Hello! This source sheet has a very specific mission. I would like to explore one word, שׁכב/sh.kh.v/to lay down, to see how it used in the Bible so that we can have a deeper understanding of the famous verses in Leviticus 18 and 20.
To begin, here are the two famous verses, though I will be largely focusing on the first:
(כב) וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא׃
(22) Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman [lit. layings-woman]; it is an abhorrence.
(יג) וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁכַּ֤ב אֶת־זָכָר֙ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה תּוֹעֵבָ֥ה עָשׂ֖וּ שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם מ֥וֹת יוּמָ֖תוּ דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם׃
(13) If a man lies with a male 'as one lies with a woman' [lit. 'lies with male layings-woman'], the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them.
Try for a moment to ignore the JPS translation. Let me walk you through the verses, which are largely identical for our purposes, except that the first bans an action (called mishakvei-isha), and the second both bans it and proscribes the punishment for the action. Notably, both parties are subject to the death penalty, which (at least for me) raises doubts about common theories that the verses ban pedophilia or rape.
Our word שׁכב shows up twice in each verse. First, in the famous phrase "and with male you (sing. masc) do not lay," and second in the very strange phrase "מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה " or "layings-woman." I include the hyphen to emphasize a grammatical point, which is that sh.kh.v is in the plural construct form. The construct form implies a relationship between the two words, like possession or even an entirely new concept, sort of like books-john (to mean John's books) or sunglasses. (One way the phrase has been understood is to say "as one lies with a woman" which sounds straight-forward, but still leaves a lot unexplained.) There is only one other place in the entire Hebrew Bible when שׁכב shows up in the plural construct form, and it is rather instructive. We'll get there. For now, I might hazard a translation along the lines of:
"And with male-kind, do not lay (2nd person masc.) 'layings-woman', it is taboo."
If we want to understand what this strange construct phrase is, and therefore what is banned in these famous verses, it may be instructive to look at every other time that שׁכב is used to mean sex in the Bible and see if we can spot a trend. We will go chronologically, skipping no instance of שׁכב as sex.
(לב) לְכָ֨ה נַשְׁקֶ֧ה אֶת־אָבִ֛ינוּ יַ֖יִן וְנִשְׁכְּבָ֣ה עִמּ֑וֹ וּנְחַיֶּ֥ה מֵאָבִ֖ינוּ זָֽרַע׃ (לג) וַתַּשְׁקֶ֧יןָ אֶת־אֲבִיהֶ֛ן יַ֖יִן בַּלַּ֣יְלָה ה֑וּא וַתָּבֹ֤א הַבְּכִירָה֙ וַתִּשְׁכַּ֣ב אֶת־אָבִ֔יהָ וְלֹֽא־יָדַ֥ע בְּשִׁכְבָ֖הּ וּבְקׄוּמָֽהּ׃ (לד) וַֽיְהִי֙ מִֽמָּחֳרָ֔ת וַתֹּ֤אמֶר הַבְּכִירָה֙ אֶל־הַצְּעִירָ֔ה הֵן־שָׁכַ֥בְתִּי אֶ֖מֶשׁ אֶת־אָבִ֑י נַשְׁקֶ֨נּוּ יַ֜יִן גַּם־הַלַּ֗יְלָה וּבֹ֙אִי֙ שִׁכְבִ֣י עִמּ֔וֹ וּנְחַיֶּ֥ה מֵאָבִ֖ינוּ זָֽרַע׃ (לה) וַתַּשְׁקֶ֜יןָ גַּ֣ם בַּלַּ֧יְלָה הַה֛וּא אֶת־אֲבִיהֶ֖ן יָ֑יִן וַתָּ֤קָם הַצְּעִירָה֙ וַתִּשְׁכַּ֣ב עִמּ֔וֹ וְלֹֽא־יָדַ֥ע בְּשִׁכְבָ֖הּ וּבְקֻמָֽהּ׃
(32) Come, let us make our father drink wine, and let us lie with him, that we may maintain life through our father.” (33) That night they made their father drink wine, and the older one went in and lay with her father; he did not know when she lay down or when she rose. (34) The next day the older one said to the younger, “See, I lay with Father last night; let us make him drink wine tonight also, and you go and lie with him, that we may maintain life through our father.” (35) That night also they made their father drink wine, and the younger one went and lay with him; he did not know when she lay down or when she rose.
