Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:22:10.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Traditional Jewish Sexual Practices and Their Possible Impact on Jewish Fertility and Demography*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2013

Evyatar Marienberg
Evyatar Marienberg*
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many religious traditions attempt to regulate the sexual practices of their members. Generally, their main tool for doing so is prescribing with whom one may or may not have intimate relations. Forbidden partners might include, for example, members of the same sex, relatives, or people of other religious and ethnic groups. Additional methods for defining how and when intimate relations are permissible are also not unheard of. For example, sexual relations using certain positions or occurring on certain days or hours or in certain places might be declared sinful. The three main Bible-related religious traditions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all have in their toolboxes these various regulatory instruments; many other religious groups use them as well.

Type
Articles
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 106 , Issue 3 , July 2013 , pp. 243 - 286
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 (More than Israel kept family purity, family purity kept Israel) (letter from an anonymous reader, Amudim: The Magazine of the Religious Kibbutz Movement 682 [2004], accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.kdati.org.il/info/amudim/682/13.htm [Hebrew]). The translation given in the inscription above is less than literal in order to make it more accessible to a wider audience. This sentence is based on a famous statement about the Sabbath attributed to Asher Zvi Hirsch Ginsberg (1856–1927), who is best known by his Hebrew pen name, Ahad Ha'am.

2 Hameln, Glückel of, The Life of Glückel of Hameln (1646–1724) Written by Herself (ed. and trans. Abrahams, Beth-Zion; Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 2010) 34Google Scholar. The text in Turniansky's edition reads: (Glikl: Memoirs 1691–1719 [ed. and trans. Chava Turniansky; Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 2006] 118).

3 As is well known, Catholics are no longer such a group, so they cannot be used as an example. For several decades already, the vast majority of Catholics worldwide have not avoided the use of contraceptives, despite the official teaching of the magisterium against it. On the situation in the U.S., see Westoff, Charles F. and Jones, Elise F., “The End of ‘Catholic’ Fertility,” Demography 16 (1979) 209–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. Renzo Derosas and Frans van Poppel state that not only do most Catholics today clearly not adhere to the Church's doctrine on the issue, but, during the last decades of the twentieth century, “countries where the Roman Catholic Church had been strongest had reached the lowest fertility in the world” (introduction to Religion and the Decline of Fertility in the Western World [ed. Renzo Derosas and Frans van Poppel; Dordrecht: Springer, 2006] 1–19, at 17). It seems reasonable to assume that Catholics who adhere to the official stance tend to have particularly large families, but I am not aware of a scholarly study that explores such cases. For a fascinating study that discusses the fact that religious affiliation can often be related to higher fertility, see Blume, Michael, “The Reproductive Benefits of Religious Affiliation,” in The Biological Evolution of Religious Mind and Behavior (ed. Voland, Eckart and Schiefenhövel, Wulf; Frontiers Collection; New York: Springer, 2009) 117–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 See Bainbridge, William Sims, “Shaker Demographics 1840–1900: An Example of the Use of U.S. Census Enumeration Schedules,” JSSR 21 (1982) 352–65Google Scholar.

5 A relatively recent volume exploring this very issue is Religion and the Decline of Fertility (ed. Derosas and van Poppel). Its introduction provides an excellent and comprehensive summary of the current state of research on the matter.

6 See, for example, DellaPergola, Sergio, “Patterns of American Jewish Fertility,” Demography 17 (1980) 261–73, at 261CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed: “Research over the last several decades has consistently shown [that low fertility] has been characteristic of Jewish communities in Central and Western Europe since as early as the second half of the nineteenth century. . . . Similar findings had been observed . . . in the United States, indicating that comparatively low Jewish fertility dates back to before the beginning of the [twentieth] century.”

7 The common scholarly assumption that ancient and medieval contraceptives and abortifacients made of plants were ineffective has been called into question in recent decades. See, for example, John M. Riddle, “Oral Contraceptives and Early-Term Abortifacients during Classical Antiquity and the Middle Ages,” Past and Present 132 (1991) 3–32.

8 On this method of birth control (which is too often neglected by scholars), see Freeze, ChaeRan Yoo, “Lilith's Midwives: Jewish Newborn Child Murder in Nineteenth-Century Vilna,” Jewish Social Studies 16 (2010) 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Gudorf, Christine E., “Contraception and Abortion in Roman Catholicism,” in Sacred Rights: The Case for Contraception and Abortion in World Religions (ed. Maguire, Daniel C.; New York: Oxford University Press, 2003) 55–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 See also the excellent article of Shalem Yahalom, where he concludes that medieval Jews probably made use of contraceptive methods (“Moch: Family Planning in the Jewish Communities of France and Catalonia in the Middle Ages,” Pe'amim 128 [2011] 105–73, at 160–63 [Hebrew]).

10 Flandrin, Jean-Louis, Un temps pour embrasser. Aux origines de la morale sexuelle occidentale (VIe–XIe siècle) (Paris: Seuil, 1983)Google Scholar.

11 They are known by their Latin name as libri poenitentiales.

12 This is not an actual instruction taken from such a book, but a fictional text created in the same style.

13 m. Yoma 8:1.

14 The same prohibition against sexual relations also applies to mourners, as well as to ad hoc fasts, for example, prohibitions declared in the case of a war or drought. See m. Ta'anit 1:4–6; b. Ta'anit 30a.

15 For a good summary of the probable origins of the term, see Eliezer Segal, “Silent Night,” accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/041223_Nittel.html. See also Marc Shapiro, “Torah Study on Christmas Eve,” The Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 8 (1999) 319–53, and in a more amusing style, Benyamin Cohen, “Holy Night: The Little-Known Jewish Holiday of Christmas Eve. Seriously,” Slate, December 23, 2009, accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.slate.com/id/2238708/.

16 On the two last customs, see Judah ben Simon Ashkenazi (Germany/Poland, 18th cent.), Ba'er Hetev on Shulhan Arukh, Orah hayyim 240, as well as the commentary by Abraham Halevi Gombiner (Poland, ca. 1635–1683), Magen Avraham, on the same text. See also Horowitz, Elliot, “Between Masters and Maidservants in the Jewish Society of Europe in Late Medieval and Early Modern Times,” in Sexuality and the Family in History: Collected Essays (ed. Bartal, Israel and Gafni, Isaiah; Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 1998) 193–211Google Scholar, at 210 [Hebrew].

17 See m. Ketubbot 5:6; b. Ketubbot 62b and 64b; b. Bava Qamma 82a.

18 How severe? See my article, Evyatar Marienberg, “Qui coierit cum muliere in fluxu menstruo . . . interficientur ambo (Lev. 20:18)—The Biblical Prohibition of Sexual Relations with a Menstruant in the Eyes of Some Medieval Christian Theologians,” in Shoshannat Yaakov: Jewish and Iranian Studies in Honor of Yaakov Elman (ed. Shai Secunda and Steven Fine; The Brill Reference Library of Judaism 35; Leiden: Brill, 2012) 271–84.

