These sources accompany the sixth episode of the Joy of Text podcast.
Is Seminal Emission the Problem?
Pornography is most commonly used as a means for masturbation. As such, and when done by men, it is first and foremost – from a halakhic perspective – an issue of zera li’vatalah, the wasteful emission of seed, a topic we have explored elsewhere. But it can also be used by women for such a purpose, or by a married couple to help them in their sexual life. What problems might be involved with looking at pornography per se, putting zera li’vatalah aside?
The Gemara in Avodah Zara speaks against (a man) looking at things that will cause him to be sexually aroused, even when not looking at nudity or images of nudity. Note, however, that at the end, the Gemara seems to contextualize this as all about a concern of seminal emission.
ולאסתכולי מי שרי מיתיבי (דברים כג, י) ונשמרת מכל דבר רע שלא יסתכל אדם באשה נאה ואפילו פנויה באשת איש ואפי' מכוערת ולא בבגדי צבע [של] אשה ולא בחמור ולא בחמורה ולא בחזיר ולא בחזירה ולא בעופות בזמן שנזקקין זה לזה... ולא בבגדי צבע [של] אשה: א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל אפילו שטוחין על גבי כותל א"ר פפא ובמכיר בעליהן.. ת"ר (דברים כג, י) ונשמרת מכל דבר רע שלא יהרהר אדם ביום ויבוא לידי טומאה בלילה
But is it permitted to gaze upon a woman? The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita. The verse states: “And you shall keep yourself from every evil thing” (Deuteronomy 23:10); this teaches that a person should not gaze upon a beautiful woman, even if she is unmarried; and a person should not gaze upon a married woman, even if she is ugly; and a person should not gaze upon the colored garments of a woman; and a person should not gaze at a male donkey, at a female donkey, at a pig, at a sow, or at fowl, when they are mating ... Nor may one gaze at the colored garments of a woman, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: This is the halakha even if they are spread on a wall, not only when they are being worn. Rav Pappa says: And the prohibition applies only when one knows their owner... The Gemara cites another source that interprets the verse cited above. The Sages taught a baraita explaining the verse: “And you shall keep yourself from every evil thing” (Deuteronomy 23:10), which is immediately followed by the verse: “If there be among you any man who is not ritually pure by reason of that which happened to him by night” (Deuteronomy 23:11). This teaches that a person should not think impure thoughts by day and thereby come to the impurity of an emission by night.
The Gemara in Shabbat speaks about sexual thoughts – not looking at sexual stimuli per se – but does not mention the problem of seminal emission. It seems that sexual thoughts are inherently problematic according to this Gemara. Why do you think that would be? What is suggested by the phrase זנו עיניהם, which could be interpreted either as “their eyes feasted” or “their eyes fornicated”? How would this apply to pornography?
Notice Rav Sheshet’s statement at the end that equates looking sexually at any part of a woman’s body with looking directly at her nudity. Why do you think the latter is a problem, and why is the former like the latter? Is this relevant to looking at pornography?
