Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Peter Kirk"<peter_kirk AT sil.org>]

Good question, from both you and Harold. The problem is, if 
"uncovering the nakedness" of any married woman is adultery and 
punishable by death (20:10), why is there a need for specific 
prohibitions on "uncovering the nakedness" of the wives of close 
relatives, both specifically (18:8,14,15,16) and generally (18:19)? 
There are similar prohibitions on "lying with" wives of specific close 
relatives (20:11,12,20,21). So what is going on? Is the point that 
adultery does not apply to widows and divorced women, so that the laws 
about wives of close relatives actually apply to widows and ex-wives? 
Possibly, and the widowhood explanation is implicit in the adaptation 
of these laws by the church to define prohibited marriages; but then 
20:21 seems to conflict with the law on levirate marriages. Or does 
"uncovering nakedness" refer to a lesser degree of contact than 
adultery, perhaps even seeing the woman not fully covered up, as 
suggested in 20:17 - some Middle Eastern cultures today still consider 
that a serious offence, and compare Genesis 9:22,23 where a man seeing 
a naked man is considered shameful (this too in some Middle Eastern 
cultures today). But then "lying with" suggests something more than 
that. And why is there no prohibition on seeing an undressed woman who 
is not a close relative? There are some complicated questions here 
which are not easily resolved. Maybe traditional Jewish exegesis would 
help us here - can anyone enlighten us?

Thanks to Jason for bringing up what seemed a very simple question and 
is actually a remarkably complicated one!

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator 
_________________________________
Subject: Re[3]: uncover that nakedness!!  :-)
Author:  <lewreich AT javanet.com> at Internet
Date:    06/04/2000 11:29


Peter Kirk wrote (\Thursday, April 06, 2000 12:56 AM):

> But it is unclear what happened when the woman was 
> already married but not to a close relative.

Wouldn't that simply be adultery?

Lewis Reich