19 See Meacham, Tirzah (leBeit Yoreh), “An Abbreviated History of the Development of Jewish Menstrual Laws,” in Women and Water: Menstruation in Jewish Life and Law (ed. Wasserfall, Rahel R.; HBI Series on Jewish Women; Hanover, N.H.: Brandeis University Press, 1999) 23–32Google Scholar.

20 See b. Niddah 66a. See also Fonrobert, Charlotte Elisheva, “When Women Walk in the Way of Their Fathers: On Gendering the Rabbinic Claim for Authority,” Journal of the History of Sexuality 10 (2001) 398–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 413–14.

21 See Leviticus 15:1–15, 19–24, and 25–30.

22 See the roots of this idea in m. Shabbat 9:3 and b. Niddah 33a. See also Israel Isserlin ben Petahiah, Terumat Hadeshen 245.

23 The conclusive decision for Sephardim is that of Joseph Karo (1488–1575), Shulhan Arukh, Yoreh de’ah 196, especially paragraphs 1, 11, and 13. The Ashkenazic practice is formulated in the commentary of Moses Isserles (1520–1572) on this same paragraph 11. It should be noted, though, that because the day begins in the Jewish tradition at sunset, the evening of the twelfth (or eleventh) day of the cycle is, according to Jewish accounting, the thirteenth (or twelfth) day and thus appropriate for the ritual bath and, successively, marital relations.

24 Richard J. Fehring, Mary Schneider, and Kathleen Raviele report that, in their study, the mean length of menses was 5.8 days (SD = 2.9), the median 6 days, and the mode 5 days. Further, 95 percent of the menstrual cycles had a length of menses between 3 and 8 days (“Variability in the Phases of the Menstrual Cycle,” Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing 35 [2006] 376–84, at 380).

25 See Vollman, Rudolf F., The Menstrual Cycle (Major Problems in Obstetrics and Gynecology 7; Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders, 1977) 73–190Google ScholarPubMed; and Wilcox, Allen J., Dunson, David, and Baird, Donna Day, “The Timing of the ‘Fertile Window’ in the Menstrual Cycle: Day Specific Estimates from a Prospective Study,” British Medical Journal 321 (2000) 1259–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar. According to Fehring, Schneider, and Raviele, “66% of the cycles had all days of the 6-day fertile phase within days 13 to 20 of the menstrual cycle. The 6-day fertile phase varied by more than 7 days among 33.6% of the participants. . . . The mean beginning of the 6-day fertile phase was day 13, and the mean day . . . indicating the beginning of fertility . . . was day 12 (SD = 3.4), range 5 to 26 days. The mean end of the 6-day fertile phase was the same as the estimated day of ovulation, that is, day 16.5 (SD = 3.4)” (“Variability in the Phases,” 380).

26 Biale, Rachel, Women and Jewish Law: The Essential Texts, Their History, and Their Relevance for Today (New York: Schocken, 1984) 148–49Google Scholar.

27 Gardin, Susan K., “The Laws of Taharat HaMishpacha: Potential Effects on Fertility,” Journal of Biosocial Science 20 (1988) 9–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed, at 15.

28 The fascinating article of Beth S. Wenger (“Mitzvah and Medicine: Gender, Assimilation, and the Scientific Defense of ‘Family Purity,’” Jewish Social Studies 5 [1998–1999] 177–202) unfortunately does not deal with this particular “scientific” claim, probably because the article concentrates on the first decades of the 20th cent., during which time the idea had perhaps not yet developed.

29 Fehring, Schneider, and Raviele found that the mean length of the menstrual cycles in their data was 28.9 days (SD = 3.3) and the median was 29.0 days (mode 28). Of the cycles in their data, 95 percent were between 22 and 36 days in length (“Variability in the Phases,” 379). See also Laurence A. Cole, Donald G. Ladner, and Francis W. Byrn, “The Normal Variabilities of the Menstrual Cycle,” Fertility and Sterility 91 (2009) 522–27.

30 Or, in Hebrew, ). Another variant of the name is also used often, “halakhic sterility” (), “halakhic” being of course an adjective based on the word halakhah, or Jewish law.

31 (Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, “A Proposal for the Benefit of Women in Matters of Niddah,” in Avraham Dov Auerbach, Imre Avraham [Jerusalem: n.p., 1964] *1–*33 [Hebrew]). Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910–1995) published his discussion at the end of a book written by his brother.

32 Auerbach reports that two physicians told him his idea would be technically feasible.

33 In an article that we will discuss later, it is claimed that “apparently, Rabbi Auerbach himself subsequently withdrew his endorsement of the suggested device” (Getzel Ellinson and Mitchell Snyder, “Early Ovulation as an Impediment to Conception: A Halachic Problem and Some Suggested Solutions,” Proceedings of the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists 6 [1980] 157–76, at 173 n. 3). I doubt this is true, for the simple reason that the appendix was still included in a second edition of his brother's work, Imre Avraham, prepared by the author and published in 1986 (six years after Ellinson and Snyder's article and nine years before Shlomo Zalman Auerbach's death).

34 Lunenfeld, Bruno and Birenbaum, N., “Treating Infertility Caused by Discrepancy between the Fertile Days and the Time of Ritual Bathing,” Moriyah 2 (1970) 48–52Google Scholar [Hebrew]. Lunenfeld had been a well-known expert in reproductive endocrinology for many years. Having been initially trained in Geneva, Lunenfeld retired from Bar-Ilan University in Israel in 1992 after serving on the faculty of its Department of Life Sciences for more than three decades. I have unfortunately not been able to locate any information on N. Birenbaum. In their article, they briefly refer to a review of the matter published in 1962 by Dr. Yaakov Levi (1889–1977), an Orthodox pediatrician from Jerusalem (“Treating Infer-tility,” 49). Despite my efforts, I have not succeeded in locating Levi's article.

35 (“Treating Infertility,” 48).

36 Ellinson, Getzel and Snyder, Mitchell, “Early Ovulation as an Impediment to Conception: A Halachic Problem and Some Suggested Solutions,” Proceedings of the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists 6 (1980) 157–76Google Scholar.

37 Toaff, Renzo, “The Religious Cause of Infertility,” Harefu'ah 78 (1970) 162–65Google Scholar [Hebrew].

38 I would like to thank Michael E. Toaff from Pennsylvania, the son of Shlomo R. Toaff and a gynecologist himself, as well as Michael Shenhav, a gynecologist from Tel Aviv, for helping me with the identification of Renzo Toaff.

39 “Treating Religious Infertility,” Sefer Assia 1 (1976) 150–51 [Hebrew].

40 Lunenfeld, Bruno, “The Fight Against Infertility: The Principles of Drug Treatment to Cause Ovulation,” Madda 25 (1981) 72–77Google Scholar [Hebrew].

41 Green, Joseph, “Artificial Insemination as a Solution for ‘Religious Sterility’,” Assia 10 (1984) 17–29Google Scholar [Hebrew].