ותשכב את אביה. וּבַצְּעִירָה כְתִיב וַתִּשְׁכַּב עִמּוֹ? צְעִירָה, לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא פָּתְחָה בִזְנוּת אֶלָּא אֲחוֹתָהּ לִמְּדַתָּה חָסַךְ עָלֶיהָ הַכָּתוּב וְלֹא פֵּרֵשׁ גְּנוּתָהּ; אֲבָל בְּכִירָה שֶׁפָּתְחָה בִזְנוּת פִּרְסְמָהּ הַכָּתוּב בִּמְפֹרָשׁ.
ותשכב את אביה AND SHE LAY WITH HER FATHER — In the case of the younger daughter it is written (Genesis 19:35) “and she lay with him”, and it does not state “she lay with her father”. But because the younger did not originate this unchaste conduct but her sister taught it to her, Scripture glosses over her sin and does not explicitly make mention of her shame; but since the elder originated this unchaste conduct Scripture exposes her fully (Numbers Rabbah 20:23).
We have our first use of שׁכב in the Bible. Lot's daughters get him drunk and then lay with him. Incestuous rape. Rashi notes a difference between שׁכב followed by the word את vs. followed by the word עמּ. A deeper dive into this distinction would take us too far afield, but suffice it to say that while this distinction is somewhat uneven throughout the Bible, it is still interesting for those who want to investigate it further.
(י) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֲבִימֶ֔לֶךְ מַה־זֹּ֖את עָשִׂ֣יתָ לָּ֑נוּ כִּ֠מְעַט שָׁכַ֞ב אַחַ֤ד הָעָם֙ אֶת־אִשְׁתֶּ֔ךָ וְהֵבֵאתָ֥ עָלֵ֖ינוּ אָשָֽׁם׃
(10) Abimelech said, “What have you done to us! One of the people might have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us.”
Now the second. Isaac told Abimelekh that Rebecca was his sister, not his wife. Now Abimelekh reprimands him for almost causing someone to commit adultery!
(טו) וַתֹּ֣אמֶר לָ֗הּ הַמְעַט֙ קַחְתֵּ֣ךְ אֶת־אִישִׁ֔י וְלָקַ֕חַת גַּ֥ם אֶת־דּוּדָאֵ֖י בְּנִ֑י וַתֹּ֣אמֶר רָחֵ֗ל לָכֵן֙ יִשְׁכַּ֤ב עִמָּךְ֙ הַלַּ֔יְלָה תַּ֖חַת דּוּדָאֵ֥י בְנֵֽךְ׃ (טז) וַיָּבֹ֨א יַעֲקֹ֣ב מִן־הַשָּׂדֶה֮ בָּעֶרֶב֒ וַתֵּצֵ֨א לֵאָ֜ה לִקְרָאת֗וֹ וַתֹּ֙אמֶר֙ אֵלַ֣י תָּב֔וֹא כִּ֚י שָׂכֹ֣ר שְׂכַרְתִּ֔יךָ בְּדוּדָאֵ֖י בְּנִ֑י וַיִּשְׁכַּ֥ב עִמָּ֖הּ בַּלַּ֥יְלָה הֽוּא׃
(15) But she said to her, “Was it not enough for you to take away my husband, that you would also take my son’s mandrakes?” Rachel replied, “I promise, he shall lie with you tonight, in return for your son’s mandrakes.” (16) When Jacob came home from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You are to sleep with me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” And he lay with her that night.
In this instance, while שׁכב occurs in the context of marriage, the wives are exchanging mandrakes for sex. Leah tells her husband, rather unhappily, that she has bought him.
