Why is adultery considered one of the three sins for which one must die rather than transgress?

The rabbinic category of “yehareg ve-al ya’avor” (be killed rather than transgress) includes murder, idolatry, and forbidden sexual relations including adultery. These are the prohibitions whose violation destroys something irreplaceable — either the human image of God (murder), the divine covenant itself (idolatry), or the domestic covenant that mirrors it (adultery). The prophets made explicit that Israel’s marital faithfulness to God is enacted and expressed through the faithfulness of its households. Adultery violates both the human and the divine covenantal orders simultaneously.

What was the sotah procedure, and why did it exist?

Numbers 5:11–31 describes a procedure for a husband who suspects his wife of adultery but has no witnesses. The woman was brought to the Sanctuary, made to drink “bitter water” mixed with dust from the Tabernacle floor and ink from a written curse, and the outcome (illness or no illness) was treated as divine verdict. The procedure existed because adultery — unlike most crimes — occurs in private, making witnesses nearly impossible to obtain. The sotah procedure provided a legally recognized mechanism for resolving suspicion in the absence of evidence. The rabbis later suspended the practice, ruling that it applied only when the husband himself was innocent of similar violations.

Does this commandment apply symmetrically to married men and married women?

In the classical Torah legal definition, adultery specifically involves a married or betrothed woman and another man. A married man who has relations with an unmarried woman does not technically commit adultery in this legal sense (though other prohibitions may apply). This asymmetry reflects the ancient Near Eastern legal framework in which the commandment was first given. However, the prophetic and later tradition has consistently expanded the moral intuition of the commandment toward symmetric faithfulness. The prophetic metaphor of God as the husband of faithless Israel demands that God exemplify absolute faithfulness — and that Israel (both men and women) do the same. Modern Jewish legal discussion has increasingly moved toward symmetric standards of marital fidelity.

Commandment #466 · Negative · Family Laws

Do Not Commit Adultery

לֹא תִנְאָף

Source: Exodus 20:13 · Maimonides, Sefer HaMitzvot, Negative #217

The Seventh Word: The Covenant Within the Household

לֹא תִרְצָח לֹא תִנְאָף לֹא תִגְנֹב לֹא תַעֲנֶה בְרֵעֲךָ עֵד שָׁקֶר

“Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.”

Exodus 20:13 — Open in Reader

Exodus 20:13 places “lo tinaph” — do not commit adultery — in the heart of the Decalogue’s social prohibitions, between the prohibition of murder and the prohibition of theft. In the Torah’s legal definition, adultery (ni’uf) specifically refers to sexual relations between a married or betrothed woman and a man other than her husband. The prohibition is grounded in the covenant-nature of marriage: the marital bond is not merely a social contract but a covenantal commitment, and breaking it is a covenant violation with spiritual as well as legal dimensions.

Leviticus 18:20 gives the companion prohibition: “Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour’s wife, to defile thyself with her.” The Holiness Code’s language is significant: the act defiles not only the relationship but the perpetrator. Adultery is not classified merely as theft of another man’s exclusive rights (though the legal tradition does use property language for this) but as a form of defilement — a pollution of one’s covenant identity and holiness. The rabbis identified adultery as one of the three cardinal sins (alongside murder and idolatry) for which a Jew must accept death rather than transgress: “yehareg ve-al ya’avor” (be killed rather than cross this line).

David, Bathsheba, and the Prophetic Confrontation

וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד מַלְאָכִים וַיִּקָּחֶהָ וַתָּבוֹא אֵלָיו וַיִּשְׁכַּב עִמָּהּ

“And David sent messengers, and took her; and she came in unto him, and he lay with her.”

