Hey folks, Shul Candyman here. Wow, there are so many great things in the Joseph narrative to write about. Complex themes. Forgotten secrets. Delicious treats. But all that's going to have to wait until next week, because if there's one thing I really cannot, cannot, cannot stand, it's when people talk about how Onan died as a punishment for masturbation (or coitus interruptus, or contraception, or whatever you want to call it). Hopefully most of you know all this already, but here goes:
People have always choked the chicken. There's absolutely no reason to think that this is a new phenomenon. In the Bible's eyes, masturbation doesn't even rate as a sin. The Bible concerns itself only with rather serious sexual dalliances, such as incest, adultery, rape, when it's OK to rape (Deut. 21:10-14), etc. Hell, in our story the tzaddik (pious) Judah thinks nothing of stopping by a prostitute on the way home from work for a little afternoon delight. (Probably wasn't his first time, if you know what I mean.) Masturbation? Not worth mentioning. Even back then, that was strictly between you and your pillow.
So why was Onan punished? Let's read what the Torah actually says (Gen. 38:8-10, JPS 1917 translation):
And Judah said unto Onan: 'Go in unto thy brother's wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her, and raise up seed to thy brother.' And Onan knew that the seed would not be his; and it came to pass when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did was evil in the sight of the LORD; and He slew him also.Onan is asked to perform levirate marriage. In the ritual, the widow of a childless man remarries to a relative of his, even his brother or father. The firstborn child of this second husband is considered the deceased's son, and inherits the deceased’s property. In the Israelite world view, the ritual gives the dead man some continuance in the world (the idea of an eternal soul was not generally accepted), and cannot be shirked lightly. This obligation to the deceased compels Tamar and Ruth to tirelessly seek out their redeemers (here and Ruth 3:8-9), for which they are lauded (v. 26 here; Ruth 3:10, 4:12, 15). By contrast, refusal to fulfill the obligation of levirate marriage is met with official, public humiliation (Deut. 25:9). (For a discussion of the Rabbinical, exegetical interpretation of levirate marriage, pick up David Weiss Halivni's book "Peshat and Derash".)
Now Onan was a sneaky guy. He didn't want Tamar to get pregnant, because he knew that the seed would not be his. If he fathered Tamar's kid, he'd be feeding a child and taking care of a field that wasn't his own, but his dead bro's. Why waste the money and resources? We hear a very similar sentiment from Ruth's closest redeemer. At first, he expresses interest in redeeming Elimelech's land. But when he finds out that it will belong not to him, he backs out of the deal: 'I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance;' Ruth 4:4-6). Similarly, by having a child with Tamar, Onan would be providing his brother an heir, and forfeiting his claim on property he stood to eventually inherit. So Onan did what any (sneaky, dishonorable) guy would do: he married Tamar, but pulled out at the last second. (I wonder how Tamar reacted to this... did he think she wouldn't notice???)
God saw what Onan did, and he was not amused. Now, if the moral of this story is that masturbation is wrong, it should have been a lot simpler. It should have been a short, inspiring tale about a guy who didn't want to have kids, pulled out at the last second, and then got hit by a lightning bolt. Why include all this stuff about levirate marriage? The answer is that God would never have struck someone down just for spilling a little love juice. Hell, if God killed people for masturbation, no one would ever survive past bar mitzva. No, God was not pissed at Onan for pulling a jerk. He was pissed because Onan was a jerk -- a selfish jerk! There's a way the world works, and one of those ways is to invest a little sperm and money in your dead brother's estate when no one else is there to pick up the slack. Trapping your bro's widow in a childless marriage? Not cool. (Zaaaap!)
'course, he's still kind of a grumpy Old Testament god. But at least he's normal.
33 comments:
Yeah! "just you & your hand tonight" Onan!
I think your interpretation of Levirate marriage as being so far reaching so that a son could marry his father's widow is off. Leviticus Chapter 18:8 The nakedness of your father’s wife shall you not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness.
Also if Israelite society did not widely accept an eternal soul why was there a word for soul? Why did people say that someone was being "gathered to their fathers" if they physically weren't? Why was King Saul wanting to conjure up the soul of Samuel? And Grumpy Old Testament G-d? That's a crude and more Christian description.
Anonymous was me Rabban Gamliel.
Let us say that the following pissed God off:
1. Onan Spilled his seed
2. Onan was selfish in not performing his duties in a levirate marriage
3. Onan was, as the candy man says, a jerk.
Now, please tell me which of these deserve the death penalty?
