Marital Intimacy and the Teaching of the Talmud and Code of Laws

Marital Intimacy

The idea of demanding from a husband that he have relations with his wife is fully developed in Yevomose 63b and 64a.

The basic obligations of a husband for his wife are שאר כסות ועונה. KESUSE means clothing, the obligation to give his wife clothes. ONAH is marital relations. SHAIRE is according to Beis Shmuel in Even Hoezer chapter 76:13 an argument. Some learn it means giving his wife food, and some learn it means that they must have marital relations without wearing clothes. That is, they surely may have an outer covering of a blanket or similar protection. But between the husband and wife they are required to be together without any clothing separating the husband and wife. The Shulchan Aruch goes so far as to say that somebody who demands that they have intimacy only when wearing clothes is doing the wrong thing. The basic teaching of the Code of Laws is that such an attitude can require a divorce. Others maintain that it is not required, but the Code of Laws says that it is required. One who refuses to have intimacy without clothes separating husband and wife, according to the Code of laws, must issue a divorce and pay a Kesubo if he is a husband, and the wife who demands this must accept a divorce without receiving a Kesubo. (See Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer 76:13.)

Let us now turn to the Rambam[1] "The wife of a man is permitted to him. Therefore, all that a man wants to do with his wife, he can do it. He may have marital intimacy with her anytime he so desires. He may kiss any organ that he desires. He may have relations with her penetrating front or back. As long as he is not guilty of spilling seed. Despite this, as a trait of piety, one should not be so accustomed to do these things, and he should sanctify himself during intimacy, as we explained in the laws of Dayose. And he should not turn away from the proper style of people that these things are for the sake of having children. End quote.

This Rambam is quoted in the Ramo. It is thus essentially the opinion of the Code of Laws. Even though the Rambam and the Ramo both, after saying what a person can do, that one should follow the path of piety to resist doing too much intimacy, but the call to resist doing too much is not said as the law but as a piety. At any rate, we must understand that Rambam and Ramo begin with an enthusiastic embrace of letting a man do what he wants, and then they go in reverse and say about piety not to do these things. What is then their opinion? Let us look once more at the words of the Rambam."The wife of a man is permitted to him. Therefore, all that a man wants to do with his wife, he can do it. He may have marital intimacy with her anytime he so desires. He may kiss any organ that he desires. He may have relations with her penetrating front or back. As long as he is not guilty of spilling seed.”
“All that a man wants to do with his wife, he can do it.” Why does the Rambam not say simply “A man can do with his wife what he wants”? Why does it say stronger, “All that a man wants to do with his wife, he can do it.”? I believe that in the question is an important idea. The stronger form of the statement reveals that there is a stronger need to do certain things with one’s wife, stronger than plain desire to do it. What is the stronger desire to do something with one’s wife? I believe that the stronger desire means that the husband has a powerful urge to perform certain things with the wife. In such a circumstance, the husband has a choice: Either accept that he has a very strong need for such things, or don’t accept that, but simply agree that doing certain things are desirable, but not with any strong pressure.

Actually, we can go even further. The stronger form of the attitude of the husband reveals that he has a great need to perform these things. It is not just a thing that he might be in the mood to perform. It is something very important for him to do. He needs, something in his heart is demanding, that he do things with his wife. Now, when a person has a great desire to do something and something blocks him, whatever the block is, what happens next? A man who has a very strong desire to do something with his wife but knows that the chasiduse or piety would frown on it, may therefore refuse to do it. This is a big mistake. Because when a husband really wants and needs those things from his wife, if he doesn’t get it from her, he is probably going to get it elsewhere, maybe from somebody else’s wife! This is an important rule. Somebody who has great desire to do something with his wife but knows that holy piety prevents this, must perform what he truly desires to do. If not, he will do it anyway, and he may do it in a way that will destroy his soul, such as if he is overpowered to do these marital things with a woman not his wife. Therefore, the Rambam says clearly that what a person has a great desire to do with his wife, he MUST DO IT, or else!

 The source for this rule is in Nedorim 20A-B. A rabbi Rebbe Yochanan ben Dihaboi spoke of men who have need for intimacy with their wives so that they may fulfill their needs. The gemora does not say that if the husband has a need for this intimacy that he can do it. It says rather that Rebbe Yochanan ben Dihaboi simply says that people who do certain things with their wives that are not appropriate for a pious person will suffer great punishment with their children. But the gemora there says that the law is not like Rebbe Yochana ben Dihaboi. The law is rather exactly what the Rambam said, that a person may, without any feelings of guilt, take from his wife the pleasures that he needs.

