Drash Mishpatim - Onah, Sex, and Touch

For the first time in the Torah cycle, there is very little narrative, found only at the end of the parsha. This week is a continuation of the same day as God reciting the Ten Commandments, and God gives directly to Moses a rapid-fire nonstop set of mitzvot, mostly covering civil and criminal law. It includes other things, such as a more elaborate explanation of the Ten Commandments including Shabbat, honoring parents, not murdering, not being a false witness, and not stealing. There also the famous line about witches, and the schedule for the three festivals. Towards the end of this portion, Moses writes down this week portion, and then ascends Sinai for the forty days and nights to receive the rest of the Torah and the tablets.

It is also a commandment in this portion which has been the case of a lot of my exhaustion I discussed last week, though regrettably only from the study of the mitzvah, and not fulfilling it. In the Talmud, we have the following story:

R. Kahana once went in and hid under Rab's bed. He heard him chatting [with his wife] and joking and doing what he required. He said to him: One would think that Abba's mouth had never sipped the dish before! He said to him: Kahana, are you here? Go out, because it is rude. He replied: It is a matter of Torah, and I require to learn.

In case not everybody got the Idea, the 11th century commentator Rashi clarifies on what he required means sex, using the interesting euphemism serving his bed. This euphemism is very often used to discuss one commandment in this week’s portion. (Ex. 21:7-11)

7. And if a man sells his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do…10. If he takes for himself another wife; her food, her garment, and her onah, shall he not diminish.11. And if he does not do these three things to her, then shall she go out free without payment of money.

There is this strange word, onah, which is a requirement in the text. The rabbis wonder what it means, and come to two conclusions, both with the same upshot. One makes onah mean time, that there is a certain time that is guaranteed for a wife. The second meaning is one that means strife or oppression, that there is something hurting the wife. The strife is described in the curse Eve receives in Genesis 3:16 your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you. But the rabbis change the he to it. So it is not the husband who rules over, but her desire for the husband. Not fulfilling that desire with sexual pleasure causes extreme pain according to the rabbis. The rabbis believed it was proper for a man to contain his lust, his yetzer hara, since he was strong enough to do so. But women were too weak, and the pain of this desire was dangerous.

This rule in Torah was for a female slave, but the text says “another wife” in verse 21:10. So the rabbis believed that this was not about mere slaves, but instead about marriages. They essentially enacted a series of rules which made onah a critical part of marriage. In short they mandated a wife orgasm in marriage. They felt so strongly about this, onah is the only marriage requirement which cannot be waived in a marriage contract. The rabbis of the Mishnah even gave a schedule of how often a man is to give his wife sexual pleasure

The times for conjugal duty prescribed in the Torah are: for men of independence, every day; for laborers, twice a week; for ass-drivers, once a week; for camel-drivers, once in thirty days; for sailors, once in six months. These are the rulings of R. Eliezer. (M. Ketubot 5:1)

The rabbis go on to impose on scholars such as themselves the requirement of every Friday night, and few exemptions for students to go longer period when studying away. (B. Ketubot 62b) Along with this, there is the requirement that a woman must want the sex, a man must not force sex. Yet, a woman who refuses sex could also be divorced. And for the otherwise prudish rabbis who never want anybody to see another’s naked body, there is a rather startling ruling

R. Joseph learnt: Her flesh implies close bodily contact, viz, that he must not treat her in the manner of the Persians who perform their conjugal duties in their clothes. This provides support for [a ruling of] R. Huna who laid down that a husband who said, ‘I will not [perform conjugal duties] unless she wears her clothes and I mine’, must divorce her and give her also her ketubah. (Ketubah 48a)

Sensual touch of the whole body is necessary to satisfy the requirement of Onah. Not only that but it is onah that is in the center of another ruling: contraception. The rabbis allowed the use of some form of contraceptive sponge in the case of a woman who was either in physical danger or logistically unable to have a pregnancy. The rabbis separated be fruitful and multiply from onah.


In the 9th century, we have evidence that there was a downside. Jews in Islamic Persia wrote a parody of the Talmud known as The Alphabet of Ben Sira. And it is within this text we find the Story of Lilith. While there are records of the Lilitu in ancient Sumeria, and a few comments about Lilith in the Talmud and in 6th and 7th century amulets, no earlier source but Alphabet of Ben Sira have the story that Lilith was Adam’s first wife, and she divorced him over sexual power in the relationship. It is possible that the Alphabet criticized the sexual power inherent in the rabbinic rulings of onah, which pretty much left women controlling a disproportionate amount of sex between couples.