1. If the spilling of seed merited the death penalty, then, a couple of things are to be expected: First, God has to warn us, ie., he should come and say "listen boys, don't spill your seed". Then, and only then, when a proper warning has been given, should the death penalty be contemplated. A law against "spilling seed" if there is such a law, could not have been given until Mount Sinai revelation, long after Onan. So Why was Onan killed?
2. If Onan was killed for violating his levrite obligations, well Deuteronomy tells us how to punish him. He would be coming to the town elders, and she would on his shoes or something and throw it at him. The punishement is NOT DEATH. So, again, why was he killed?
3. There is no death penalty for jerks. There is no halacha that subjects selfish people to executions.
So, what was it that Onan did that merits the death penalty?
The fact is, God is grumpy and sometimes kills cause he can! Does this not undermine the notion of an all good god?
G-d kills old people without warning. We can't.
"God kills old people without warning"
LOL. Is it God that is killing old people? Are we now attribting chronic medical ailments to God? Are we saying that all deaths are caused by God?
What is the overlying theology here?
"Are we now attribting chronic medical ailments to God? Are we saying that all deaths are caused by God?"
Yes.
"What is the overlying theology here?"
G-d utilizes nature to run the world and serves out justice through this world and the next without warning.
>I think your interpretation of Levirate marriage as being so far reaching so that a son could marry his father's widow is off. Leviticus Chapter 18:8 The nakedness of your father’s wife shall you not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness.
This is argument is flawed from several perspective. First, there is an equally severe prohibition against marrying your brother's wife and, yet, this prohibition gives way to the Levirate obligation. Anyone who has ever learned masecheth yavomoth should be familiar with this point. Thus, there is no reason that other prohibited familial relationships couldn't give way to Levirate marriage as well. Moreover, the Torah makes it clear that when Tamar slept with Yehuda, her father-in-law, that was considered to be justified (even though, ironically, Yehuda was prepared to burn her at the stake if she had gotten pregant from an unidentified and presumably unrelated man).
Finally, Onan was not Tamar's first husband's son, he was his brother.
What a deprived childhood I had. They skipped all these juicy parts in the United Lubavitcher Yehsiva
"G-d utilizes nature to run the world and serves out justice through this world and the next without warning."
But is this serving of justice random? Does God basically roam the earth, Zapping and frying at will and with no reason? Does he say "I gonna kill you for this", when the 'this' is whatever he wants it to be? Is justice random?
There are, as I understand it, 613 Mitzvoth, some are "do's" and some and some are "don'ts". I am told that these 613 commandments are the sum totals of our responsibility. So I am asking which ones of these did Onan violate? Which ones of his transgressions merit the death penalty?
One more thing;
Recall that all the laws of hashem, the 7 laws of Noah excepted, were given at Sinai. So, how was Onan to know that what he was doing was wrong?
Badrabbi
I don't know why death was warrented, so that is an interesting question. But regarding a warning, let me just bring this up. Avraham in the text is said to have kept the teachings of God. I would assume the levirate marriage was one of them or at least known. Perhaps then, his descendants would also have known this as a rule and hence do not need an actual warning not to do it.
Hmm..
frank,
>Yeah! "just you & your hand tonight" Onan!
Could have been posted by "Onanymous"
anonymous,
>I think your interpretation of Levirate marriage as being so far reaching so that a son could marry his father's widow is off.
First, I didn't say that. The point is that a father can marry his son's widow, as Judah married Tamar, his daughter-in-law. Otherwise, she should have been burned.
The first redeemer is the brother-in-law ("yavam" in Hebrew), of course. Mosaic law does not specify whether a father can marry his son's widow. But Ruth's case demonstrates that the brother-in-law is only one of many possible redeemers.
As for the case you described: a son cannot marry his father's widow, because then his father is not childless.
> As for the case you described: a son cannot marry his father's widow, because then his father is not childless.
Priceless.
anonymous,
>Also if Israelite society did not widely accept an eternal soul why was there a word for soul?
Well, I'm not sure there really was a word for soul. In my understanding, the Biblical Hebrew word "nefesh" generally means "life," as in "[don't eat blood, because] the life of the flesh is in the blood." (Lev. 17:11)
There was an idea of a "sh'ol," an underground to which the dead went. It's not clear what they did there. The case of raising Samuel is an example of this. He clearly existed in some kind of spirit form, although the word "nefesh" is not used to refer to this. He is apparently being raised up from the "sheol"... whatever that was.
