Is the Prohibition of Yichud Biblical or Rabbinical and what are its practical ramifications?[1]
The prohibition of Yichud is debated among Halachic authorities as to whether it is a Biblical or rabbinical status. The Talmud[2] explicitly states that the Yichud prohibition of an Erva comes from the Torah and goes on to give a supportive hint from Scripture for the prohibition. However, while most authorities understand this Talmudic statement to be literal and that the prohibition of Yichud is a biblical status, and hence one who transgresses it, is liable for transgressing a biblical prohibition, nonetheless not all authorities agree with this understanding and rather view the Talmudic statement as a mere scriptural support for the rabbinical decree. Furthermore, the Talmud itself goes on to say that the possibility of the prohibition of Yichud being biblical is limited specifically to Yichud with an Erva. However, having Yichud with those who are not defined as an Erva is certainly only rabbinical. Below we will analyze the various cases of Yichud which are biblical and rabbinical as well as their practical ramifications.
- The law by an Erva:
Some Poskim[3] rule based on explicit Talmudic[4] statements, that Yichud with an Erva is a Torah-level prohibition (d’Oraita)[5], derived from a verse in scripture.[6] Other Poskim[7], however, maintain that Yichud is a rabbinic safeguard (d’Rabbanan), instituted to prevent Giluiy Arayos and are not of Biblical status. Practically, most Poskim[8] concord that Yichud is treated as a Biblical prohibition. This conclusion contains certain practical ramifications as will be explained in E that there are certain cases in which we are stringent by potentially biblical Yichud versus rabbinical. However, even this conclusion that Yichud is biblical, is limited only to Yichud with an Erva and not to Yichud with two parties that are not considered Erva, as will be explained in B. Likewise, according to many authorities, it only applies in certain circumstances as will be explained in C.
The Geder of an Erva – Eishes Ish, Relatives, Nida: The definition of an Erva regarding the Biblical prohibition of Yichud includes any married woman [i.e. Eishes Ish] and all female relatives whom the Torah forbids for marriage[9] with exception to a parent and child, grandparent and grandchild, and sibling, as will be explained below. In contrast, a single Jewish woman whom one is permitted to marry is not considered an Erva, provided she is not in a state of Niddah. If she is a Niddah, however, there is a dispute among halachic authorities whether she assumes the status of Erva for the purposes of Yichud. Some Poskim[10] rule that any woman who is a Nida is considered an Erva regarding the biblical prohibition of Yichud [with exception to her husband[11]]. [According to this approach, all single girls today enter the biblical prohibition of Yichud at the moment they begin to menstruate, which is approximately at age 12 but potentially early or later depending on the child.[12]] Other Poskim[13], however, rule that single girls which are permitted in marriage are not considered an Erva regarding the biblical prohibition of Yichud, even though they are considered an Erva regarding the prohibition of Giluiy Arayos.[14] According to this approach, the biblical prohibition of Yichud with a girl to whom one is permitted in marriage only applies once she gets married.
The law by a mother and daughter and grandparent and grandchild:[15] Although a mother and daughter, father and son, [and grandparent, and grandchild[16]] are considered Arayos (forbidden relationships for marriage), there is no prohibition of Yichud with these close relatives.[17]
The law by a sibling:[18] Although brothers and sisters are considered Arayos, and thereby it is forbidden according to all opinions for siblings of opposite gender to have Yichud Kavua [i.e. to live together alone on a permanent basis][19], nonetheless, this prohibition is only Rabbinical, as the biblical prohibition of Yichud does not apply to siblings.
- The law by a non-Erva – Penuya, Goyah, Lav, Asei:
Penuyah:[20] According to all opinions, the Biblical prohibition of Yichud is limited to a woman who is an Erva or is forbidden in marriage due to one reason or another [see below regarding Issur Lav and Issur Asei], however, Yichud with a woman whom one is not forbidden in marriage, such as a Penuya (unmarried Jewish woman) who is not an Erva, then the prohibition of Yichud is considered Rabbinic and was established by King David and his Beis Din after the incident of Amnon and Tamar.[21] [With regards to Yichud with a single woman to whom one is permitted in marriage but is a Nida, which includes all single girls today starting from age 12 and on, it is debated amongst the Poskim as to whether Biblical Yichud is applicable and the main approach is to be stringent, as explained in A.]
