|
A HETEROSEXUAL JEWISH RABBI'S VIEWPOINT ON HOMOSEXUALITY
RABBI
GERSHON CAUDILL SEEKS TO RECLAIM LEVITICUS FROM THE RELIGIOUS BIGOTS WHO HAVE WRONGLY USED THE ANCIENT HEBREW TEXTS TO PERSECUTE
AND DENY RIGHTS TO GAYS AND LESBIANS.
HEALING THE TEXTS OF TERROR - THE REINTERPRETATION OF THE PROHIBITION ON HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES
AS THERE IS NO REASON, BIBLICAL, ETHICAL NOR MORAL, TO CONTINUE TO DENY ANY CIVIL RIGHTS TO GAYS AND LESBIANS, ESPECIALLY
IN TODAY'S WORLD. ALL HONORABLE PEOPLE SHOULD STAND IN SUPPORT OF GRANTING EQUALITY OF ALL LEGAL AND CIVIL RIGHTS TO GAYS
AND LESBIANS.
Below, I begin with a statement on homosexuality written by the foremost modern authority on the Book of Leviticus,
Rabbi Jacob Milgrom. Following that very interesting statement, I add my own opinions and viewpoints, followed by the opinion
of Rabbi Gershon Winkler, my Rebbe and teacher. That we disagree on minor issues related to this subject is to be expected.
In fact, Judaism encourages dispute and dialogue. It is our obligation as Jews to question the use of these texts in the continued
discrimination of gays and lesbians. It is most important to see where we agree, not where we disagree.
The three Bible scholars quoted below have each come to a slightly different conclusion about whether homosexuality is actually
prohibited.
Rabbi Milgrom says that, YES, the Bible prohibits homosexual behavior. However, only in the land of Israel and only for
males, and, possibly, only in certain interfamily relationships.
Rabbi Caudill says that the "homosexual" behavior of the Bible that is prohibited is actually heterosexual substitution
of a male in place of a female, and may even need to be done in an idolatrous worship scenario. Rabbi Caudill also posits
that, like the G*D given command to kill the "stubborn and rebellious" son, which the rabbis a century after the
Christian era began negated, any vestige of the prohibition against homosexuality also needs be negated.
Rabbi Winkler says that the only homosexual behavior that is prohibited is anal sex, and that lesbianism is permitted.
DOES THE BIBLE PROHIBIT HOMOSEXUALITY, by Rabbi Jacob Milgrom, Professor
Emeritus of Biblical Studies at the University of California, Berkeley
Of course it does (Leviticus) 18: 22;
20: 13), but the prohibition is severely limited. First, it is addressed only to Israel, not to other nations. Second, compliance
with this law is a condition for residing in the Holy Land, but is irrelevant outside it (see the closing exhortation, 18:
24-30). Third, it is limited to men; lesbianism is not prohibited. Thus it is incorrect to apply this prohibition on a universal
scale.
Moreover, as pointed out by my erstwhile student, Dr. David Stewart, both occurences of the prohibition (18:
22; 20: 13) contain the phrase "as one lies with a woman" (lit. "lyings a woman"), an idiom used only for illicit heterosexual
unions. Thus one could argue that carnal relations are forbidden only if their correlated heterosexual unions would be in
these lists. For example, the Bible lists the following prohibited relations: nephew-aunt, grandfather-granddaughter, and
stepmother-stepson. Thus, according to this theory, nephew-uncle, grandfather-grandson, and stepfather-stepson are also forbidden.
This implies that the homosexual prohibition does not cover all male-male liaisons, but only those within the limited circle
of family. However, homosexual relations with unrelated males are neither prohibited nor penalized. Admittedly, more than
two occurrences of the phrase "as one lies with a woman" (Gen. 49: 4; Lev. 20: 13)[mishkevey משכבי
-RGSC] are needed before accepting this argument as definitive.
As I mentioned above, in the entire list of forbidden
sexual unions, there is no prohibition against lesbianism. Can it be that lesbianism did not exist in ancient times or that
Scripture was unaware of its existence? Lesbianism existed and flourished, as attested in an old (pre-Israelite) Babylonian
omen text (Texts from Cuneiform Sources 4, 194: XXIV 33') and in the work of the lesbian poet Sappho (born c. 612 BCE, during
the time of the First Temple), who came from the island of Lesbos (hence "lesbian"). But, in the eyes of the Bible, there
is a fundamental difference between the homosexual acts of men and women: in lesbianism there is no spilling of seed. Thus
life is not symbolically lost, and it is for that reason, in my opinion, that lesbianism is not prohibited in the Bible.
Thus,
from the Bible, we can infer the following: the female half of the world's homosexual population, lesbians, are not mentioned.
Over ninety-nine percent of the remaining gays, namely non-Jews, are not addressed. This leaves the small number of Jewish
gay men subject to this prohibition. To those who argue that the Bible enjoins homosexuality, a careful reading of the source
text offers a fundamentally different view. While the Bible never applauds homosexuality, neither does it prohibit most people
from engaging in it.
(LEVITICUS, pgs. 196-197, by Jacob Milgrom, 2004)
Jacob Milgrom is Professor Emeritus of
Biblical Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. The author of five scholarly books, including "Studies in Levitical
Terminology" (1970), "Cult and Conscience: The Asham and the Priestly Doctrine of Repentence" (1976), "Numbers" (JPS Torah
Commentary- 1990), and "Leviticus (Anchor Bible, 3 vols.,-1991-2001), and more than two hundred articles. He was named a fellow
of the Guggenheim Foundation, a fellow of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Jerusalem, and a senior fellow of the Albright
Institute of Archaeological Research. Now retired, he and his wife, Jo, live in Jerusalem.
Rabbi Gershon Caudill's Thoughts: HOW DID THE EARLY TALMUDIC SAGES DEAL WITH OUTDATED BIBLICAL LAW? (And how does that relate
that to the question of modern day homosexuality)?