The debate on life after death is as old as wikipedia itself. I think BTA does a good job summarizing:
http://offthederech.blogspot.com/2006/11/resurrection-of-dead-without-heaven.html
My position is that the Israelites didn't believe in heaven or life after death the way we do. They believed that "lo hamaitim y'hal'lu ya" -- the dead cannot give praise to god. That's not to say that the idea of life after death weren't around or didn't hold meaning. As we will see in the next few weeks, in the Joseph story, these ideas definitely did exist, and in fact held tremendous meaning. But it's not the meaning to which you refer.
>And Grumpy Old Testament G-d? That's a crude and more Christian description.
Well, sometimes the Christians get it right. Judge not by the flask, but by what it contains. God in the OT gets angry pretty easily, and overreacts. Folks like Abraham and Moses often call him out on it. Chalila lach, says Abraham--far be it from you! Should the judge of the entire world not do justice? (Gen. 18:25)
So I am asking which ones of these did Onan violate? Which ones of his transgressions merit the death penalty?
He might not have violated anything directly in the torah. But dont forget that the rabbis added many things, that supposedly come from the torah. Some rabbis are very good at causing kids to feel guilty for being kids. By the way most psychiatrists believe that about 98.6 % of all normal teenagers masterbate. Wonder what the great rabbis did when they were teenagers..........Avi
">I think your interpretation of Levirate marriage as being so far reaching so that a son could marry his father's widow is off. Leviticus Chapter 18:8 The nakedness of your father’s wife shall you not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness.
This is argument is flawed from several perspective. First, there is an equally severe prohibition against marrying your brother's wife and, yet, this prohibition gives way to the Levirate obligation."
But in that case the Torah specifies that it should be the case of Levirate marriage. A law doesn't overthrow prohibitions when in conflict unless it is specified in law otherwise. As for Yehuda and Tamar they are proof that the concept was not for fathers and sons. Yehuda instructs his son to fulfill his obligation for his brother. Why is it put in terms of the son's obligation to his brother if it is his son's and his own collective obligation? Yehuda never intended to have the Levirate obligation fulfilled through him. His daughterinlaw waited patiently for Yehuda's next son who Yehuda ostensibly said someday she'll have him. Tamar realizing he wasn't being serious tricked Yehuda. If she fulfilled an obligation of Levirate marriage he would not have sentenced her to death. He sentenced her to death because she was his daughterinlaw obligated to their other son and not him. Only when she showed him that he was the one who had had relations with her was he mollified realizing that her actions were motivated under the special circumstances. Still after the Torah they would not have had their marriage approved of.
"Finally, Onan was not Tamar's first husband's son, he was his brother."
I know. No one was arguing with that.
"badrabbi said...
"G-d utilizes nature to run the world and serves out justice through this world and the next without warning."
But is this serving of justice random? Does God basically roam the earth, Zapping and frying at will and with no reason? Does he say "I gonna kill you for this", when the 'this' is whatever he wants it to be? Is justice random?"
No. It doesn't mean everyone will get the same punishment or whether it will be in this world or the next. As long as the world proceeds with natural law however punctuated or not with miracles you are going to have random choices available for punishment (and reward) by heaven. To ask otherwise is to rely on miracles.
"badrabbi said...
One more thing;
Recall that all the laws of hashem, the 7 laws of Noah excepted, were given at Sinai. So, how was Onan to know that what he was doing was wrong?"
What kind of a Divine Justice if G-d can only Reward and Punish if people are aware they are doing something He disapproves of. This isn't how American law works. Jewish law requires more warning but that's for Earthly courts. G-d is not obligated to come down and reveal His every command. For one thing that puts a potential damper on our free will. We are meant to attain credit in this world. Angels don't get praised for being good.
First, I didn't say that. The point is that a father can marry his son's widow, as Judah married Tamar, his daughter-in-law. Otherwise, she should have been burned.
Leviticus 18:15. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife; you shall not uncover her nakedness.
"As for the case you described: a son cannot marry his father's widow, because then his father is not childless."
True. You wrote "In the ritual, the widow of a childless man remarries to a relative of his, even his brother or father." So I just answered from there thinking of the relationship between father and son.
Rabban Glamliel said:
"What kind of a Divine Justice if G-d can only Reward and Punish if people are aware they are doing something He disapproves of. This isn't how American law works."
First, American Law indeed does work this way. You can not be punished for something that is NOT against the law! Where have you been?
Second, are we to read god's mind as to what is and what is not moral? How was I to know that eating pig meat is bad if he did not tell me? How was I to know that mixing meat with cheese is bad if he did not say so (wait, he never did say that one!)? And, how was Onan to know that spilling his seed was bad?
Is it nice for God to kill people for things that don't seem like transgressions at all (like eating a cheeberger or slapping their monkey)?
badrabbi said...