Goyah – Female gentile:[22] A Gentile woman is not considered an Erva even though she is forbidden in marriage. Thus, according to all opinions, there is no Biblical prohibition of Yichud with a Gentile woman, although Yichud with a Gentile woman remains rabbinically forbidden under a decree that was passed in the times of Beis Shamaiy and Beis Hillel which included even Gentiles within the prohibition of Yichud.
Goy – Male gentile:[23] A married Jewish woman is Biblically forbidden to be in Yichud with a gentile man. A single Jewish woman is Rabbinically forbidden to be in Yichud with a gentile man.
Issur Lav and Asei: Some Poskim[24] rule that any woman whom one is prohibited to marry even due to a mere Lav or Asei[25] is Biblically prohibited in Yichud, even if she is not an Erva [i.e. Kohen and Gerusha]. Other Poskim[26], however, rule that the Biblical prohibition is limited to Arayos, and does not include women who are prohibited due to a mere Lav or Asei.
- The form of Yichud that is Biblical:
With more than one male or female: Some Poskim[27] rule that the biblical prohibition of Yichud only applies to when one man is secluded with one woman [whose relationship would constitute a biblical Yichud prohibition, as explained above]. In circumstances where multiple men or multiple women are present, there is no biblical prohibition of Yichud, even if the individuals involved would otherwise fall under the general biblical restrictions.
Living versus visiting: Some Poskim[28] rule that the biblical prohibition of Yichud only applies to when the two parties live with each other, however, a mere temporary seclusion, is only Rabbinically forbidden. Other Poskim[29], however, rule that the biblical prohibition of Yichud applies even to temporary Yichud.
- The practical ramifications:
Case of Doubt (Safek):[30] If Yichud is Biblical, then in cases of doubt, we apply the principle “Safek d’Oraita l’chumra”—a doubt in a Torah law requires stringency. If it were rabbinic, the rule would be more lenient (Safek d’Rabbanan l’kula).
Sick or weak man: If a man has complete erectile dysfunction due to his very old age or due to his illness, some Poskim[31] rule that all Rabbinically forbidden forms of Yichud [i.e. girls below age 11] do not apply, however Biblically forbidden forms of Yichud [i.e. all girls above age 11] remain in state.
Ishto Bair:[32] If one’s wife is in the city and can arrive home or to one’s work at any moment, then if the wife does not have a key to the house and the door is locked then while the husband can be lenient regarding Rabbinical Yichud in the home or workplace, such as one who is alone with two women, he may not be lenient regarding Biblical Yichud.
Yaharog V’al Ya’avor: Some Poskim[33] rule that it is forbidden under Yaharog Veal Yaavor to have Yichud with any of the Arayos with which Yichud is Biblically forbidden, as it is included in Avizraiyhu of Giluiy Arayos. Other Poskim[34], however, rule that the Issur of Yichud is not under the category of Yaharog Veal Yaavor.
Summary:
The prohibition of Yichud—seclusion between a man and a woman who are not permitted to each other—is debated among Halachic authorities as to whether it is a Biblical (d’Oraita) or Rabbinical (d’Rabbanan) law. The Talmud provides scriptural hints that Yichud with a forbidden relative (Erva) is a Torah law, and most authorities treat it as such, meaning transgressing Yichud with an Erva is considered a Biblical violation. However, some authorities consider the scriptural references as support for a Rabbinic law. The Biblical status generally applies only to Yichud with an Erva, while Yichud with non-Erva women is Rabbinically forbidden.
- Erva (forbidden relatives): Most authorities hold that Yichud with an Erva (e.g., married woman, certain relatives) is Biblically prohibited. Some dissenting views exist, but the mainstream approach is to be stringent. However, this only applies to certain relatives (not parents, children), and even for siblings, the prohibition is Rabbinic.
- Non-Erva (e.g., single women, Gentiles): Yichud with a single Jewish woman (Penuya) who is not a Nida is Rabbinically forbidden, not Biblical. The same applies to Gentile women and cases where a woman is forbidden due to a less severe prohibition (Lav or Asei), though some authorities are stringent in these cases.
- Forms of Yichud: The Biblical prohibition is generally limited to one man with one woman; if there are multiple men or women, or if the seclusion is not permanent (e.g., just visiting), some authorities consider it only Rabbinically forbidden.