If the question of modern homosexuality had been put before Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi (135-220 C.E.), the editor of the Mishnah
portion of the Talmuds, in Tiberias, Israel, or Rabbi Ashi (c.352-427 C.E.), one of the compilers of the Gemara in Babylon,
it is my belief that the Talmud would have depicted Rabbis Shimon and Eliezer and Elazar, son of Rabbi Eleizer as having handled
the proof texts of Leviticus in a similar manner as they handled the questions of "A Stubborn and Rebellious Son,"
"An Idolatrous City," and a "House Contaminated with Blight (Nuga)" in the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate
Sanhedrin, chapter eight.
The Hebrew Bible, in Deuteronomy 21: 18 - 21 records the Word of God when it states that God told Moses on Mt. Sinai:
"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, who does not obey the voice of his father; or the voice of his mother,
and when they have chastened him, will still not hearken to them....they shall bring him out to the elders of his city...And
all the men of his city shall stone him to death: so shall you put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear and
fear."
Even though the Torah EXPLICITLY has God stating that a stubborn and rebellious son should be stoned to death, these rabbis
of the Talmudic period strongly disagreed. They knew that the Torah of Moses day (the 14th century BCE) was not to be practiced
as LAW in the Talmudic Period, almost 1500 years later.
The text of the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin 68B starts out the Mishnah with the statement; "A stubborn
and rebellious son - from when does he become a stubborn and rebellious son?"
It ends the intricate discussion on just what constitutes a "Stubborn and Rebellious Son" five pages later on
page 71A by resolving the halakha according to the decision of Rabbi Yehudah, who states: "THERE NEVER WAS A REBELLIOUS
SON, NOR WILL THERE EVER BE."
Then the anonymous redactor of the Mishnah in the Talmud asks: "Then why was it written?"
The Talmud responds: "So that people might study it (wrestle with it), and receive reward for their efforts."
However, the Talmud also records both sides of the discussion for the Talmud now records the objection of Rabbi Yonatan,
who states: "This is not so, for I once witnessed a rebellious son being tried, and I sat on his grave."
This same series of discussions continues as to whether there can exist an "Idolatrous and Condemned City" as
per God's Word in Deuteronomy 12: 3-4.
The result is again that the halakha is that "THERE NEVER WAS A CONDEMNED CITY, NOR WILL THERE EVER BE" based
upon the argument of Rabbi Eliezer.
Again, Rabbi Yonatan objects with: "I once saw a city declared a condemned city, and I sat upon its rubble after
it had been destroyed."
Now, the Sages turn to the question of a house infected with nega (erroneously translated as leprosy) which the Torah
demands that it be torn down (Leviticus 14: 37).
Rabbi Elazar, the son of Rabbi Shimon, renders the halakha as: "THERE NEVER WAS A LEPROUS HOUSE, NOR WILL THERE EVER
BE."
However, the Talmud records the objections of Rabbi Elazar, the son of Rabbi Tzaddok and Rabbi Shimon of Kefar Akko, that
they personally visited a place where the stones of a Leprous House had been desposed of.
Yet, in all three of these cases, the halakha is that "THERE NEVER WAS..., NOR WILL THERE EVER BE" followed
by: "WHY WAS IT WRITTEN IN THE TORAH?" This was answered by: "So that people might study it, and receive reward
for their efforts."
In other words, in Rabbinic methodology, they were saying: "EVEN IF THERE WAS SUCH A THING AS A REBELLIOUS SON, A
CONDEMNED CITY, OR A LEPROUS HOUSE, IN A PAST TIME, WE STATE THAT WE WILL NOT OBSERVE THESE HARSH COMMANDS OF GOD IN THIS
AGE AND TIME OR FROM THIS TIME ON." (Perhaps they were also inferring that Moses might have misheard what God really
said). In any case, they did not accept that the death of a stubborn and rebellious son was what God desired.
The Sages of the Talmud looked at the Written Torah in much the same way as modern American jurisprudence looks at the
American Constitution, which some people hold to also be a Sacred document.
The Sages operate in much the same manner as do the American Supreme Court Justices. They determine, based upon the needs
of their own time period, the Rules of Law that are still mandatory upon the Jewish people in their own time period, and their
rulings operate in the same manner as do Amendments to the Constitution or The Bill of Rights.
When this is resolved in a Responsa, with both a majority opinion and a minority opinion, it becomes Halakha, Law. Thus,
halakha is synonymous with continuing revelation.
The purpose of revelation is to bring ancient law into modern practice, or, in other words, to bring the people into balance
with the Will of G*D.
This does not mean that they ignore or negate the original text. They still continue to argue using it in later Baraitot
as examples, but they do not use the text to carry out a sentence of judgement -Rabbi Gershon Steinberg-Caudill].
Since 1994, Rabbi Caudill has been seriously involved in a compassionate
study of the so-called "anti-homosexual" verses of the Book of Leviticus. He has searched extensively in the Hebrew Scriptures,
in the Dead Sea Scrolls texts, in both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds, and in Jewish historical writings. With the help
of Catholic, Greek and Latin linguists and scholars, and a LDS (Mormon) Biblical Languages student at Emory University, Rabbi
Caudill has also been able to study, second-handedly, original translations of the Greek and Latin texts.
This serious
study has also involved reviewing the various Biblical manuscripts and translations, Talmudic responsa texts and other materials
of a collateral nature to the subject matter being studied; i. e. history, anthropology, archaeology, philology, etymology,
etc.
As a result of this serious research, Rabbi Caudill is completely convinced that THE ORIGINAL HEBREW TEXTS OF
THE TORAH (the Hebrew Five Books of Moses) HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO SAY CONCERNING HOMOSEXUALITY AS WE UNDERSTAND THE TERM
"HOMOSEXUALITY" TO MEAN IN TODAYS WORLD!
Sadly, the reality of our history is that the texts of Leviticus (and Deuteronomy)
which were utilized by the teachers and rabbis of the Jewish tradition to condemn homosexuality, were so employed under a
direct and constant danger and THREAT from the dominant and controlling Christian governmental and ecclesiastical authorities
who needed to have the "perceived" Jewish interpretation of the texts, as taught by the Jewish rabbinical authorities, to
be in accordance with their own Christian commentaries and teachings on homosexuality and what they believed (falsely) to
be sexual perversion. Thus, they kept a close watch on what the Jewish rabbis wrote about subjects sensitive to Church dogma.