42 Some (e.g., Green, “Artificial Insemination”) also propose using methods of artificial insemination: according to this solution, due to the fact that religious law prohibits intercourse during the seven days after the cessation of the period but does not prohibit insemination, an injection of the husband's sperm into the woman's vagina using a syringe would solve the problem. Because this solution has other problems (for example, finding an acceptable way to collect the husband's semen in a framework in which masturbation is forbidden), many authors avoid suggesting it; therefore, we will not discuss it here. See also Ellinson and Snyder, “Early Ovulation as an Impediment to Conception,” 168–73.

43 This is, of course, not the mindset of all Orthodox halakhic experts. In recent years, some Orthodox rabbis have hinted that during private counseling to couples, they might suggest more lenient practices than those they speak about in public. And yet, these ad hoc solutions likely affect only a very small number of couples. In a recent study of forty-five women in Jerusalem who suffered from this condition, the following information is given: “Consultation with a Rabbinate authority was reported by 64% of women, but no halachic solution was provided to any of the applicants. Two-thirds of these couples were referred by the Rabbinate authority to seek medical advice and treatment. The majority of patients with precoital ovulation (23/34, 68%) chose medical treatment for halachic infertility” (Haimov-Kochman, Ronitet al., “Infertility Associated with Precoital Ovulation in Observant Jewish Couples: Prevalence, Treatment, Efficacy and Side Effects,” Israel Medical Association Journal 14 [2012] 100–103Google ScholarPubMed, at 101). In short, the reality remains that in the vast majority of cases, Orthodox rabbis do prefer to modify the women rather than the law. A relatively recent book by Daniel Rosenak, to which we will return later, tries among other things to challenge these rabbis and make public some halakhic solutions they give in private. See Rosenak, Daniel, To Restore the Splendour: The Real Meaning of Severity in Applying Jewish Marital Traditions (Tel Aviv: Yedioth Ahronoth, 2011)Google Scholar [Hebrew]. For a rather striking example of a physician—the head of an IVF unit in the religious hospital Shaare Zedek in Jerusalem—who openly suggests complex protocols of pills and hormone injections to deal with this “problem,” see Margaliot, Ehud, “Preventing Ovulation before Immersion,” in Woman's Health: Innovations, Problems, and Their Solutions (Jerusalem: Puah Institute, 1996) 41Google Scholar [Hebrew].

44 See, for example, the discussion in Grazi, Richard V., Overcoming Infertility: A Guide for Jewish Couples (New Milford, Conn.: Toby Press, 2005) 277–309Google Scholar, esp. 301–4. For a report on the (positive) results of such an approach, see Yairi-Oron, Yael, Rabinson, Jacob, and Orvieto, Raoul, “A Simplified Approach to Religious Infertility,” Fertility and Sterility 86 (2006) 1771–72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; and Haimov-Kochman, Ronit, Rosenak, Daniel, Orvieto, Raoul, and Hurwitz, Arye, “Infertility Counseling for Orthodox Jewish Couples,” Fertility and Sterility 93 (2010) 1817–18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. There are also those who propose various types of “natural” or “holistic” approaches to the issue: see an example in J. Rivkah Asoulin, “Natural Approaches to Halakhic Infertility,” n.p., accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.yoatzot.org/article.php?id=187.

45 . This exchange is from the website of the Puah Institute (www.puah.org.il; accessed September 2006), an Orthodox Jewish institute in Israel that is involved in advising and supervising halakhically approved fertility treatments. The exchange no longer appears on the website.

46 (ibid.).

47 An article that strongly supports such use of hormones is Ganzel, Tova and Zimmerman, Deena Rachel, “Hormonal Intervention for Religious Concerns: A Halakhic and Ethical Discussion,” Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women's Studies and Gender Issues 21 (2011) 114–29Google Scholar. For a systematic critique of this opinion in the same volume, see Ner-David, Haviva, “Hormonal Intervention for Religious Concerns: A Response,” Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women's Studies and Gender Issues 21 (2011) 130–33Google Scholar.

48 Also known as the Schlesinger Institute for Jewish Medical Ethics.

49 I would like to thank Rabbi Dr. Halperin and Ms. Liora Moshe for their help and answers in several emails in February 2005.

50 Daniel Rosenak and Rivkah Shim'on, “The Severity of Rabbi Zeira: Is the Time Right for New Thinking?,” Hatsofe, November 3, 2006 [Hebrew], accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.kolech.com/show.asp?id=15318.

51 See Haimov-Kochman et al., “Infertility Associated with Precoital Ovulation,” 100–101.

52 The study described in the article by Fehring, Schneider, and Raviele found that although 66 percent of cycles had their window of fertility during days thirteen to twenty, about 25 percent had that window earlier, between days ten and seventeen (“Variability in the Phases,” 376 and 381). An earlier study puts this number at around 30 percent (Wilcox, Dunson, and Baird, “Timing of the ‘Fertile Window’,” 1259). Although it is hard to draw conclusions from this data, these findings hint that a significant minority of women's fertility windows ends around the same time that halakhah-observant women can only begin to have sexual relations.

53 Rosenak and Shim'on, “Severity of Rabbi Zeira.”

54 For a comprehensive view of Rosenak's arguments, see his book To Restore the Splendour. It is worthwhile to mention that the actual Hebrew title of the book is much more to-the-point than the official English title given by the editor. In the Hebrew, the title is approximately this: “To Return Purity to Its Past: The Severity of the ‘Seven Clean Days’ and Its Implications; Medical, Halakhic, Moral, and National Aspects” ().

55 Rosenak's two most substantial early responses are “Do Not Throw the Ball to the Medical Field!,” Hatsofe, December 1, 2006 [Hebrew], accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.kolech.com/show.asp?id=15988 and “The Halakhot of Niddah: The Reality and the Ideal,” De'ot 32 (May 2007) 12–20 [Hebrew], accessed March 21, 2013, http://toravoda.org.il/files/D_R.pdf. Later, of course, his most comprehensive response was his book, mentioned above.

56 See, for example, ben-Porat, Eliezer and Kleiman, Pesach, “Halakhic Options in Cases of Early Ovulation,” Assia 85–86 (2009) 83–88Google Scholar [Hebrew], accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.medethics.org.il/articles/ASSIA/ASSIA85-86/ASSIA85-86.08.asp. One of the most recent articles is Naomi Zeveloff, “For Some, Halacha Makes Conceiving Tough,” Forward, June 18, 2012, accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.forward.com/articles/157819.

57 Ganzel, Tova and Zimmerman, Deena, “Halakhic Infertility: Medical-Halakhic Diagnosis and Treatment,” Assia 85–86 (2009) 63–82Google Scholar [Hebrew], accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.medethics.org.il/articles/ASSIA/ASSIA85-86/ASSIA85-86.07.asp. I will cite the online version, which uses only section numbers, not page numbers.

58 Ganzel and Zimmerman, “Halakhic Infertility,” section 4.

59 Ibid. One should note that the figure of 35 percent is higher than the figures suggested by Halperin and Rosenak, who hint that 20–25 percent of those treated for infertility might have the problem because of “religious infertility.”

