Eikev: When to Disregard Tznius (Modesty) and Act Like an Animal

Yes, this is an article about a case in which Chazal permit us to totally disregard the laws of tznius and explicitly encourage us to behave like animals ... but probably not in the way you think.

Rabbi Matt Schneeweiss

Aug 23, 2024

Article voiceover

1×

0:00

-8:44

If you are interested in sponsoring the Torah content for the remainder of August, let me know!

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.

I have a feeling that the only people who understand this image are children of the 90s who familiarize themselves with the statements of Chazal in this article.

Eikev: When to Disregard Tznius (Modesty) and Act Like an Animal

I taught at an all-girls high school for ten years. If there’s one word that is guaranteed to elicit a reaction from female Orthodox Jewish day school students, it's tznius. Some associate this term with the highest religious and ethical ideals, while others connect it with anxiety, oppression, or even trauma.

One might expect the Rambam to discuss tznius in Hilchos Deios (Laws of Character Traits), particularly in Chapter 5, which outlines the exemplary conduct of the wise. However, his treatment of tznius in 5:6 has a specific focus:

Talmidei chachamim (students of the wise) conduct themselves with exceptional tznius. They do not demean themselves, nor do they uncover their heads or bodies. Even when they enter the bathroom, they should be modest and not uncover their garments until they are seated. They should not wipe themselves with their right hand. They should distance themselves from all people, entering a chamber within a chamber, deep within a cave, and relieve themselves there. If they relieve themselves behind a fence, they should distance themselves so that no one can hear the sound if they break wind. If they relieve themselves in an open area, they should be far enough away that no one can see them uncovered. They should not speak while relieving themselves, even if there is a great need. Just as they conduct themselves with modesty in the bathroom during the day, so should they at night. One should train themselves to relieve themselves only in the morning and evening so that they need not go far.

According to the Rambam here, tznius is primarily about bathroom behavior. While he discusses clothing and sexual conduct earlier in the chapter, he doesn’t use the word tznius. He does refer to tznius in sexual matters elsewhere, but not in Deios. The Yad Peshuta (ibid.) theorizes that Rambam’s use of this term here is based on the Gemara (Berachos 62a), which states that “the only person called tzanua is one who is tzanua in the bathroom.”

We now have enough background information to understand a strange midrash at the beginning of this week’s parashah. Among the rewards promised for heeding the Torah’s ordinances is, “there will not be an akar (barren man) or akarah (barren woman) among you, and among your livestock” (Devarim 7:14). The Gemara (Bechoros 44b) features a series of statements emphasizing the importance of not holding in one’s urine when nature calls. The first statement is a baraisa that sets forth the premise of the two drashos on our pasuk which follow:

It was taught in a baraisa: There are two ducts in a man. One expels urine and one expels semen, and there is only [a membrane] about [the thickness of] a garlic peel between them. When a man needs [to urinate but holds it in,] if [his urinary duct and seminal duct] were punctured [such that] one [duct leads] into another, he’ll become sterile.

As far as I can tell, this statement reflects an outdated conception (no pun intended!) of male anatomy. [2] However, for our purposes, the accuracy of the baraisa isn’t what matters. What’s important is how Chazal viewed the need to go to the bathroom, as we’ll see. The next statement is the first midrash on our pasuk:

Reish Lakish says: What is, “There shall not be a barren male or female among you, and among your cattle?” [It means:] When will there not be a barren [male] among you? At a time that [you act as] among your cattle.

The Torah Temimah (Devarim 7:14, Note 23) explains the meaning and ~~impotence~~ impetus of the midrash:

You should make yourself like an animal by not being modest with regards to urination (i.e. if you need to go, you may urinate even in public and disregard concerns about modesty). This is supported by a syntactical nuance in the pasuk: “'There shall not be a barren man or woman among you, and among your cattle,” since it would have been more straightforward to say, “There shall not be among you and your cattle a barren man or woman.”

