah and the nature of the problem they are
dealing with, and work with individuals to find the best course of action.
[1] In his fourth rule at the
beginning of Sefer Hamitzvos he explains that this command merely emphasises
that we must keep the whole Torah, and does not add anything specific.
[4] Ibid. 2:36
[5] Sanhedrin
64a
[6] Technically
this obligation applies only to men, and a woman may choose not to get married.
Although clearly if a large number of women made this choice it would become
very hard for men to fulfil their obligation.
[7] See for
example Mishnayos in Kesuvos 61b and 63a.
[9] Moreh
Nevuchim 3:49
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[13] I am
no professional in this field, and this information comes primarily from this article on
Wikipedia. Some may want to dismiss this research as the work of those with a
pre-written agenda, a claim which is not easy to prove or disprove. As I
believe that nothing here is contradictory to the Torah, I am assuming that the
information is correct.
[14] See for
example the website of 'havruta' (mainly in Hebrew).