60 See, for example, Amundsen, Darrel W. and Diers, Carol Jean, “The Age of Menarche in Classical Greece and Rome,” Human Biology 41 (1969) 125–32Google ScholarPubMed; Amundsen, Darrel W. and Diers, Carol Jean, “The Age of Menarche in Medieval Europe,” Human Biology 45 (1973) 363–69Google ScholarPubMed; Bullough, Vern and Campbell, Cameron, “Female Longevity and Diet in the Middle Ages,” Speculum 55 (1980) 317–25CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed, at 323 n. 35; “W.H.O. Multicenter Study on Menstrual and Ovulatory Patterns in Adolescent Girls. I. A Multicenter Cross-sectional Study of Menarche,” Journal of Adolescent Health Care 7 (1986) 229–35; Kimmel, Douglas C. and Weiner, Irving B., Adolescence: A Developmental Transition (2nd ed.; Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley, 1995) 69Google Scholar; and Morabia, Alfredo and Costanza, Michael, “International Variability in Ages at Menarche, First Livebirth, and Menopause,” American Journal of Epidemiology 148 (1998) 1195–205CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

61 According to one estimate, the number of cycles for an average woman in an industrialized society is between 350 and 400, compared to about 110 in a non-industrialized society. See Meredith F. Small, “A Woman's Curse?,” The Sciences (January/February 1999) 24–29, at 28.

62 See, for example, Pliny the Elder, Nat. 7.13. As Lesley Dean-Jones says, “Words for menstrual blood in Greek and Latin ( and “menses”) show that ancient Mediterranean society did expect it to flow monthly. . . . Both the Hippocratics and Aristotle thought women who menstruated more often than once a month were ill in some way” (“Menstrual Bleeding according to the Hippocratics and Aristotle,” Transactions of the American Philological Association 119 [1989] 177–91, at 185). The reasoning behind the peculiar idea, found in Tannaitic and then later halakhic literature, that women's cycles are eighteen days in length remains unclear to me, and anybody who knows rabbinic literature will agree I am not alone in my bafflement (see, for example, m. Niddah 4:7; b. Niddah 72b; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Issure bi'ah 6:3). Nevertheless, a good explanation of how it works is given in Meacham, “Abbreviated History,” 30.

63 See, for example, Jeyaseelan, L. and Rao, P. S. S., “Correlates of Menstrual Cycle Length in South Indian Women: A Prospective Study,” Human Biology 65 (1993) 627–34Google ScholarPubMed.

64 The origins of this idea are found in m. Yevamot 6:6, b. Yevamot 64a, and b. Ketubbot 77a. It was later codified in major works of halakhah: see Maimonides's 12th-cent. Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot ishut 15:7, and the 16th-cent. Shulhan Arukh, Even ha'ezer 154:10. From various sources, it seems that rabbinic courts did not generally force a man to repudiate his wife in such a case against his will. See, for example, Moses Isserles's gloss on the paragraph from the Shulhan Arukh mentioned above (at 9 n. 23). But if a man wanted to repudiate his wife, such a claim was probably very useful in case the wife resisted the divorce. See also Feldman, David M., Birth Control in Jewish Law (Northvale, N.J.: Jason Aronson, 1998) 36–37 and 54Google Scholar; and Baumgarten, Elisheva, Mothers and Children: Jewish Family Life in Medieval Europe (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004) 33–34Google Scholar.

65 Ganzel and Zimmerman, “Halakhic Infertility,” section 4.

66 In the halakhic literature, the question as to whether one is commanded to perform the ritual bath at the first possible moment () is debated in many places. The generally accepted majority conclusion is that it is not mandatory, although bathing on time is highly recommended, and a ritual bath of a niddah can be postponed only in rare cases. See, for example, b. Yoma 8a; b. Niddah 30a; b. Shabbat 120b–121a; Tosafot on b. Yoma 8b “dekhule alma”; Shulhan Arukh, Yoreh de'ah 197b. See also Baskin, Judith R., “Women and Ritual Immersion in Medieval Ashkenaz: The Sexual Politics of Piety,” in Judaism in Practice: From the Middle Ages through the Early Modern Period (ed. Fine, Lawrence; Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2001) 131–42Google Scholar.

67 Marienberg, “Le bain des Melunaises,” 91–101; idem, “Women, Men, and Cold Water: The Debate over the Heating of Jewish Ritual Baths from the Middle Ages to Our Own Time,” Jewish Studies: An Internet Journal 12 (2013, forthcoming) [Hebrew].

68 Emanuel, Simcha, “The Seven Clean Days: A Chapter in the History of the Halakhah,” Tarbiz 76 (2007) 233–54Google Scholar, at 251 [Hebrew]. I imagine Emanuel's claim that the Talmud prescribes “two weeks” is a simplification, though we will soon discuss the practice of a two-week niddah period, even if it is not, strictly speaking, talmudic.

69 See, e.g., Wellings, Kayeet al., “Seasonal Variations in Sexual Activity and their Implications for Sexual Health Promotion,” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 92 (1999) 60–64CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

70 See Baskin, Judith R., “Male Piety, Female Bodies: Men, Women, and Ritual Immersion in Medieval Ashkenaz,” Jewish Law Association Studies 17 (2007) 11–30Google Scholar, at 13–20. See also Grossman, Avraham, Pious and Rebellious: Jewish Women in Medieval Europe (trans. Chipman, Jonathan; Hanover, N.H.: Brandeis University Press, 2004) 109–10Google Scholar and 240–52.

71 Likewise, other voluntary practices done to prevent conception are also not part of our investigation. For those, see Yahalom, “Moch.”

72 Gardin, “Laws of Taharat HaMishpacha,” 14.

73 Ibid., 15–16. Some of the aforementioned articles use the statistics that appear in this article by Gardin and in Vollman, Menstrual Cycle. One can only hope that we will have more accurate data relevant to the population in question, based also on changes in scientific knowledge about the cycle since these sources were written, in the near future. It seems that a study that tries to do exactly this is currently underway, led by Ganzel and Zimmerman. Not having other sources for now, I must also continue to rely on Gardin's article.

74 Of course, by saying “reasonable chance” we merely refer to the probability of conception for any healthy and fertile heterosexual couple having intercourse on a regular basis without the use of contraceptives, including around the time of ovulation. It is generally assumed that one in three copulations of such a couple, at the time of ovulation, may initiate a pregnancy. See Wilcox, Allen J., Weinberg, Clarice R., and Baird, Donna Day, “Timing of Sexual Intercourse in Relation to Ovulation: Effects on the Probability of Conception, Survival of the Pregnancy, and Sex of the Baby,” New England Journal of Medicine 333 (1995) 1517–21CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

75 In an article based on interviews with thirty Orthodox women in Jerusalem in 2001, the practice of postponing the ritual bath as a contraceptive method is mentioned, but the issue of “religious sterility” is not. See Hartman, Tova and Marmon, Naomi, “Lived Regulations, Systemic Attributions: Menstrual Separation and Ritual Immersion in the Experience of Orthodox Jewish Women,” Gender and Society 18 (2004) 389–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 403–4.