- Practical Ramifications:
- Cases of Doubt: If Yichud is Biblically forbidden, any doubt must be treated stringently (Safek d’Oraita l’Chumra). If it is Rabbinic, one can be lenient in cases of doubt (Safek d’Rabbanan l’Kula).
- Sick or weak man: In cases where a man is incapable of relations, Rabbinic Yichud prohibitions may not apply, but Biblical ones remain.
- Ishto Bair (wife in town): If a man’s wife is nearby, leniencies at times only apply to Rabbinic Yichud but not to Biblical Yichud.
- Yaharog V’al Ya’avor: Some authorities rule Yichud with an Erva is so severe that one must give up their life rather than transgress (Yaharog V’al Ya’avor), but others disagree.
In summary, the prohibition of Yichud is mostly treated as a Biblical law when it comes to forbidden relatives (Erva), and as a Rabbinic law for other cases, with several practical differences in how stringency is applied in cases of doubt or extenuating circumstances.
Topic | Biblical (d’Oraita) | Rabbinical (d’Rabbanan) | Details/Notes |
Yichud with Erva | Most authorities: Yes | Some authorities: Yes | Includes married woman, certain relatives; not parents, children, siblings |
Yichud with Sibling | No | Yes | Prohibition is only when living together |
Yichud with Parent/Child/Grandparent/Grandchild | No | No | No prohibition |
Yichud with Penuya not Nida (Single Jewish woman) | No | Yes | Rabbinic, established after Amnon and Tamar |
Yichud with Niddah | Disputed | Disputed | Some say Biblical, others say not unless married |
Yichud with Gentile Woman | No | Yes | Decree from Beis Shamaiy and Beis Hillel |
Yichud with Gentile Man (married Jewish woman) | Yes | Biblically forbidden | |
Yichud with Gentile Man (single Jewish woman) | No | Yes | Rabbinically forbidden |
Yichud with Lav or Asei (minor prohibitions) | Disputed | Disputed | Some include in Biblical, others limit to Arayos |
One man with one woman Erva | Yes | Biblical applies | |
Multiple men/women present | No | Yes | Some say only Rabbinic prohibition |
Living together (permanent Yichud) | Yes | Biblical applies according to some | |
Temporary Yichud (visiting) | Some say Yes | Some say Yes | Disputed if Biblical or Rabbinic |
Case of Doubt (Safek) | Stringent (l’Chumra) | Lenient (l’Kula) | Treat doubts stringently if Biblical, lenient if Rabbinic |
Sick or weak man | Applies | May not apply | Biblical prohibitions remain, Rabbinic may not |
Ishto Bair (wife in city) | No leniency | Leniency possible | Lenient for Rabbinic, not for Biblical Yichud |
Yaharog V’al Ya’avor | Some say Yes | Some say No | Debate if Yichud is under this severe prohibition |
[1] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Volume 23 Erech Yichud; Nitei Gavriel 1:1
[2] Kiddushin 80b; Sanhedrin 21b; Avoda Zara 36b “Rabbi Yochanon stated: From where is Yichud hinted to from the Torah. As it is stated: “If your brother, the son of your mother, entices you…” (Devarim 13:7). Does only a maternal brother entice and not a paternal brother? Rather, this teaches that a son may be secluded with his mother, but it is forbidden to be secluded with all other arayot in the Torah.”; Brought in Beis Shmuel 22:1; AvoS d’Rabbi Natan 2:2 “A man, a man, to all his close flesh you shall not approach” (Vayikra 18:6). From here they said: A person should not be secluded with women.
