Achrei Mois – Kedoishim 2025: Forbidden Sexual Encounters: Are They All Equally Bad?

Print this Post

Raboyseyee and Ladies,

Forbidden Sexual Encounters: Are They All Equally Bad?

Are all the forbidden relationships listed in the heylige Toirah equal in sin? Or, is it the case that some are worse than others? Parshas Achrei Mois specifically delineates forbidden relationships of a sexual nature that the RBSO abhors. The list is found in Perek 18 and again Perek 20 (in Parshas Kedoishim) with one major difference. In its second appearance, the list is presented alongside a list of punishments to be meted out. They all sound quite giferlich but are they really? Let’s check in to see who made it onto the “no-do-list.” As to the list, each posik begins with this formula:  “You shall not uncover the nakedness of…” which is the heylige Toirah’s modest way of referring to prohibited sexual relations.

1. Mother – “Your mother” (18:7)
2. Step-mother – “Your father’s wife” (18:8)
3. Sister (same parents) – “Your sister, the daughter of your father or mother” (18:9)
4. Half-sister (from either parent) – included in (18:9)
5. Granddaughter (son’s daughter) – (18:10)
6. Granddaughter (daughter’s daughter) – (18:10)
7. Sister of father (aunt) – (18:12)
8. Sister of mother (aunt) – (18:13)
9. Wife of father’s brother (aunt by marriage) – (18:14)
10. Daughter-in-law (son’s wife) – (18:15)
11. Brother’s wife (sister-in-law) – (18:16) (unless levirate marriage applies)
12. Woman and her daughter – (18:17)
13. Woman and her granddaughter – “Her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter” (18:17)
14. Wife and her sister (while wife is alive) – (18:18) (allowed after wife’s death according to many)

And for good measure, the RBSO also forbade these non-family sexual encounters.

1. Niddah (menstruating woman) – (18:19)
2. Another man’s wife (adultery) – (18:20)
3. Male with male (homosexual act) – (18:22)
4. Bestiality (man with animal) – (18:23)
5. Bestiality (woman with animal) – (18:23)

Collectively, these 19 relationships are referred to as “giluy arayis” (uncovering nakedness), a euphemism for sexual intimacy with anyone on the above list. Chap all that? Veyter.

Now, let’s jump ahead one parsha where we find out what awaits those who cannot control themselves. The retributions are clearly spelled out. The severity varies: Some carry the punishment of korase (spiritual excision), others are punishable by death, and others are but lavin (negative commandments). Check out this beautiful table the Ois prepared.

Let us review: One who violates gets either korase, death by fire or stam azoy death. The bottom line: It’s seemingly better -and safer- to take matters into one’s own hand, if you chap. And the question on the Ois’s mind this week is this: Are all forbidden relationships described the same way? They are not!  And do they all carry the same punishment? Also not! Are they all the same in the RBSO’s eyes? Are they equal in disgust? Of course, the RBSO does not have eyes but you chap. Are they all equally as abhorrent? Is any one of them a lesser sin or violation? Scroll back up a bit and read the last column, the one marked Punishment and let us compare how the RBSO feels about them. It does epes appear from how they are described and from the punishments associated with each, that they are not equal in measure. Of course, that doesn’t give you license to pick the one with less severe consequences to violate.  Though grouped together in Perek 18, it does appear that the punishments in Perek 20 have quite the range. The ‘do not do’ list mainly concerns incest, adultery, and certain forms of sexual immorality. While all these forbidden relationships are considered sins, we can argue -with some support- that the heylige Toirah does in fact differentiate between them in terms of severity and consequences. Moreover, the RBSO describes them differently.

And with that introduction, let us now zoom in on the different wording the RBSO uses to describe His disgust or feelings for the violators. While all on the list are subject to punishment, check out the terminology used in the heylige Toirah as it differs from grouping to grouping. The RBSO tells us that a certain sexual union is a toievah (toi-ey-vo), one is zimmah, while the term tevel and -believe it or not- one is even referred to as a chesed. What’s pshat here? What the hec is a zimmah? And how could a forbidden encounter be a chesed? Shoin, now would be a good time to define the terms and we begin with toievah.

As it turns out, the term toievah (תּוֹעֵבָה) is the most widely used and known in terms of condemnation in the entire heylige Toirah. So happens that in our parshas -the term is used in both- toievah is used to condemn male homosexual intercourse.

^{ויקרא יח:כב} וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה תּוֹעֵבָה הִוא. – Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is a toievah.

^{ויקרא כ:יג} וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אֶת זָכָר מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה תּוֹעֵבָה עָשׂוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם מוֹת יוּמָתוּ דְּמֵיהֶם בָּם.

“If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done a toievah; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them.”

Interestingly, though very well known by anyone who went to yeshiva and who has had discussions about gay sex- the term toievah is not used to describe any of the other specific forbidden acts in either parsha, though it is used multiple times where the RBSO spells out the ramifications for violating these norms. The bottom line: The RBSO does not appreciate toievah type behavior and tells us that davka because of toievah violations, were the Canaanites and other inhabitants spit out from their land. That land is what we call Israel today. Let’s read the relevant pisukim.

