Sanhedrin 54b

עוֹנֶשׁ שָׁמַעְנוּ, אַזְהָרָה מִנַּיִין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה תּוֹעֵבָה הִיא״.

We have learned the punishment for homosexual intercourse, but from where is the prohibition derived? The verse states: “And you shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22).

לָמַדְנוּ אַזְהָרָה לַשּׁוֹכֵב. אַזְהָרָה לַנִּשְׁכָּב מִנַּיִין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא יִהְיֶה קָדֵשׁ מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״. וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְגַם קָדֵשׁ הָיָה בָאָרֶץ עָשׂוּ כְּכֹל הַתּוֹעֲבֹת הַגּוֹיִם אֲשֶׁר הוֹרִישׁ וְגוֹ׳״. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל.

We have learned from here the prohibition for the one who engages in homosexual intercourse actively. From where do we derive the prohibition for one who engages in homosexual intercourse passively? The verse states: “There shall not be a sodomite [ kadesh ] among the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 23:18). And another verse, cited to clarify the meaning of the term kadesh , states: “And there were also sodomites [ kadesh ] in the land, they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the Lord drove out before the children of Israel” (I Kings 14:24). This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ, הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה״. קְרִי בֵּיהּ ״לֹא תִשָּׁכֵב״.

Rabbi Akiva says: It is not necessary to derive this halakha from the verse: “There shall not be a sodomite.” Rather, it says: “And you shall not lie [ tishkav ] with a male as with a woman.” Read into the verse: You shall not enable your being lain with [ tishakhev ] by a male.

בְּהֵמָה מְנָא לַן? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אִישׁ״ – פְּרָט לְקָטָן, ״אֲשֶׁר יִתֵּן שְׁכׇבְתּוֹ בִּבְהֵמָה״ – בֵּין גְּדוֹלָה בֵּין קְטַנָּה.

§ The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that one who engages in intercourse with an animal is liable to receive capital punishment? It is as the Sages taught: “And if a man lies with an animal, he shall be put to death, and you shall kill the animal” (Leviticus 20:15). The word “man” excludes a minor boy. The phrase “lies with an animal” is referring to any animal, whether old or young.

״מוֹת יוּמָת״ – בִּסְקִילָה. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר בִּסְקִילָה, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בְּאַחַת מִכׇּל מִיתוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה? נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״תַּהֲרֹגוּ״, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן ״כִּי הָרֹג תַּהַרְגֶנּוּ״. מָה לְהַלָּן בִּסְקִילָה, אַף כָּאן בִּסְקִילָה.

The phrase “shall be put to death” refers to execution by stoning. Do you say that they are executed by stoning, or is it rather by one of all the other types of death penalty that are stated in the Torah? It is stated here: “You shall kill,” and it is stated there, with regard to an inciter: “But you shall kill him…and you shall stone him with stones and he shall die” (Deuteronomy 13:10–11). Just as there the verse states that an inciter is executed by stoning, so too here, one who engages in bestiality is executed by stoning.

לָמַדְנוּ עוֹנֶשׁ לַשּׁוֹכֵב. עוֹנֶשׁ לַנִּשְׁכָּב מְנָלַן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״כׇּל שֹׁכֵב עִם בְּהֵמָה מוֹת יוּמָת״. אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְיָן לַשּׁוֹכֵב, תְּנֵיהוּ עִנְיָן לַנִּשְׁכָּב.

We have learned the punishment for one who engages in bestiality actively, but from where do we derive the punishment for one who engages in bestiality passively? The verse states: “Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death” (Exodus 22:18). If this verse is not needed for the matter of the one who actively lies with an animal, i.e., a male who sexually penetrates an animal, apply it to the matter of the one who causes an animal to lie with him, by being penetrated by the animal, i.e., any type of intercourse with an animal is punishable by death.

לָמַדְנוּ עוֹנֶשׁ בֵּין לַשּׁוֹכֵב בֵּין לַנִּשְׁכָּב. אַזְהָרָה מִנַּיִין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּבְכׇל בְּהֵמָה לֹא תִתֵּן שְׁכׇבְתְּךָ לְטׇמְאָה בָהּ״.

We have therefore learned the punishment for both one who engages in bestiality actively and one who engages in bestiality passively, but from where is the prohibition derived? The verse states: “And you shall not lie with any animal to defile yourself with it” (Leviticus 18:23).

לָמַדְנוּ אַזְהָרָה לַשּׁוֹכֵב. לַנִּשְׁכָּב מִנַּיִין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא יִהְיֶה קָדֵשׁ מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְגַם קָדֵשׁ הָיָה בָּאָרֶץ וְגוֹ׳״. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל.

We have learned the prohibition for one who engages in bestiality actively. From where do we derive the prohibition for one who engages in bestiality passively? The verse states: “There shall not be a kadesh among the children of Israel,” and another verse states: “And there were also kadesh in the land,” which shows that anyone who engages in intercourse in a way that is like the abominations of the nations is called a kadesh . This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ, הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר ״לֹא תִתֵּן שְׁכׇבְתְּךָ״ – לֹא תִתֵּן שְׁכִיבָתְךָ.