76 Tanhuma (Buber), Metsora 15: . The full citation for this version is Midrash Tanhuma: Al Hamishah Humshe Torah (ed. Salomon Buber; Vilnius: Rom, 1885).

77 Baraita de-Niddah 3:2 (Horowitz) / 158 (Marienberg): . The full citations for these versions are: Chaim M. Horowitz, Pithe Niddah (Sefer Tosefta Atiqata 4; Frankfurt am Main: Hebräische Buchhandlung und Antiquariat, 1890); and Marienberg, Evyatar, La Baraïta de-Niddah. Un texte juif pseudo-talmudique sur les lois religieuses relatives à la menstruation (Bibliothèque de l'École des Hautes Études, Sciences Religieuses 157; Turnhout: Brepols, 2012) 123, 154Google Scholar. On the Baraita de-Niddah, see Marienberg, Evyatar, “Baraita de-Niddah,” in Jewish Women: A Comprehensive Historical Encyclopedia (ed. Hyman, Paula E. and Ofer, Dalia; Shalvi Publishing: Jerusalem, 2006)Google Scholar, accessed March 21, 2013, http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/baraita-de-niddah.

78 Perhaps the result of 7×7−1.

79 2nd cent. c.e.

80 The theme of a foreign ruler who prohibits Jews from fulfilling major commandments is a common one in rabbinic literature. See Herr, Moshe D., “Persecutions and Martyrdom in Hadrian's Days,” in Studies in History (1972) (ed. and trans. Shatzman, Israel and Asheri, David; ScrHier 23; Jerusalem: Magnes, 1972)Google Scholar 85–125; and Charlotte Elisheva Fonrobert, “When Women Walk in the Way of Their Fathers.”

81 Midrash Eikhah Zuta 1, 43: . It is clear that the core of this midrash uses earlier appearances of this folkloric theme. See also the previous note.

82 1040–1105 c.e.

83 Sefer Hapardes (ed. Hayyim L. Ehrenreich; Budapest: Katzburg, 1924) 4; Mahzor Vitry (ed. Simon Hurwitz; Nuremberg: Bulka, 1923) 606. See also on this issue Zimmer, Eric, Society and Its Customs (Jerusalem: Shazar, 1996) 240–49Google Scholar, at 242–243 [Hebrew].

84 Mahzor Vitry, 608. See also Ta-Shma, Israel M., “On some Franco-German Niddah Practices,” Sidra 9 (1993) 163–70Google Scholar [Hebrew], who discusses similar texts referring to two periods of seven days.

85 Cordoba (Andalusia) 1135 – Fostat (Egypt) 1204.

86 Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Issure bi'ah 11:14: . Maimonides was involved in attacking various local practices related to the laws of niddah. See further Friedman, Mordechai A., “Menstrual Impurity and Sectarianism in the Writings of the Geonim and of Moses and Abraham Maimo-nides,” Maimonidean Studies 1 (1990) 1–21Google Scholar [Hebrew]; and Cohen, Shaye J. D., “Purity, Piety, and Polemic: Medieval Rabbinic Denunciations of ‘Incorrect’ Purification Practices,” in Women and Water: Menstruation in Jewish Life and Law (ed. Wasserfall, Rahel R.; Hanover, N.H.: Brandeis University Press, 1999) 82–100Google Scholar. It should be noted that Maimonides does not take into account here a concept that will only later become universally accepted: that there is a minimum period a woman must wait before she begins to count the “seven clean days,” regardless of the actual length of the bleeding. At the same time, one should remember that menstrual bleeding that lasts just one day is rather rare.

87 Eric Zimmer, Society and Its Customs, 244. Of course, a century or two later Jews were expelled from many of these areas, so the lack of later evidence for the practice should be placed in such a context.

88 The term used in Hebrew is simply “Osterreich” (), yet at that time this probably meant the eastern parts of today's Germany or the Archduchy of Austria (Erzherzogtum Österreich). The Empire of Austria (Kaisertum Österreich, later Österreich-Ungarn) was founded only in 1806. After World War I, it was followed by the Republic of Austria, in the borders of the region one would associate with the term “Austria” today.

89 Maribor, 1390 – Wiener Neustadt, 1460.

90 The author of the book Or Zarua was Isaac ben Moses of Vienna (ca. 1200 – ca. 1270).

91 Israel Isserlin ben Petahiah, Terumat Hadeshen 245: . It seems that the Hebrew text is slightly corrupt, as it contains the letter ḥêt, instead of the expected yôd, in the abbreviation of the author's name (Isaac).

92 Judah ben Jacob Landau, Agur, art. 1372: .

93 Moses Isserles, Mapah, Yoreh de'ah 196:11: . Rosenak, in his article with Shim'on, also briefly mentions the fact that in medieval Ashkenazic communities it is possible that a practice of fourteen days existed, but he does not explicitly discuss its possible implications. According to Isaac Lifshitz, he knows from actual witnesses that the practice of 7+7 days was common in White Russia in the first half of the twentieth century (personal communication, May 2013). I would like to thank him for this testimony and for other useful comments he had after reading the pre-final version of this article.

94 Johannes Buxtorf (1564–1629), Synagoga Judaica, ch. 31. This translation is a slightly modified version of Alan D. Corré's English translation, available online at https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/corre/www/buxdorf/. The book was first published in German in 1603 under the title Synagoga Iudaica: Das ist Jüdenschul, and it was later published in Latin. The text of the 1603 edition reads: “Nach siben tage / der Unreinigkeit / zehlet sie wider siben tage der Reinigkeit / unn nachdem sie sich ganz rein befindet / [. . .] muß [sie] in kaltem Wasser ganz nacket [. . .] badent” (593–94). See an online version of that edition here: http://tinyurl.com/SynagogaJudaicaGerman. On Buxtorf, see Burnett, Stephen G., From Christian Hebraism to Jewish Studies: Johannes Buxtorf (1564–1629) and Hebrew Learning in the Seventeenth Century (Studies in the History of Christian Thought 68; Leiden: Brill, 1996)Google Scholar.

95 Born in Baghdad in 1920.

96 Yabi'a Omer, Yoreh de’ah 15: (Ovadya Yosef, Sefer She'elot u-Teshuvot Yabi'a Omer [vol. 1; Jerusalem: n.p., 1953]). For a fuller discussion of this issue, see Picard, Ariel, The Philosophy of Rabbi Ovadya Yosef in an Age of Transition: Study of Halakhah and Cultural Criticism (Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 2007) 233–38Google Scholar [Hebrew]. The words “because peace is important” suggest that the woman should make herself more sexually available to her violent husband, with the hope that this will bring about peace in their home.

