Komentarz do Kapłańska 18:7

אביך‎ ערות‎ THE NAKEDNESS OF THY FATHER, [AND THE NAKEDNESS OF THY MOTHER SHALT THOU NOT UNCOVER] — This refers to intercourse with thy father's wife (no matter whether she is thy own mother or thy stepmother). Or perhaps this is not so, but ערות אביך has to be taken literally (as sodomy)?! Scripture, however, uses the expression ערות אביך here, and it is said later on (Leviticus 20:11) “And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness (״(ערות אביו גלה. Now what is the meaning of ערות אביו there? It refers to one's fathers wife! so does ערות אביך here also refer to one's father's wife (Sanhedrin 54a).

THE NAKEDNESS OF THY FATHER, AND THE NAKEDNESS OF THY MOTHER, SHALT THOU NOT UNCOVER. Rashi commented: “The nakedness of thy father — this refers to thy father’s wife. And the nakedness of thy mother — this is intended to include one’s own mother, although she be not the wife of one’s father. The nakedness of thy father’s wife shalt thou not uncover²⁶²Verse 8. — this is intended to include in this prohibition one’s father’s wife even after [the father’s] death.” Similarly Rashi explained: “Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s brother.²⁶³Verse 14. And what does this [uncovering of his] nakedness mean? Thou shalt not approach to his wife.”²⁶³Verse 14. This is indeed true according to the correct sense [of the verses]. But in the Gemara of Tractate Sanhedrin²⁶⁴Sanhedrin 54 a. the Rabbis concluded that the verses, the nakedness of thy father, and the nakedness of thy father’s brother,²⁶³Verse 14. are prohibitions against carnal relationships with these males themselves [and not with their wives], and [are required] to make the offender liable to a double penalty if he committed it in error [lying carnally with his father or uncle].²⁶⁵If the sin were committed knowingly, there would be no point in saying that “a double penalty is incurred,” since the punishment for either of these two sins is death by stoning, and death cannot be inflicted more than once. Hence “the double penalty” must be where he committed it unwittingly, in which case he must bring two sin-offerings. See “The Commandments,” Vol. II, pp. 315-317. But I wonder, according to the opinion of the Sages [who explain the verse, the nakedness of thy father as being a prohibition against lying carnally with one’s father], why did He not likewise admonish against lying carnally with a son or brother, in addition to prohibiting [sexual relationships with their] wives?²⁶⁶Verses 15-16. Perhaps the Torah was more particular in guarding the honor of the elders. However, each and every verse in this section [of forbidden relationships] constitutes only one prohibition,²⁶⁷Hence the verse before us, the nakedness of thy father and the nakedness of thy mother does not constitute two separate prohibitions as Rashi explained it [one referring to one’s father’s wife, and one to one’s own mother although she is not the wife of one’s father, as stated above], but they are one prohibition, as explained further on in the text. there being here no case of two admonitions in one prohibition, for the command concerning sisters [in Verse 9] and also daughters [in Verse 10] each constitute but one prohibition [and not, as Rashi explained there, that each verse contains two prohibitions]. The correct interpretation by way of the simple meaning of Scripture appears to me to be that the nakedness of thy father, and the nakedness of thy mother [shalt thou not uncover], constitute but one negative commandment and one admonition, which forbids intercourse with one’s own mother, for in having such intercourse he thereby uncovers the nakedness of his father and that of his mother. This is the sense of the [concluding] expression in this verse, she is thy mother, meaning that you have done with her two evils, in that you have uncovered the nakedness of your mother and that of your father. Following the admonition against uncovering the nakedness of one’s father, which refers [as explained] to one’s mother, He went back [in the following Verse 8] and admonished against [uncovering] the nakedness of one’s father’s wife, although she be not one’s mother, saying, The nakedness of thy father’s wife shalt thou not uncover; it is thy father’s nakedness.²⁶⁸Verse 8. Similarly, Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s brother²⁶⁹Verse 14. means [as the verse itself continues], thou shalt not approach to his wife.²⁶⁹Verse 14. This is why it does not say “and” to [his wife thou shalt not approach].

ערות אביך, “The nakedness of your father, etc.” Rashi explains that the reference is to the wife of one’s father who is not one’s mother, whereas the words ערות אמך refer to one’s mother who was never married to your father (either because he raped her or they had illegitimate relations seeing that he was legally unable to marry her) Nachmanides adds that the Talmud in Sanhedrin 54 does not explain our verse in the manner Rashi does, but explains the scenario in terms of homosexual relations of son and father. Seeing that in the Talmud there is an opinion (Rabbi Yehudah) that reflects Rashi’s approach, the R’osh, our author’s father, writes that Rabbi Yehudah’s view appears closer to the plain meaning of the text. Nachmanides’ own opinion is that the two statements ערות אביך and ערות אמך do not speak of parallel situations at all. The first warning is the prohibition not to sleep with one’s mother, because by doing so one violates one’s father’s nakedness, whereas the second warning mentioning one’s mother underlines the fact that in violating one’s father’s nakedness one at the same time violates one’s mother’s nakedness. One commits two evil deeds at one and the same time by perpetrating a single incestuous act. After the Torah warns regarding incestuous relations involving one’s father which is at the same time an incestuous relationship with one’s mother, the Torah comes back to forbidding incestuous relationships with the wife of one’s father who is not one’s mother by saying that one must not have such relations with one’s father’s wife because by doing so one would in effect commit incest with one’s father. Similar reasons are given by the Torah for forbidding such relations with the father’s brothers. The meaning of the line ערות אחי אחיך לא תגלה is: “do not have relations with the wife of your father’s brother.” This is why no mention was made specifically of the wife of such brother (uncle).

Its plain meaning. I.e., homosexuality. Re’m writes, “You might ask against R. Yehuda and against Rashi who cites him: Why do they not use the gezeira shava ’your father’ ’your father’ from the verse “The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness,” which is juxtaposed and it is a negative commandment just like it, and [instead] bring a gezeira shava from the verse in parshas Kedoshim which deals with punishment. He leaves the matter unanswered. (Nachalas Yaakov) But I say that the question itself hints [at the answer]. Because [if this was derived] from “the nakedness of your father’s wife” that is juxtaposed to it, you could ask, as it asks there (Sanhedrin 74a), “This only teaches that there is a negative commandment etc. From where do we derive that one is liable to punishment?” Because the juxtaposed verse too, is only a negative commandment! Therefore he had to learn it from “the nakedness of his father he uncovered.” See there.

וערות אמך AND THE NAKEDNESS OF THY MOTHER [SHALT THOU NOT UNCOVER] — This is intended to include in the prohibition the marriage of one's own mother although she be not the wife of one's father (Sanhedrin 54a).

[Who] is not the wife of his father. I.e., if he was born from a woman raped or seduced by his father.