ונקרב את קרבן ה׳ איש אשר מצא כלי זהב אצעדה וצמיד טבעת עגיל וכומז אמר רבי אלעזר עגיל זה דפוס של דדין כומז זה דפוס של בית הרחם... ויקצף משה על פקודי החיל... אמר להן משה לישראל שמא חזרתם לקלקולכם הראשון אמרו לו לא נפקד ממנו איש אמר להן אם כן כפרה למה אמרו לו אם מידי עבירה יצאנו מידי הרהור לא יצאנו מיד ונקרב את קרבן ה׳ תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל מפני מה הוצרכו ישראל שבאותו הדור כפרה מפני שזנו עיניהם מן הערוה אמר רב ששת מפני מה מנה הכתוב תכשיטין שבחוץ עם תכשיטין שבפנים לומר לך כל המסתכל באצבע קטנה של אשה כאילו מסתכל במקום התורפה:
The Gemara interprets verses written with regard to the Midianite war discussed above: “And we have brought an offering before the Lord what every man has gotten of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, agil, and kumaz, to make atonement for our souls before the Lord” (Numbers 31:50). Rabbi Elazar said: Agil is a mold in the shape of a woman’s breasts worn over them as an ornament... Later in that chapter, it is written: “And Moses was angry with the officers of the host, the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, who came from the battle” (Numbers 31:14);... They said to him: “Not one man of us is missing” (Numbers 31:49), we remain as wholesome in deed as we were. He said to them: If so, why do you need atonement? The princes brought these ornaments to atone for their souls. They said to him: If we have emerged from the grasps of actual transgression, we have not emerged from the grasps of thoughts of transgression. Immediately, they decided: “And we have brought an offering before the Lord.” The Sage of the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: For what reason did Israel in that generation require atonement? Because they nourished their eyes from nakedness. With regard to the verse that lists the ornaments, Rav Sheshet said: For what reason did the verse list outer ornaments, i.e., a bracelet, with inner ornaments, i.e., a kumaz? To tell you that anyone who gazes upon a woman’s little finger is considered as if he gazed upon her naked genitals. The atonement was for the sin of looking.
In Gemara Niddah, amidst a discussion of masturbation and zera li’vatalah, the Gemara discusses the problem of a man giving himself an erection. Interestingly, it seems that the concern around doing this is unrelated to that of wasting of seed, and can focus purely on the problem of sexual thoughts themselves, particularly in that they may lead a person to act on them, or to in general give in to his more base desire
Rambam’s rulings reflect both a concern for how looking at sexual stimuli might provoke sexual desire and lead to acting on it {source 4}, and also a concern for wasting of seed {source 5}. What do you think determines which category something falls into? What is the common denominator of all the cases that Rambam frames as a concern for leading to acting on one’s desires? Which category do you think pornography would fall into?
אָסוּר לְהוֹצִיא שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע לְבַטָּלָה. לְפִיכָךְ לֹא יִהְיֶה אָדָם דָּשׁ מִבִּפְנִים וְזוֹרֶה מִבַּחוּץ. וְלֹא יִשָּׂא קְטַנָּה שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לֵילֵד. אֲבָל אֵלּוּ שֶׁמְּנָאֲפִין בַּיָּד וּמוֹצִיאִין שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע לֹא דַּי לָהֶם שֶׁאִסּוּר גָּדוֹל הוּא אֶלָּא שֶׁהָעוֹשֶׂה זֶה בְּנִדּוּי הוּא יוֹשֵׁב וַעֲלֵיהֶם נֶאֱמַר (ישעיה א טו) "יְדֵיכֶם דָּמִים מָלֵאוּ" וּכְאִלּוּ הָרַג הַנֶּפֶשׁ: וְכֵן אָסוּר לְאָדָם שֶׁיַּקְשֶׁה עַצְמוֹ לְדַעַת אוֹ יָבִיא עַצְמוֹ לִידֵי הִרְהוּר. אֶלָּא אִם יָבוֹא לוֹ הִרְהוּר יַסִּיעַ לִבּוֹ מִדִּבְרֵי הֲבַאי (וְהַשְׁחָתָה) לְדִבְרֵי תּוֹרָה. שֶׁהִיא (משלי ה יט) "אַיֶּלֶת אֲהָבִים וְיַעֲלַת חֵן". לְפִיכָךְ אָסוּר לְאָדָם לִישֹׁן עַל עָרְפּוֹ וּפָנָיו לְמַעְלָה עַד שֶׁיִּטֶּה מְעַט כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹא לִידֵי קִשּׁוּי: וְלֹא יִסְתַּכֵּל בִּבְהֵמָה וּבְחַיָּה וְעוֹף בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁמִּזְדַּקְקִין זָכָר לִנְקֵבָה. ומֻתָּר לְמַרְבִּיעֵי בְּהֵמָה לְהַכְנִיס כְּמִכְחוֹל בִּשְׁפוֹפֶרֶת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן עֲסוּקִין בִּמְלַאכְתָּן לֹא יָבוֹאוּ לִידֵי הִרְהוּר: וְכֵן אָסוּר לְאָדָם לְהִסְתַּכֵּל בְּנָשִׁים בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהֵן עוֹמְדוֹת עַל הַכְּבִיסָה. אֲפִלּוּ לְהִסְתַּכֵּל בְּבִגְדֵי צֶמֶר שֶׁל אִשָּׁה שֶׁהוּא מַכִּירָהּ אָסוּר. שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹא לִידֵי הִרְהוּר:
[2] It is forbidden for a person to beckon with his hands or feet or to signal with his eyes to one of the arayot (i.e., a woman with whom he is forbidden to have sexual relations). He is similarly forbidden to be jocular with her or to interact with her in a way of levity. It is even forbidden to smell the perfume that she is wearing or to gaze at her beauty, and a person who intends to do so is given lashes.