Rabban Glamliel said:
"What kind of a Divine Justice if G-d can only Reward and Punish if people are aware they are doing something He disapproves of. This isn't how American law works."
First, American Law indeed does work this way. You can not be punished for something that is NOT against the law! Where have you been?"
I was saying that in American law just because you are not warned that something is against the law doesn't mean you won't be punished.
"Second, are we to read god's mind as to what is and what is not moral?"
Something being moral or not aught to be independent of whether we heard it from G-d. If I steal it is wrong whether G-d told me or not that He considers it so.
"How was I to know that eating pig meat is bad if he did not tell me?"
Eating a cheeseburger is considered only wrong for Jews and in the absence of finding out we are not guilty of anything. In any event Onan knew from his father that he was to fulfill the Levirate duty so he had knowledge of it's Divine origin in any event.
Everyone is welcome to comment however, you need to keep it within reason. If I get the impression you are commenting to the point of spamming I will being deleting posts as I have just done so now.
Your benevolent dictator,
LNM
What I want to know is what do you men plan on telling your son(s) about masturbation?
http://dreamsofwho.blogspot.com/2007/10/yes-chaim-there-is-no-tooth-fairy.html
come running,
> What I want to know is what do you men plan on telling your son(s) about masturbation?
I'm going to tell him most people do it and he shouldn't think there is anything wrong about it. I'm also going to try to tell him about sex while he's still too young to be embarrassed about it. If I wait until he actually hits puberty I'll only make us both uncomfortable.
Of course he's still a baby and talk is cheap.
This issue (pardon the pun...) is a good example of 3 phenomena in Halacha:
1. The rabbis creatively interpreting the torah to create a moral message appropriate in their eyes. Obviously the original intent of the text had nothing to do with masturbation.
2. Jews, knowingly or unknowingly, being influenced by other societies' taboos and adopting them as their own. (ie death impurity, menstrual blood, etc)
3. The rabbi using strong exagerated language to make a point, but not to be taken literally. This similar to the hundreds of examples of rabbi's threats of losing olam habah or other punishments if we don't listen to them.
Its only a matter of time before this prohibition gets thrown to the dustbin.
I don't think it's a problem but many of us here share a dilemma. It's choosing to(remain) live in the orthodox world while not being obeservant.
If you have an administrative question please email me. My address is on the blog. Do not post messages in the comment section. This forum is for people who want to talk about spanking the monkey. Please try to respect that. ;)
-LNM
(RG I will email you privately.)
drj, your points about the rabbis are dead-on as usual. I found a decent summary (with sources) in one of those encyclopedia entries that could only exist on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_masturbation
Hopefully we'll get a chance to discuss things like Rabbinic hyperbole in time.
I also agree that the Jewish halakha (law) has been influenced by other cultures' taboos, as well as the natural guilt many people (religious or not) feel after jerking off.
Just a random thought;
If "spilling seed" by monkey spanking is considered wasteful and therefore sinful, then would having sex with a sterile woman considered just as sinful?
Does sex for purposes other than procreation land you in a Jewish pergatory?
badrabbi,
That's EXACTLY one of the examples my rabbi gave me when we had this conversation about ten years ago. He said that Er & Onan had nothing to do with masturbation. He said there was no such thing as 'zera levatoloh' in the conventional understanding. As poof, he said that one may have sex with an infertile or pregnant woman. At the time, I was absolutely blown away-- this ran counter to everything I had been taught and inculcated with growing up in the Yeshiva world. he did say, however, that married men whose wives are permitted to them should refrain from it. That may have not much to do with halacha, though.
He also said that the taboos against it were likely of medieval Church origin.
(And lest anyone think this rabbi is some "modernishe, 'YU'-type lightweight", he has smicha from R. Moshe Feinstein.
A kashye that occurred to me as well was this: if, according to the gemara, a fertilized embryo, comprised of both sperm and ovum, is not considered a halachic living entity (bar kayama) until 40 days, kal vechomer that a sigle component of an embryo, a sperm, should not be considered alive.
I linked this post up on my blog, BTW. Good topic.
Candyman,
Thanks for your additional remarks. As regards to the moral message, I believe that Rabbi Boteach speaks about this in his books. Masturbation is seen as a negative influence on healthy sexual relations. At the same his explanations are inadequate in dealing with a single man who cannot have sexual relations, nor a married man during his wife's niddah.
I wonder if the guilt generated by the rabbis' comments and in the kitzur, causes damage to a adolescent boy. I remember even then, guilt which was then replaced by disdain for the rabbis. How do the Charedim handle it?
I guess the bottom line is.. everything in moderation.
Post a Comment