Siman 73

Two who were sleeping in one garment, and the flesh of both of them is touching one another, meaning that they are sleeping naked and covering themselves with one garment—it is forbidden for them to recite Keriat Shema and to speak words of Torah, because their flesh is touching one another and there is improper thought. Whether they are lying face to face, or whether they are lying back to back, as long as there is touching of the bodies to one another—it is forbidden. And what is their remedy? That they should separate between them with a garment, from their loins and below until the end of the body. But from their loins and above there is no concern, for there is no improper thought there by means of touching one another. And when they separate it is permitted, even if they lie face to face. And one should not ask: are they not forbidden regardless, for since they are naked, behold their hearts see the nakedness? For it can be said: for example, that they interpose with the garment over their hearts, which is permitted as will be explained in siman 74. And it seems simple that all this is when the bodies touch one another, for if they do not touch—there is no need for a separation of a garment. And there is one who says that face to face, even if they do not touch—a separation of a garment is required when they lie in proximity (Pri Megadim). And I do not know the reason for this stringency. And if they lie clothed—it is permitted in every manner.

If he was sleeping with his wife—he does not require the separation of a garment, for his wife is like his own body and he is accustomed to her, and there is no improper thought. Nevertheless, face to face is forbidden without the separation of a garment, for in such a case there is improper thought. Rather, they should turn their faces away, and even though they touch one another with their backs—we have no concern with it. And so our sages, of blessed memory, said (24a): Buttocks do not have the status of ervah. And "buttocks" refers to the touching of their backs to one another. And if one of them turns his face away, and one does not turn away—the one who turns away is permitted, and the one who does not turn away is forbidden. And there are those who say that his wife also has the law of another person, and it is forbidden without the separation of a garment even with the turning away of faces. And it is proper to be concerned for this opinion. And it is simple that even in this we require the separation of a garment over his heart, so that his heart should not see the ervah. And the woman does not require this, for with them there is no "their hearts seeing the ervah," as will be explained in siman 74.

There is one who says that post facto, if they recited Keriat Shema even without the separation of a garment, and face to face, and even with another who is not his wife—they have fulfilled their obligation (Pri Chadash). And there are those who doubt this (Pri Megadim). And it appears the primary view is like the first opinion, for we have not found that one must repeat the recitation except when one needs to relieve himself, for "the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination," or in a place where there was excrement, as I wrote in siman 76, for it is a greater disgrace. But in this case, where it is a mere concern, a concern of improper thought—certainly he does not need to repeat the recitation. And it appears to me further that even if his heart sees the nakedness—he does not need to repeat the recitation. Therefore, we have not found a revelation of these laws in the Gemara or the poskim, that one must repeat the recitation or pray. And proof for this: for here, thought is permitted in matters of Torah, and likewise when his heart sees the nakedness, as the great Acharonim wrote (Magen Avraham siman 85, subsection 2, and Pri Chadash at the end of siman 75). This is not the case in filthy places, and certainly when one needs to relieve himself. And since thought is permitted, it follows that post facto, if he recited Keriat Shema or prayed—he does not need to repeat (so it appears according to my humble opinion).

If he was sleeping with his sons while they were still small – it is permitted to recite with the turning of the face without the separation of a garment. And if they are large – a separation of a garment is required. And the turning of the face is required even with small ones, for without this there is a concern of improper thought through the touching of the ervot to one another. And so it is implied from the Rambam at the end of chapter 3, see there. However, in the Hagahot Asheri chapter three, he wrote in the name of the Or Zarua that even if their ervot touch one another – it is permitted, see there. And ostensibly, also in the Gemara (24a) it is explicitly implied so, for regarding his sons it did not mention the turning of the face at all, see there. But since the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch ruled that the turning of the face is required, and also from the Rambam it is implied so – thus we establish the law. However, it seems to me that this is specifically when they are somewhat large, like three or four years old. But with less than this, there is no concern in the matter.

Until what point are they considered minors? A male child until he is twelve years old, and a female child until she is eleven years old. And even if they brought two hairs it is permitted, for hairs that appear before the time of their adulthood are nothing. And in the thirteenth year for a male child and the twelfth year for a female child, if they brought two hairs – it is forbidden without a separation. And if they did not bring two hairs – it is permitted. And from the thirteenth year and onward, meaning when the thirteen years are completely finished, and likewise when twelve years are finished for a female child, even if they did not bring two hairs – it is forbidden. Thus ruled the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch. And it appears that this matter, that a twelve-year-old girl is permitted when she has not brought hairs – this is with her mother, for with her father – it is forbidden for him to lie with her with closeness of flesh, as is explained in Even HaEzer siman 21. And a son with his father and with his mother – it is forbidden. And here we are only dealing with the matter of Kriat Shema, whether they are considered as ervah regarding the matter of Kriat Shema or not. For any two bodies are equal in these laws, whether two males or two females. (Eliyah Rabbah. And the difficulty of the Magen Avraham, subsection 2, is answered; see there carefully.)