One who gazes at even a small finger of a woman and intends to derive sexual pleasure, it is as if he has gazed at her genital area. And even to hear to voice of an ervah or to see her hair is forbidden.
[3] It is permitted to look at the face of an unmarried woman and examine [her features]… to determine whether she is attractive in his eyes so that he may marry her. There is no prohibition in doing this. On the contrary, it is proper to do so. One should not, however, look in a licentious manner. Behold the verse states: “I established a covenant with my eyes; I would not gaze at a maiden.” (Job 31:1).
[4] It is permitted for a person to gaze at his wife when she is a niddah, although she is an ervah [at that time]. Although his heart derives satisfaction from seeing her, since she will be permitted to him afterwards, he will not come to stumble. He should not, however, share mirth with her or act frivolously with her lest this lead to sin.
One of the early pious ones and the great sages would take pride in the fact that he never looked at his circumcision, and another one took pride in the fact that he never look at the visage of his wife, because his heart was turned away from matters of nonsense to words of truth which take hold of the hearts of the holy ones.
Values
The following Midrash focuses on the reward that Moshe received for hiding his eyes and not looking at the Shekhina, and the punishment that Nadav and Avihu received for looking at the Shekhina. Notice the use of the phrase זנו עיניהם, their eyes “feasted” or “fornicated.” What do you think is suggested by that phrase? Think about the measure-for-measure nature of the respective rewards and punishments. Seeing something illicitly is punished by not truly benefitting from it (and the reverse). Is this relevant to the concern of pornography becoming a substitute for real sexual intimacy with another person? How else might this passage be relevant?
רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דְּסִכְנִין בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר משֶׁה לֹא זָן עֵינָיו מִן הַשְּׁכִינָה וְנֶהֱנָה מִן הַשְּׁכִינָה, לֹא זָן עֵינָיו מִן הַשְּׁכִינָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות ג, ו): וַיַּסְתֵּר משֶׁה פָּנָיו, וְנֶהֱנָה מִן הַשְּׁכִינָה מִנַּיִן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות לד, כט): וּמשֶׁה לֹא יָדַע כִּי קָרַן עוֹר פָּנָיו, בִּשְׂכַר וַיַּסְתֵּר זָכָה (שמות לג, יא): וְדִבֶּר ה' אֶל משֶׁה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים, בִּשְׂכַר (שמות ג, ו): כִּי יָרֵא זָכָה (שמות לד, ל): וַיִּירְאוּ מִגֶּשֶׁת אֵלָיו, בִּשְׂכַר (שמות ג, ו): מֵהַבִּיט, זָכָה (במדבר יב, ח): וּתְמֻנַת ה' יַבִּיט, נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא זָנוּ עֵינֵיהֶם מִן הַשְּׁכִינָה וְלֹא נֶהֱנוּ מִמֶּנָּה. וְעוֹד מִן הֲדָא (במדבר ג, ד): וַיָּמָת נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא לִפְנֵי ה'
Rabbi Yehoshua from Saknin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Moshe did not let his eyes feast upon the Shekhinah, therefore he merited to derive pleasure from the Shekhina. His eyes did not feast upon the Shekhina, as it says, “And Moshe hid his face [for he feared to look upon God]” (Shemot 3:6). He merited to derive pleasure from the Shekhina, as it say, “And Moshe did not know that his face shone [when God spoke with him” (Shemot 34:29). In merit of “he hid” he was rewarded with “And God spoke to Moshe face-to-face.” (Shemot 33:11). In merit of “for he feared” he was rewarded with “and they feared to draw near to him.” In merit of “to look” he was rewarded with “And the vision of God he saw” (Bamidar 12:8).