This period of the condemnation of homosexuals, coincides with similar condemnation edicts against witches, healers,
and heritics which took place mostly in the 4th to 6th centuries of the common era (CE), which was at least 1500 years after
the original text was codified in the Hebrew Torah by the Prophet Ezra.
Within the Hebrew Torah reading parashot of
Achare Mot (Leviticus 16: 1-18: 30) and Kedosheem (Leviticus 19: 1-20: 27) are found the particular verses utilized for the
past sixteen centuries, by both Jewish and Christian fundamentalist teachers to erroneously (and purposefully) persecute,
torture and punish a small portion of the human population.
These specific verses read:
(1) Leviticus 18: 22; which
states: ואת זכר לא תשכב
משכבי אשה תועבה
הוא Do not lie (sexually) with a male like as you would with a woman, since this is an idolatrous
perversion (תועבה TOEYVAH).
And:
(2) Leviticus 20: 13, which states: ואיש
אשר ישכב את זכר משכבי
אשה תועבה עשו שניהם מות יומתו
דמיהם בם If a man has sexual intercourse with a male person, as with
a woman, they have both committed a תועבה TOEYVAH
(aמ idolatrous perversion). Their death is their own fault.
These verses were written in the Book of Leviticus
originally sometime about 1350 BCE. This was a full millennium prior to Jews being in contact with a hedonistic, militant
non-Semitic culture that had a Syrian-Greek-Hellenistic AND A missionizing Hellenizing religious premis that was openly promiscuous
and a bi-sexual modality. This public display of what Jews held as sacred and private behavior was why the very first Talmudic
references are to PUBLIC DISPLAYS of homosexual like, sexual activity, mostly by non-Jews, which was spoken of as an idolatrous
perversion (תועבה TOYEVAH) of JEWISH mores
and religious practice (Sanhedrin 54a) if practiced by Jews.
According to the rabbi and Bible scholar, Professor Jacob
Milgrom, the prestigious translator and commentator of the scholarly Anchor Bible Series Translation of the Book of Leviticus,
and the Jewish Publication Society Commentary on the Book of Numbers; the ORIGINAL Hebrew Bible Leviticus texts are referring
to NON-ISRAELITE, RELIGIOUS cultic ritual sexual and sexual abuse practices that Israelites were not to imitate when they
entered into the Land of Israel. It has nothing at all to do with what we today term as being homosexuality per se, but with
cultic religious fertility rituals.
The Hebrew speaking people who wrote the original text of Leviticus did not see
homosexual actions as a sexual orientation of any consequence. In fact, they viewed homosexuality as something that was
of little or no real concern to the normal operation of the tribal group.
The ORIGINAL LEVITICUS documents of the
texts that are today used to deny a spiritual connection to God for homosexuals are actually referring to non-Jewish, foreign
CULTIC sexual substitution fertility rituals, and do not condemn anyone who does not use substitutional and/or incestuous
sex as a method of worship.
In fact, the original text of the Book of Leviticus was written as instructions for the
priestly tribe, and refered to PRIESTLY prohibitions only, and not to the everyday rank and file Israelite sexual practices.
The original name of the Book of Leviticus (which name comes from the Greek Septuagint) was in Hebrew "ספר תורת
כהנים SEFER TORAT KOHANIM" (The Instructions of the Priestly Officiants).
During
Ezra's time period (5th century BCE) this text of Leviticus was then edited to apply to all Jews, who were now to be a "nation
of kings and priests."
It is thought that the Dead Sea community of Zadokites (Zadukeem
- Sadducees), who are considered by most scholars to have written and hidden most, if not all, of the Dead Sea Scrolls,
evidently thought that the Book of Leviticus was ESPECIALLY important for their community. Sixteen separate manuscripts (none
totally complete) of the Scroll of Leviticus have been discovered in the Qumron caves.
Of these sixteen manuscripts,
three manuscripts show no deviation from what we read in the Masoritic text of the Book of Leviticus today. Interestingly,
however, four manuscripts were written in the Paleo-Hebraic script in use prior to the exile of the Judeans into Babylon.
Although both chapters 18 and 20 are present in these manuscripts, our particular verses do not seem to have survived.
It is the opinion of Rabbi Gershon that, like all other indigenous
tribal societies of people, including Native American Indians, the Jewish people were not overly concerned about homosexuality
as a sexual modality within the community, where-in two married or widowed men might come together in a loving, companionship
that well may have included a sexual relationship. As a rule, it did not get any notice. Why? Because, just as long as these
men had also fulfilled the command to take a wife and be fruitful and multiply and replenesh the earth (to have at least one
child of each sex), their "other sexual activity" did not make a difference. No condemnation of King David's relationship
with Jonathon, nor of Judah's tryst with Tamar is recorded in the Hebrew Bible.
IN THE TIME OF THE TORAH, ALL MALES
WERE COMMANDED TO MARRY
The first commandment in the Torah is considered to be fruitful and multiply [Sefer HaHinnuch
Vol. 1, pg. 7] and one who fails to marry is considered to have neglected one of the most fundamental of Jewish laws. In fact,
the Sages tell us, when a person comes up for judgment after his death, he will be asked: "Did you get married?" "Did you
raise a family?"..Thus we are told, " A man who does not have a wife is not a proper man," and "A man who has no wife lives
without joy, without blessing and without goodness" [Yebamot 62b].
In ancient traditional Jewish society, ALL males
were viewed as under the command of Heaven to marry and to have children. No provision was made for a completely celibate
or a completely homosexual orientation. A man could, but was not required to, obtain a divorce from a woman who was unable
to produce him children. He could also take a second wife (polygamy) or even a "common-law" wife (a pelegesh - a concubine).
A person who failed to keep a commandment that applied to him (i.e. to marry and have children) was seen as a danger to the
welfare of the entire community; because of his disobedience of a positive commandment, the rains would fail to come and the
herds would abort their young.