But others had other ideas. In the middle ages, a rabbi and vintner from Troyes, the capitol of the Champagne region of France spent most of his life commenting on both Talmud and Torah. Rabbi Solomon b. Isaac, known by the acronym Rashi, produced a phenomenal amount of commentary of virtually the entire Talmud and Torah. Rashi’s work is so incredible and comprehensive, it still is the prime commentary to this day. Rashi did qualify that the Talmudic discussion of onah was about sex. But he also went one step further. While in one Talmudic passage R. Hisda is admonishing his daughters to act modestly, Rashi’s comments on this verse is on the importance of foreplay by manual stimulation of the whole body before touching the genitals (b. Shabbat 140b)

Others, contemporary with Rashi’s grandsons and colleagues, also appeared. Some like the Rabad enumerated four permitted kavvanot for sexual relations with rewards in the world to come: for procreation, for welfare of the fetus, for a wife’s desire, and that a man has desire to act promiscuously and relieves that through intercourse with his wife. Yet the last one is a lesser reward, since the man should have had the strength to resist. If He does not show any strength, and has sex anytime he wants, this would not be rewarded.

To the south, in Spain and the Islamic world there were differing views. Their tastes included intellectual pursuits of the ancient Greeks. By the 12th century the rationalism of Aristotle were taken for granted. One Andalusian Jew, who after expulsions from Spain earlier that century was living in Egypt, championed the rationalists’ view of Aristotle. This or course was Maimonides. Maimonides, also known as the Rambam, saw everything as rational, and everything fit into a world of a rational God. Yet for Maimonides, the physical pleasure of touch was not rational, and thus was to be done away with.

We ought to limit sexual intercourse altogether hold it in contempt, and only desire it very rarely… I have already quoted the verbatim the words of Aristotle. He says: “The sense of touch which is a disgrace to us leads to indulge in eating and sensuality”, etc.

Maimonides and other rationalists saw sexuality and desire as an animal drive, not something for the rational man. Interestingly, Maimonides in his codification of Jewish law does not even mention onah.

There was a deep reaction to this about a generation after the Rambam. The growing movement of Kabbalah and other schools of the region had a negative reaction to this passage of Maimonides quoting Aristotle, referring to “the impure Greek” though given their tone it is not clear whether they are talking about Aristotle or the Rambam. The text this insult come from, The Iggeret Ha-kodesh continues:

But we who have the Torah and believe that God created all in his wisdom [do not believe he] created anything inherently ugly or unseemly. If we were to say that intercourse is repulsive, then we blaspheme God who made the genitals.

While this seems a relatively liberal attitude the rest of the Iggret Ha-kodesh outlines a very different view. Touch is necessary, not for onah but for pregnancy. Desire is still sublimated to an ideal holiness in the sexual union. The book main theme is how and when to perform the sexual act in order to have the ideal offspring: a male scholar for a child, a theme later repeated in the Kabbalists’ magnum opus the Zohar, though in this case emphasising unions in the upper spheres.

All of this today provides some food for thought. While the Law of Onah is on the books, it would be difficult for a woman to use it as grounds for divorce. Between Maimonides view and the view of the Zohar that onah is more about the man than the woman, the rule is know only as the mitzvah of sex on erev Shabbat.

But at its core, I believe is a piece of Wisdom here that cannot be forgotten, once that extends to far more than just sex. The three requirements of a bride, food, clothing and onah are requirements of our physical bodies; in that the Rambam was right. But where he and his contemporaries are wrong is that touch is an animal urge that is to be completely suppressed. Indeed we can go too far, and overeating is just as much as a problem as unbridled lust or inappropriate touch. Yet, touch is a need, something we must have to survive. This is true of not just women but men too. In a world where provisioning the family was the exclusive role of the male, then the rules of Exodus 21:10-11 were specifically directed at the female, for her to have the basic needs for survival. For the past 40 years or so, that assumption of male as exclusive provider is no longer as true, and the deeper wisdom, that both men and women have physical needs requires more thought. That the rabbis who had serious qualms of letting anyone see anyone else naked would mandate nudity for performance of onah is telling of the importance of touch. In a classic Modern experiment, infant primates were removed from their mothers and either given a surrogate mother made of cloth and fur or just fed like adults without any touch. The ones with the surrogate mother survived and grew up healthy, the one without a mother became withdrawn or psychotic.

Touch is important, be it hugging a teddy bear, petting a dog, or making love with our life partner. In our world it’s hard to touch, as we a never sure what is appropriate or not. But what this Law of Torah implies is that we must touch, that there is pain in not touching another. Whether we set up a schedule like the Talmudic Rabbis did for spousal satisfaction, or just have two people mutually agree to touch, such an act is as important as food for nutrition, and clothing to keep our bodies warm.


May you have a hug today.