[3] Tur 22:1; Tosafus Sotah 7a and Shabbos 13a; Implication of Rashi Shabbos ibid; Riy Melunil Shabbos ibid; Yireim 26; Ramban on Sefer Hamitzvos Shoresh Shelishi; Zichron Yosef E.H. 14; Tosafus Tuch Kiddushin 81b; Haeshkol 1:117; Pirush Haraavad Toras Kohanim chapter 13; Rabbeinu Yona on Sanhedrin ibid and Sefer Hayorah;; Chinuch 188 and Minchas Chinuch ibid; Rivash 22; Tosafus Rosh Sanhderin and Kiddushin ibid; Rosh Kitzur Hilchos Nida; Rashba 1:587; 1178; Yad Rameh Kiddushin ibid; Meiri Kiddushin ibid; Nimukei Yosef Sanhedrin 26b; Ran ibid; Aguda Sanhedrin 37a; Rabbeinu Chananel Sanhedrin 21b; Terumas Hadeshen 244; Sefer Chareidim 32: 25; Radbaz 7:32; Bach E.H. 22 in opinion of Tur and Semag 126; Beis Shmuel E.H. 115:34; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 20; Chochmas Adam Shaar Beis Hanashim 15:26; Shevet Halevi 5:201-1; Mishneh Halachos 3:48
[4] Gemara Sanhedrin 21b and Avoda Zara 36b “Is Deoraisa”
[5] Is it a Lav? No. According to all opinions it is not counted as a Lav. [See Pnei Yehoshua Kiddushin 81a; Gr”a E.H. 22:4; Minchas Chinuch ibid; Chikrei Leiv E.H. 17; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 23] Rather it is a Lav that comes from an Asei, or is an Issur of Chetzi Shiur, or is Stam an Issur Torah, not an Asei and not a Lo Sasei, or is included in the Lav of Sikravu. [See Poskim ibid for the different approaches of how to learn this matter; Zohar Harakia Asei 78 writes to include it in Lo Sikrovu]
[6] The source: Rabbi Yochanon stated: From where is Yichud hinted to from the Torah. As it is stated: “If your brother, the son of your mother, entices you…” (Devarim 13:7). Does only a maternal brother entice and not a paternal brother? Rather, this teaches that a son may be secluded with his mother, but it is forbidden to be secluded with all other arayot in the Torah.” [Avoda Zara 36b; Kiddushin 80b; Sanhedrin 21b; Brought in Beis Shmuel 22:1] Alternatively, it is learned from the verse “A man, a man, to all his close flesh you shall not approach” (Vayikra 18:6). From here they said: A person should not be secluded with women. [Avos d’Rabbi Natan 2:2] Alternatively, it is a Halacha Lemoshe Misinai. [See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 29]
[7] Implication of Rambam Issurei Biyah 22:2 “The Issur of Yichud with Arayos is from Kabalah” as learns the Semag 126, Bach ibid, Beis Shmuel 22:1, Biur Hagr”a, [however some argue that even according to Rambam its Biblical, See Mishneh Limelech on Rambam ibid; Mahariy Elgaz and Shevet Halevi 5:201; Bach and Beis Yosef on Tur ibid]; Semak Mitzvah 99; Levush E.H. 22; Hagaah Perisha 44:115; Kehilas Yaakov Mareches 10:157; Arugas Habosem 1:18; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 30-35
[8] Most Rishonim ibid and so conclude: Chochmas Adam Shaar Beis Hanashim 15:26; Shevet Halevi 5:201-1; Mishneh Halachos 3:48
[9] List of Arayos: Father’s wife (stepmother); Sister (whether paternal or maternal); Half-sister (born to your father or mother); Aunt (father’s sister or mother’s sister); Uncle’s wife (wife of father’s brother)
Daughter-in-law; Sister-in-law (brother’s wife); Woman and her daughter or granddaughter; Woman and her sister as a rival wife during her lifetime; Father’s brother’s wife; Mother-in-law
[10] Rivash 425; Chikrei Leiv E.H. 17; Sefer Hazichronos 10; Chochmas Adam in Binas Adam Shaar Beis Nashim 18; Mahariy Halevi 1:16; M”B 75:17; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 451; Nitei Gavriel 7:2
[11] Michaber Y.D. 195:1; E.H. 22:1; Rambam Issurei Biyah 22:1; Sota 7a; Kesubos 4a; Sanhedrin 47a; Tosefta Sotah 1:2; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 412
[12] See Michaber Y.D. 190:2; Nida 10b; Nitei Gavriel 7:3
[13] Meyuchas Lerashi on Avos 2:10; Imrei Kohen 26; Tzitz Eliezer 6:40; Beis Moshe E.H. 22:1; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 456
[14] The reason: As one can marry a Nida, and the Torah only prohibited a woman whom it is forbidden to marry eternally.
[15] Michaber E.H. 22:1; Tur 22:1; Rambam Issurei Biyah 22:1; Mishneh Kiddushin 80b; Sanhedrin 21b; Avoda Zara 36b; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 344
[16] Bach 22; Ezer Mikodesh 21; Od Yosef Chaiy Shoftim 3; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 393-397
[17] The reason is that the Torah and Chazal did not apply the restriction of seclusion to immediate family members, as the concern for immoral behavior does not generally apply in these cases.