Rabbi Akiva says: It is not necessary to derive the halakha prohibiting passively engaging in bestiality from this verse. Rather, it says: “You shall not lie [ shekhovtekha ],” which can be read as follows: You shall not enable your being lain with [ shekhivatkha ].

הַבָּא עַל הַזְּכוּר, וְהֵבִיא עָלָיו זָכָר.

The Gemara discusses cases to which these halakhic expositions are relevant: What is the halakha of one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with a male, and unwittingly causes a male to engage in intercourse with him, within one lapse of awareness, i.e., without realizing in the interim that these behaviors are forbidden? Is he considered to have transgressed two separate prohibitions and therefore liable to bring two sin-offerings, or is he considered to have transgressed one prohibition twice and liable to bring only one sin-offering?

אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל חַיָּיב שְׁתַּיִם, חֲדָא מִ״לֹּא תִשְׁכַּב״ וַחֲדָא מִ״לֹּא יִהְיֶה קָדֵשׁ״. לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת. ״לֹא תִשְׁכַּב״ ״לֹא תִשָּׁכֵב״ חֲדָא הִיא.

Rabbi Abbahu says: According to the statement of Rabbi Yishmael, he is liable for transgressing two different prohibitions: One is derived from the verse: “You shall not lie,” and the other one is derived from the verse: “There shall not be a sodomite,” which includes one who engages in homosexual intercourse passively. But according to the statement of Rabbi Akiva, he is liable for only one prohibition, as the prohibitions of “you shall not lie [ tishkav ]” and you shall not enable your being lain with [ tishakhev ] are one statement in the verse.

הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה וְהֵבִיא בְּהֵמָה עָלָיו, אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל חַיָּיב שְׁתַּיִם, חֲדָא מִ״לֹּא תִתֵּן שְׁכׇבְתְּךָ״ וַחֲדָא מִ״לֹּא יִהְיֶה קָדֵשׁ״. לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת, ״שְׁכׇבְתְּךָ״ וּ״שְׁכִיבָתְךָ״ חֲדָא הִיא.

Similarly, with regard to one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an animal, and then unwittingly causes an animal to engage in intercourse with him within one lapse of awareness, Rabbi Abbahu says: According to the statement of Rabbi Yishmael he is liable for transgressing two different prohibitions. One is derived from the verse: “You shall not lie,” and the other one is derived from the verse: “There shall not be a sodomite.” But according to the statement of Rabbi Akiva he is liable for only one prohibition, as the prohibitions of “you shall not lie [ shekhovtekha ]” and you shall not enable your being lain with [ shekhivatkha ] are one statement in the verse.

אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל נָמֵי אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת, דְּכִי כְתִיב ״לֹא יִהְיֶה קָדֵשׁ״ – בְּגַבְרֵי כְּתִיב.

Abaye says: Even according to the statement of Rabbi Yishmael he is liable for only one prohibition, as when it is written: “There shall not be a sodomite,” it is written only with regard to intercourse with men, but not with regard to bestiality.

אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, אַזְהָרָה לַנִּשְׁכָּב מְנָא לֵיהּ? נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מִ״כׇּל שֹׁכֵב עִם בְּהֵמָה מוֹת יוּמָת״. אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְיָן לַשּׁוֹכֵב, תְּנֵיהוּ עִנְיָן לַנִּשְׁכָּב.

The Gemara asks: But according to Abaye, from where does Rabbi Yishmael derive the prohibition for one who engages in bestiality passively? The Gemara answers: He derives it from the verse: “Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death.” If this verse is not needed for the matter of the one who actively lies with the animal, apply it to the matter of the one who causes the animal to lie with him.

וְאַפְּקֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא לַנִּשְׁכָּב בִּלְשׁוֹן שׁוֹכֵב: מָה שׁוֹכֵב עָנַשׁ וְהִזְהִיר, אַף נִשְׁכָּב עָנַשׁ וְהִזְהִיר.

And it is derived from the fact that the Merciful One expresses the halakha of one who engages in bestiality passively using the term for one who engages in bestiality actively: Just as with regard to one who engages in bestiality actively the Torah both punishes for this action and prohibits it, so too, with regard to one who engages in bestiality passively, the Torah both punishes for this action and prohibits it.

הַנִּרְבָּע לְזָכָר וְהַנִּרְבָּע לִבְהֵמָה, אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא חַיָּיב שְׁתַּיִם, חֲדָא מִ״לֹּא תִשְׁכַּב״ וַחֲדָא מִ״לֹּא תִתֵּן שְׁכׇבְתְּךָ״. לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת, אִידֵּי וְאִידִי ״לֹא יִהְיֶה קָדֵשׁ״ הוּא.