According to the Jerusalem Talmud in Tractate Ketubot, Rabbi Chisda (3rd-4th century
Babylonian Amora) said; "I am better than my colleagues because I was married when I was but sixteen years old. Yet, if I
had married at age thirteen, I would not have had (a single wasted seminal emission) and would have spit in the Adversary's
(HaSatan) eye." In other words, a young married man will not spill semen in vain.
The Sages further taught that the
commandment to marry and to have children is more important than the commandment to build the Temple. It is considered as
the VERY FIRST COMMANDMENT (Genesis 1: 28 & 2: 24). A Jew who willfully did not marry was considered a sinner and needed
to offer a sin sacrifice. He could even be FORCED by his community to take a wife if he was still unmarried by the age of
20 (Rokeach 12, as quoted in the 18th century Sephardic Commentary on the Bible, MeAm Lo'ez, Vol. 1, page 124).
The
Sages taught that a boy should be under the obligation to marry at an early age, he should have already signed the prenuptial
document by his thirteenth birthday. This was the origin of today's Bar Mitzvah ceremony. If he had not married by his twentieth
birthday, the court could compel him to marry (ibid.)
THE COMMUNITY OF ESSENES WAS NOT CELIBATE
According to the
Dead Sea Scroll, "The Messianic Rule," (1QSa,I, 9-11); "At the age of twenty years old, a youth shall be enrolled (in the
Community) to enter upon his allotted duty to raise a family and to be joined to the Holy Congregation. He shall not lay with
a woman before then for he does not yet know the difference between good and evil." Thus, you see that a youth of 20 years
of age had to marry and assume the duty to raise a family in order to be "joined to the Holy Congregation." Being married
and a father of children was viewed by the Essenes as a REQUIREMENT, just as in normative Pharisaic Judaism.
From the
above texts we see that within both the Pharisaic-Sadducean Judaism, and Essene Judaism, as represented by the Talmud and
the Dead Sea Scroll texts, EVERY Jewish young man was to be married to a Jewish young woman by the time they were sexually
active, no matter what their true sexual orientation was. In fact, the signing of the prenuptial documents, the ketubah, was
part of a child's coming of age (B'nai Mitzvah) ceremony.
Although both the Essene community and the Priestly
element of Sadducean Judaism were obsessed with sexual purity and seminal emissions, yet, one cannot find specific references
to male homosexuality as being a prohibited activity for Jews in any of their sectarian writings. It seems that the married
Essenes lived in the cities, near the walls, while, possibly, those who had already raised their families, were widowed, or
were no longer married may have lived at the community at Qumron.
In a closely knit religious community of this kind,
true homosexuality, wherein two persons of the same sex live together in a committed, sexually active relationship, is usually
accepted without fanfare or public notice. Snide remarks might be made but the relationship is usually just ignored.
THE TORAH IS NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE REFER TO AS HOMOSEXUALITY
Almost all Jewish halakhic authorities agree that nowhere in the specific texts of the Five Books of the Written Torah
does the Torah prohibit homosexual acts by WOMEN (see the writing on this by Rabbi Yosef Hayyim of Chief Rabbi of Baghdad,
1834-1909), in The Halachot of the Ben Ish Hai, Chapter "Shoftim," on lesbianism). This fact proves that, to the later rabbis,
homosexuality as a sexual orientation is not the intent of the subject verses in the Book of Leviticus.
The intent
of the verses in question was to prohibit male sexual idolatry in the practice of Canaanite and Egyptian cultic fertility
rites by Israelite heterosexual men (see Leviticus 18: 1).
In the 3rd century CE, the Babylonian Talmud records that
Rabbi Huna (the miracle working rain making-sacred circle drawing rabbi) tried to get the Sanhedrin to legislate against female
homosexuals (lesbians) being able to marry a High Priest, a Cohen, but his colleagues ruled against him (BT Yebamot 76a).
The Sanhedrin said that it was not permissible to prohibit what the Torah permits.
It logically follows that if the
Torah was referring to homosexuality in general, as a sexual preference or as an sexual orientation, why would it just address
only the MALE homosexual activity and not also the female homosexual activity?
JEWISH EXEGESIS METHODOLOGY
On
the basis of the exegesis of Baraitha d'Rabbi Ishmael in the Sifra, on Leviticus, written in the mid-second century of the
Common Era, Rabbi Ishmael says:
"The Torah is interpreted by means of thirteen rules.... When a generalization is
followed by a specification, only what specifies applies (Miklal u'frat)."
In our texts of Leviticus the generalization
is the text; "A man shall not lay with a man," ואת זכר
לא תשכב and the specification is the text; "as you would with a woman" משכבי אשה.
Based
upon Rabbi Ishmael's method of Jewish Torah exegesis, we can clearly see that the biblical passages in Leviticus 18: 22 and
also in Leviticus 20: 13 can not refer to true homosexual activity at all, as at least one of the males is a heterosexual
or perhaps a bisexual male. Otherwise the text need not supply the words, "as (you would) with a woman."
Rabbi Jacob
Milgrom has said that these Leviticus texts are in reality, referring to foreign religious, cultic, ritual and promiscuous
sexual practices, as practiced by the religions of Egypt and Canaan, which featured the substitution of others, including
relatives, animals, and members of the same sex for cultic ritual fertility purposes.
It should also be noted that
it is not the normal homosexual practice for a man to lay with another man as though he were laying with a (preferred) woman.
This is HETEROSEXUAL SUBSTITUTION for sexual gratification.
In fact, if a man were thinking of using his sexual partner
as though that partner were a woman, and not the man that he is, it would not be a true homosexual relationship, as one of
the parties involved is PRETENDING that the person he is laying with is a preferred woman. Why should he lay with a man when
he could find many willing women that would lay with him?
SUBSTITUTIONAL SEXUAL BEHAVIOR NOT PERMITTED
There
is a second possible explanation that the situation described in our Leviticus texts are actually a permissive sexual situation
in which the first man does not have control over his sexual emotions, but uses others to satisfy his sexual desires. If we
read the Torah this way, it is warning this kind of person that certain types of substitutional sexual behavior are not permitted.