(ב) וַיַּ֨רְא אֹתָ֜הּ שְׁכֶ֧ם בֶּן־חֲמ֛וֹר הַֽחִוִּ֖י נְשִׂ֣יא הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּקַּ֥ח אֹתָ֛הּ וַיִּשְׁכַּ֥ב אֹתָ֖הּ וַיְעַנֶּֽהָ׃
(2) Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country, saw her, and took her and lay with her by force.
(ז) וּבְנֵ֨י יַעֲקֹ֜ב בָּ֤אוּ מִן־הַשָּׂדֶה֙ כְּשָׁמְעָ֔ם וַיִּֽתְעַצְּבוּ֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים וַיִּ֥חַר לָהֶ֖ם מְאֹ֑ד כִּֽי־נְבָלָ֞ה עָשָׂ֣ה בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֔ב וְכֵ֖ן לֹ֥א יֵעָשֶֽׂה׃
(7) Meanwhile Jacob’s sons, having heard the news, came in from the field. The men were distressed and very angry, because he had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter—a thing not to be done.
שׁכב now makes another appearance in the rape of Dinah.
(כב) וַיְהִ֗י בִּשְׁכֹּ֤ן יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ בָּאָ֣רֶץ הַהִ֔וא וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ רְאוּבֵ֔ן וַיִּשְׁכַּ֕ב֙ אֶת־בִּלְהָ֖ה֙ פִּילֶ֣גֶשׁ אָבִ֑֔יו וַיִּשְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵֽ֑ל (פ) וַיִּֽהְי֥וּ בְנֵֽי־יַעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁנֵ֥ים עָשָֽׂר׃
(22) While Israel stayed in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine; and Israel found out. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve in number.
Another instance of adultery.
(ז) וַיְהִ֗י אַחַר֙ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה וַתִּשָּׂ֧א אֵֽשֶׁת־אֲדֹנָ֛יו אֶת־עֵינֶ֖יהָ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֑ף וַתֹּ֖אמֶר שִׁכְבָ֥ה עִמִּֽי׃
(7) After a time, his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph and said, “Lie with me.”
(י) וַיְהִ֕י כְּדַבְּרָ֥הּ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֖ף י֣וֹם ׀ י֑וֹם וְלֹא־שָׁמַ֥ע אֵלֶ֛יהָ לִשְׁכַּ֥ב אֶצְלָ֖הּ לִהְי֥וֹת עִמָּֽהּ׃
(10) And much as she coaxed Joseph day after day, he did not yield to her request to lie beside her, to be with her.
(יב) וַתִּתְפְּשֵׂ֧הוּ בְּבִגְד֛וֹ לֵאמֹ֖ר שִׁכְבָ֣ה עִמִּ֑י וַיַּעֲזֹ֤ב בִּגְדוֹ֙ בְּיָדָ֔הּ וַיָּ֖נָס וַיֵּצֵ֥א הַחֽוּצָה׃
(12) she caught hold of him by his garment and said, “Lie with me!” But he left his garment in her hand and got away and fled outside.
(יד) וַתִּקְרָ֞א לְאַנְשֵׁ֣י בֵיתָ֗הּ וַתֹּ֤אמֶר לָהֶם֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר רְא֗וּ הֵ֥בִיא לָ֛נוּ אִ֥ישׁ עִבְרִ֖י לְצַ֣חֶק בָּ֑נוּ בָּ֤א אֵלַי֙ לִשְׁכַּ֣ב עִמִּ֔י וָאֶקְרָ֖א בְּק֥וֹל גָּדֽוֹל׃
(14) she called out to her servants and said to them, “Look, he had to bring us a Hebrew to dally with us! This one came to lie with me; but I screamed loud.
Now שׁכב appears in the Joseph cycle, when Potiphar's wife tried to get Joseph to have sex with her and, when she fails, accuses him of attempting to rape her.