Let us return to the gemora Nedorim 20A about the statement of Rebbe Yochanan ben Dihaboi. He says, “Four things were taught to me by the Heavenly Administering Angels.” And the four things were terrible punishments for people who fulfilled their desires with their wives while feeling guilt, even though those guilty feelings were introduced by the Heavenly Administering Angels. The gemora on Nedorim 20b states clearly that the law is not like Rebbe Yochanan ben Dihaboi; rather the law is that what a man wants from his wife he can take it. No guilt. Rather, knowing that if he does not take when he has a great desire for these things, he may end up taking these things from a woman who is not his wife, maybe from the wife of another man. Therefore, taking when he has a strong desire for it will save him from the suffering attached to the teaching of Rebbe Yochana ben Dihaboi.

The gemora says clearly there that the law is not like Rebbe Yochanan ben Dihaboi, but like the rabbonon. And the rabbonon don’t claim to have heard this law from Heavenly Administering Angels. So where did they discover that a husband can do what he wants when he has a great desire for some pleasure from his wife? As we explained, if a person has such a desire, either he takes his pleasure with full confidence, or else, it is quite possible he will take his pleasures from a woman not his wife!

But there is more to it than that. The gemora there explains that one may take pleasure from his wife, and it says that people want a piece of meat or a fish, they have many ways of preparing the meat or the fish, and all of these ways are permitted.  These appetites are permitted with no punishment as long as the desire to eat the meat or fish is sincere. Eating the meat and fish satisfies the man and he will not get his appetites in doing a sin. But one who has a real desire for his wife and refuses it can end up sinning with another woman, because his need for intimacy is very strong and he better do it with his wife rather than sin with somebody else’s wife.

Now when a man wants a piece of meat or fish, it is not sinful to want such pleasures. And this is the level of wanting a wife. It is not sinful, and there is no punishment for doing it. But, this applies only if one takes his wife as he would take meat or fish. He has a real appetite for meat or fish, and eats it, anyway he desires, there no sin  in doing this. The same holds true for marital desires. There is no sin, if a person has a true desire for the intimacy and if he does not perform the intimacy he may get into major trouble, perhaps with another woman not his wife but somebody else’s wife. We come now to another phase of intimacy. True intimacy is ideally when both husband and wife know that they are accustomed to be together on a certain day of the month or a similar schedule. At this time, they both prepare for intimacy. Both husband and wife are filled with desire for each other. Then husband and wife anticipate that they will be together with no disturbances until they complete their process. Ideally, the couple anticipates and assumes that the two husband and wife will work together building up the desire to have intimacy until its conclusion. This is the ideal way of doing things.

But it is not always so simple. Maybe the husband or wife had a rough day and are just not in the mood for serious intimacy. Maybe husband or wife had a good day anticipating intimacy but the other spouse did not have a good day anticipating intimacy, rather a rough day, and intimacy is on the back burners.This is especially prevalent in a family with little children. Little children are accustomed to start crying and demanding whenever they are in the mood. And that can make a problem with intimacy.

For this, on day when intimacy is scheduled, the appropriate thing is for the husband and wife to schedule prayers that their intimacy will not be interrupted.  

---

[1] הלכות איסורי ביאה פרק כא' הלכה  ט'

A Husband or Wife without a Functioning Marriage

Rambam Chapter 15 of the Laws of Marriage says, “The rabbis have decreed that a man should not be without a wife lest he come to sinful thoughts.” The Magid Mishneh there brings the source of the Rambam in the gemora Yevomose 62B, “A man is forbidden to live without a wife.” Let us understand that the Rambam and the Magid are not saying that if a man has a wife and they have no intimacy that this is okay. It is not okay. The Rambam and the Magid mean that only when a man has a functioning marriage where there is regularly intimacy as taught in the Shulchan Aruch and gemora is he fulfilling his obligation. But if a wife wants a divorce and the husband refuses to give her one, even if they continue to live in the same house, the husband has no intimacy nor does the wife. This can cause both of them to find intimacy with another person who is forbidden to them and if they do this they are doing a horrible sin.

See also the Code of Laws Even Hoezer about marriage, chapter 76 paragraph 13, that a husband or wife who demand that intimacy be only wearing clothes separating husband and wife, that this is grounds for divorce. See also Beis Shmuel there. This may be an argument among the authorities, but this is what it says in the Code of Laws.