Nadav and Avihu – their eyes feasted upon the Shekhina (see Shemot 24:9-11, “Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadav, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; And they saw the God of Israel… And upon the nobles of the children of Israel He laid not his hand: and they saw God, and did eat and drink.”) – and they did not derive pleasure from the Shekhina, as the verse states, “And Nadav and Avihu died before the Lord.” (Bamidbar 3:4).
The following passage addresses sexual thoughts, not looking at sexual stimuli, and states that such thoughts are worse than the actual act. Rashi interprets this from a health perspective. But Sefat Emet, Shalah, and – in fact –Rambam see this as pointing to a way that one corrupts one’s mind and soul by indulging in such thoughts. How might this be relevant to pornography?
Thoughts of transgression are worse than transgression itself, and your mnemonic is the odor of meat.
Thoughts of sin – regarding lust for women are more difficult to weaken one’s flesh (i.e., have a more deleterious effect on one’s health) than the act itself.
ריחא דבישרא – המריח בשר צלי קשה לו ריח מאד, שמתאוה לו.
The smell of meat – one who smells roasting meat, it is very hard for him, because he lusts after it.
שפת אמת, יומא דף כט
הרהורי עבירה קשה מעבירה, נראה דקשה לנפש ממש קאמר שקשה לתקן עצמו כשנטבע בהם יותר מלפרוש מעבירות ממש, וגם פוגמים יותר את הנפש כדמייתי ראי’ מהגוף דהריח קשה לו טפי… ורש”י לא פי’ כן:
Sefat Emet, Yoma 29a
Thoughts of sin are more difficult than the sin itself – it appears that the meaning is that it is more difficult for the soul, for it is more difficult to fix oneself after one has immersed himself in such thoughts more than it is to separate from the sin itself. Such thoughts also cause more damage to the soul, as the Gemara shows from the example of the smell of meat, which is more difficult [than the eating of the meat itself]… But Rashi did not explain it this way
של”ה, מסכת יומא, איכות התשובה
הנה ארשום קצת מהפגמים מה שהחוטא פוגם… נמצא באיזה איבר שחוטא הוא פוגם בו… וארז”ל קשין הרהור עבירה קשין מעבירה. כי כלי המחשבה מכוונים נגד רוחניות הפנימית של מעלה כנודע, והפגמים שאדם פוגם בנשמתו ובכל העולמות רבו מלספור.
Shelah, Yoma, Quality of Teshuva
Behold, I will list some of the damages that the sin causes… It emerges that with whatever limb a person sin, the limb is damaged thereby…. And our Sages have said, “thoughts of sin are more difficult than the sin itself,” for the vessels of thought (the mind) are directed towards the inner spirituality above, as is known, and the damages that a person does to his soul and to all the supernal worlds are beyond number.