(ד) פַּ֤חַז כַּמַּ֙יִם֙ אַל־תּוֹתַ֔ר כִּ֥י עָלִ֖יתָ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אָבִ֑יךָ אָ֥ז חִלַּ֖לְתָּ יְצוּעִ֥י עָלָֽה׃ (פ)
(4) Unstable as water, you shall excel no longer; For when you mounted your father’s bed [bedded/layings-your-father], You brought disgrace—my couch he mounted!
We have now reached the one other place in the Bible in which שׁכב is used in plural construct form.
Curiously, it is also followed by a noun that the person in question is not having sex with, but having the sex of. That is "you had the sex that belongs to your father, you got in his bed with his partner." The now-disgraced (for other reasons) academic Jan Joosten argues that this is the meaning of those original verses, that mishkavei isha actually means the sex that belongs to a woman by right of marriage. In other words, adultery. This idea finds broader acceptance in Nedarim 51a and its commentaries.
(טו) וְכִֽי־יְפַתֶּ֣ה אִ֗ישׁ בְּתוּלָ֛ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־אֹרָ֖שָׂה וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ מָהֹ֛ר יִמְהָרֶ֥נָּה לּ֖וֹ לְאִשָּֽׁה׃
(15) If a man seduces a virgin for whom the bride-price has not been paid, and lies with her, he must make her his wife by payment of a bride-price.
(יח) כָּל־שֹׁכֵ֥ב עִם־בְּהֵמָ֖ה מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת׃ (ס)
(18) Whoever lies with a beast shall be put to death.
Now we have one of several instances of bestiality.
(יח) וְאִשָּׁ֕ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁכַּ֥ב אִ֛ישׁ אֹתָ֖הּ שִׁכְבַת־זָ֑רַע וְרָחֲצ֣וּ בַמַּ֔יִם וְטָמְא֖וּ עַד־הָעָֽרֶב׃
(18) And if a man has carnal relations with a woman, they shall bathe in water and remain unclean until evening.
Carnal relations. How very odd that NJPS chose this particular iteration of שׁכב to translate it this way, but almost nowhere else (Lev 18:23, 19:20, and Numbers 5:13 are the only other examples). Perhaps they were trying to convey that this is not normal sex in an otherwise ambiguous verse? Why then would they use it for beasts in 18:23?
The commentary on this verse indicates that while this sex isn't quite normal (there's a slightly unusual emission, says Sforno) this section (including verse 20, in which שׁכב is used to literally mean 'lay down') is one of three moments where it is not expressly clear that שׁכב is abhorrent sex (the others being Leah/Jacob and the David/Batsheva narrative, though I think I have reasonable explanations for each). Likely the word is being used here to indicate ritual impurity, but it is an odd choice, knowing what we know about how the word is used otherwise.
(כג) וּבְכָל־בְּהֵמָ֛ה לֹא־תִתֵּ֥ן שְׁכָבְתְּךָ֖ לְטָמְאָה־בָ֑הּ וְאִשָּׁ֗ה לֹֽא־תַעֲמֹ֞ד לִפְנֵ֧י בְהֵמָ֛ה לְרִבְעָ֖הּ תֶּ֥בֶל הֽוּא׃
(23) Do not have carnal relations with any beast and defile yourself thereby; and let no woman lend herself to a beast to mate with it; it is perversion.
(כ) וְ֠אִישׁ כִּֽי־יִשְׁכַּ֨ב אֶת־אִשָּׁ֜ה שִׁכְבַת־זֶ֗רַע וְהִ֤וא שִׁפְחָה֙ נֶחֱרֶ֣פֶת לְאִ֔ישׁ וְהָפְדֵּה֙ לֹ֣א נִפְדָּ֔תָה א֥וֹ חֻפְשָׁ֖ה לֹ֣א נִתַּן־לָ֑הּ בִּקֹּ֧רֶת תִּהְיֶ֛ה לֹ֥א יוּמְת֖וּ כִּי־לֹ֥א חֻפָּֽשָׁה׃
(20) If a man has carnal relations with a woman who is a slave and has been designated for another man, but has not been redeemed or given her freedom, there shall be an indemnity; they shall not, however, be put to death, since she has not been freed.