2 Samuel 11:4 — Open in Reader

2 Samuel 11:2–11:4 narrates the most prominent act of adultery in Scripture: David saw Bathsheba, wife of Uriah the Hittite, from the palace roof. He sent for her. She came. He lay with her. The brevity of the narrative is devastating — three verses of action with no emotion, no justification, no hesitation recorded. The king used his power to take what the commandment forbade. The cascade that followed — Bathsheba’s pregnancy, David’s attempt to cover it by calling Uriah home from battle, Uriah’s refusal to enter his house while his comrades remained in the field, and finally David’s arrangement of Uriah’s death in battle (2 Samuel 11:15) — shows the full destructive spiral that the seventh-word violation initiates.

Nathan’s parable (2 Samuel 12:1) confronts David indirectly: a rich man with many flocks steals the one beloved lamb of a poor man. When David declares the rich man worthy of death, Nathan says: “Thou art the man.” David’s response (2 Samuel 12:13) — “I have sinned against the LORD” — is the Torah tradition’s model of genuine teshuvah: immediate, undefended acknowledgment without excuse. Psalm 51, attributed to this moment, has been the Jewish and Christian tradition’s central liturgy of repentance for three millennia. The narrative does not erase the consequences — Nathan declares they will be severe (2 Samuel 12:10) — but it establishes that the most serious covenant violations can be met with genuine return.

Spiritual Adultery: The Prophetic Metaphor

כִּי זָנֹה זָנְתָה אִמָּם הֹבִישָׁה הוֹרָתָם כִּי אָמְרָה אֵלְכָה אַחֲרֵי מְאַהֲבַי

“For their mother hath played the harlot: she that conceived them hath done shamefully: for she said, I will go after my lovers.”

Hosea 2:7 — Open in Reader

The prophets (Hosea, Jeremiah, Ezekiel) use adultery as the central metaphor for Israel’s worship of foreign gods. God is the husband; Israel is the wife; idolatry is spiritual adultery. Hosea is commanded to take back his adulterous wife (Hosea 3:1) as a living enactment of God’s relationship with unfaithful Israel — unwilling to give up on the covenant partner despite repeated betrayal. The metaphor runs so deep that the prohibition of adultery and the prohibition of idolatry are spiritually intertwined in prophetic literature: to worship Baal is to commit adultery against the divine husband who redeemed Israel from Egypt.

This metaphorical dimension reveals why adultery is placed among the three cardinal sins alongside idolatry and murder. Adultery violates the domestic covenant that mirrors the national covenant. Marriage in the Torah’s framework is not merely a social institution but a covenantal reality — the faithfulness between husband and wife enacts in human relationships the faithfulness God requires in the divine-human relationship. Commandment #466 therefore protects not only individual households but the covenantal imagination of Israel: a community that cannot maintain faithfulness in its most intimate human covenant will not maintain it in its covenant with God.

Study Questions

For reflection and group study

The prophets use adultery as the central metaphor for Israel’s worship of foreign gods — God as husband, Israel as unfaithful wife (Hosea 2:7). What does it mean that the most intimate violation of human covenant becomes the Torah’s primary image for spiritual apostasy? How does this metaphor shape how we understand both marriage and faith?

See Hosea 2:7

David’s sin (2 Samuel 11) is the most prominent act of adultery in Scripture, committed by the most celebrated king. Nathan’s rebuke, David’s confession, and Psalm 51 together make this narrative the Torah tradition’s paradigm of genuine repentance. What does this story reveal about the possibility of return after the most serious covenant violations?

See 2 Samuel 11 · Psalm 51

The rabbis identify adultery as one of the three sins for which one must accept death rather than transgress (yehareg ve-al ya’avor), alongside murder and idolatry. Why is marital infidelity placed at the same moral level as these? What is it about adultery that makes it a threat to covenantal existence itself?

See Exodus 20:13 — Open in Reader

The Torah’s definition of adultery in the classical legal sense is asymmetric — it involves a married woman and another man. How has the tradition’s moral intuition about marital faithfulness expanded beyond this asymmetric legal definition? What does the commandment demand of a covenant community that takes it seriously?

See Exodus 20:13 — Open in Reader

Read Exodus 20:13 in the Bible reader.

Read in the Torah Reader

← Do Not Murder Uncircumcised Kohen May Not Eat Terumah →