97 Joel ben Samuel Sirkis (Poland, 1561–1640), in his commentary on Jacob ben Asher's Arba'ah Turim of the 14th cent., discusses this issue, mentioning several important authorities, and he seems to understand the origin of the 7+7 custom in a similar way (Bayit Hadash, Yoreh de'ah 183).

98 Such an attitude is attested, for example, in the extra-canonical book of Jubilees, probably composed in the 2nd cent. b.c.e., where it is stated that “the man who does any work [on the Sabbath] is to die. Any man who desecrates that day; who lies with a woman . . . is to die.” (Jub. 50:8; translation from The Book of Jubilees [ed. and trans. James C. VanderKam; CSCO 511; Scriptores Aethiopici 88; Louvain: Peeters, 1989] 326). Similar ideas might also be hinted at in some of the sectarian scrolls from Qumran. On this, see Werman, Cana and Shemesh, Aharon, Revealing the Hidden: Exegesis and Halakha in the Qumran Scrolls (Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute, 2011) 162–63Google Scholar [Hebrew]; and Shemesh, Aharon, “Marriage and Marital Life in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls and Contemporary Culture (ed. Roitman, Adolfo D., Schiffman, Lawrence H., and Tzoref, Shani; Leiden: Brill, 2011) 589–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 594–95. Abstinence on the Sabbath is also the tradition among the Samaritans and among the Karaites. On the Samaritans, see Kirchheim, Raphael, Karmei Shomron (Frankfurt am Main: Kaufmanii Bibliopolae, 1851) 27Google Scholar [Hebrew]. I would like to thank Benyamim Tsedaka, an important Samaritan scholar, who wrote me (in an email, September 2011): “Sexual relations on Shabbat are out of the question [for Samaritans] because each should keep himself pure for Shabbat Services. The Torah said that whoever has relations is considered impure in any day of the week and should wash himself/herself and be considered as impure till the evening. A sperm that is a result of a wet dreamer who ejaculates is considered impure too. In that case he should sit in the back of the synagogue and not raise his voice nor read the Shabbat portion because he cannot hold the Torah book in his hands till the sunset, although he washed.” On the Karaites, see Leon Nimoy and Joseph Y. Schwartz, “Chapters on the Sabbath by al-Qirkisani,” Horev (1935) 200–6 [Hebrew]. For al-Qirkisani, an important tenth-century Karaite thinker, intercourse is forbidden on the Sabbath for three reasons: because it brings impurity, because of the effort it requires, and because it is similar to another forbidden activity, the planting of seeds. This remains the custom of Karaites to this day. Shlomo D. Goitein discusses the impact of this difference in opinion on “mixed couples” in Egypt—that is, when one spouse was Rabbinite and the other Karaite (The Family [vol. 3 of A Mediterranean Society; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978] 168–69). For an explanation of the sex-on-Sabbath practice as counteracting pagan beliefs and practices, see the commentary of Bahya ben Asher (Spain, ca. 1255 – ca. 1340) on Deuteronomy 18. See also the attack of Abraham ibn Ezra (1089–1164) on this Karaite idea in his commentary on Exod 34:21. On the prohibition of relations on the Sabbath among Beta Israel (“Ethiopian Jews,” “Falashas”), see Shalom, Sharon, From Sinai to Ethiopia (Tel Aviv: Miskal, 2012) 161–63Google Scholar [Hebrew].

99 m. Ketubbot 5:6: . The English version is from Danby, Herbert, The Mishnah (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1933)Google Scholar. One might also have the suspicion that an idea of discouraging reproduction among those of lower socioeconomic strata may be at play, but we will not delve into this possibility here.

100 b. Ketubbot 62b: . Soncino's translation, modified. See also b. Bava Qamma 82a. David Biale highlights the possibility that these laws were created in order to fight a growing tendency among scholars to suspend marital relations altogether, seeing them as an obstacle to holiness in general or to Torah study in particular: “The laws . . . were designed to resolve the conflict, but they clearly did not provide a definitive solution” (Eros and the Jews: From Biblical Israel to Contemporary America [New York: Basic Books, 1992] 55).

101 In many other places in talmudic literature, such an expression seems to mean “once a week” or “an entire week.” Therefore, there is no doubt it can be read as meaning simply that. See, e.g., t. Arakhin 4:27; b. Pesahim 57a; b. Ta'anit 17a; b. Nazir 5a; b. Menahot 103b.

102 See y. Megillah 4a (75a); b. Bava Qamma 82a; b. Nedarim 63b. I do not know how to explain the last statement. Did the talmudic rabbis find the smell of garlic sexually appealing? I have no answer to that, although it is possible that text refers to baked, rather than fresh, garlic. Thus, Sefer Hasidim (Parma) 390 warns that while baked garlic increases lust, fresh garlic decreases it. See also Mishnah Berurah 280:1. On the meaning of the term “love” in rabbinic culture, see Satlow, Michael L. “‘One Who Loves His Wife like Himself’: Love in Rabbinic Marriage,” JJS 49 (1998) 67–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

103 b. Shabbat 25b.

104 Satlow, Michael L. argues: “There is a predominantly Babylonian suggestion that Friday night is the best time for a husband, especially if a student, to fulfill his conjugal obligation. No reason for this opinion is given, nor is it suggested that intercourse on Friday is additional to other conjugal obligations” (Tasting the Dish: Rabbinic Rhetorics of Sexuality [Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995] 278–80)Google Scholar.

105 b. Niddah 17a.

106 b. Niddah 38ab:

107 One should remember that this talmudic paragraph is a well-crafted piece that combines various texts. In fact, the correlation between the assumed length of pregnancy and the testimony about the practice of the “Early Pious” is an editorial one and is not necessarily historically correct. This might also be the case in the last sentence, which explains that these pious people did not have relations only on Wednesdays but from Wednesday on. Although it is generally assumed that the “Early Pious” depicted in the Talmud feared that a transgression of this precept might cause a woman to deliver on the sacred day and limited relations to days following Wednesday accordingly (including, it seems, on the Sabbath itself), some modern scholars have suggested that the actual fear of these “Early Pious” was that if remains of the man's semen were released from the woman's body on the Sabbath (something that can happen up to three days after coitus according to an ancient rabbinic understanding), she will become impure, an undesired event on the Sabbath. For similar reasons, relations on the Sabbath itself were, for them, absolutely forbidden. On this, see Werman and Shemesh, Revealing the Hidden, 162–63.

108 This calculation disregards the exact length of the Jewish month, which is about 29.5 days.

109 This explanation for the numbers is the most convincing I have found; there may be others.

110 Did many religiously meticulous Jewish couples follow this advice? I do not know. The only thing of which we can be sure is that those men who had direct or indirect access to the important tractate of Niddah in the Talmud were potentially aware of it and that the idea was repeated, and at times even prescribed, in various books addressing a certain religious elite. See, e.g., mentions of this idea in Sefer Hasidim from 12th/13th-cent. Germany, in its Parma edition, paragraphs 264, 517, and 565. See also Sefer Ha'eshkol, Hilkhot tseni’ut 36b (Abraham ben Isaac of Narboone, Sefer ha-Eshkol [ed. Hanokh Albeck; Jerusalem: Mas, 1935–1938]); and Elisheva Baumgarten, Mothers and Children, 42.