The way that the text is written also provides us with a clue that sexual substitution is what is being referred to when it
says: ואת זכר לא
תשכב משכבי אשה תועבה
הוא.The writing of the last word as הוא, which
means HE, and yet is vowelled so that it is to be pronounced as HEE, היא, which means SHE, instead of the correct HU, for
the masculine tense, shows that the male is substituting as a female instead of the male that he is.
In the Greek texts reference to Lev. 18:22 from the Septuagint
(translated in 3rd century BCE), the words are: "koimithisi koitin gynaikos" (you may not lie as with a woman).
This
is the way it is usually rendered. The above translates into Greek the Hebrew words mishkevey, (to lay sexually with - The
Hebrew consonants are: מ-ש-כ-ב-י) and
eeshah, (woman : א-י-ש-ה).
This translation
is attested in three of the earliest papyri, A, B, and F, which support the word "gynaikos" -- (as with a woman). It implies
a substitution of some sort. Later Christian Greek renditions have used "arsenos" (young male) instead of gynaikos, which
shows a decided anti-Hellenistic or a pro-Gentile Christian, anti-Jewish Christian bias.
The Torah itself tells us
it is not referring to homosexuality but to idolatry by its opening statement in chapter 18 of Leviticus wherin YHVH God states;
"I am is YHVH your Creator Force! You are not to follow the practices of Egypt where you lived, nor of Canaan, where I will
be bringing you. Do not follow any of their customs."
If we wish to determine what kind of customs the author of Leviticus
is referring to as being prohibited, we must ask ourselves: What were the supposed homosexual practices of the religions in
Egypt and in Canaan in the 14th century-10th century BCE (the time represented by Leviticus)?
According to the Alexandria,
Egypt Jewish philosopher Philo (1st century CE); "They [the pagan TEMPLE PRIESTS] would apply themselves to deep drinking
of strong liquor and dainty foods and forbidden forms of intercourse. Not only in their mad lust for WOMEN [these were heterosexual
men] did they violate the marriages of their neighbors, but also these men mounted males [they were promiscuous men].... Then,
little by little they accustomed those who were BY NATURE MEN to submit to play the part of women.... (On Abraham, Chapter
26, pages 134-136.)
This Egyptian cultic religious practice is a SUBSTITUTION of the male body for a female body in
male to male promiscuous sexual activity. It is not homosexuality! The practices being referred to are those of CULTIC ritual
promiscuous sexual behavior.
SODOMY
The passage in Genesis 19 that is used to erroneously
give the nomenclature of sodomy to homosexual sex (from the 17th or 18th century BCE account), actually does not refer to
an act of consensual sex or to homosexual sex at all, but to an act of sexual violence and degradation and male rape, as also
does the passage in Judges 19: 22. These are acts of VIOLENCE that are committed by parties seeking, by sexual brutality,
to show their hatred for those they are degrading. It is not an act of love or of caring nor is it based upon sexual orientation.
That ministers and some rabbis would see this as homosexuality speaks more to their own bias than to their desire to be true
to the meaning of the original text.
The Hebrew Prophet, Ezekiel, actually addresses directly the question of what
the sin of the people of Sodom was.
In Ezekiel 16: 49 it states: "Behold, this was the INIQUITY of your sister Sodom;
PRIDE, FULNESS OF BREAD (gluttony), AND ABUNDANCE OF IDLENESS was in her and in her daughters, NEITHER DID SHE STRENGTHEN
THE HAND OF THE POOR AND NEEDY." The sins of Sodom were - social injustice, waste, over-indulgence, and insolence.
These were the crimes of Sodom, not homosexuality!
The male prostitutes הקדשים of I Kings 14: 24, 15: 12, II Kings 23:7 (proscribed in Deuteronomy
23: 18) are described in the Talmud (BT Sanhedrin 54b) as providing homosexual sex, but other contemporary Bible translators
were of a different opinion.
The translator of the 2nd century CE Babylonian Aramaic Jewish translation of the Hebrew
texts, theTargum Onkelos to read the Book of Kings text to show that they provided sex to the FEMALE visitors to the Idolatrous
temples. If this is the case, there is some question whether these male prostitutes were providing homosexual sex to men or
if they were also, or only, providing heterosexual sex to women.
In any case, the male rapes of Genesis 19 and Judges 19: 22,
and the promiscuous male sexual activity of I & 2 Kings does not describe monogamous, loving and caring homosexual relationships
anymore than the case of Lot and his daughter's act of incest in Genesis 19: 31-38, describes monogamous, loving and caring
heterosexual relationships.
Now let us examine the meanings of the Hebrew word - תועבה -TOEYVAH (abomination, detestable, idolatrously unfit,
a horrible deed)
A look at the internal evidence shows that the words (toeyvah hee תועבה הוא), which are translated as "an abomination" or "a disgusting
perversion," means much more than that.
The Hebrew word TOEYVAH תועבה
is used in the Torah to describe three CATEGORIES of actions in the Torah that are considered abominations or disgusting
perversions.
These are (1) laws around IDOLATRY; as in Deuteronomy 17: 4; (2) laws around the eating of forbidden
animal species or bodily fluids (blood, semen), as in Deuteronomy 14: 3; and (3) laws around the male cultic sexual prohibitions,
as in Leviticus 18 & 20, which include incestuous relationships, bestiality, and same sex substitution.
Thus the
word TOEYVAH תועבה (or a form of the
word), is a CATEGORY of IDOLATROUS forbidden action, and is used in that manner over 100 times in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh).
The word TOEYVAH תועבה is used
only 26 times in the Torah; 2 times in Genesis; 1 time in Exodus; 6 times in Leviticus; 0 times in Numbers; and 17 times in
Deuteronomy. In all these cases it refers to a form of (idolatrous) substitution. The one time תועבה is used in Exodus (8: 22), it refers to the concept that
what Israelites sacrifice are considered to be by the Egyptians; an ABOMINATION, a תועבה.