Another problem is that even if a marriage is broken and husband and wife live in the same house without intimacy, the biological processes of both husband and wife, the need for regularly intimacy, is not being served. This can either lead to the husband and wife seeking other partners not their spouses, or the husband can sin with masturbation, a serious sin. But biology must be served, and one who lives without a functioning wife is not serving his biology. The wife also has a biology and emotions and they must be served.

The Shulchan Aruch Even Hoezer chapter 23 paragraph one says that it is forbidden to emit sperm and this is a very great sin. The Shulchan Aruch elaborates on the very serious nature of that sin.

If so, a husband who has reached a point with his wife that he cannot have regularly intimacy with her, either because she refuses or because he does not want to be with her, we have a crisis. Biology is burning for a young person, and it doesn’t go away for many years until the person is really old, and even then, who knows if anybody is really cleansed of the biology. If so, the only solution is a good marriage. If a person is unable to have intimacy but the marriage is good, things may be fine. But especially with younger people, any marriage with no functioning intimacy and nothing to calm the fire of the biology, what hope is there to be saved from serious sins?

There are today thousands of people without a proper protection from their biology. Many people divorced and cannot remarry for whatever reason. Many people can marry but are reluctant because of the many problems in marriages today, the gender war, etc. Many people delayed marriage until it got to the point that they could only marry by accepting somebody much older or much different than the person they always planned to marry. Such people can wait and wait and wait until they find what they always wanted, but it is not easy to find somebody you wanted in your youth when you are much older.

This is a crisis and it is only getting worse. The gender wars, the fears, the lack of proper guides for many people, yes, it is a crisis and it is only getting worse.

Let us review our teaching here. A husband and a wife are supposed to live together with regularly intimacy. This is crucial to save them both from sin. If the marriage is not going well, and the two live in the same house, but there is no regular intimacy, we have a very dangerous situation that can lead to very serious sins. It is therefore sinful for a man and a wife to live in the same house in a broken marriage without regular intimacy.

This is crucial today when many marriages break down and intimacy suffers, that both should recognize they are living in sin that can lead them heaven forfend to very serious sin. Again, it is a sin for a husband or a wife to live without regular intimacy. If the marriage has broken down both husband and wife live in sin. Now, if the husband wants the wife but the wife is against the husband and doesn’t want anything to do with him, for instance, the classical case of a woman complaining that her husband disgusts here, this is a situation where there is no proper intimacy in the family, and it is a sin for both husband and wife to live together.

A woman with Kiddushin cannot force the husband to divorce her against his will, only to divorce her willingly. And if the husband refuses to divorce her willingly, he is living in sin, and she is suffering, but the sin is not hers, the sin is that of the husband who will not give her a GET. If there are children who will suffer from a broken family and a GET from father to mother, it may be that the husband has an excuse to save the children from a divorce. But the husband is living without a functioning marriage, which can lead to serious sins.

Again, a couple living together and certainly living apart without regular intimacy are living in sin. If the marriage has broken down but there cannot be a divorce because of the children, we have a very serious problem that leads to serious sins. Every effort must be made to rectify the problem.

Perhaps, if the Beth Din or people involved in solving the problem can convince the husband to improve his attitude to the wife, and if the wife can be convinced to improve her attitude to the husband, perhaps they can improve their marriage and find a way to have regular intimacy. But if not, they are both living separately and are both exposed to biological problems that lead to serious sin.

Experienced rabbonim have told me that today there are entire sections of Orthodox people who live in sin, because of the problems today with marriage. Every day that the marriage exists without regular intimacy is a day of sin.

On the one hand, a woman cannot force a Kiddushin GET from the husband. On the other hand, the husband is not allowed to live without a functioning marriage, meaning, a marriage with regular intimacy. Something has to give. And the greatest efforts must be made to solve the problem. The key is to find people who can solve these problems, and bring the husband and wife back together until they accept regular intimacy.

On the one hand, a husband cannot be forced to divorce his wife if the marriage was made with Kiddushin. On the other hand, the husband is not allowed to live without a regular intimacy, nor is the wife permitted to live this way.

We come to a situation where either people get involved who can solve the problem of the marriage, or they must consider a divorce. If children are involved, and a divorce is a terrible thing for them, and perhaps husband and wife don’t want to divorce, and yet they don’t want to have regular intimacy, I don’t know how husband and wife are allowed to continue without regular intimacy, because of the biology that has no cure.