^{ויקרא יח:כו} …וְלֹא תַעֲשׂוּ מִכֹּל הַתּוֹעֵבֹת הָאֵלֶּה הָאֶזְרָח וְהַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכְכֶם. ^יח:כז כִּי אֶת כָּל הַתּוֹעֵבֹת הָאֵל עָשׂוּ אַנְשֵׁי הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵיכֶם וַתִּטְמָא הָאָרֶץ. ^יח:כח וְלֹא תָקִיא הָאָרֶץ אֶתְכֶם בְּטַמַּאֲכֶם אֹתָהּ כַּאֲשֶׁר קָאָה אֶת הַגּוֹי אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵיכֶם. ^יח:כט כִּי כָּל אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה מִכֹּל הַתּוֹעֵבוֹת הָאֵלֶּה וְנִכְרְתוּ הַנְּפָשׁוֹת הָעֹשֹׂת מִקֶּרֶב עַמָּם. ^יח:ל וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת מִשְׁמַרְתִּי לְבִלְתִּי עֲשׂוֹת מֵחֻקּוֹת הַתּוֹעֵבֹת אֲשֶׁר נַעֲשׂוּ לִפְנֵיכֶם וְלֹא תִטַּמְּאוּ בָּהֶם אֲנִי יְ־הוָ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם.

^{Lev 18:26} …you must not do any of those toievas, neither the citizen nor the stranger who resides among you; ^18:27 for all those toievas were done by the people who were in the land before you, and the land became defiled. ^18:28 So let not the land spew you out for defiling it, as it spewed out the nation that came before you. ^18:29 All who do any of those toievas, such persons shall be cut off from their people. ^18:30 You shall keep My charge not to engage in any of the toievah laws that were carried on before you, and you shall not defile yourselves through them: I YHWH am your G-d.

The bottom line: Toievah violations cause the Yiddin to become impure and the land to be nauseous and vomit them out. The message is clear: By abstaining from these practices the Yiddin must distinguish themselves from the previous inhabitants. As it reads, the prior occupants were mamish party animals; all sorts of chazerish behaviors were tolerated as normative. Over in nearby Egypt things were not very different; is it a wonder that 4/5ths of the Yiddin didn’t want to leave? And in case, you’re wondering why the RBSO davka attached the toievah term to male-on-male encounters, you are mistama not alone as many with that proclivity are left wondering the same. Is there something more toievah about it than incest? Lest you think that toievah was reserved for gay sex, not to worry because the RBSO revisits toievah in Sefer Devorim and there we find that toievah also includes idolatry (12:31; 13:15), false weights (25:13–16), transvestism (22:5) and remarrying a divorced wife (24:4). What the hec is transvestism you ask? I didn’t know either but Rav Google -using AI-says azoy: Transvestism, sometimes referred to as cross-dressing, is the practice of wearing clothing typically associated with a gender other than the one the person identifies with. It’s important to note that the term “transvestite” is now considered outdated and potentially offensive. While some people may engage in cross-dressing for various reasons, including personal expression or for entertainment, in some cases, it can be associated with a mental health condition called “transvestic disorder,” characterized by a persistent and intense focus on cross-dressing for sexual arousal.

The bottom line: Despite these differences, all sources agree that toievah refers to a behavior that is “abhorrent” or “disgusting” to the RBSO. In other words, the term does not seem to have a precise connotation, and a given sin’s “toievah-ness,” is in the eyes of the beholder. Like porn, you know it when you see it! Shoin!

Having explored toievah, let’s check in on zimmah. Though many of us have read of these forbidden unions for many decades, it is likely the case that you ever noticed that the RBSO decided to characterize one as zimmah. What the hec is zimmah and how does the RBSO use that term? Let’s check out posik 17 where we find this.

^{ויקרא יח:יז} עֶרְוַת אִשָּׁה וּבִתָּהּ לֹא תְגַלֵּה אֶת בַּת בְּנָהּ וְאֶת בַּת בִּתָּהּ לֹא תִקַּח לְגַלּוֹת עֶרְוָתָהּ שַׁאֲרָה הֵנָּה זִמָּה הִוא.

Do not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; nor shall you marry her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter and uncover her nakedness: they are flesh-relations; it is zimmah.

What happens when zimmah is committed? For that that we move to Parshas Kedoishim, the back end of the doubleheader where we read this:

^{ויקרא כ:יד} וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִקַּח אֶת אִשָּׁה וְאֶת אִמָּהּ זִמָּה הִוא בָּאֵשׁ יִשְׂרְפוּ אֹתוֹ וְאֶתְהֶן וְלֹא תִהְיֶה זִמָּה בְּתוֹכְכֶם.

If a man marries a woman and her mother, it is zimmah; both he and they shall be put to the fire, that there be no zimmah among you.

What went down? Seemingly the man had sex with his wife and daughter (or the granddaughter) chazir that he is. He is playing with fire and taka fire is the punishment. Ober, what is zimmah? Is zimmah also a toievah or it is something else? We don’t know because the RBSO didn’t provide this information. What we know is that the RBSO does not want the land to be filled with zimmah. And we know this because it says so specifically in the posik below.