(יא) וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר יִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־אֵ֣שֶׁת אָבִ֔יו עֶרְוַ֥ת אָבִ֖יו גִּלָּ֑ה מֽוֹת־יוּמְת֥וּ שְׁנֵיהֶ֖ם דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם׃
(11) If a man lies with his father’s wife, it is the nakedness of his father that he has uncovered; the two shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them.
(יב) וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר יִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־כַּלָּת֔וֹ מ֥וֹת יוּמְת֖וּ שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם תֶּ֥בֶל עָשׂ֖וּ דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם׃
(12) If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall be put to death; they have committed incest—their bloodguilt is upon them.
Note that these previous two instances occur just before one of the two famous verses (Leviticus 20:13). They appear in the context of a long list of forbidden sexual relationships, based largely on marriage or incest. This will be important later.
(יח) וְ֠אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יִשְׁכַּ֨ב אֶת־אִשָּׁ֜ה דָּוָ֗ה וְגִלָּ֤ה אֶת־עֶרְוָתָהּ֙ אֶת־מְקֹרָ֣הּ הֶֽעֱרָ֔ה וְהִ֕יא גִּלְּתָ֖ה אֶת־מְק֣וֹר דָּמֶ֑יהָ וְנִכְרְת֥וּ שְׁנֵיהֶ֖ם מִקֶּ֥רֶב עַמָּֽם׃
(18) If a man lies with a woman in her infirmity and uncovers her nakedness, he has laid bare her flow and she has exposed her blood flow; both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
(יג) וְשָׁכַ֨ב אִ֣ישׁ אֹתָהּ֮ שִׁכְבַת־זֶרַע֒ וְנֶעְלַם֙ מֵעֵינֵ֣י אִישָׁ֔הּ וְנִסְתְּרָ֖ה וְהִ֣יא נִטְמָ֑אָה וְעֵד֙ אֵ֣ין בָּ֔הּ וְהִ֖וא לֹ֥א נִתְפָּֽשָׂה׃
(13) in that a man has had carnal relations with her unbeknown to her husband, and she keeps secret the fact that she has defiled herself without being forced, and there is no witness against her—
(יט) וְהִשְׁבִּ֨יעַ אֹתָ֜הּ הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְאָמַ֤ר אֶל־הָֽאִשָּׁה֙ אִם־לֹ֨א שָׁכַ֥ב אִישׁ֙ אֹתָ֔ךְ וְאִם־לֹ֥א שָׂטִ֛ית טֻמְאָ֖ה תַּ֣חַת אִישֵׁ֑ךְ הִנָּקִ֕י מִמֵּ֛י הַמָּרִ֥ים הַֽמְאָרֲרִ֖ים הָאֵֽלֶּה׃
(19) The priest shall adjure the woman, saying to her, “If no man has lain with you, if you have not gone astray in defilement while married to your husband, be immune to harm from this water of bitterness that induces the spell.
Numbers 5 details the sotah ritual, used to determine whether a woman had committed adultery.
(כב) כִּֽי־יִמָּצֵ֨א אִ֜ישׁ שֹׁכֵ֣ב ׀ עִם־אִשָּׁ֣ה בְעֻֽלַת־בַּ֗עַל וּמֵ֙תוּ֙ גַּם־שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם הָאִ֛ישׁ הַשֹּׁכֵ֥ב עִם־הָאִשָּׁ֖ה וְהָאִשָּׁ֑ה וּבִֽעַרְתָּ֥ הָרָ֖ע מִיִּשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (ס)
(22) If a man is found lying with another man’s wife, both of them—the man and the woman with whom he lay—shall die. Thus you will sweep away evil from Israel.