111 In the Roman world, Friday was called Dies Veneris, the day of Venus, the Goddess of love and sexuality. See an explanation in Cassius Dio, Roman History, 37.18–19 (available online at http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/37*.html). I would like to thank Moshe Blidstein (Oxford) for this reference. In Greek, the day's name is a Greek version of the same thing: Hemerea Aphrodites, “Day of Aphrodite.” I am still trying to find out whether these names had practical meaning: in other words, whether Friday was connected with sexual activity in the Greek and Roman worlds, as well as the origins of the expression “Act of Venus” used in different places to refer to copulation. Note that in Jewish Greek of the 1st cent. c.e., the day had a more banal, and “Jewish,” name: it was simply called “day of preparation” (). See for example Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, and John 19:14.

112 As this article went to press, I came across a long discussion of sex on the Sabbath in talmudic and other ancient Jewish literatures in Anat Sharbat, “The Concept of Sexuality in the World of the Sages” (Ph.D. diss., Bar-Ilan University, 2011) 55–130 [Hebrew].

113 Rashi on b. Niddah 17a.

114 Zohar 2:89a. Translation from Wolfson, Elliot R., “Eunuchs who Keep the Sabbath: Becoming Male and the Ascetic Ideal in Thirteenth Century Jewish Mysticism,” in Becoming Male in the Middle Ages (ed. Cohen, Jeffrey Jerome and Wheeler, Bonnie; New York: Garland, 1997) 151–85Google Scholar, at 158. See also Zohar 3:142b–143a (Idra Rabba): “When the Consort sits with the King and they unite face to face, who can enter between them? Who can get closer to them? . . . This is the reason [for the idea] that the appropriate time for sexual relations for scholars, who know this secret, is from Sabbath to Sabbath” (). I would like to thank Daniel Abrams for his help with this text. See also various long paragraphs on the matter quoted in Tishby, Isaiah, The Wisdom of the Zohar: An Anthology of Texts (trans. Goldstein, David; 3 vols.; Oxford: The Littman Library and Oxford University Press, 1989) 3:1390–94Google Scholar (in the Hebrew edition of 1961: 2:637–40). See Gershom Scholem's short explanation of the matter in his Zohar—The Book of Splendor: Basic Readings from the Kabbalah (New York: Schocken Books, 1949) 35–36. See also Harris, Manford, “Marriage as Metaphysics: A Study of the ‘Iggeret Hakodesh,” HUCA 33 (1962) 197–220, at 213–14Google Scholar; Guberman, Karen, “The Language of Love in Spanish Kabbalah: An Examination of the ‘Iggeret ha-Kodesh,” in Approaches to Judaism in Medieval Times (ed. Blumenthal, David R.; Brown Judaic Studies 54; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1984) 53–105Google Scholar, at 74–75; Ginsburg, Elliot K., The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989) 289–93Google Scholar; Cohen, Esther and Horowitz, Elliot, “In Search of the Sacred: Jews, Christians, and Rituals of Marriage in the Later Middle Ages,” The Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 20 (1990) 225–49Google Scholar, at 241; Wolfson, Elliot R., “Coronation of the Sabbath Bride: Kabbalistic Myth and the Ritual of Androgynisation,” Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 6 (1997) 301–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stanislawski, Michael, “Toward the Popular Religion of Ashkenazic Jews: Yiddish-Hebrew Texts on Sex and Circumcision,” in Mediating Modernity—Challenges and Trends in the Jewish Encounter with the Modern World: Essays in Honor of Michael A. Meyer (ed. Strauss, Lauren B. and Brenner, Michael; Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2008) 93–106Google Scholar, at 99–100; and Ophir, Natan, “Meditative Instructions for Friday Night Conjugal Intimacy: Romantic Kabbalah in the Writings of R. Moses Kordovero,” Massakhet 10 (2010) 87–113Google Scholar [Hebrew].

115 Menahem Recanati (Italy, ca. 1250 – ca. 1310), commentary on Gen 1:3; Gen 2:21; Deut 31:20.

116 See Cohen, Seymour J., The Holy Letter: A Study in Medieval Jewish Sexual Morality Ascribed to Nahmanides (New York: Ktav, 1976)Google Scholar. On the modern uses of this text, see Marienberg, Evyatar, “Jews Have the Best Sex: The Hollywood Adventures of a Peculiar Medieval Jewish Text on Sexuality,” Journal of Religion and Film 14:2 (2010)Google Scholar, accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.unomaha.edu/jrf/vol14.no2/Marienberg_JewishText.html.

117 Abraham ben David of Posquières, Ba'ale ha-Nefesh, Sha’ar Haqedushah.

118 Koren, Sharon, “Mystical Rationales for the Laws of Niddah,” in Women and Water: Menstruation in Jewish Life and Law (ed. Wasserfall, Rahel R.; Hanover, N.H.: Brandeis University Press, 1999) 101–21Google Scholar, at 106.

119 See Ginsburg, Elliot K., “Kabbalistic Rituals of Sabbath Preparation,” in Essential Papers on Kabbalah (ed. Fine, Laurence; New York: New York University Press, 1995) 400–37Google Scholar, at 432 n. 39.

120 Kordovero, Moses (1522–1570), Shi'ur Qomah (Warsaw: Goldman, 1883)Google Scholar 30a (see ch. 15, “Adam”). On the processes that caused esoteric kabbalistic ideas to penetrate mainstream Jewish thought and have major impact on Jewish life, see Weinstein, Roni, Kabbalah and Jewish Modernity (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press, 2011)Google Scholar [Hebrew].

121 Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot ishut 14:1: .

122 See b. Berakhot 22a; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot tefillah 4:5.

123 Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot de'ot 5:4: .

124 Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot shabbat 30:14: .

125 Goitein, Shlomo D., “The Sexual Mores of the Common People,” in Society and the Sexes in Medieval Islam (ed. al-Sayyid-Marsot, Afaf Lutfi; Malibu: Undena Publications, 1979) 43–61Google Scholar, at 49. See also idem, The Family, 168–69. The “failure to observe” was probably in most cases that of men who did not fulfill this minimum and who were thus sued for divorce by their wives. One should remember that, especially in cases of men who had more than one wife or a mistress, abandoning a wife sexually without releasing her from the marriage was not unheard of.

126 Shlomo D. Goitein, “Sexual Mores,” 50. Goitein's last suggestion, although interesting, is not free of problems, beginning with the fact that for Jews, Friday night is already a part of the holy day, not simply preceding it. The additional facts that many activities are forbidden on the Sabbath and that various Jewish groups actually considered sexual activity during that day to be prohibited just add to the doubts regarding his theory. And yet it is worth further consideration.

127 . See Arba'ah Turim, Orah hayyim 240; Even ha’ezer 25.