^{ויקרא יט:כט} אַל תְּחַלֵּל אֶת בִּתְּךָ לְהַזְנוֹתָהּ וְלֹא תִזְנֶה הָאָרֶץ וּמָלְאָה הָאָרֶץ זִמָּה.

Do not degrade your daughter and make her a harlot, lest the land fall into harlotry and the land be filled with zimmah. In this case, the father is prostituting his own daughter; oy vey. Whatever this zimmah is, the RBSO does not like it. In the heylige Novee (Shoiftim 20:6) we find zimmah again when reading the famous myseh (story) concerning the concubine in Gibeah who was violently gang raped:

^{שופטים כ:ו} …כִּי עָשׂוּ זִמָּה וּנְבָלָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל.

…For a zimmah and nevoloh (act of depravity) had been committed in Israel.

Whatever zimmah and nevoloh are, or are not, what we know with certainty is that the RBSO is not a fan. Especially so when the Novee included both zimmah and nevoloh in one posik when mentioning a disgusting gang rape. Mamish dirty and bad.

And hear this: The famous Novee Yechezkel – a man of many visions- was quite the personality. It appears that he was also a linguist because the Ois found a posik where he was able to use zimmah and toievah in one sentence. Let’s read it:

^{יחזקאל כב:יא} וְאִישׁ אֶת אֵשֶׁת רֵעֵהוּ עָשָׂה תּוֹעֵבָה וְאִישׁ אֶת כַּלָּתוֹ טִמֵּא בְזִמָּה וְאִישׁ אֶת אֲחֹתוֹ בַת אָבִיו עִנָּה בָךְ.

^{Ezekiel  22:11} They have committed toievah with other men’s wives; in their zimmah they have defiled their own daughters-in-law; in you they have degraded (inna) their own sisters, daughters of their fathers.

While the Novee’s usage of the terms ring familiar as it references illicit sexual behaviors, it employs them in reference to different specific prohibitions. In our parshas of the week, zimmah refers to sex with a mother and daughter and toievah to male homosexual sex, while in the Novee (22:11), zimmah describes sex with one’s daughter-in-law and toievah adultery. The bottom line: When the posik is warning about zimma, toievah and other similar acts, it is not a code for good things. Over in Yirmiyahu (Jerimah 13:27), the term refers to promiscuity and shameful sexual conduct in general, not to a specific prohibition.

Let’s go veyter where we find different acts on the list described with yet other terms. In fact, and as mentioned, the RBSO uses a total of four distinct terms to describe certain forbidden sexual relationships: let us chazir them again.  תּוֹעֵבָה (toeivah), זִמָּה (zimmah), תֶּבֶל (tevel), and חֶסֶד (Chesed). These terms are not synonyms; each reflects a different moral, social, or spiritual dimension of the sin.

In Perek 20 (20:12) the heylige Toirah forbids a man from lying with his daughter-in-law (Leviticus 20:12) and refers to this act as תֶּבֶל – Tevel. The translation seems to point to a perversion, and disorder, the mixing or overturning of proper structure, the breakdown of order.  The terms seemingly describes actions that confuse boundaries, such as the generational roles within a family. It’s an act that destroys the structure that keeps society and family stable.

And to the surprise of many who know the word chesed and associate it only with good things, in our parsha, we find that the term חֶסֶד  is used -ironically- to mean shameful kindness or intimacy. You will find the term attached to a man who lies with his sister (20:17).

 וְאִ֣ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יִקַּ֣ח אֶת־אֲחֹת֡וֹ בַּת־אָבִ֣יו א֣וֹ בַת־אִ֠מּ֠וֹ וְרָאָ֨ה אֶת־עֶרְוָתָ֜הּ וְהִֽיא־תִרְאֶ֤ה אֶת־עֶרְוָתוֹ֙ חֶ֣סֶד ה֔וּא וְנִ֨כְרְת֔וּ לְעֵינֵ֖י בְּנֵ֣י עַמָּ֑ם עֶרְוַ֧ת אֲחֹת֛וֹ גִּלָּ֖ה עֲוֺנ֥וֹ יִשָּֽׂא׃

If a man takes his sister [into his household as a wife], the daughter of either his father or his mother, so that he sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace; they shall be excommunicated in the sight of their kinsfolk. He has uncovered the nakedness of his sister; he shall bear the guilt.

What’s pshat? In its ironic or opposite usage, the act mimics closeness and affection (chesed), but in the wrong context it becomes disgraceful. It’s a perversion of natural love, turning what should be care into corruption. In plain English, we can kler that it’s used to describe abused intimacy; kindness turned toxic.

Does everyone agree on the precise distinctions between toeivah, zimmah, tevel, and chesed? Not exactly. Let us close with the final bottom line: Not all commentaries agree 100% on the precise distinctions between to’eivah, zimmah, tevel, and chesed, but all seem to agree that each term signals a different moral nuance, and that their usage in specific cases is intentional and meaningful. The RBSO abhors all, though not equally.

And now you know!

A gittin Shabbis-

The Heylige Oisvorfer Ruv

Yitz Grossman

Print this Post