We thus learn that the Hebrew word TOEYVAH refers to a concept
akin to adultery against God, by substituting the idolatrous sexual behavior of another religion's fertility practice as a
method of worshipping the Israelite concept of God.
The word TOEYVAH תועבה
is in the Major Prophets 57 times. 5 times in 1 & 11 Kings, 3 times in Isaiah, 8 times in Jeremiah, 1 time in Malachi
and 41 times in Ezekiel. It is not found AT ALL in the Minor Twelve Prophets.
In the Writings, TOEYVAH תועבה is found once in Psalms and 25 times in Proverbs.
In every case that תועבה is
found, it is referring to a prohibitted activity centered around some concept of IDOLATRY.
In today's world, most
traditional rabbinical halakhists would not see the Christian concept of Trinity as a toeyvah form of idolatrous belief (as
the Torah saw Egyptian and Canaanite beliefs), but rather they would accept that Judaism, Christianity and Islam all worship
the SAME GOD even if by different Names and concepts of understanding the nature of that same One God.
There are certainly
no authorities within mainline, traditional Judaism that would consider any of the variants of Christian or Moslem faiths
as "a disgusting perversion or abomination," with the possible exception of those groups that advocate violence or hatred
based upon race, religious differences, ethnicity, or sexual orientation (and ALL religions have their zealots).
Even
the eating of a forbidden animal, bird and fish species, as well as eating a kid cooked in it's mother's milk is considered
toeyvah in Deuteronomy 14: 4, as well as the eating of blood (forbidden even in the early Jewish-Christian community, see
Acts 15: 20 & 29), yet we do not hold non-Jews guilty of being idolators because they eat these Torah forbidden substances.
Anthropological studies and modern genetic and social science has
shown that homosexuality is a natural state of being for some human beings and other animal species.
If that
is truly the case, and I believe that it is, then it is the God who created the human species who is responsible for the condition
of homosexuality just as it is God who is responsible for the condition of heterosexuality.
To say that homosexuality
is a deviant behavior is to say that God made a mistake when God created the אדם, the Earth Creature, זכר
ונקבה, "He created him; to be male and female, He created them. And
God blessed them.... And God saw all that He had made, and He found it to be VERY GOOD טוב
מאד! (Genesis 1: 27 - 31).
Rabbi Ted Alexander (A Conservative rabbi) of the San Francisco,
California's Jewish community has stated that; "This is the way God has created them (as homosexuals), and if God has created
them this way, I'm willing to give them the blessings (of marriage). Furthermore, anyone who has any hesitation to give blessings
to same-sex people should not say the Sabbath Psalm, 'How great are Your works, oh God,' because that includes everybody."
Rabbi Gershon Steinberg-Caudill is in agreement with this statement.
In March 2000, the 111th Convention of the Central
Conference of American Rabbis, representing The Union of American Hebrew Congregations, (Reform), passed a Resolution On Same
Gender Officiation whereby they resolved to support a Reform Rabbi that would perform same gender marriage rituals. They also
supported the right of Rabbis to choose not to perform same gender marriage rituals.
As a Jewish Flexodox Rebbe, I
commend the Reform Rabbis for taking this important step towards full Jewish religious equality in our communities. I pray
for the day when the other communities of Jewish thought; Conservative, and Orthodox, also follow suit.
In the San
Francisco area, and, I suppose, other areas of intellectual progressive thinking, some Rabbis belonging to the Conservative
movement have begun performing same-sex marriages. Rabbis of the Renewal and Flexodox areas of Jewish thought are also performing
same-sex unions.
It is of utmost importance for us Jews who are students of the Torah to reclaim our texts that have
been kidnapped by the Fundamentalists among us, the Moslems, and the Christians and used to hurt and make afraid.
We
must follow the example of our blessed Rabbis of Talmudic times and retranslate the Torah in EVERY generation so that we might
live in it and not die by it. The Torah is our life and length of days. It is Eternal! It is TRUE!
The Hebrew Torah
is the CONSTITUTION of the Jewish people, but it is the Rabbis who, like the Supreme Court, tell us how the Torah directs
us in our current generation. The INTERPRETATION of the Torah is a New and Everlasting Continuing Revelation (kabbalah).
In
fact, Rabbi Hayyim Palachi writes that: "...the Torah gave permission to each person to express his opinion according to his
understanding.... It is not good for a sage to withhold his words out of deference to the sages who preceded him if he finds
in their words a clear contradiction.... A sage who wishes to write his proofs against the kings and giants of Torah should
not withhold his words nor suppress his prophecy, but should give his analysis as he has been guided by Heaven."
Rabbi
Palachi notes that "even though Rambam wrote with Divine inspiration, many great sages of his generation criticized his work.
There are numerous examples of students refuting their teachers: Rabbi Yehudah haNassi disagreed with his father; Rashba disagreed
with Ramban; The Tosafists disagreed with Rashi. Respect for the authorities of the past does not mean that one cannot arrive
at an opposing opinion." (See Hikekei Lev, vol. 1, O. H. 6 and Y. D. 42.)
Rabbi Marc Angel (an New York Orthodox Sephardi
Rabbi, and past President of the Union of Sephardi Congregations, and past President of the Modern Orthodox Rabbinical Council
of America) writes: "Diversity of opinion is a reality well recognized in Jewish tradition. The Talmud (Berakhot 58a) records
the ruling that one is required to make a blessing upon seeing a huge crowd of Jews, praising God who understands the root
and inner thoughts of each individual. Their thoughts are not alike and their appearances are not alike. God created each
individual to be unique; He expected and wanted diversity of thought. (Seeking Good, Speaking Peace.)
Rabbi Hayyim
David Halevi, and Rabbi Yaakov Emden both gave their opinions that; a student should question their rabbis teachings as best
they can. In this way, truth is clarified. (See Aseh Lekha Rav, 2: 61 and Shehlot Yavetz, 1: 5)
Rabbi Halevi further
quotes Rambam (Hilkhot Sanhedrin 23: 9), who states the principle that En le-dayan ella mah she-enav ro'ot (A judge has only
what his eyes see). In other words, a judge must base his opinion solely on his own understanding of the case he is considering.