128 See Shulhan Arukh, Orah hayyim 240, 280:1.

129 Orhot Hayyim, Ketubbot 38: . In the same sentence, the author also includes the practice of relations on the night of the ritual bath. We will return to this soon. For an example from the 17th cent. of a desire to spread this practice among the masses, see the outstanding book of Weinstein, Roni, Juvenile Sexuality, Kabbalah, and Catholic Reformation in Italy: Tiferet Bahurim by Pinhas Barukh ben Pelatiyah Monselice (trans. Stein, Batya; Studies in Jewish History and Culture 21; Leiden: Brill, 2009) 221–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a fascinating critique of this same practice, see ibid., 80–81. This discussion also appeared in Hebrew: Weinstein, Roni, The Glory of Young Men (Tiferet Bahurim): The First Jewish Guidebook for Weddings (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute, 2010) 60–70Google Scholar, 188–89.

130 For an interesting visualization—and perhaps critique—of this practice, see the images “Mizvah Night I” and “Mizvah Night II” by the Israeli artist Ruth Schreiber, under the category “sculpture” on her website, accessed March 21, 2013, http://www.ruthschreiber.com.

131 See Arba'ah Turim, Even ha'ezer 25; Orah hayyim 240; Shulhan Arukh, Orah hayyim 240:1. This idea is undoubtedly related to a talmudic concept that a woman can become pregnant only close to the time of her ritual bath. It is important to note that this is not the only opinion on the matter in talmudic literature. At the same paragraph, another opinion—that conception can occur only “close to her period”—is expressed as well. See b. Niddah 31b and b. Sotah 27a. On this and other related issues, see Evyatar Marienberg, “Female Fertility in Talmudic Literature,” HUCA 83 (forthcoming, 2014) [Hebrew]. In much later periods, in some Lurianic-kabbalistic sources, it is mentioned that the couple should engage in relations on the night of the ritual bath even if the bath does not fall on the eve of the Sabbath. It seems that some of these texts consider such relations to be as good as relations on Sabbath Eve (see, for example, Moses Kordovero, Tefillah le-Moshe, Part 1, Sha'ar 10, Siman 13), while others do not say this explicitly (see, for example, in Siddur Qol Ya'aqov of Jacob Koppel Lifshitz, commandment 86).

132 1249–1316 c.e. See Ta-Shma, Israel Moses and Derovan, David, “Meiri, Menahem ben Solomon,” Encyclopaedia Judaica (ed. Berenbaum, Michael and Skolnik, Fred; 22 vols.; 2nd ed.; Detroit: Macmillan Reference, 2007) 13:785–88Google Scholar.

133 Menahem ben Salomon Hame'iri, Bet Habehirah on b. Berakhot 31a: .

134 Sefer Hasidim (Ms Parma H 3280) 380: .

135 Stow, Kenneth R., “The Jewish Family in the Rhineland in the High Middle Ages: Form and Function,” AHR 92 (1987) 1085–110Google Scholar.

136 Avraham Grossman suggested in 1981, and kept this statement in later editions of his seminal work on the early sages of Ashkenez, that the average number of children in rabbinic families was four (The Early Sages of Ashkenaz: Their Lives, Leadership and Works (900–1096) [Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1981] 8–9 n. 32 [Hebrew]). He based this assertion on a short paragraph on this matter in Blumenkranz, Bernhard, “Germany, 843–1096,” in The Dark Ages: Jews in Christian Europe, 711–1096 (ed. Roth, Cecil and Levine, Israel H.; rev. ed.; vol. 2.2 of The World History of the Jewish People; New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1966) 162–74Google Scholar, at 165. In later editions (1989, 2001), Grossman added a note dismissing Stow's article but unfortunately without providing substantial arguments. The arguments presented by Blumenkranz in 1966 seem to me to be very lacking by today's standards.

137 In quite a number of studies, there is evidence that the number of people living in an average European household during the Middle Ages was often between four and six. Although it is tempting to assume this means two to four children per family, many of these studies show that the very nature of these households was complex and fluid, including at times more than two adults or, on the other hand, young people who were not part of the biological family. I am still not aware of studies that can answer a question that to us moderns might seem simple: How many living children did an average medieval couple have? For more on medieval households, see Flandrin, Jean-Louis, Families in Former Times: Kinship, Household, and Sexuality (trans. Southern, Richard; London: Cambridge University Press, 1976) 53–65Google Scholar; and Herlihy, David, Medieval Households (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985) 56–78Google Scholar.

138 This idea has been raised occasionally by other scholars, but without further exploration. See for example a comment by Patricia Skinner: when mentioning the possibility that many medieval Jewish families were small, she said that this “may have been due to the strictness of Jewish purity laws which acted as a regulator to sexual activity” (“Gender, Memory, and Jewish Identity: Reading a Family History from Medieval Southern Italy,” Early Medieval Europe 13 [2005] 277–96, at 292).

139 See, for example, Fishman, Talya, “The Penitential System of Hasidei Ashkenaz and the Problem of Cultural Boundaries,” Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 8 (1999) 201–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Soloveitchik, Haym, “Piety, Pietism, and German Pietism: ‘Sefer Ḥasidim I’ and the Influence of Ḥasidei Ashkenaz,” JQR 92 (2002) 455–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Kanarfogel, Ephraim, “R. Judah he-Hasid and the Rabbinic Scholars of Regensburg: Interactions, Influences, and Implications,” JQR 96 (2006) 17–37Google Scholar.

140 An article about Jewish demography in late antiquity also discusses the pattern of very small families. However, the period discussed, which was well before many of the halakhic factors considered in our study evolved, makes it of little relevance for our topic. See nevertheless Tropper, Amram, “Children and Childhood in Light of the Demographics of the Jewish Family in Late Antiquity,” JSJ 37 (2006) 299–343Google Scholar.

141 See such a statement at the very beginning of this article.

142 See also Kanarfogel, Ephraim, “Rabbinic Attitudes toward Nonobservance in the Medieval Period,” in Jewish Tradition and the Nontraditional Jew (ed. Schacter, Jacob J.; Lanham, N.J.: Jason Aronson, 1992) 3–35Google Scholar; and Judith R. Baskin, “Male Piety, Female Bodies,” 20–23. For a survey of contemporary levels of observance of these laws among Orthodox Jews, see Guterman, Mark A., “Observance of the Laws of Family Purity in Modern-Orthodox Judaism,” Archives of Sexual Behavior 37 (2008) 340–45CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

143 Shatzmiller, Joseph, “Les bains juifs aux XIIe et XIIIe siècles,” Médiévales 43 (2002) 83–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 85 [my translation].

144 Gardin, “Laws of Taharat HaMishpacha,” 10.

145 Daniel Rosenak hints in many places that the niddah laws might have had a negative demographic impact on Jews in the past. He nevertheless does not discuss this assertion in any detail, nor does he consider many of the questions we deal with in this article. See Daniel Rosenak, To Restore the Splendour, 19, 69–70, 97, 123, 129, 137, 150, 161, 213 n. 284, 247, 256–59.