Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The gemarah (nedarim 20b) mentions that one of the reasons for having beautiful children is due to having relations "as if forced by a demon". Rashi there explains the term as either indicating that the act is performed forcefully or in a completely covered way as if hiding from a demon. This is codified in the halacha (shulchan aruch, orach chaim 240:9) where it is explained differently as either performing the act in fear or under duress.

I would like to understand this concept

  1. How did this go from being a 'segulah' (charm) for having beautiful children to a compulsory halacha?
  2. What is this business with demons? If the intent is to perform the act in any of the ways described above, why not just say so? What relevance do demons have over here?
  3. Why does the shulchan aruch explain the implications of 'being forced by a demon' differently than Rashi? Where does he get this explanation from?
  4. Why, in fact, must one perform this mitzvah in a way that wold seem like it is against his will? Usually we are encouraged to be happy in our performance of mitzvot, why not here?
  5. What is the woman's role here? Should she also feel compelled by a demon?
  6. This does not seem to conform with the behavior of Rav when he slept with his wife (brachos 62a).
share|improve this question
2  
Note, I realize that this question deals with a topic that may be viewed as immodest to discuss publicly. I tried to keep the language as prim as possible but if you'd like to edit to make it more tzanuah please do so –  user1668 Nov 12 '12 at 14:44
    
It was clear to me in my own chasan class, as well as a reinforcement session I had with another rav later, who was a talmid of R' Henkin, that I was not encouraged to follow this halachah. I still don't understand what the fact of it being in SA is actually supposed to mean. –  yitznewton Nov 12 '12 at 16:11
    
My chosson teacher, the renowned Reb Alter Halpern z"l gave me the same advice as yitznewton's teacher. –  Avrohom Yitzchok Nov 12 '12 at 18:17
    
Once again, see my answer here. –  Shalom Nov 12 '12 at 18:51
add comment

2 Answers 2

up vote 4 down vote accepted
  1. It is not a compulsory halacha but rather a recommended practice for someone who is concerned with his soul, as stated at the end of the Sif - וצריך בעל נפש ליזהר בהם.
  2. There is a perspective (like it or not) that part of the sexual act involves accessing urges that are less than holy. Yes marital union is holy etc, but it borders very closely with some of our basest urges, which the torah proscribes indulging in. This dual nature is rare, seemingly only found with the sexual drive and the drive that underpinned prophecy/idol worship (cf. Yoma 69a). If one was not aware of the 'demonic' pitfalls then performing the act in accordance with halacha may miss the greater point; which is that you need to be careful, you're playing with fire here.
  3. My guess would be that he is offering his own advice on how to deal with your yetzer in this situation. It is in the same spirit as that of Rashi, meaning that it acknowledges the danger inherent in the act and prescribes practical steps to avoid improper behavior.
  4. No one is saying you can't perform the mitzvah out of joy, but there are many mitzvot that we are cautioned to take very seriously (davening for example).
  5. Simply put the woman does not have the same restrictions because her yetzer hara is not the same as a man's. That's not to say that a woman does not have restrictions imposed on her to prevent her from indulging in base sexual desires, this just isn't one of them
  6. My guess would be that this falls in line with the gemarah (Kesubos 17a) about amoraim who would dance while touching a kallah because they felt no inappropriate sexual desire toward her. Rav may have conquered his baser sexual instincts and was able to relate to his wife in a purely holy way during the act of sleeping with her.
share|improve this answer
    
So getting married is not halacha? –  Jim Thio Nov 28 '13 at 7:01
    
@JimThio to the best of my understanding there is not mitzvah to get married per say, the mitzvah is to be fruitful and multiply. However since a man cannot do that in an appropriate halachic way without being married the mitzvah is seen as a 'heicha timzah' or means to an end. –  not-allowed to change my name Dec 2 '13 at 2:30
    
mitzvah means God says do it. Is it? Heicha timzah means you do it so you can do what God says. Am I correct here? In what ways men can't reproduce in halachic ways if he is not married (and have concubines instead, for example) –  Jim Thio Dec 2 '13 at 3:59
    
@JimThio though techincally he may find ways to have children outside of wedlock the preferred way is through marriage. It is not the only means to the end, though generally the Rabbis have put the kibosh on the other ones. –  not-allowed to change my name Dec 2 '13 at 4:24
add comment

For a more comprehensive discussion of this source and the topic as a whole, see this article (specifically page 24 and the footnotes on it):

http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/725299/Rabbi_Dr-_Aharon_Lichtenstein/Of_Marriage-_Relationship_and_Relations

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.