This is the meaning of this article’s title: When should you be immodest like an animal? When you really need to urinate, throw tznius to the wind and go! The Gemara continues with a second drashah on our pasuk:

R' Yehoshua ben Levi says: “There shall not be an akar” among your students, “and akarah” [indicates] that your tefilah (prayer) will not be barren before God. When? At a time when you make yourself like an animal.

Both clauses of this statement are perplexing. Torah Temimah (ibid. 24-25) explains both of them in order:

The subject of this isn’t clear. What relevance do these words have to the subject of the preceding drashah? It is possible to answer, based on that which was stated in Yevamos 62b and 64a, that many of the Sages who learned with Rav Huna became sterile. Rashi explains that this was because he would go on at length in his lectures, and they needed to urinate but weren’t able to leave in the middle of the lecture, so they held it in and became sterile. This is in line with the previous drashah, that [urine] retention causes sterility. R’ Yehoshua ben Levi said that if you conduct yourself and guide the conduct of others in according to this approach—by not delaying urination—then your students will not refrain from coming to you to learn, and they will not worry about this concern, as stated.
[“make yourself like an animal” means] like an animal that does not wait to relieve itself; through this, the students will not become barren, and similarly, the tefilah will not become barren. This is based on Berachos 23a, that “a person’s tefilah is not heard if he needs to relieve himself, and if he davened, his tefilah is an abomination.” This is what Rashi refers to in his commentary: “so that your tefilah will not be barren” [means] “when you daven, your tefilah will be heard, since if you hold in [your urine], your tefilah is an abomination, and is barren.”

The main question I had after reading the Gemara and the Torah Temimah’s commentary is: What exactly is the error made by the person who holds in his urine? What mistaken thinking compelled Rav Huna’s students to stay in his lecture and cause themselves bodily harm instead of leaving to use the bathroom? What mistake did Rav Huna himself make by not accommodating the normal needs of his students? And what mistake does a person make when they know they need to go to the bathroom but choose to daven anyway? [2]

Perhaps an answer lies in understanding tznius. Rav Hirsch opens his chapter on tznius (Horeb 458) with:

Be human in your appearance! Only those parts of the body should be visible which primarily serve as instruments of work – namely, face and hands. But everything that primarily serves animal needs should be covered, so that only the human should appear to your physical eye, and the animal withdrawn; and thus your appearance will already remind you that you exist for a Divine-human task and not for a physical-animal one.

One way to be immodest is by giving primacy to your animalistic body over your human mind. Another is by denying the reality that you are a body-mind hybrid. If a person knows he urgently needs to urinate but refuses to address this need, believing he can remain engaged in the sublime activities of Torah or tefilah without tending to the physical vessel of his non-physical soul, to the point of harming the former in service of the latter, he has a severe misconception of his very self—of what it means to be human. This is why the tefilah of a person holding in his urine is not heard and is considered an abomination: he has a skewed view of the type of creation he is and is therefore incapable of the self-judgment that is the essence of tefilah. The Gemara warns those who neglect to foster this kind of tznius in their teaching that such Torah will not leave a legacy of students to pass it on.

[1] The urethra is the sole duct for both urine and semen, though the Gemara’s reference to two ducts may allude to their distinct origins—urine from the bladder and semen from the seminal vesicles via the ejaculatory ducts and prostate. There is no membrane separating them, so mixing via puncture is not possible. Theoretically, chronic urinary retention or infections could lead to reproductive complications, especially before the advent of antibiotics, and psychological factors related to urine retention might also impact sexual performance and be deemed “impotence.” These are speculative ideas, and input from urologists or sex therapists would be appreciated.

[2] See the Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 92 for the detailed halachos. Not all “needing to go the bathroom” is equal.

What do you think of the answer to the question I raised at the end? I’d love to hear other approaches, insights, and observations!

The Rabbi Schneeweiss Substack

Discussion about this post