Concerning Levirate Marriage

25:5-10 - If brothers are living together and one of them dies without a son, his widow must not marry outside the family. Her husband's brother shall take her and marry her and fulfil the duty of a brother-in-law to her. The first son she bears shall carry on the name of the dead brother so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel.

However, if a man does not want to marry his brother's wife, she shall go to the elders at the town gate and say, "My husband's brother refuses to carry on his brother's name in Israel. He will not fulfil the duty of a brother-in-law to me." Then the elders of his town shall summon him and talk to him. If he persists in saying, "I do not want to marry her," his brother's widow shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, take off one of his sandals, spit in his face and say, "This is what is done to the man who will not build up his brother's family line." That man's line shall be known in Israel as The Family of the Unsandalled.

The practice of levirate marriage (in which a man marries his eldest brother's widow)1 is, surprisingly, found in a number of contemporary societies,2 but, also just as surprisingly, is not attested in any text from the Ancient Near East outside of Israel.3 The practice is described in Gen 38 and Ruth,4 but this passage is the only instructional literature on the matter in the Old Testament. The text may be divided into two parts:

A. The levirate marriage, vv5-6.

B. The refusing levir, vv7-9.

The Levirate Marriage, vv5-6

The mandate opens casuistically, "if brothers dwell together and one of them dies." It is difficult to determine the significance of this introductory condition. Does it serve merely as a lead-in to set the scene for the case, or does it more specifically define cohabitation of the brothers as a condition for levirate marriage to be required? Neither Gen 38 or Ruth informs us on this matter. It is also not clear if siring a son who "shall carry on the name of the dead brother so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel" (v6) is the sole "duty of a brother-in-law to her" (v5; and thus defining the purpose of levirate marriage), or if some other (un-specified) duties are involved?5 The impression that quickly presses upon us in reading this instruction in the light of Gen 38 and Ruth is that the point of the custom is to sire a son for the dead man. But even this impression is challengeable since Gen 38 leaves sons to Judah, not Er, and the son born to Ruth is consistently listed in the line of Boaz, not Mahlon. As with so much of Moses' exposition of the torah in Deuteronomy, he assumes Israel to be already familiar with many of the things that leave us puzzled. Puzzled or not, a more significant question is why might Moses, in the Lord's name, pay any interest in a dead man. What does it say about a God, and a society, for whom the fate of every person, and his hope of leaving behind a legacy, is a matter of explicit concern?

The Refusing Levir, vv7-10

The case of the brother who refuses to marry his brother's widow here is interesting because this is the first time in Deuteronomy that we hear of a woman speaking and given the right of legitimate initiative. The widow's speech in v7 signals that the primary "duty of a brother-in-law" is to sire a son "to carry on his brother's name in Israel," even if other responsibilities are involved. The right of the levir to refuse is also recognized—hence this provision—but it is viewed with obvious disdain. This is demonstrated in the shaming sentence meted upon the man (v9) when all efforts by the elders fail to persuade him to do otherwise (v8). This disdain is all the more serious given that no room is given for considering the levir's reasons for refusal, and that his family shall henceforth be tagged with the derisive moniker as "The Family of the Unsandaled" (v10). Still this is a far more generous fate than Onan's, who became the second person specifically named to be killed by the Lord6 because, while he would lay with her sister-in-law, he deliberately spilled his semen in order to "keep from producing offspring for his brother" (Gen 38:9). This, once again, underlines how seriously Yhwh, and Israel, views the importance of each person, living or dead.

Low Chai Hok
©Alberith, 2017