With regard to the case of one who was unwittingly sodomized by a male and then unwittingly was one with whom an animal copulated within one lapse of awareness, Rabbi Abbahu says that according to the statement of Rabbi Akiva he is liable for transgressing two prohibitions. One is derived from the verse: “You shall not lie with a male,” and the other one is derived from the verse: “You shall not lie with any animal.” According to the statement of Rabbi Yishmael he is liable for transgressing only one prohibition, as both this prohibition and that prohibition are derived from the verse: “There shall not be a sodomite.”

אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל נָמֵי חַיָּיב שְׁתַּיִם, דִּכְתִיב ״כׇּל שֹׁכֵב עִם בְּהֵמָה מוֹת יוּמָת״. אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְיָן לַשּׁוֹכֵב, תְּנֵיהוּ עִנְיָן לַנִּשְׁכָּב. וְאַפְּקֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא לַנִּשְׁכָּב בִּלְשׁוֹן שׁוֹכֵב: מָה שׁוֹכֵב – עָנַשׁ וְהִזְהִיר, אַף נִשְׁכָּב – עָנַשׁ וְהִזְהִיר.

Abaye says: Even according to the statement of Rabbi Yishmael he is liable for transgressing two prohibitions, as it is written: “Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death.” If the verse is not needed for the matter of one who engages in bestiality actively, as this prohibition is stated explicitly in the verse: “And you shall not lie with any animal” (Leviticus 18:23), apply it to the matter of one who engages in bestiality passively. And it is derived from the fact that the Merciful One expresses the halakha of one who engages in bestiality passively using the term for one who engages in bestiality actively: Just as with regard to one who engages in bestiality actively the Torah both punishes for this act and prohibits it, so too, with regard to one who engages in bestiality passively, the Torah both punishes for this act and prohibits it.

אֲבָל הַבָּא עַל הַזְּכוּר, וְהֵבִיא זָכָר עָלָיו, הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה, וְהֵבִיא בְּהֵמָה עָלָיו – בֵּין לְרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ בֵּין לְאַבָּיֵי, לְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל חַיָּיב שָׁלֹשׁ, לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא חַיָּיב שְׁתַּיִם.

But with regard to one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with a male, and then unwittingly causes a male to engage in intercourse with him, and who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an animal, and then unwittingly causes an animal to engage in intercourse with him, performing all of these actions in one lapse of awareness, in this case, both according to Rabbi Abbahu and according to Abaye, the halakha according to the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael is that he is liable for transgressing three prohibitions; the ones mentioned above and the prohibition of: “There shall not be a sodomite,” whereas according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva he is liable for transgressing only two prohibitions.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: זְכוּר – לֹא עָשׂוּ בּוֹ קָטָן כְּגָדוֹל, בְּהֵמָה – עָשׂוּ בָּהּ קְטַנָּה כִּגְדוֹלָה.

§ The Sages taught: With regard to intercourse with a male, the Torah does not deem a younger boy to be like an older boy; but with regard to intercourse with an animal, the Torah does deem a young animal to be like an old animal.

מַאי ״לֹא עָשׂוּ בּוֹ קָטָן כְּגָדוֹל״? אָמַר רַב: לֹא עָשׂוּ בִּיאַת פָּחוֹת מִבֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים כְּבֶן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: לֹא עָשׂוּ בִּיאַת פָּחוֹת מִבֶּן שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים כְּבֶן שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים.

The Gemara asks: What does it mean that the Torah does not deem a younger boy to be like an older boy? Rav says: It means that the Torah does not deem the intercourse of one who is less than nine years old to be like the intercourse of one who is at least nine years old, as for a male’s act of intercourse to have the legal status of full-fledged intercourse the minimum age is nine years. And Shmuel says: The Torah does not deem the intercourse of a child who is less than three years old to be like that of one who is three years old.

בְּמַאי קָמִיפַּלְגִי? רַב סָבַר: כֹּל דְּאִיתֵיהּ בְּשׁוֹכֵב – אִיתֵיהּ בְּנִשְׁכָּב, וְכֹל דְּלֵיתֵיהּ בְּשׁוֹכֵב – לֵיתֵיהּ בְּנִשְׁכָּב.

The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do Rav and Shmuel disagree? The Gemara answers: Rav holds that any halakha that applies to one who engages in intercourse actively applies to one who engages in intercourse passively, and any halakha that does not apply to one who engages in intercourse actively does not apply to one who engages in intercourse passively. Therefore, just as one who engages in intercourse actively is not liable if he is less than nine years old, as the intercourse of such a child does not have the halakhic status of intercourse, so too, if a child who is less than nine years old engages in homosexual intercourse passively, the one who engages in intercourse with him is not liable.

וּשְׁמוּאֵל סָבַר: ״מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה״ כְּתִיב.

And Shmuel holds: It is written: “And you shall not lie with a male as with a woman,” indicating that the halakha of a male who engages in intercourse passively is like that of a woman; just as the intercourse of a woman has the halakhic status of intercourse from when she is three years old, the same is true with regard to a male who engages in intercourse passively. Consequently, in Shmuel’s opinion, one who engages in intercourse with a male who is older than three is liable.

תַּנְיָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרַב: זָכָר בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד

It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav: One who engages in homosexual intercourse with a male aged nine years and one day,