[18] See Beis Shmuel E.H. 20:14; Piskeiy Harosh 4:22; Nitei Gavriel 3 footnote 2
[19] Rav Assi in Kiddushin 81b “A man may have Yichud with his sister and live with his mother”; Rashi Kiddushin ibid in explanation of opinion of Rav Assi; Yerushalmi Sotah 1b; Chelkas Mechokei E.H. 20:9, 21:1; Beis Shmuel 22:1 [unlike 20:14]; Rashal in Yam Shel Shomo Kiddushin 27; Perisha 22:3; Kitzur Piskeiy Rosh Kiddushin 24; Semak 99; Ran Kiddushin ibid; Mishneh Limelech Sotah 1; Chochmas Adam 126:12; Chikrei Lev E.H. 6 and 17; Avnei Nezer 2:233; Aruch Hashulchan 22:2; Maharsham Mafteichos 76; Nidchei Yisrael [of Chofetz Chaim] 24:6; Nachalas David 23; Erech Shaiy E.H. 22 based on Zohar; Misgeres Hashulchan 152:1
The reason: The inclination for a mother or daughter is completely dormant and Yichud is hence allowed even permanently. However, the Yetzer for a sister although dormant is still possible, and hence the Sages limited the Yichud allowance to only a temporary basis. [See Rashi Kiddushin ibid; Pnei Yehoshua ibid; Tosafus Rosh Kiddushin ibid] Alternatively, it is not possible to decree against living alone with a mother or daughter, as opposed to a sister. [Erech Shaiy ibid]
[20] Michaber E.H. 22:2; Tur 22:1; Rambam Issurei Biyah 22:3; Sanhedrin 21b; Avoda Zara 36b; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 531 and 636
[21] See Shmuel 2:13
[22] Michaber E.H. 22:2 “Shamaiy and Hillel”; Tur 22:1; Rambam Issurei Biyah 22:3; Avoda Zara 36b “Talmidei Beis Shamaiy and Beis Hillel”; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 6 and 670
[23] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 625-635; See regarding that Yichud with a gentile man is forbidden: Michaber E.H. 22:3; Y.D. 153:4; Rambam Issureiy Biyah 22:4; Mishneh Avoda Zara 22a;
[24] Beis Shmuel 22:1; Perisha E.H. 22:1; Toras Chesed Lublin 2:12 -2; Beis Moseh E.H. 22:1; Chazon Ish E.H. 34:6; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 522
[25] See Toras Chesed ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 541
[26] Kiryas Sefer on Rambam Issurei Biyah 22; Arei Arazim 22; Toras Chesed ibid in name of some Rishonim; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 527
[27] See Pischeiy Teshuvah 22:4 in name of Shev Yaakov 19 that Biblical Yichud is only one with one; Nitei Gavriel 21 footnote 14
[28] Rabbeinu Yerucham Nesiv 23:1; Chikrei Leiv E.H. 17; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 76
[29] See Tosafus Harosh Kiddushin 81b; Shevet Halevi 5:201 – 1; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 84
[30] See Divrei Malkiel 4:102; Pnei Moshe E.H. 22:13; Igros Moshe E.H. 4:65 -12; Devar Halacha 15:1; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 253
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that Safek Yichud is forbidden even by Rabbinical matters. [Shevet Halevi 3:183; 5:201]
[31] Zayis Ranan E.H. 1, brought in Dvar Halacha ibid; So also rules Rav SZ”A in Nishmas Avraham E.H. 22; See Sotah 26b that Issur Setira applies with a Shachuf; See Otzer Haposkim 20/11-5; See Nechpa Bakaesef 2/19 that “Lo Sikrav” related prohibitions don’t apply to a man with erectile dysfunction, however a Rabbinical prohibition certainly remains; See also Peri Hadama Issurei Biya 1 p. 41 and Tuv Taam Vadaas Telisa 1/5 regarding Chibuk and Nishuk
[32] Doveiv Meishatim 5; Dvar Halacha 6/3; Nitei Gavriel 41/1
[33] See Zera Avraham Y.D. 5; Tzur Yaakov 16; Shem Aryeh E.H. 33; Tuv Taam Vadaas Kama 192; Piskeiy Teshuvah 1:13; Michtam Ledavid 12; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 244
[34] Hagahos Zer Zahav on O.C. 59:1; Tzitz Eliezer 6:40; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 246-250
