In defining a compromise position on the debate, Rabbi Greenberg mentions the concept of uprooting the prohibition on lesbian relations (generally viewed as a rabbinic prohibition), and arguing that, just as heterosexual couples are forbidden to engage in sexual relations for two weeks out of the month (when the woman is in niddah — during her menstrual cycle and the week following), so too could consenting adult male homosexuals be permitted to engage in any form of monogamous sexual behavior sans intercourse. In comparing his position with the prohibition of niddah, Greenberg enacts a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy which questions his halakhic seriousness.
While correctly noting that the (commonly-violated and Toraitic) prohibition against having sexual relations while in niddah is much more serious than (rabbinic) lesbian sex or non-anal gay sex, by emphasizing the idea that no one should inquire about ones sexual practices regarding homosexual males (as is common with heterosexual couples), Greenberg fails to acknowledge the important pedagogical reality that the prohibitions of niddah should be taught with equal force as the prohibitions against anal sex.
In the last section, Rabbi Greenberg sets out certain communal and policy options that can be taken by Orthodox synagogues (and some Conservative synagogues) to ensure an openness to gay and lesbian Jews while also ensuring fealty to the halakhic process. Unless a radical transformation occurs in the way the observant community views homosexuality, this is perhaps the most useful section of the book, in explaining both how a Jewishly-committed homosexual can remain comfortable in a halakhic environment and how a congregational rabbi, committed to halakha and creating an open and welcoming community, can create a community devoted to halakha that is also welcoming to homosexuals. Rabbi Greenberg rightly points out the need for a compassionate and open framework, bounded in halakha, for pastoral counseling for the homosexual looking for a place in the observant community.
It is, in fact, in this section that Greenberg lays out the most cogent halakhic framework for how halakhically committed Jews can rectify a commitment to the halakhic process with a desire to be compassionate and pluralistic.
While Rabbi Greenberg’s approach to Leviticus is relatively weak, his reading of “mumar lehakhis” (the halakhic construct of a willful transgression) and “mumar leteavon” (this construct refers to someone who violates the law due to an uncontrollable appetite) can be useful in constructing a halakhic response to homosexuality. He notes that, if one assumes that homosexual activity can be classified as coming from a “mumar leteavon,” such construct is used to refer to a variety of activities that technically violate halakha but are committed by large groups of Jews. Socially, by referring to a sexually-active homosexual as someone who is an indulgent transgressor than they have served to equalize them with someone who eats non-kosher food out of lust or many non-observant Jews. The flaw, however, is in applying this category to learned and otherwise observant Jews — the Orthodox homosexual that Rabbi Greenberg is most concerned about. He also notes the weakness in this approach as “coming out” could serve to turn the mumar leteavon into a mumar lehakhis (a much more serious transgression).
Article comments
1 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Amechad,
Barúkh habá, welcome to Blog Critics.
This is a very interesting review - and very rough reading on those of us who do not have a clear knowledge of Jewish law. I am one such individual. So please correct my erroneous assumptions in my comments below.
I have a question or two for you.
1. I am not a homosexual myself, but am aware that in creating the Unviverse through a process of tzimzúm (withdrawal), Hashem allowed for the laws of nature to operate. And these laws create imperfect creations. Thus, in addition to evil in the universe, there are imperfect births, early deaths and all sorts of other occurrences that are the result of imperfection. Homosexuality is arguably a "teavón," an appetite, resulting from an imperfection in the person. From the evidence that we see, homosexual desire in men at least, appears to be instinctual, rather than a willful behavior. There is a significant enough number of homosexual men in the world to make one wonder if Hashem had desired to allow the creation of so many individuals who would suffer condemnation for desiring what the rest of us take (more or less) for granted - the intimate affection of another human being.
2. In reading Vayikrá/Leviticus 18, I have always been mindful of Vayikrá/Leviticus 18:25, which gives a very clear reason for the forgoing chapter on sexual behasvior. In fact, I suggest going to this article, Reform Jewish Leader Blasts Religious Right's 'Monopoly On God', posted at Blog Critics last November, and follow the comments. There you will get to know me and my point of view. Feel free to correct what I say in terms of Judaism and homosexuality. You can apply to my attempts to elucidate Jewish law a sharper focus and clearer perspective. Your learning appears to be superior to mine. But do read thoroughly. The comment section in that article will also give you a good idea of what to expect in the comments on this article. The fellow who calls himself "The Fifth Dentist" is actually a lawyer.
2 - amechad
I just have to note that I was just informed by Rabbi Steve Greenberg, the author of the book, that there was 8 pages missing in the first 1000 copies of the book and I believe that I may have that edition. I'm not sure as to the content of these pages.
3 - MAOZ
Ruvy: "...individuals who would suffer condemnation for desiring ..."
Say what? I don't recall there being any condemnation for desiring; the problem is with acting on that desire.
Just like you might desire to kill someone in cold blood. As long as you don't act on it, you're not a murderer.
OK, I'll butt out now.
4 - amechad
The missing pages which I just read.
Rabbi Greenberg elaborates on various halakhic solutions offered by others. The discussion is frank but still brief. In the end, I am still unsatisfied with his re-reading of the Leviticus verse and believe that there were other solutions he could have offered that -- while not perfect for him -- would have allowed for the sanctification of homosexual relations within the boundaries of Orthodox Judaism.
While Rabbi Greenberg notes that his re-reading is "midrashic" and not halakhic, it does not negate the original critical comments. Nevertheless, I definately think Rabbi Greenberg did a great service through his book and summarizing these issues from his very important perspective. His voice is certainly one that needs to be heard.
5 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
MAOZ,
Please don't butt out here. The real issues in my mind are these:
1. Does Vayikrá's Chapter 18 prohibition on homosexual behavior cover activity by Jews outside of Israel?
2. Does Yayikrá's prohibition on homosexual behavior cover activity by non-Jews (B'nei NoaH) outside of Israel?
3. To what degree does Vayikrá's prohibition on homosexual behavior deal with events inside Israel?
4. How does Chapter 20 of Vayikrá making this activity a capital offense (therefore requiring two witnesses to convict) affect its enforcement? Would this apply to a "pride parade" for example, or would that not be considered enough of a sexual act to be considered "lying with a man like a man"?
5. Could violating these laws before the destruction of the evil inclination cause a Galút Yishmaél?
You're probably more learned than I as well as is the author of the article, and while your view may be more mashmír (strict) than mine, at least I'd be consulting somebody instead of making assumptions on my own.
And as you can see, these all have consequences that go beyond an immediate book review.