(כג) כִּ֤י יִהְיֶה֙ נַעֲרָ֣ בְתוּלָ֔ה מְאֹרָשָׂ֖ה לְאִ֑ישׁ וּמְצָאָ֥הּ אִ֛ישׁ בָּעִ֖יר וְשָׁכַ֥ב עִמָּֽהּ׃ (כד) וְהוֹצֵאתֶ֨ם אֶת־שְׁנֵיהֶ֜ם אֶל־שַׁ֣עַר ׀ הָעִ֣יר הַהִ֗וא וּסְקַלְתֶּ֨ם אֹתָ֥ם בָּאֲבָנִים֮ וָמֵ֒תוּ֒ אֶת־הַֽנַּעֲרָ֗ עַל־דְּבַר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־צָעֲקָ֣ה בָעִ֔יר וְאֶ֨ת־הָאִ֔ישׁ עַל־דְּבַ֥ר אֲשֶׁר־עִנָּ֖ה אֶת־אֵ֣שֶׁת רֵעֵ֑הוּ וּבִֽעַרְתָּ֥ הָרָ֖ע מִקִּרְבֶּֽךָ׃ {ס} (כה) וְֽאִם־בַּשָּׂדֶ֞ה יִמְצָ֣א הָאִ֗ישׁ אֶת־הַֽנַּעֲרָ֙ הַמְאֹ֣רָשָׂ֔ה וְהֶחֱזִֽיק־בָּ֥הּ הָאִ֖ישׁ וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ וּמֵ֗ת הָאִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־שָׁכַ֥ב עִמָּ֖הּ לְבַדּֽוֹ׃ (כו) וְלַֽנַּעֲרָ֙ לֹא־תַעֲשֶׂ֣ה דָבָ֔ר אֵ֥ין לַֽנַּעֲרָ֖ חֵ֣טְא מָ֑וֶת כִּ֡י כַּאֲשֶׁר֩ יָק֨וּם אִ֤ישׁ עַל־רֵעֵ֙הוּ֙ וּרְצָח֣וֹ נֶ֔פֶשׁ כֵּ֖ן הַדָּבָ֥ר הַזֶּֽה׃ (כז) כִּ֥י בַשָּׂדֶ֖ה מְצָאָ֑הּ צָעֲקָ֗ה הַֽנַּעֲרָ֙ הַמְאֹ֣רָשָׂ֔ה וְאֵ֥ין מוֹשִׁ֖יעַ לָֽהּ׃ {ס} (כח) כִּֽי־יִמְצָ֣א אִ֗ישׁ נַעֲרָ֤ בְתוּלָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־אֹרָ֔שָׂה וּתְפָשָׂ֖הּ וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ וְנִמְצָֽאוּ׃
(23) In the case of a virgin who is engaged to a man—if a man comes upon her in town and lies with her, (24) you shall take the two of them out to the gate of that town and stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry for help in the town, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. Thus you will sweep away evil from your midst. (25) But if the man comes upon the engaged girl in the open country, and the man lies with her by force, only the man who lay with her shall die, (26) but you shall do nothing to the girl. The girl did not incur the death penalty, for this case is like that of a man attacking another and murdering him. (27) He came upon her in the open; though the engaged girl cried for help, there was no one to save her. (28) If a man comes upon a virgin who is not engaged and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are discovered...
(כ) אָר֗וּר שֹׁכֵב֙ עִם־אֵ֣שֶׁת אָבִ֔יו כִּ֥י גִלָּ֖ה כְּנַ֣ף אָבִ֑יו וְאָמַ֥ר כָּל־הָעָ֖ם אָמֵֽן׃ (ס)
(20) Cursed be he who lies with his father’s wife, for he has removed his father’s garment.—And all the people shall say, Amen.
(כא) אָר֕וּר שֹׁכֵ֖ב עִם־כָּל־בְּהֵמָ֑ה וְאָמַ֥ר כָּל־הָעָ֖ם אָמֵֽן׃ (ס)
(21) Cursed be he who lies with any beast.—And all the people shall say, Amen.
(כב) אָר֗וּר שֹׁכֵב֙ עִם־אֲחֹת֔וֹ בַּת־אָבִ֖יו א֣וֹ בַת־אִמּ֑וֹ וְאָמַ֥ר כָּל־הָעָ֖ם אָמֵֽן׃ (ס)
(22) Cursed be he who lies with his sister, whether daughter of his father or of his mother.—And all the people shall say, Amen.