Man must have control over all these desires, reduce them as much as possible, and only retain of them as much as is indispensable. His aim must be the aim of man as man, viz., the formation of ideas, and nothing else. The best and sublimest among them is the idea which man forms of God, angels, and the rest of the creation according to his capacity. Such men are always with God, and of them it is said, "Ye are princes, and all of you are children of the Most High" (Ps. 82:6). This is man's task and purpose. Others, however, that are separated from God form the multitude of fools, and do just the opposite. They neglect all thought and all reflection on ideas, and consider as their task the cultivation of the sense of touch,--that sense which is the greatest disgrace: they only think and reason about eating and love. Thus it is said of the wicked who are drowned in eating, drinking, and love, "They also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way," etc. (Isa. 28:7), "for all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean" (ver. 8); again, "And women rule over them" (ibid. 3:2),--the opposite of that which man was told in the beginning of the creation, "And for thy husband shall thy desire be, and he shall rule over thee" (Gen. 3:16). The intensity of their lust is then described thus, "Every one neighed after his neighbour's wife," etc. (Jer. 5:8); "they are all adulterers, an assembly of treacherous men" (ibid. 9:2). The whole book of the Proverbs of Solomon treats of this subject, and exhorts to abstain from lust and intemperance. These two vices ruin those that hate God and keep far from Him; to them the following passages may be applied, "They are not the Lord's" (ibid. 5:10); "Cast them out of my sight, and let them go forth" (ibid. 15:1). As regards the portion beginning, "Who can find a virtuous woman?" it is clear what is meant by the figurative expression, "a virtuous woman." When man possesses a good sound body that does not overpower him nor disturb the equilibrium in him, he possesses a divine gift. In short, a good constitution facilitates the rule of the soul over the body, but it is not impossible to conquer a bad constitution by training. For this reason King Solomon and others wrote the moral lessons; also all the commandments and exhortations in the Pentateuch aim at conquering the desires of the body. Those who desire to be men in truth, and not brutes, having only the appearance and shape of men, must constantly endeavour to reduce the wants of the body, such as eating, love, drinking, anger, and all vices originating in lust and passion; they must feel ashamed of them and set limits to them for themselves. As for eating and drinking in so far as it is indispensable, they will eat and drink only as much as is useful and necessary as food, and not for the purpose of pleasure. They will also speak little of these things, and rarely congregate for such purposes. Thus our Sages, as is well known, kept aloof from a banquet that was not part of a religious act, and pious men followed the example of R. Phineḥas, son of Jair, who never dined with other persons, and even refused to accept an invitation of R. Jehudah, the Holy. Wine may be treated as food, if taken as such, but to form parties for the purpose of drinking wine together must be considered more disgraceful than the unrestrained conduct of persons who in daylight meet in the same house undressed and naked. For the natural action of the digestive organ is indispensable to man, he cannot do without it; whilst drunkenness depends on the free will of an evil man. To appear naked in the presence of other people is misconduct only according to public opinion, not according to the dictates of reason, whilst drunkenness, which ruins the mind and the body of man, reason stamps as a vice. You, therefore, who desire to act as human beings must keep away from it, and even from speaking of it. On sexual intercourse, I need not add anything after I have pointed out in the commentary on Abot (i. 17) how it is treated by our Law, which is the teaching of pure wisdom--no excuse whatever should induce us to mention it or to speak of it. Thus our Sages said, that Elisha the prophet is called holy, because he did not think of it, and consequently never found himself polluted with semen. In a similar manner they say that Jacob had the first issue of semen for the conception of Reuben. All these traditional stories have the object of teaching the nation humane conduct. There is a well-known saying of our Sages, "The thoughts about the sin are more dangerous than the sin itself." I can offer a good explanation of this saying: When a person is disobedient, this is due to certain accidents connected with the corporeal element in his constitution; for man sins only by his animal nature, whereas thinking is a faculty of man connected with his form,--a person who thinks sinfully sins therefore by means of the nobler portion of his self: and he who wrongly causes a foolish slave to work does not sin as much as he who wrongly causes a noble and free man to do the work of a slave. For this specifically human element, with all its properties and powers, should only be employed in suitable work, in attempts to join higher beings, and not in attempts to go down and reach the lower creatures. You know how we condemn lowness of speech, and justly so, for speech is likewise peculiar to man and a boon which God granted to him that he may be distinguished from the rest of living creatures. Thus God says, "Who gave a mouth to man?" (Exod. 4:11); and the prophet declares, "The Lord God hath given me a learned tongue" (Isa. 50:4). This gift, therefore, which God gave us in order to enable us to perfect ourselves, to learn and to teach, must not be employed in doing that which is for us most degrading and perfectly disgraceful; we must not imitate the songs and tales of ignorant and lascivious people. It may be suitable to them, but is not fit for those who are told, "And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exod. 19:6). Those who employ the faculty of thinking and speaking in the service of that sense which is no honour to us, who think more than necessary of drink and love, or even sing of these things: they employ and use the divine gift in acts of rebellion against the Giver, and in the transgression of His commandments. To them the following words may be applied: "And I multiplied her silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal" (Hos. 2:10).