No legal precedent obligates him, even if it is a decision of courts greater than he, even of his own teachers.
In
Judaism, we teach that ALL the Torah was given to Moses at Mount Sinai, and that even the most future Responsa of a future
Rabbi was included in that Revelation.
We do not change the past teachings arbitrarily, but examine the present needs,
look at all the past teachings on the subject, closely inspect the inner meanings of any textual materials that are relevant
to determine if we can deduce a new and the true meaning of the texts, and with a prayer towards the concept of unifying the
Jewish people so that they last on into the coming generations, we do what needs to be done.
Rabbi Gershon Winkler,
who was ordained as an Ultra-Orthodox Rabbi in Jerusalem, has written that: "Asked the Sages of France (11th century), how
can the ruling of both parties be the Word of God when this one permits and this one forbids? And they answered with the following
midrash (sermon): When Mosheh ascended the mountain to receive the Torah, the Holy Blessed One demonstrated to him concerning
every commandment 49 different angles (literally "faces") from which a matter might be declared forbidden and 49 angles from
which a matter might be declared permitted. And he asked the Holy Blessed One about this, and God said: "This knowledge shall
be transmitted to the spiritual teachers in every generation so that the decision on any matter shall be theirs" (13th-century
Rabbi Yom Tov ben Avraham Isbili (Ritva) on the Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 13b).
Had the Torah been given already sliced
(Rashi: with its laws already set and absolutized and void of any process of learning to one side of an issue or the other),
no leg would have anything to stand on (Rashi: the world could not survive, because the Torah requires us to interpret her
many faces this way and that, and both these and those are the Words of the Living God)... Said Moses to the Holy Blessed
One: "Teacher of the Universe! Show me how the halachah is determined (Rashi: so that there will be no question about the
application of any of the laws." But God then said to him: "That is impossible, because the Torah requires us to interpret
her many faces this way and that, and if I disclose to you the final halachah the Torah would then never be interpreted based
on her many faces), for there are 49 ways of interpreting the Torah so that a thing is rendered impure, and 49 ways of interpreting
the Torah so that a thing is rendered pure" (2nd-century Rabbi Yannai, in Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 4: 2)."
From the preceeding we see that the Jewish rabbis and sages of the Talmud, our Jewish Supreme redactors on what the Torah
means to convey to us in our own generation, as a living document for a living community, did not believe that how they, or
a generation 1000 or 2000 years down the road saw the Torah to mean, would be how the Torah SHOULD mean at some still future
date in time.
WHY DOES THIS MATTER TO ME, AS A HETEROSEXUAL RABBI? THE REBBE'S DREAM.
In the early 1990s, the legislature of the State of Idaho was presented with a bill that would deny civil rights to gays
and lesbians. A lesbian member of my congregation asked me to represent the Jewish community by being present in a march
against that oppresive legislation.
As rabbi of Boise's single unified Jewish community, I was presented with a conflicting internal wrestling match. On the
one hand, no segment of any population ought to be denied their civil rights based solely upon their sexual orientation, and
on the other hand, I had been taught that homosexual acts were expressly prohibited by the teachings of the Torah as being
not just sinful acts but acts that were abhorrent to God.
I resolved my own inner conflict by deciding to follow the Torah dictate of "tzadakah v'chesed" (justice tempered
with mercy), and support the gay-lesbian desire to obtain and keep the civil rights that were rightfully theirs as citizens
of the United States of America and of the State of Idaho.
The Torah stipulates 32 times that one shall not oppress the "stranger" that dwells among you. To deny any person,
or group of persons, their civil rights was definitely a form of oppressive behavior.
Having resolved my immidiate quandary, I then began to actively support in public the gay-lesbian rights movement as a
friend of the gay-lesbian community and as a representative of Boise's Jewish community.
This public action on my part led to a speaking engagement at a retreat that was being held by one of Boise's more gay-friendly
churches. It was my intention to address the Torah concept of the oppressive nature that any legislation passed by the State
against any segment of its population represented. I did not intend to address the issue of my own personal beliefs as to
the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality within Judaism.
However, evidently God had other ideas. That evening I retired to my room to study and sleep. I recited my evening and
bedtime prayers and began to read a new book that I had received just that day (Paradigm Shift, by Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi)
while I lay on my bed.
In the course of the night, I began to dream about the Kabbalistic Tree of Jacob's Ladder and how EVERY person possessed
within themselves the energies of this Tree, which is an inner psychological Tree. This Tree was represented in my dream by
a visual "Shiviti" ( a mandala) that was pictured in "Paradigm Shift."
I dreamed that in bringing the individual's inner energies through the various energy centers within this inner Tree;
through the masculine oriented places and through the feminine oriented places; to the central balancing places, from the
"Heavenly realm" to the "Earthly realm," one unified the Sacred Name of God; Yod, Heh with the Vav, Heh.
Suffice it to say that along with the visual representation seen in the dream, I also received audio explanation. This
"Voice" told me that it was God who determined the sexual orientation of every person on earth who is created in
the Divine Image as a physical-spiritual representative of the Divine on earth, as represented by their head being associated
with the Yod of God's Sacred Name, their shoulders and arms with the Heh, their spine and torso with the Vav, and their hips
and legs with the final Heh.
So impactful was this dream on my consciousness that upon awakening I jumped out of my bed and ran to the Art Cabin where
I drew the representation of the dream on the back of the sweat shirt that I was using as a pajama top due to the extreme
cold night Fall temperatures of 4:00 A.M. in McCall, Idaho.
That morning, at my lecture, I threw away my notes and instead I used the pajama top as a visual aid representation to
describe the dream of the previous night and its meaning for me. That dream had taught me to be totally accepting of homosexuality
as a God based and God ordained sexuality and not as an "abomination." Several of those who attended my lecture
told me that my explanation cleared up for them why they knew that homosexual orientation was the way that they had been born
and not a learned behavior.