(ד) וַיִּשְׁלַח֩ דָּוִ֨ד מַלְאָכִ֜ים וַיִּקָּחֶ֗הָ וַתָּב֤וֹא אֵלָיו֙ וַיִּשְׁכַּ֣ב עִמָּ֔הּ וְהִ֥יא מִתְקַדֶּ֖שֶׁת מִטֻּמְאָתָ֑הּ וַתָּ֖שָׁב אֶל־בֵּיתָֽהּ׃
(4) David sent messengers to fetch her; she came to him and he lay with her—she had just purified herself after her period—and she went back home.
David is laying with a married woman whose husband, Uriah, he is about to have killed so that he can continue having sex with her.
(יא) וַיֹּ֨אמֶר אוּרִיָּ֜ה אֶל־דָּוִ֗ד הָ֠אָרוֹן וְיִשְׂרָאֵ֨ל וִֽיהוּדָ֜ה יֹשְׁבִ֣ים בַּסֻּכּ֗וֹת וַאדֹנִ֨י יוֹאָ֜ב וְעַבְדֵ֤י אֲדֹנִ֨י עַל־פְּנֵ֤י הַשָּׂדֶה֙ חֹנִ֔ים וַאֲנִ֞י אָב֧וֹא אֶל־בֵּיתִ֛י לֶאֱכֹ֥ל וְלִשְׁתּ֖וֹת וְלִשְׁכַּ֣ב עִם־אִשְׁתִּ֑י חַיֶּ֙ךָ֙ וְחֵ֣י נַפְשֶׁ֔ךָ אִֽם־אֶעֱשֶׂ֖ה אֶת־הַדָּבָ֥ר הַזֶּֽה׃
(11) Uriah answered David, “The Ark and Israel and Judah are located at Succoth, and my master Joab and Your Majesty’s men are camped in the open; how can I go home and eat and drink and sleep [lit. lay] with my wife? As you live, by your very life, I will not do this!”
This is one of three instances of the word שׁכב where it is not fully clear that it is being used to mean problematic sex. However, based on the context, Uriah may using it to say that leaving the war for home to have sex with his wife would be shameful. I read this, and the speech of Potiphar's wife, as using the word almost like we use f*** in English. Alternatively, there is some reason to believe Uriah knows what David did (and the verb which was used to describe it), and perhaps this is another instance of our text winking at that fact (like it does in the next example).
(יא) כֹּ֣ה ׀ אָמַ֣ר יְהוָ֗ה הִנְנִי֩ מֵקִ֨ים עָלֶ֤יךָ רָעָה֙ מִבֵּיתֶ֔ךָ וְלָקַחְתִּ֤י אֶת־נָשֶׁ֙יךָ֙ לְעֵינֶ֔יךָ וְנָתַתִּ֖י לְרֵעֶ֑יךָ וְשָׁכַב֙ עִם־נָשֶׁ֔יךָ לְעֵינֵ֖י הַשֶּׁ֥מֶשׁ הַזֹּֽאת׃
(11) Thus said the LORD: ‘I will make a calamity rise against you from within your own house; I will take your wives and give them to another man before your very eyes and he shall sleep with your wives under this very sun.
(24) David consoled his wife Bathsheba; he went to her and lay with her. She bore a son and she named him Solomon. The LORD favored him,
This is a continuation of the third instance of שׁכב where it is not perfectly self-evident that it is negative. However, based on how David and Batsheba came to be together, this sounds more like the Bible's narrator is condemning their union than a real revolution in how the word is used.
(יא) וַתַּגֵּ֥שׁ אֵלָ֖יו לֶֽאֱכֹ֑ל וַיַּֽחֲזֶק־בָּהּ֙ וַיֹּ֣אמֶר לָ֔הּ בּ֛וֹאִי שִׁכְבִ֥י עִמִּ֖י אֲחוֹתִֽי׃
(11) But when she served them to him, he caught hold of her and said to her, “Come lie with me, sister.”