Practical Considerations
The prevalence and easy access of pornography makes it an almost irresistible temptation for some people. The Talmud was well aware of how such realities can easily lead a person to sin.
דבי רבי ינאי אמרי מהכא ודי זהב מאי ודי זהב אמרי דבי רבי ינאי כך אמר משה לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא רבונו של עולם בשביל כסף וזהב שהשפעת להם לישראל עד שאמרו די הוא גרם שעשו את העגל... אמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן משל לאדם אחד שהיה לו בן הרחיצו וסכו והאכילו והשקהו ותלה לו כיס על צוארו והושיבו על פתח של זונות מה יעשה אותו הבן שלא יחטא
The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai, however, say proof that Moses spoke impertinently toward God on High is derived from here, Moses’ rebuke at the beginning of Deuteronomy: “And Di Zahav” (Deuteronomy 1:1). This is an entry in a list of places where Moses had spoken to Israel. As there was no place encountered by that name, it is interpreted as an allusion to another matter. We must clarify: What is the meaning of and Di Zahav? The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai said that Moses said the following before the Holy One, Blessed be He, to atone for Israel after the sin of the Golden Calf: Master of the Universe, because of the gold and silver that you lavished upon Israel during the exodus from Egypt until they said enough [dai]; it was this wealth that caused Israel to make the Golden Calf... Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is comparable to a person who had a son; he bathed him and anointed him with oil, fed him and gave him drink, and hung a purse of money around his neck. Then, he brought his son to the entrance of a brothel. What could the son do to avoid sinning?
Can pornography be used as a marital aid? In addition to always having to weigh the mitzvah of onah and the importance of shalom bayit in all such cases, there is also the question of whether it is a concern since it could avoid most if not all of the problems generally associated with pornography – wasteful emission of seed, thoughts that lead to sin, and the like. In the following teshuva, Rav Moshe allows a soon-to-be-married man to read a sex manual if there is not a concern that it will lead to the wasting of seed.
אגרות משה אבן העזר, א:ק”ב
ובדבר שאלתך אם קודם הנישואין כדאי לקרא בספרי חכמי הרופאים בענין התשמיש איך שיהיה באופן הנאות להאשה כדי שיהיה שלום בית. הנה בימים האחרונים שקודם הנישואין שחתן טרוד במחשבת בעילה דהא בלילה הראשונה שאחר הנישואין נחשב זה גם טירדא דמצוה ליפטר מק”ש כמפורש בגמ’, יכול לקרא בהם אבל קודם לזה אינו כדאי שיש לחוש שיבא מזה ח”ו לידי הרהור ולהוצאת זרע לבטלה אם לא שבטוח בנפשו שלא יבא לכך אבל מי הוא בזמננו שיכול לבטוח בנפשו כ”כ.
Iggrot Moshe, Even Ha’Ezer, 1:102
Regarding your question – if prior to marriage it is appropriate to read in books written by medical experts regarding sex, how it should be done so that it is the most pleasing for the woman, so that there will be marital peace (shalom bayit). Behold, in the days immediately leading up to the wedding, when the groom is distracted by thoughts regarding sex – for on the first night following the wedding this is considered to be even a distraction of a mitzvah to exempt him from reciting Shema, as is stated explicitly in the Gemara – he is permitted to read such books. But prior to this it is not fitting for him to do so, for there is reason to be concerned that this this may possibly – God forbid – lead to sexual thoughts and to wasteful emission of semen, unless he is confident in himself that this will not occur. But who is it in our day who can be so confident in himself?