Leviticus 18:22

Leviticus 18:22; 20:13 in the original Hebrew are actually very vague texts. While many seem to assume that the meaning of these texts are perfectly clear, they have major difficulties. Most importantly, as Bruce Wells writes: “both contain the phrase מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁה (vocalized as miškəbê ʾiššâ), a longstanding crux for interpreters. In fact, Jacques Berlinerblau finds this phrase so unintelligible that he believes scholars should “admit defeat” in light of the perplexities it presents and forgo further attempts to arrive at a sensible interpretation of these biblical texts” (Bruce Wells, “On the Beds of a Woman: The Leviticus Texts on Same-Sex Relations Reconsidered,” Sexuality and Law in the Torah, 2020, pp. 124). Typical English translations on the issue are irrelevant, since most translations are interpretive rather than literal (see below for more comments on the English translations). Berlinerblau says that a literal, secular, translation of Leviticus 18:22 might read something like this:
And with a male you will not lie lying downs of a woman, It is an abomination.
The initial phrase, “and with a male you will not lie” (or have sex), may seem very explicit and clear. Most scholars have little problems translating this part of the verse. If the author left the verse as is and cut out מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁה and a couple other elements of the verse, this would be a clear condemnation of homosexuality universally speaking among males. But this universal interpretation is probably blocked by the phrase מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁה, which must add some sort of different element or nuance to the statement “with a male you will not lie.” Why else would the author add the phrase “מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁה” (“lying downs of a woman” or “on the beds of a woman”) if this was not the case? Stewart among others have already noticed:
“Did the writer need to write more than ‘You shall not lie with a male’ if the intent was a general condemnation of male homosexuality? Unless one posits that the ‘lyings of a woman’ means nothing, or is a redundancy, it must specify something.”
The words מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁה that are translated “lying downs of a woman” occurs also in a similar verse (Leviticus 20:13) does little to clarify matters:
And a man that will lie with a male lying downs of a woman, the two of them have committed an abomination. They will die. Their blood is upon them.
In Leviticus, the specific target of the texts is sexual relations between men that occur “on the beds of a woman” (מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁה), as Wells translates it (and this is the more accurate translation imo). The big question has to be: what does that expression – “on the beds of a woman” or “lying downs of a woman” – mean? In 18:22, the adverbial use to describe how the lying down occurs (which results in the English translations “as one lies with a woman”) is not supported for מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י. Such an adverbial use would first need to be demonstrated. Additionally, while the preposition ‘as’ is present in all English versions, there is no equivalent in the Hebrew text. Between the words tishkav and mishkevey, one would expect the Hebrew prepositional particle ke, which means ‘like’ or ‘as’. However, ke is not there. The English translations are unjustified (cf. Lings, K. Renato. “The ‘Lyings’ of a Woman: Male-Male Incest in Leviticus 18.22?” Theology & Sexuality, 2015). Going back to the word “מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י,” I think that one has to assume a locative connotation, because מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י nearly always (I would say always) indicates a place or location. So for 18:22, the grammatical/syntactic function of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י is telling the reader “where” you can’t lie with a man (see below). In Lev 20:13, the use of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י is appositional. The conclusion is almost inevitable, in both cases, the end result is that it is qualifying the sleeping partner in question, which limits the scope of the prohibition of the male-with-male relationship. Instead of condemning same-gender sex universally, they condemn a specific form of same-gender sex between men.
Possible suggestions of interpretation are that the texts condemn male on male incest (since the main aim behind Leviticus 18-20 is to ban incestuous practices). Another potential and I think more likely interpretation is that the texts are basically saying, ‘don’t have sex with a man who is the sexual partner of a woman.’ Many different directions could be had because of the ambiguous phrase. So the expression “lyings of a woman” or “on the beds of a woman” functions as a qualifier, which signifies a specific category of males with whom same-sex sex is forbidden. In other words, it limits the scope of the prohibition to a specific male-with-male relationship. At least four other experts of Leviticus all agree (not counting Bruce Wells and Tabb Stewart): Milgrom, Leviticus 17-22: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, pp. 1569; Lings, K. Renato. “The ‘Lyings’ of a Woman: Male-Male Incest in Leviticus 18.22?” Theology & Sexuality, 2015; Joosten, Jan. “A New Interpretation of Leviticus 18:22 (Par. 20:13) and Its Ethical Implications.” The Journal of Theological Studies, 2020, pp. 1-10; Johanna Stiebert, First-Degree Incest and the Hebrew Bible: Sex in the Family, Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 596 [London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2016], 91, 98–101).
Understanding these verses on the basis of the meaning ‘bed’ is fruitful indeed. This is confirmed by Gen. 49:4, which refers back to Gen. 35:22, ‘While Israel lived in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine.’ As in Lev. 18:22, the subject matter in Genesis is illicit sexual intercourse. In addition, as Jan Joosten points out, “Gen. 49:4 shares two distinctive features with the verses in Leviticus:

1. The noun appears in the form mishkebe, a form found only in these three verses in the entire Hebrew Bible;
2. The following noun designates a person other than the one with whom intercourse is had: just as in Lev. 18:22 the man is not lying with a woman, so in Gen 49:4 Reuben is not having sex with his father.
   These similarities between Lev. 18:22 and Gen. 49:4 are hardly due to chance” (Jan joosten, “A New Interpretation of Leviticus 18:22 (Par. 20:13) and Its Ethical Implications.” The Journal of Theological Studies, 2020, pp. 5-6). Wells also writes: “the reference here is to Reuben’s having been sexually involved with one of Jacob’s women and may specifically have in view the tradition that Reuben slept with Bilhah, recorded in Genesis 35. The phrase “(onto) the beds of your father” (אביך משכבי) is clearly an adverbial accusative indicating location. See also Isa. 57:8: “you have uncovered, you have gone up (onto), you have made wide your bed.” As in Gen. 49:4, the word משכב functions here as an adverbial accusative for the verb עלה”) to go up”)” (Bruce Wells, “On the Beds of a Woman: The Leviticus Texts on Same-Sex Relations Reconsidered,” Sexuality and Law in the Torah, 2020, pp. 136).