(יד) וְלֹ֥א אָבָ֖ה לִשְׁמֹ֣עַ בְּקוֹלָ֑הּ וַיֶּחֱזַ֤ק מִמֶּ֙נָּה֙ וַיְעַנֶּ֔הָ וַיִּשְׁכַּ֖ב אֹתָֽהּ׃
(14) But he would not listen to her; he overpowered her and lay with her by force.
(ח) וְאֶת־תַּזְנוּתֶ֤יהָ מִמִּצְרַ֙יִם֙ לֹ֣א עָזָ֔בָה כִּ֤י אוֹתָהּ֙ שָׁכְב֣וּ בִנְעוּרֶ֔יהָ וְהֵ֥מָּה עִשּׂ֖וּ דַּדֵּ֣י בְתוּלֶ֑יהָ וַיִּשְׁפְּכ֥וּ תַזְנוּתָ֖ם עָלֶֽיהָ׃
(8) She did not give up the whoring she had begun with the Egyptians; for they had lain with her in her youth, and they had handled her virgin nipples and had poured out their lust upon her.
It's pretty clear to me from reading these texts that the word שׁכב, when used to refer to sex, denotes assault, incest, adultery, bestiality, or solicitation. Those instances in which it is less than clear seem more like moments in which the TaNaKH's narrator is cluing the reader in on the morality of the sex act described rather than some radical reimagining of the word.
I propose two theories of how our study may effect how we read Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, the first is narrow and the second is broad.
The narrow theory is much the same as Jan Joosten*. The use of the phrase mishkavei isha is the same as in Gen. 49:4 and it refers to sex that belongs to the noun (be it Rueben's father or a married woman) by right of marriage. With this understanding, we are talking about an adulterous relationship between two men, which helps to explain also why both parties are subject to the death penalty. This version is also, contestably, backed up by Nedarim 51a and the subsequent Jewish legal conversation based on it. Given how often שׁכב is used to mean adultery, it makes sense it would mean this here as well.
The wide theory takes the negative connotations of the word שׁכב and looks at the verses contextually. Each prohibition occurs at the end of a longer list of male-female relationships which are forbidden, like son–mother-in-law, or nephew–aunt (read chapters 18 and 20 of Leviticus to see what I mean). Our verses then come in and say "and with male-kind, don't lay the (illicit) layings-woman." In other words, nephew-uncle relationships are also banned, because that would be mishkavei isha et zachar (forbidden woman-sex with a man). The homosexual version of any forbidden heterosexual relationship is itself forbidden. This helps me to understand why both parties are subject to the death penalty, because adulterous and incestuous relationships largely are as well. This also helps us to understand why mishkavei isha is in the plural, which has confused generations of commentaries. It is not because you can, as has been argued, have sex with a hermaphrodite in more than one way, but in fact because there is more than one person you can lay with which would be considered forbidden-woman-laying with a male. This wider argument is Dr. David Stewart's as transmitted (and approved) by Jacob Milgrom, with additional sources (and a little more chutzpah) from me.
What I like about each of these readings, from a queer perspective, is that same-sex relationships become largely similar to other kinds of relationships discussed in the Torah, albeit more briefly. We no longer feel obligated to somehow erase the verses or be ashamed of them. They forbid adultery or incest, not normative homosexual relationships. I also like that this reading removes gender from the equation. If you are married and you cheat on your spouse, the gender of the person you with whom you cheat is immaterial. Likewise, incest is incest regardless of the genders of the people involved. Other readings of these verses try to argue that it is impossible to have sex with a woman the way you could with a man, but in a world where trans people exist, this argument falls apart.
It is important to note that I am not a biblical scholar nor am I making a halakhic argument (though I believe this would be a good place to start). The argument I make here is merely what I believe to be a deeply probable way to understand what is forbidden by the Torah in those most famous of gay-bashing phrases. I hope that this study will allow those who feel victimized by their beloved texts and tradition to begin having a less confrontational relationship with them.
Happy Pride!