Kol brakhot tobot (May you receive all good blessings)
Copyright 2000 by Rabbi Gershon Caudill, (the EcoRebbe) Updated August, 2005.
IT IS TIME FOR THE GLBT COMMUNITY TO SEE ITSELF AS "THE CHOSEN PEOPLE"
After approximately 1600 years of being degraded, persecuted, put down, murdered, encloseted, and in many other ways caused
to be thought of as depraved and deviant, it is high time that Gays and Lesbians recognize that they are just as much loved
by God as ANY other member of the human specie.
The whole idea of God singling out a group of people, and in It's covenant with that group of people, referring to them
as "My Chosen People," is to cause that previously hated group of people to gain confidence in themselves as human
beings capable of loving and being loved, and through that confidence, lifting themselves up as spiritual people who care
about other human beings and sentient creatures. One can only show love for others if one feels that one is worthy of being
loved him or herself. The term "Chosen People" is one way that God used to cause the Jewish ex-slaves to raise their
feelings of self worth up so that they could see themselves as valuable and worthy of being a FREE people. It is time for
the homosexual community to lift up it's feelings of self-worth and value.
On the Chosen People Syndrome
By Rabbi Gershon Winkler
Regarding the question about the Jews claiming to be the chosen people, and how that has led to antisemitism: my feeling
is that we never claimed to the world to be the chosen people. We claimed it to ourselves, no less and no more than did the
Celts claim that they were the chosen ones, or the Hopi Indians, or the Lakota Sioux or the Egyptians, or the Greeks. It is
not our fault that Christianity TOOK our personal diary from us and published it all over the world. It is the early Church
in its claim to be the only true religion that used our scriptures to prove this by quoting about how we were chosen by God,
so that by replacing us, they became automatically the NEWLY chosen ones.
But we Jews never publicized to the world that God had chosen us over any other. On the contrary, throughout the Tenakh
we were reminded again and again that we are not THE chosen people, but A chosen people, meaning a people chosen amongst many
others.
Here are a few examples from the Tenakh, the private diary of the Jewish people:
"In that day shall Israel be third alongside Egypt and Assyria, as a blessing on earth; for God will bless them,
saying: 'Blessed be my people Egypt, my handiwork Assyria, and my inheritance Israel'" (Isaiah 19:24).
"Are you not just like the Children of the Ethiopians unto me, O Children of Israel? Did I not bring out Israel from
the Land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caf'tor, and Aram from Kir?" (Amos 9:7).
From the Talmud:
"It is written, 'There never again arose among the Israelites a prophet as great as Moses' (Deuteronomy 34:10) --among
the Israelites there never again arose a prophet as great as Moses, but amongst other peoples, it is certainly probable!"
(Midrash Bamid'bar Rabbah 14:19).
Martin Buber put it this way: "As a historical people, Israel enjoys no precedence over any other. Like Israel, the
other peoples were all wanderers and settlers; they came 'up' from a land of want and servitude into their present homeland.
The one God, the Redeemer and Leader of the peoples, strode before all of them upon their way -- even the hostile neighboring
peoples -- protecting them by His might. He guided their steps, gave them power, let them 'inherit' the soil of a people that
had been ruined by its sins and abandoned by history." (From "Martin Buber On the Bible", edited by N. Glatzer
[Schocken Books, 1982], p. 80).
I believe that we believe that God does not discriminate between one people and another. That God loves the Palestinians
as much as [God loves] the Israelis. Sort of like a mother who writes six letters to her six children, and in each letter
she writes "You are my favorite. I love you more than anything in the world!" This is why we never went out missionizing
to people. We believed every-one had their own divine revelation and each their path is sacred as long as they don't use it
to destroy others. A tzadik (righteous person), the Talmud teaches, is not someone who is a holy Jew, but someone of ANY faith
or [ANY] people who is righteous by their actions. A tzadik is not determined by belief or religious affiliation but by how
they live their life.
So, no we are not any more chosen than the aboriginals of Australia. We are equally chosen. And when we say "asher
bachar ba'nu mee'kol ha'ameem" (who chose in us from all the nations) we mean that we thank God for choosing us, too,
from among all the other nations, meaning from among all those other peoples who were chosen long before we were.
Of course the average traditional Jew will think about this differently. I believe that is because we have as a people
been persecuted for so long that our religious teachers kept impressing upon us how precious we were to God in order to lift
up our downtrodden spirits. A people oppressed for close to two thousand years needs to hear that they are important, chosen,
the highest of the high. But theologically it is totally incorrect. We are different than most, yes. But we are not more important
to God than most. God likes us because we are funny. We gave the world more comedians than anyone else.
We are not hated because we claim to be chosen. We are hated because of the venom spread against us by the New Testament
story of the Jews calling for the crucifixion of Jesus, which has been proven again and again as historically and theologically
fictitious, but it is already a poison well-entrenched in every-one influenced by the Church, whether Christian or not, which
is practically the entire world today.
I think another factor of this chosen people problem is not anything we say or said to the world as much as what the world
assumes we say about ourselves or think about ourselves, because the world sees us as uncompromising, tenaciously clinging
to our peculiar and often politically-incorrect ways, even when those ways clash with the rest of the world. We have always
been different, and always refused to conform to the religious and cultural ways of those who have conquered us, whether Babylonian,
Greek, Roman, Christian, etc. which led them to assume that we thought ourselves special. Why don't the Jews give in? They
couldn't understand it. Everyone else who was conquered adopted the conqueror's ways. Everyone but the Jews. Which may naturally
lead people to think that we think we are too special, chosen by God or the gods. Our crime was our stubborn refusal to compromise
our beliefs and our ways, and so we chose death more often than any other conquered people, rather than conform or convert.
Our crime was not our claim to be chosen. Our crime was our claim to the right to believe as we wished.
And for that we have paid dearly.
San Francisco Gay-Lesbian Synagogue Congregation Shaar Zahav (link) click here
Gay-Lesbian friendly BEYT TIKKUN SYNAGOGUE (link) click here
Conservative Congregation B'nai Emunah (link) click here
|
